The URL can be used to link to this page

CC 05-07-01 AGENDA CUPER'I'INO CITY COUNCIL -- REC~ULAR ADJOURNED MEETING CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ~ REGULAR MEETING 10300 Torre Avenue Monday, May 7, 2001 6:15 p.m. Cf1'¥ COUNCIL MEETING ROLL CALL HOUSING COlVll~ll'l-rEE INTERVIEWS - 6:15 p.m. - Conference Room A 1. Interview applicants for an uuscheduled vacancy on the Cupertino Housing Committee. RECESS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - 6:45 p.m. - Council Chamber ROLL CALL CEREMONIAL MATTERS - I~RESENTATIONS 2. Proclamation reco~m~izing the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Depathxlent. The videotape titled, "Every 15 Minutes," will be shown, illustrating prevention efforts related to 3. Report by the Cupertino Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committ~ (BPAC) of 2000 accomplishments and proposed 2001 goals. 4. Presentation of a monetary contribution for improvements at Blackberry Farm by Lion's Club representative John Kohki. POSTPONEMENTS WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This port/on of the meeting is reserved for persons wi~.hing to addre~ the council on any matter not on the asenda. Speake~ are limited to three (3) minutes. In most eases, State law will prohibit the council from making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the age~la. May 7, 2001 Cupertino City Council & Page 2 Cupertino Redevelopment Agency CONSENT CALENDAR Unless there are separate discussions end/or actions requested by council, staff or a member of the public, it is requested that items under the Consent Calendar be acted on simultaneously. 5. Approval of minutes: April 2, 2001. 6. Accounts payable: March 30, April 6, April 13, April 20 and April 27, Resolution Nos. 01-92 to 0t-96. 7. Payroll: March 30, April 13 and April 27, Resolution Nos. 01-97 to 01-99. 8. Treasurer's Budget Report - March 2001. 9. Review of application for Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses: (a) Bdx BBQ, 20950 Stevens Creek Boulevard CO) Caf6 Ophelia, 10118 Bendley Drive, Suite H 10. Setting date for consideration of reorganization of area designated "N. Stelling Road 00- 12," property located at 10599 N. Stelling Road, on the west side of Stelling Road, between Garderm Drive and G-reenlcaf Drive, approximately .24 acre (APN 326-08-053) Lin-Hal Nan, Resolution No. 01-100. 11. Request for waiver of $2,145 fee t~om the Iranian Federation Women's Club for their September 23, 2001, Fifth Annual Inmien Arts and Cultural Event at the Quinlan Community Center. 12. Appwve the destruction of Parks end Recreation rental permits, purchase orders and daily deposits from 1997 and Senior Center membership forms, receipts end rental p=,mits prior to 1999, Resolution No. 01-101. 13. Acceptance of Municipal Improvements (drainage swales end ditches, concrete flatwork, underground utilities, retuini~g walls). (a) O'Brien Group, Oak Valley, Unit 1, Area 2, Tract 9054 (b) O'Brien Group, Oak Valley, Unit 2, Area 3, Tract 9075 (c) O'Brien Group, Oak Valley, Unit 3, Area 4, Tract 9076 (d) O'Brien Group, Oak Valley, Unit 4, Area 1, Tract 9077 (e) O'Brien Group, Oak Valley, Unit 5, Area 1, Tract 9078 14. Improvement Agreements: (a) 10631 Tuggle Place, APN 375-34-066; Keith and Lee Ann Kolker, Resolution No. 01-102 Co) 21730 Alcazar Avenue, APN 357-19-012; Chiao-Fu Chang and Su~.-Fay L. Chang, Resolution No. 01-103 May 7, 2001 Cupertino City Council & Page 3 Cupertino Redevelopment Agency 15. Quitclaim Deed, 21730 Alcazar Ave., APN 357-19-012; Chiao-Fu Chang and Sue-Fay L. Chang, Resolution No. 01-104. 16. Approve Conlract Change Order No, 13, in tho amount of $21,111.00, Cupertino Senior Center Project No. 99-9210, Resolution No. 0i-105. 17. Approve Homestead Road and Tantau Avenue Con/dom Traffic Signals Upgrade Project No. 9527 and Homestead Road Arterial Management Phase II Project No. 9530, Con~ract Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $12,955.00, Resolution No 01-106. 18. Recommendation to replace the Accounting Technician position with that of Finance Manager. 19. Authorize release of covenants on two expired deferred agreements for improvements on the property at 10157 Foothill Bird (Wallace Amaral and Betty Amaral as Joint Tenants) (APN No. 342-14-116), Resolution No. 01-107. 20. Setting a public heating for June 4, 2001 at 7:00 PM to consider water rate changes proposed by the San Jose Water Company for Cupertino water customers. 21. Adopt a resolution modifying Resolution No. 00-185, Un-Represented Employees' Compensation Prngrsm; to add a $250 automobile allowance for the classification of Senior Civil Engineer to Policy No. 4, Automobile Allowances and Mileage Reimbursements, Resolution No. 01-108. 22. Revised Fee Schedule Amount for Stevens Creek Specific Plan Square Footage, Resolution No. 01-109. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THF. CONSENT CALENDAR (above) PUBLIC HEARINGS 23. Applications 03-Z-01 and 01-EA-01 - City of Cupertino - Area generally bounded by Greenleaf Drive, Beardon Drive, Elenda Drive, Hazelbrook Drive, Ann Arbor Drive, Gardona Drive and Stelling Road (commonly known as C-arden Gate). City-initiated prezuning to Pre-RI-10 (single-family residential prezuning district) of approximately 107 acres commonly known as Garden Cate. A Negative Declaration is recommended because there are no significant environmental impacts from the project, and this item is recommended for approval. A. First reading of Ordinance No.1879: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Pre, zoning Approxhnately 107 Aca'es, Developed With Single- Family Detached Residences and C-enerally Bounded by Greenle. af Drive, Beardon Drive, Elenda Drive, Hazalbrook Drive, Arm Arbor Avenue, Garderm Drive and Stelling Road, Commonly Known as C. nu'den Cate, to Pre-R1-10 May 7, 2001 Cupertino City Council & Page 4 Cuperl/no Redevelopment Agency (Single-Fam/ly Residential With a Minimum Lot Size of I0,000 Square Feet) Zoning Dislrict.' Actions to be takan: 1. Grant Negative Declaration 2. Conduct first reading of O~inance No. 1879. 24. Appeal of Planning Commission decision regarding Applications 11-Z-98 And 14-U-98, Lake Biltmore, located at 10159 South Blaney Avenue (APN 369-03-008). Appellant John Moss. 25. Rezoning and modification of a use permit to change approximately 3,000 square feet from the Forum property P (Institutional) to Oak Valley properties P (Residential). APPLICATIONS 02-Z-01, 06-U-97 (M), Brian Kangas Foulk, located at 23657 and 23667 Black Oak Way. A Negative Declaration is recommended because the pwject will not have a sign/ficant impact on the environment end this item is recommended for approval. A. First reading of Ordinance No. 1880: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino rezoning 3,220 square feet of forum property from p (institutional) to p (residential) for 23657 and 23667 black oak way. Actions to be taken: 1. Grant Negative Declaration 2. Conduct first resding of Grdinance No. 1880. PLANNING APPLICATIONS UNFINISHED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 26. Review of bids and award of contract for Pavement Restoration, Project No. 2001-02. 27. Schedule dates for two budget study sessions. 28. Report on California Housing Finance Agency (CHFA) loan for Cupertino Community Services (CCS) and issuance of tax-exempt bond t%a~cing. 29. Rcquest for 5-year extension ofintemet sales tax agreement with Apple Computer. ORDINANCES 30. Second reading of Ordinance No. 1877: "An OrainAnce of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amendin~ Chapter 2.06 of the Cupertino Municipal Code Related to City Council Elections and Campaign Finance Disclosure." May 7, 2001 Cupertino City Council & Page 5 Cupertino Redevelopment Agency 31. Second reading of Ordinance No. 1878: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Prezoning a .24 Gross ~efe Pa/cci, located at 10599 N. Stelimg Road, (Crarden Gate Area) to Pre RI-10 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. APN: 326-08-053, Lin-Hal Nan." STAFF REPORTS 32. Informational Report on the Stevens Canyon Road Improvement Project. 33. Report on proposal for gateway monument in the intersection of De Anza Boulevard end Stevens Creek Boulevard. COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor James: Cupertino Audit Committee Economic Devclopmant Team Environmental Review Committee- Alt~laato Leadership Cup~ino Legislative Review Committee Library Steering Committee Northwest Flood Conlxol Zone Advisory Committee - Alternate Santa Clara County Cities Association Santa Clam County Emergency Prepareduess Commission Teen Task Force West Valley Mayors and City Managers Vice-Mayor Lowenthal: Animal Control ~PA Association of Bay Area Governments Cupertino Audit Committee Economic Development Teem Environmental Review Committee Santa Clara County Cities Association- Alternate Santa Claxa County Commi~o on Housing and Community Development Block C-rant Santa Clara County Library District JPA Board of Directors Santa Clara County Transportation Agency Policy Advisory Committee - Alternate Teen Task Force - Alternate West Valley Mayors and City Managers - Alternate Councilmembe~ Burnett: ABAG Board of Direetors, Santa Clara County Cities Association Representative North Central Flood Con~rol Zone Advisory Committee Northwest Flood Control Zone Advisory Committee May 7, 2001 Cupertino City Council & Page 6 Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Public Dialog Liaison Santa Clara County Committee on Housing & Community Development Block Grant Santa Clara County Library District JPA Board of Directors - Alternate Santa Clara County Solid Waste Commission - North County representative Santa Clara County Transportation Agency Policy Advisory Committee Santa Clara Valley Water Commission Councilmember Chang: Association of Bay Area Governments - Alternate · Leadership Cupertino Legislative Review Committee Library Steering Committee Public Dialog Liaison Santa Clara County Emergency Preparednass Commission - Alternate Sister City Committee o Toyokawa CLOSED SESSION ADJOURNMENT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Canceled for lack of business. lVllNtrfE8 CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL Monday, April 2, 2001 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At 6:45 p.m. Mayor lames called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers, 10300 Tone Avenue, Cupertino, California, and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL City Council members present: Mayor Sandra James, Vice-Mayor Richard Lowenthal, and Council member Don Bumett. Council member absent: Michael Chang. Staff preso~t: City Manager David Knapp, Admi~slrative Services Director Carol Alwood, Community Development Director Steve Piasecki, Senior Planner Vera C-il, Public Works Director Ralph Quails, Fmergency Preparedness Coordinator Marsha Garcia, Pubhc Information Officer Rick Kitson and City Clerk Kimberly Smith. CEREMONIAL MAi-r~.RS - PRESENTATIONS -- 1. Proclaim'mE April to be the California Earthquake Preparedness Month, and supporting and participating in California's "Ready To Ride It Out" campaign. Mayor Sandra lames read thc proclamation. The city's Emergency Preparedness Coordinator Marsha Garcia tbsnked the city and county fire dcpartment for being so supportive in their preparedness efforts. She talked about the display in City Hall that shows tips on how to prepare for earthquakes. She also mentioned classes that are available to the public be~nning April 12. POSTPONEMENTS The City Clerk noted that item No. 6, DKS Associates, had been tabled. VtrRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS David Greenateiu, Chairperson for the Bicycle and Pedeslrian Advisory Committee (BPAC), Joe Walton and Ann NE, members of the BPAC, honored City Traffic Engineer Ray Chong for his service. The committee and Ray worked together on projects like the bicycle snd pedeslrian transportation plans, and are currently working on traffic abatement with schools. Ray worked on grant proposals, bike parking at Monta Vista High School and the proposal for the UP railroad trail and helped the committee and the city obt~i,~ many IFants. They presented Ray with a paperweight. April 2, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 2 Anne Ng r~ninded everyone about Bike to Work week being the 3'~ week of May. She invited the City Council members to a kick off on May 13 outside City Hall, which would entail a abort bike tour of Cupertino. She also introduced Smart Chessen as the newest member of the BPAC. Council also offered their commendations and congratulations to Ray Chong and said that he would be missed. Ray Chong thanked everyone for their years of support and acknowledged City Manager Dave Knapp for his support of projects and Public Works Director Ralph Quails for his role as a mentor and a guide. CONSENT CALENDAR Buructt moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar as recommended, except item number 6, which was tabled. Lowenthal seconded and the motion can'ied 3-0, with Council member Chang absent. 2. Approval ofmlnutes: March 19, 2001. 3. Accounts payable: Mar~h 16 and March 23, Resolution Nos. 01-080 and 01-081. 4. Payroll: March 16, Resolution No. 01-082. 5. Treasurer's Budget Report: February 2001. 6. Authorizing the Director of Public Works to negotiate and execute a design agreement with DKS Aasuciates to develop the Cupe~ino Adaptive Traffic Signals Control System Project not to exceed $805,000, R~olution No. 01-083. (This item was tabled). 7. Review of application for Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses: a) Todai Restaurant, 10123 Wolfe Road, ~2001 b) Dars Hideaway, 10095 Saich Way 8. Acceptance of improvements: O'Brien Group, Oak Valley, Unit 1 Area 2, Tract 9054, Kevin C. H. and Lynn M. Ching, APN 357-05-023. 9. Approving the fu'st amendment to the 1996 Measure B Pavement Management Program Cooperative Agreement, Resolution No. 01-084. 10. Authorizing submittal of an application for Transportation Development Act Article 3, Bicycle and Ped~trian Fund Program to fund the City-Wide Bicycle Parking Facilities Project f~om the City's guarantee of $51,789.00, Resolution No. 01-085. 11. Approval of appoiniment of Smart Chessen to tho Bicycle and Pedasirian Advisory Committee. April 2, 2001 Cupe~ino City Council Page 3 12. Authorizing signature authority for federal and state ~rants, Resolution No. 01-086. 13. Memorandum of Understanding between San ~Iose State University Foundation and the City of Cupertino to support regional collaborafivc cffort by local govcrflmcnts, businesses, non-profits and academia to mitigate potential disasters. 14. Authorize fine mis grants for Spring 2001 as recommended by the Fine Arts Commission. Vote Members of the City Council AYES; Burnett, J'ames, Lowe~thn]~ NOES: None ABSENT: Chang ABSTAIN: None ITEMS REMOVED FROM TIlE CONSENT CALENDAR - None PUBLIC I~ARINGS 15. 2001/02 User Fee Schedule: rascinding Rasolution 00-120 and establishing user foas, Resolution No. 01-087. Mayor James op~ned the public hearing. Them were no ~peaker~ and the he, axing was closed. Director of Administrative Service~ Carol Atwood reviewed the staff report. She said that the new fees would be effective a~ of luly 1. The prices are in line with increases in inflation and the Consumer Price Index. Lowenthal moved to adopt Resolution No. 01-087. Bumett seconded and the motion carried 3-0 with Council member Chang ab~e~t. 16. Prezonlng of a .22 acre single family lot to Pre-RI-10, Application No. 01-Z-01; Lin-Hai Nan; 10599 .N. Stelling Road (Garden Gate area). APN: 326-08-0~3. This item is categorically exempt fxom the California Environmental Quality Act and is recommended for approval. (a) First reading of Ordimmce 1878, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Pre, zoning a .22 Gross Acre Parcel to Pre RI-10 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District." Mayor Sames opened the public homing. There were no ~pe, akers, and the hearing was closed. Director of Community Development Steve Pia~r, ki revi~ved the ~T report. The City Clerk read the title of the ord~m~. Bum~tt moved and Lowenthal seconded to read the ordinance by rifle only, and that the City Clerk's reading would coustimt~ the first reading thereof. Motion carried 3-0 with Council member Chang ab~e~t. April 2, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 4 17. Public hearing to review and approve use of the Twenty-Seventh program year (2001- 2002) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) fimds: (a) Authorize submittal of funding proposal, Resolution No. 01-089. Mayor James oPened the public hearing. There were no speakers, and the hearing was closed. Senior Planner Vera Gil reviewed the staff report and highlighted this year's changes. She said that the Cupertino Community Services (CCS) will be receiving more funding because they are taking over the Below Market Rate (BMR) placement program. The CCS will also conduct an audit of current apartment complexes that contain BMR units. The rehabilitation program is being Wansferred to the County of Santa Clara and they will take over the loan manag~nent program. The following recommendations were listed in the staffreport: 2001-02 CDBG Allocatlon: Pwgram Adminiah-a*don $15,000.00 CCS - Rotating Shelter $25,000.00 CCS - Affordable Placement Program $$,167.00 Senior Adults Legal Assistance $6,500 CCS - Vista Drive Development $129,207.00 Sub-Total: $180,874.00 Affordable Housing Fund: CCS - Affordable Placement Pwgram $44,833.00 Sub-Total: $44,833.00 TOTAL: $225,707.00 Council members talked about how valuable the services are that the CCS provides. Bumett moved to adopt Resolution No. 01-089. Lewenthal seconded and the motion carried 3-0 with Council member Chang absent. PLANNING APPLICATIONS - None UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS 18. Approval of Community Development Block Crrant (CDBG) agreement between the County of Santa Clara and the City of Cupertino for fiscal year 2000/01 and authorization for the City Manager to exeaite the agreement, Resolution No. 01-090. Senior Planner Vera Gil reviewed the staff report. She said that this is an annual agr~-~.-ment and that there were major changes involving language and exhibits p~/alning April 2, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 5 to the rehabilitation program. The City is contr~fing with the County of Santa Clara for these services. This agreement authorized thc City Manager to act in Council's stead. Burner moved to adopt Resolution No. 01-090. Lowanthal seconded and the motion carried 3-0 with Council member Chang absent. 19. Campaign ordinance revision and resolution establishing voluntary expenditure limit of $20,000: (a) First re~tlinS of Ordinance No. 1877, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Ammding Chapter 2.06 of the Cupertino Municipal Code Related to City Council Elections and Campaign Finance Disclosure." (b) Adopt Resolution No. 01-091, regarding s~tting voluntary campaign expenditure limits at $20,000. City Clerk Kimberly Smith revi~ved the staffreport. She said that this resolution retained the $100 maximum conlribufion per person and allowed candidates to accept contributions until 5 days prior to the election and required disclosure 4 days prior to the election. The ordinance repealed the sectinn regarding audit appeals and complaint pwvisions. The City Clerk reed the title of the ordinance. Bumett moved and Lowenthal seconded to -- read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the first reading thereof. Motion carried 3-0 with Council member Chang absent. Bumett moved to adopt Resolution No. 01-091. Lowe~tha! seconded and the motion carried 3-0 with Council member ChAng absent. ORDINANCES 20. Massage regulations: Second re~iing of Ordinance No. 1875, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapter 9.06 of the Cupertino Municipal Code Regarding Regulation of Massage." The City Clerk read thc title of the ordinsnce. Burner moved and Lowcnthal seconded to read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute thc second reading thex~of. Motion carried 3-0 with Council member Chang absent. Bumett moved and Lowenthal seconded to enact Ordinance No. 1875. Motion carried 3-0 with Council member Chang absent. 21. Second reading of Ordinance No. 1876, "An Ordinance of the City Council of thc City of Cupertino Amending Section 11.20.020 of thc Cupertino Municipal Code Relating to .... Establishment of Vehicular Stop and Section 11.20.030, All Directional Vehicular Stop Required At Certain Intersections; Fclton Way at the Intersection of Kirwin Lane." April 2, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 6 Thc City Clerk read the title of thc ordinance. Burner moved and Lowenthal seconded to read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute thc second re, lng thereof. Motion carried 3-0 with Council member Chang absent. Burner moved and Lowenthal seconded to enact Ordinance No. 1876. Motion carried 3-0 with Council member Chang absent. STAFF REPORTS - None COUNCIL REPORTS Lowenthai reported on the Every 15 Minute~ program held at Monta Vista High School. He said it was a powerful program for preventing drinking and driving. He said he attended the Crab Feed at DeAnza College with Fremont Union High School District, Fremont Union High School Foundation, the Rotary Club of Cupertino and the DeAnza Foundation. The feed served about 1000 people. He said it was a fun event that raised scholarship funds for students who need computers to participate in school events. .lames said she was the speaker at the Sher/ff's Annual Retirement Dinner. She said she was also the keynote speaker for the Santa Clara County Sheriff's DeparUnent's 3~ Annual Recognition Dinner. lames agreed that the Every 15 Minutes program was very moving and asked for a presentation at the next City Council meeting in April. She said the Chalnber of Commerce hosted the Citizen of Year and Businesses of the Year awards and that the program was very good. Wally Dean was Citizen of the Year. She acknowledged the City's video crew for creating an excellent presentation. CLOSED SESSION - None ADJOURNMENT At 7:15 p.m., Mayor Sames adjourned the meeting in memory of City employees Paul Antonucci end lease Green who had been killed in a recent automobile accident. James said their deaths were a heartfelt loss for family, friends end coworkers. Kimberly Smith, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 01-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING March 30, 2001 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated representative has certified to accuracy of thc following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in thc amounts and from thc funds as hereinafter set forth in Exhibit "A". CERTIFIED: Director of Administrative Services PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of ,2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cup~tino 1020 583856 03/30/01 1292 14CX WORM)CON 1108508 ¥2326426 2/02-2/28/02 0.00 2.]$ 1020 583874 03/30/01 1748 STEVE PIASKCKZ 1107200 ~ ~NFE~CE 0.00 363,00 1020 583895 03/30/01 ~001 T~ZTA, ~ 580 REC ~ 0.00 160.00 RESOLUTION NO. 01-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING April 06, 2001 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated representative has certified to accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds as hereinafter set forth in Exhibit "A". CERTIFIED: Director of Administrative Services PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of ,2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino 1020 583940 04/09/01 1367 C A P I 0 1101201 C~,PIO 2001 AHI~L.LE 0.O0 245.00 1020 583942 04/06/01 133 CA, L-LINE EQUII~V~NT CO IN 1108408 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 132.26 04/OS/O1 CITY OF f.~IJ'PI~.TI~O PA~E 4 ACk'~W~ING PERIOD: 10/0! CHEC]( I~I~'~A * DI~I~.SI~qT ~rdD 1020 584010 04/00/01 431 MC JJJ~TBR,S OFFICE PItOD 1108201 SUPPLXBS 0.00 19.86 1020 S84010 04/05/01 431 MC JGIORTBR'S OFFICE PROD S806445 SUPPLIES 0.00 12.85 1020 S84017 04/06/01 444 MlN"~14'S ~ 1107503 pARTS/SUPPlIES P.O.10? 0.00 109,71 1030 S84017 04/06/01 444 Kllf'l~H'$ ~ER 1108314 PARTS/SUPPLIES P.O.108 0.00 85.83 ~0~0 584017 04/06/01 444 h.La-~g'S ~ 5208003 pARTS/SUPPlIES P.O.240 0.00 33.31 584017 04/06/01 444 NZHI'C~'S ~ 1108408 FARTS/SUPPLIES P.O.I08 0.00 138.43 584041 04/06/01 5X5 PACZFXC ~ SB~,~XTY ZN 1108506 MAy 2001 SEfL~ItXTY/FZRE 0.00 4S.00 ACCOUNTING PERIOD'. 10/01 CIIECK ItEGIC:'I~R - DISBL~E~T ~ 1020 584094 04/06/01 1665 U.S. BANK /'RUST H.A. 3105306 S~41~AZ'~UAL FEES 0,00 534.00 RESOLUTION NO. 01-94 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOP. THE PERIOD ENDING April 13, 2001 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated representative has certified to accuracy of thc following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows the following claims end demands in the amounts and from the funds as hereinafter set forth in Exhibit "A". CERTIFIED: Director of Administrative Services PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this __day of ,2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino ACCOWITX~ PEItX(~: XO/O~ C~BC~C REG~'EA - DXSBX3~S~ ~ KESOLUTION NO. Ol-95 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOP. THE PERIOD ENDING April 20, 2001 WHEREAS, the Director of Adminislrative Services or her designated representative has certified to accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds as hereinafter set forth in Exhibit "A". CEKTIFIED: Director of Administrative Services PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of ,2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cup~ino o4/2o/o~ 1020 5836S6 V 03/23/01 339 I~ 1107503 ~PLI~ 0,00 -124.49 ~020 5828S4 v 02/30/0~ ~00~ ~ ~ ~P ~o ~ S~ ~ DP~ 8 o.OO -~20.00 1020 S84~49 ~/17/0~ 148 ~H 1108315 ~ ~H 3/13-4/12 0.00 5.39 1020 584149 04/17/01 ~48 ~ ~08820 ~ 3/~3-4/~2 O.O0 2~.62 1020 S84149 04/17/01 148 ~ 110820~ ~ ~ 3/~3-4/12 0,00 20.90 ~20 S84~49 04/17/0~ 148 ~ 2708404 ~ 3/13-4/~2 0.00 8.O8 1020 S84149 04/17/01 ~48. ~H 6208840 ~ ~H 2/~2-4/~2 0.00 40.84 1020 584149' 04/17/01 ~48 o~/2o/o2 cz~-z o~ cup~?~o FA~S ~ 04/20/0: C~TY oF cupn?z~o P~E ? ~020 S~4254 04/20/0~ 334 ~020 S842S4 04/20/0~ 334 TOTAL C~BCE 0.00 428S.02 ~020 SS42SS 04/20/0~ 2098 HORZZ~I ~084~? FY 2000-200~ O~P~C 0.00 ~Z68.S3 ~020 564255 04/20/0~ LG98 HORZZOH 2208407 S~P~ZES P.0.~0843 0.00 O~.4Z ~020 Sg42SS 04/20/0~ ~B98 HO~.~Z~H ~08303 FY 2000-200~ OP~ I~3~,C 0.00 ~07.74 It~BDATB04/20/0X TX~XZ:33:35 - PZI~v~Y.A~AC~O~ITZII~ AC~AT/'ING PE~.I~: 10/01 ~,E~'K ~GiSTE~t - DISBI~,SD4E~T F~D RESOLUTION NO. 01-96 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING April 27, 2001 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated r~'presentative has certified to accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment ha'eof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds as hereinaiter set forth in Exhibit "A". CERTIFIED: PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of ,2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino ACCO~ZNG PE~X~: X0/0~ CH~CX PJ~GI&A'~ - DISB~ ~ XO~O S84140 V 04/13/01 6~8 ~A ~ ~ ~X llO F~ Oi-GSG45~/ST145~O 0.00 -403.98 X020 584399 04/27/01 ~00X 3~ ~X~ X~ XX00000 ~ ~ ~R ~ P 0.00 gS.15 ~020 S84400 04/2~/02 ZEg5 3M 2708404 Q~ATZON~SO~0~3363 0.00 494.55 1020 584424 04/27/01 149 ~ 1103300 PE'ZTY ~ O.00 35.00 1020 584434 04/27/01 149 CASH 1108101 PE'L"l~f(~tS~ 0.00 3.00 1020 S84424 04/27/01 149 CA.SH ~104000 PET~'~CASIf 0.00 27.88 1020 584424 04/27/01 140 ~ 1101200 P5'Lglq~CASIJ 0.00 4.00 ACCO~TIIIG PERIOD: $0/0~ ~CK I~GIST~ - DI~BURSEI~IT ~ CA81i ~.ccr (m~cx NO ~s~'o~ PT .............. vmmo~ ............. Fmm/l~PT ..... D~,S~t~TZmi' ...... gA.T.~S T~ ACCOUNTING P~IOD: ~0/0~ C~CK KSGISTBR - D~SB~;SS~IqT ~ RESOLUTION NUMBER 01-97 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR SALARIES AND WAGES PAID ON March 30, 2001 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services, or their designated represen/ative has certified to the accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law; NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds set forth: GROSS PAYROLL $385,474.88 Less Employee Deductions $(I 25,424.02) NET PAYROLL $260,050.86 Payroll check numbers issued 52706 through 52906 Void ch~ck number CEP~TIF,IED: ,,~ DireCtor of Administrative Services PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular m~ting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this __ day of ,2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino I~SOLUTION NUMBER ot-98 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR SALARIES AND WAGES PAID ON April 13, 2001 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services, or their designated representative has certified to the aecura~y of thc following claims and demands and to the availability of funds ' for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law; NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds set forth: GROSS PAYROLL $386,791.75 Less Employee Deductions $(123,568.52) NET PAYROLL $263,223.23 Payroll check numbers issued 52907 through 53126 Void check number Director of Administrative Services PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular mc~ting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this __ day of ,2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATI'EST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino RESOLUTION NUMBER 01-99 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TH~ CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCK1BED FOR SALARIES AND WAGES PAID ON April 27, 2001 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services, or their designated representative has certified to thc accuracy of thc following claims and demands and to the availability of funda for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audit~l as r~quir~d by law; 'NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby allows following claims and demands in the amounts and from thc funds set forth: GROSS PAYROLL $370,838.45 Less Employee Deductions $( I 17,019.72) NET PAYROLL $253.818.73 Payroll check numbers issued 53127 through 53342 Void cheek number Director of Administrative Services PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of thc City of Cupertino this __ day of ,2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino City Hall 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (408) 777=3220 CITY OF FAX: (408) 777-3366 CUPEILTINO DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SUMMARY Agenda Item No. ~ Mecfing Date: May 7, 2001 SUBJECT Monthly Treasurer's and Budget Report - March 2001 BACKGROUND Attached is the Treasurer's and Budget report for the period ended March 31, 2001. The report includes all funds in control of the City. Investments The market value of our current portfolio totaled $43.7 million at month end with a maturity value of $43.4 million. The City intends to hold investments until maturity to redeem full value of the securities currently with a maturity value below market value. The current investment portfolio remained relatively unchanged during the month of March with incoming revenues offsetting expenditures. The outstanding check total exceeded the cash balance in the 8weep account at March 30 creating a negative balance. Funds were transferred on April 2. The investments of the City of Cupertino are in full compliance with our City investmerit policy and/oi' State law. Investments are tiered to adequately provide the City with sufficient cash flows to pay its obligations over the next six months. Revenue/Expenditure Trends General fund revenues are below budget projections at the end of March due to the timing of major tax payments received by the State and County. Operating expenditures for the General Fund remnin below budget by 7.50%. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council review and accept thc March Treasurer's and Budget report. Submitted by: Approved for submission: David W. Knapp Deputy Treasurer City Manager Investments By TypeJ Managed Portfolio 0% O% Rate of Return CompaHslon 6.60% 6.40% ¢ ty of Cuper no Marcb 2001 CASH 03/31~1 ~C~inoN~U~] 0 [ 0 0 ~ 0 oI o o,, o ~O~O~'i~NDS 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 MONEY MA~T tI I (~!)i (49~])~ (49~61): 0 MOR~AGE 09/~D3 ~/15~7 ]FHLMC~) ~6k 7.42%~ 2,4~79 2,~: 2~9,~ ] (41~35) 0~97.' 05/31/01 ~T~u~ No~ [~ 6.05% 2,501,658 = 2~,~ 2~07 875 [ 6~17 Av~ Yldd City of Cupertino March 2001 ~URCHASt: I MATURIiY DESCRIPiiON I/El' YP'LD COST VALUE VALUE PROFIT/LOSS '1 #UST & AGENCY PORI FOLIO C~.RTII'ICA'I ]~'S OF DEPOSI 1: i 07/26/00 · 06/27/01 ICupertino Natl(Kast~t Trust) 5.60%1 3~410 ] 38,41'0 38,410 T ~ i BOND RESERVE POR'I I, OLI~) : Trafllc Impae~ I i Franklin Fiducia~ Tnu~t 5.68%I 19,100 [ 19,100 ] 19,1~ 0 ProJeet Fnnd i Chy Hall E~row A Lease Fund (~o~954) 5.80% I 15 I 15 ! 115 0 Memorlal/Wll~on B Lease Fund (~00960) 5.81% 134 [ 134 134 0 Memorlnl/~Vllson I~serow B (~40094~) i Cash 24 24 24 0 -- 0 /A 7,4 /,4 0 04/06/93 01/01/03 .~ - E~row A (400972) ~ 6.25%, 2,833,527 2,833,527 2.833,527 0 '~i~/16/92 -i-- "-l'~]] 6/99 :Money Mkt - Eacrow A (40095T) 6.10%, 849,886 849 886.[ 849.886 0 .... ~]~/~)~-" 12/16/99 ,Money Mkt - Escrow B (400963) 6.10%, 1,350,897 ~ 1,350.897 ~ 1.350,897 0 5,034~10 ] 5,0~4,310 ~ ~,Q34~i0 0 ~iackberrylltremont Older 1993 Escrow A (~400966) Cash $,217 5,217 I 5,217 0 ..... 02/15/01 ' 03/31/01 tU.S. Treasury Stripped lnt 6.3'/%i 28,016.000 28.016,000: 28,033,5101 17,510 i j /,8,071.217 28,021.217 28,038,727 17,S10 ToLql Bond Reserve I*orfl'ollo ~ 33,074c~7 33,074,6S:Z 33,093~41~ 17,S10 ~ City of Cupertino Summary of Budget Transfers 3/31/01 Budget Revenue Expondimr~ Descriotion Acct# Adjustment Budget Budaet 2000/01 ADOPTED BUDGET 55,422,000 59,936,570 PROJECT CARRYOVERS variou~ 1999/00 CARRYOVER: Encumbrances I various 4,122,072: 4,122,072 Department ca.,xyovers i 733,815 Project can'yovers ] ' 7,735,187 Budget carryovers [ 154,357 REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS: 110-0000-4432 COPS grant 114 7761 BJA grant 110-0000-4431 25,001 OTI for Brown house purchase ]424-0000-4910 501,788 OTI for Memorial park restroom 1420-0000-4910 30,000 OTI for Sports Center fitoess i426-0000-4910 435,209 Senior Center donation ]424-0000-4758 94,750 '~' OTI for Outlook 1610-0000-4910 30,000 'IDA Allocation 1270-0000-4431 28,024 TDA Allocation !270-0000-4432 100,000 Blackberry Ixenching-IT ]560-0000-4614 20,000 Federal Hes Projects !420-0000-4431 57,000 Federal Hca Projects i420-0000-4431 360,000 Cleep state grant ] 110-0000-4432 118,286 OTO to IT for pw laptops 1610-0000-4910 7,550 ....OTO to IT for pw laptops 610-0000-4910 2,376, Federal CMAQ project 420-0000-4431 619,710 Federal CMAQ project 1420-oooe ~.32 SO,O00; . Federal CMAQ project i420-0000-4431 354,120: _._Federal CMAQ project 142o-oooo-4432 46,000i Federal HSP grant 420-0000-4431 25,000 Local Match-VTA/other cities 4200000-4427 182,000 Measure B-VTA funded project 270-0000-4433 200,000! EXPENDiTuRE ADJUSTMENTS: Adjust Budget Estimate 110-1040-7018 -60,0001 -60,000 COPS grant 110-2401-7014 114,776! 114,776 BJA grant 110-2402-7014 25,001 25,001 _.Apple Public Art ,110-1043-7014 100,000 I00,000 ClP funding change 1420-9315-9300 -125,000 -125,000 --- CIP funding change !420-9118-9300 -180,000, -180,000 CIP funding change [ 420-9220-9300 - 150,0001 - 150,000 CH~ funding change 420-9222-9300 -500,000:. -500,000 CIP funding change !270-9435-9300 - 115,000 ! - 115,000 CIP funding change 1270-9445-9300 -125,0001 -125,000 CIP funding change 1270-9447-9300 180,000! 180,00-~ _CIP funding change 270-9430-9300 850,000 _. 850,000 Cf1· funding change 1270-9448-9300 150,000 _ 150,000 .. OTO for B. rown house purchase [ 110-0100-8020 501,788 501,788 Brown house purchase !420-9217-9400 502,953 502,953 Appro. Memorial park ~estronm 1420-9114-9300 30 000~ 30,000 OTO for Memorial paxk res~oem i 110-0100-8020 30,000i 30,000 Combine Sport Center fitness/building !570-9212-9300 -435,209,. -435,209 Combine Sport Center fitness/bulldog ]426-9212-9300 435,2091 435,209 OTO for Sports Center fi~ess !570-0100-8020 435,209i 435,209 Senior Center donation .424-9218-9400 94,750i 94,750 OTO for Outlook 110-0100-8020 30,000 30,000 Appro transfer for Outlook 110-1300-7014 -19,197. -19,197 Appro Wansfer for Outlook I 110-6100-5501 -10,803i -10,803 _.Appro transfer for Outlook I 110-0100-8020 30,000[ 30,000 WWII Memorial Donation : 110-3300-7102 5,000i 5,000 Led waffic signal prognun 420-9533-9300 140,000! 140,000 TDA BoHinger Road Bicycle Impvr :270~9443-9300 28,024i 28,024 TDA FouthiH Bird Bicycle Imlnv 1270-9448-9300 100,000 100,000 Blackbe~y tsench~', g-IT 420-9536-7014 20,000 =, 20,000 Federal Hes Projects 420-9537-7014 16,000i 16,000 _Federal Hes Projects 420-9538-7014 10,0001 10,000 _ .Federal Hes Projects ·420-9539-7014 16,000! 16,000 Federal Hes Projects 1420-9539-7014 15,000 15,000 Federal Hes Projects [420-9541-9300 400,000. 400,000 Cleep state grant 110-2403-9400 118,286=, 118,286 OTO to IT for pw laptops 110-0100-8020 7,550i 7,550 · 0TO to I'l~ for pw laptops 110-0100-8020 2,3761 2,376 Budget tsf per dept request 110-8501-9100 -100,000 -100,000 Budget tsf per dept request : 110-8503-9100 100,000] 100,000 ._ F~e.d. eral CMAQ project .420-9535-9300 700,0001 700,000 Federal CMAQ project 1420-9534-9300 400,120: 400,120 _ F~edeml HSP grant 420-9540-9300 25,000i 25,000 Local Match-VTA/other cities 420-9118-9300 182,000[ 182,000 · -Measure B-VTA funded project ,270-9449-9300 200,000[ 200,000 :~000/01 ADJUSTED BUDGET [ I 58,853,590 76,856,833 IRevenue Comparison I e.O00,O00 - 8,000,000 - I hies Tax 7,(~0,000 - 3 Utility Tax 4 Franchise & Liceme 50the~ 8,000,000 - 6 Moo~ nd l'r~'~ S,OOO,0~0 - 80m~=s F~ Sg~,iccs 10 Otha- lL-*~uua Expenditure Comparison [] YTD 0~31KI1 1,000,000 - COMPLIANCE WITH INVESTMENT POLICY City of Cupertino March 31, 2001 Category Standard : Comment Treasury Issues No 1/mit [Complies US Agencies (eg FHLMC) 'No limit IComplies Medium Term Corporate Bonds/Notes 30% with A rating i Complies LAIF :$20 million !Complies Money Market Funds 20% ~Complies M_.a~. i_m_u_ _m Maturities 25% up to 15 years i Complies (FI-]LMC at 9.5 yrs) " [Remainder up to 5 years !Complies Per Issuer Max i10% (exert govts) :Complies Bankers Acceptances !270 days & 40% Complies ~ommemial Paper ' 15% !Complies Negotiable Certi_ficates of Deposit 130% !Complies Repurchase Agreements ! 365 days [Complies Reverse Repurchase agreements i Prohibited [Complies Fund ....................... Pro~ D~sc~l~J~n C/O. _ enc cio bud=e~ Adooted ~e T~I Bu~ ~m~n~ Expire ~ ~. '~ ':~H~~m~ 7~,~.~8 ' ~J,0~J.~" 7~,051.~ 215 ~20 S~ ~ P~ 0.~ 1,O29,2~.~ ~,0~,~.~2 ~,0~,~.32 ~ '~-~ ~:~n~ ~.E:~. o.~ ~.~.4~ ~,~.~ ' ~,~.~ ~o _~ ~_~~ ~,~5.~ ~,~:f~ 0.~ 8,8~5.75 0.~ ~7~ ~1 ~ R~I 35,152.87 35,~.~ 3,309.~ 3J,~.6~ .......................... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N~ 5,~.~ ~,7~.13 ~3,~3.13 0.~ 2,4~.~ 231,~.13 ~ '-~ H~ ~i~-f~ ~. ' ........... f~,~.~ f~,~.~ fJ,~.~ '~ --~ u~ ~ C~ ........ ~,~.~ - ' ~,~.m ~,~.m ~ ~ Ne~~ ~,~.~ 9,~1.11 1~,~ (115,~) ~,4~.03 4,~.15 ~,~3.13 (4,~25) ~0 ~ 8~ C~ Tm, Bike ~ 2,133.~ ~,5~.~ 40,~.~ 339.~ 6,7~.~ 33,~.~ ~ ~ ~~ ..... :.::::'".'.~,~:~ '. -~,~:~ .... -' .'-.' .': ' . ....... ~2,1~.~ 24,811.42 24,7~.~ 172,~2.~ "~0 ~1 B~~e~ 19,772.~ 6,7~.~ ........ ~::'-~;~J:J~ "~,~.~ '- "~- ~2 ~ ~ ~ .................... ~.~ ..... ~.~ ...... ~.~ ~ ~T~~u~.__ ._: -: - ' ' . :..: ]~ :'~,~. :':_':'::~.~ .... ,.~ ~.~ .......... o.~ ~o ~7 m~A~ .............. . . ..:..::":_.'_:'::-: T..::~;~ ....... ................................. ~;~ ........ ~;~.~ ~ ~ F~, ~ ~ ........... . ~,~ ._ .~.~ ~,~*~ ~,!~._~ ~ ~ ~~ T~ ~'.::::: '~: ~.~ .......... 1,~2.70 ~;~.~-" 0.~ ..................................................... ~ ~17 M~ at ~ 23,7~.76 ~.~ ~,~.76 23,~.76 ~.~ 2~ ~1 ~~ 18,7~.~ .................................... 479,~.~ ~,~ ...... ~,J~:~" J3,~.53 4~,~.~ ~ ~S~T~.~ _..~,~.~~,~.~ ............ . :'. ...... :"".?i;~- :- '.'. ~,~i.~ ~,g0~.e~ ~;~.~ '2~ -- ~ ~n ~_~ ~. ... 2~ ~,~.. 21~,652.. 21~,~.~ '~ 91~ ~ R~a~ j~,~j~.~ j~,~ ~,~jS.~ 2~,2J8.62 4~ 9110 8~~bi~ 2,0~.45 2,0~.45 4,619.10 (2,~) 4~ 9113 8~ C~l ~an ~,7~.~ 0.~ ~,738.~ 57,951.18 4,7~.86 0.~ 4~ 9114 Me~l'~ ~ --'~.~ j~f,~:~ ~,~ J~,J~J.~ ' ~.~ 178,~7.~ 8,~61.~ 4~ 9.~ ~'-- ....................... :-:: :.':': ........ ~_~ .'. .......... ............... ~,~.~ ~,~.~ 3,~.~ 3~,~.~ ....... - 4~ 9116 ~n ~, ~iJ~m ...................... ."'. .......... 15,0~ ..... 15,~.~ .15,~'~ ' 4~ 9117 S~Tmi~n~y ................. . .... . j~,~ J~,~.~ 1~,~.~ --~ ~ ~ 91 .... ~,79~.~ -'"~;~.~ '- ' 577,978.57 ~.~ J~,298. J3 ~,~.44 4~ ~16 S~m~ex~n~ ............................................... 216,~.~ 1~,~ ~;~.~ '" ~,~J.~ Jf,929.~9 ~J2,~.41 ~ ~17 ~~ ~E~J. ~,9~ ~,~.~ 0.~ ~3,81~.~ · 4~ . ~ ~ ~.v~e ~ ......... ~;~,00~ (~2_5, .0~_)- 0.0~ .... ~.~6 ~,~(~' ~ ~ B~ ~mi~ ' ' ' i~,78{.70 {~,Y8~.7~ {3,id{ ' ~ '-~ ~ ~:~'~ne "5~.~ ~.~ "~,~.~ ' ~.~ ~.~ ~ g~ ~ ~ ~. 10,~.24 2,7~.~ 13,73724 10,~.~ 4,4~.~ (f,~) 4~1 ~l~O88~S~l I 2,~.~1 2g,9~.731 I I ~,~4.~1 ~.251 ~3,1~.~ I ~8,1~.~ ~ ~ ~a~ T~ u~e 2,~.~ ~,~.~ ~,~.~ 10,497.81 57,~.~ (3,~) 4~ ~ ~ ~ ~.qm~. 16,~.24 478,~.~ 4~,~.24 ~,~.61 32,~7.78 ~,616.~ 4~ ~ ~,~ HmU'~ ~-'::"~ .-/ :t~,~.~'"' ~.~!,~Y.~ .... ~' ": '~_~_~___ ~;~;~ ............................" '"~0:~.~ -" t~,~.'~ ~,~i~.~ ' 4~ ~ ~ ~D T~ I~ ................................ 1~,~ 1~,~.~ g8,1~.~ 0.~ 41,816.18 ~ '- ~ ~1~ ~ T~ u~-~ ........ 16,~ ........ 16,~.~ 8,~.~ 0.~ 8,~.~ ~ ~7 B~ ~ T~ ~de 10,~ 10,~.~ 5,~.~ 0.~ 5,~.~ 4~ ~ ~~ T~u~-~ ....................... ~ ........ i~,~.~ ..... ~,~.~ ~.~ ...... ~ -'-~ ~~ t~ ~ ................................................ ~,~ ...... ~.~ ..... ~ ~,~ ....o.~ t,~.~ -' ~~ ~ ~ ~m ..................................... ~,~ ~,~.~ ........................ o.~ ~.~ ::".~.~ ~1 ~10 6~.C~ 6~ ~n 11,1~.~ 1~.28 11,318.~ 11,1~.~ 1~.28 4~ ~ ~.~ o.~ ~,~=.~7 ....................... '.:'~;~ ' '."':'~:'.~:'. '.:~,~.~ ' ~;~.~ - ~ ~14 ~m~ 7,~.24 10,~.~ 18,~0.49 7,~.24 6,211.~ 4,7~.48 ~ ~ b~~ 2,~,~ ;~.. ~,~.~ ....... ~.~ ...... ~.~ 2,~,~.m ......... ~ ~10 ~~ 2,~,7~.~ 1~,175.~ 3,~,~.~ 3~,~.~ 2,~3,016.~ ~,~.92 ~4 ~18 ~ ~ F~ 0.~ 0.~ ~,7~ ~,7~.~ 0.~ 197,~2.~ (1~,~.~) ~ ~13 F~r~ ~,~7.~ ~0,171.~ ..... ~5,1~.~ 24,~.~ ......... ............ 2~0,171.~ 4~ ~14 F~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~.70 ~,~.70 ~,~.70 ~ ot~;~ ~,~.~ 24~,~.~ ~7s,~ ................ ~,8~8.~ ..~,~.~'~' ~,~.~ -'~f~_ ....... ~ ~11 ~e ~M~A 15,7~.~ 15,7~.~ 15,7~.~ ~7o ~ s~=A. ........ -.'.~:.~ ~:-~... ~.=; ..... ~,.~ ....':~:'. ........... _~.~.~-:~-'~,~;~ ~: '.. ~,~ " ~,~.~ ....... ~ ..................... ~ '~,~5,{~.~ ~f~,~ 1,~,Y~ ~,~J~,~.~ 1,~,~.~ ~,~,414.~ ~3,~,~.~ ~ ........ ~- ......... ~ ...... ~ .............................. City Hall -- 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 CITY OF Phone (408)777-3312 CUPE INO (408) 777-3366 OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER SUMMARY AGENDA ITEM NUMBER '~ AGENDA DATE 5[7/01 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Application for Alcoholic Beverage License. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Bnsiness: Brix BBQ Location: 20950 Stevens Creek Boulevard Type of Business: Restaurant '- Type of License: On-Sale Beer and Wine for Bona Fide Public Eating Place Reason for Application: Person to person transfer RECOMMENDATION There are no use penmit restrictions or zoning restrictions which would prohibit this use, and staff has no objection to the issuance of the license. Prepared by: Submitted by: Ciddy Word'ell, City Planner David Knapp, C~ty Manager G :planning/misc/abcbrixbbq Pnn~e~ on Recycled Pa~er '~'~ I State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE(S) ABC 211 TO: Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control File Number: 375276 100 Pasco de San Antonio Receipt Number: 1320140 Room 119 Geographical Code: 4303 San Jose. CA 95113 Copies Mailed Date: March 22, 2001 (408)277- 1200 DISTRICT SERVING LOCATION: SAN.lOSE First Owner: CHIMfI~.NTI RF, STAURANTS Name of Business: BRIXBBQ Location of Business: 209S0 STEVENS CREEK BLVD CUPERTINO, CA 95014 County: .SANTA CLARA Is premise inside city limits? Yes Mailing Address: $04 ESPLANADE LN (If different from SAN JOSE, CA 95138 premises address) Type of license(s): 41 Transferor's license/name: 343375 lOLLER GABRIEL Dropping Partner: Yes__ No License Type Transaction Type Fee Tv_ne Master ~ Date Fee 41 ON-SALE BEER AND PERSON TO PERSON TRANSF NA Y 0 0 312 1 l01 $1.50.00 41 ON-SALE BEER AND ANNUAL Pl~J~ NA Y 0 0 312 1 l01 $20.5.00 30 TEMPORARY PERMI DUPLICATE NA N I 03/2 1 l0 1 $100.00 41 ON-SALE BEER AND STATE FINGERPRINTS NA N I 0312 1 l01 $39.00 Total $494.00 Have you ever been convicted of a felony? No Have you ever violated any provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, or regulations of the Department pertaining to the Act? No Explain any 'Yes" answer to the above questions on an attachment which shell be deemnd part of this application. Applicant agrees (al that any manager employed in an on-sale licensed premise will have all the qualifications of a licensee, and (b) that he will not violate or cause or permit to be violated any of the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act. STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of SANTA CLARA Date: March 21, 2001 Under penalty of perjury, en~h per,on whose signature appe~n bolow, cenlne~ and s~ys: (1) He is an applicant, or one of the applicants, or nn executive officer of the applicant corperetion, nnmed in the foresoin~ appli~tion, duly autboriznd to n~ke this application on its hehelf: (2} that he has rend the foresoing and knows the contents thereof and that each of the above ~tamments therein made ar~ tree: (3) that no person other than the applicant or applicants has any dim~t or indirect interact in the applicant or ndplicant's business to bo ¢ondeetnd under the license(s} for which this application is made: (4l that the transfer nppfication or proposed transfer is n~t made to utisfy the payment of a loan or to fulfill nn agreement entered into more then ninety (~0) days pmendins the day on which the tmnsfe~ application is filed with the I~pemnent or to sain or establish n preference to or for any c~ditor or tramfemr or to defraud or injure any creditor of tramf~or; ($} that the ~ransfer application may be withdrnwn by either the applicnet or the li~ens~ with no resultins liability to the Department. Applicant Name(s) Applic~(s) CHIM_ !E~_ I RE_S. TAU. R~T'. INC City Hall _ 10300 Tone Avenue Cupertino. California 95014 CITYOF Phone (408) 777-3312 CUPERTINO (408) 7.-3 66 OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER SUMMARY AGENDA ITEM NUMBER c~ (~ AGENDA DATE ~ll~0t SUBJECT AND ISSUE Application for Alcoholic Beverage License. BACKGROUND 1. Narae of Business: Cafe Ophelia Location: 10118 Bandley Drive, Suite H Type of Business: Restaurant Type of License: On-Sale Beer and Wine for Bona Fide Public Eating Place Reason for Application: New license RECOMMENDATION There are no use permit restrictions or zoning restrictions which would prohibit this use, and staff has no objection to the issuance of the license. Prepared by: Submitted by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner David Knapp, City Manager O:planning/misc/abc/cafeophelia State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE(S) . TO: Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control File Number: 3'7S?12 100 Pasco de San Antonio Receipt Number: 1.321877 Room 119 Geographical Code: 4303 San Jose. CA 95113 Copies Mailed Date: April 5, 2001 (408)277- 1200 DISTRICT SERVING LOCATION: SAN.lOSE First Owner: OKRA INC Name t)f Business: CAFE OPHELIA Lo~ation of Business: 10118 BANDLEY DR STE H CUPERTINO, CA 95014 County: SANTA CLARA Is premise inside city limits? Yes Mailing Address: 43185 OSGOOD RD (If different from FREMONT~ CA 94.,q.39 premises address) Type of license(s): 41 Transferor's license/name: / Dropping Partner: Yes No ?~. License Type Transaction Type Fee Tyne Master Du~ Date Fee 41 ON-SALI~ BEER AND ORIGINALFI~..S NA Y 0 04~04/0 I $300.00 41 ON-SALE BEER AND ANNUALFE~ NA Y 0 04/04~01 $205.00 Total $505.00 Havc you ever been convicted of a felony? No Have you ever violated any provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act. or regulations of the Department pertaining to the Act? No Enplain any "Yes" answer lo the nbove questions on an attachment which shall be deemed part of this application. Applicant agrees (a) that any mannger employed in an on-sale licensed premise will have all the qualit'ications of a licensee, and (b) that he will not violate or cause or permit to be violated any of the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act. STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of SANTA CLARA Dam: April 4, 2001 Under penalty ,d' perjury, each person whose sisnatur~ appears below, certifie~ and says: (I) He ts an appliennt, or one of ~he arr.iennt~, nr an exccul~vc officer o1' Ibc applicant corporation, named in the foregoing application, duly authorized to make this application on it~ behalf: (2) that he has rend the foregoing and knows the contents thereof and that each of tbe above statements therein made nrc true; {31 that no pe~son other tben Iht applicant or applic'nnts has any direct or indirect interest in Ibe applicant or applicant's business In be condectcd under the licensels} for which this app0cntion is made; (4) that the transfer application or proposed transfer is not made to satisfy the payment of n Ionn or to fulfill an ngreemenl catered into more thnn ninety (90) days p~ceding the day on which the transfer application is filed with the Depertment or to gain or be withdrawn hy cilher the appllcnnt or the licensee with no resulting liability to the Department. Applicant Namers) Applicant Signature(s)/ RESOLUTION NO. 01-100 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TI~ CITY OF CUPERTINO SETTING DATE FOR CONSIDERATION OF. REORGANIZATION OF AREA DESIGNATt~D '%1. STELLING RD. 00-12", PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10599 N STELLING ROAD; APPROXIMATELY 0.24 ACRE, LIN-HA1 NAN (APN 326o08-053) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino has received a request for annexation of territory designated "N. Stelling Rd. 00-12" from property owner, Lin-Hag Nan. WHEREAS, the property, 0.24+ acm on the west side of Stelling Road between Gardena Drive and Greenleaf Drive (APN 326-08-053) is contiguous to the City of Cupertino and is within its urban service area; and WHEREAS, annexation would provide for use of City serviies; and WI-IBREAS, this t~ritory is uninhabited and was prezoned on May 7, 2001, to City of Cupertino 1/re RI-10 zone; and WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino, as Load Agency for environmental review determined that this propm'y is categorically exempt from the California Environmmtal Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the County Surveyor of Santa Clara county has found the map and desci'iption (Exhibits "A" and "B") to be in accordance with Govennnent Code Section 56757, the boundaries to be defirdte and certain, and the proposal to bo in complianc, with LAFCO's mad annexation policies; and WHEREAS, tho fee set by the County of Santa Clara to cover staffcost for above certification has been paid; and WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section 56826 the City Council of the City of Cupertino shall be conducting authority for a reorganization including an annexation to the City; and WHEREAS, Govemrnent Code Section 56837 provides that if a petition for annexation is signed by all owners of land within the affected territory the City Council may approve or disapprove the annexation without public hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the city Council of the City of Cupertino hereby initiates annexation proceedings and will consider annexation of the territory designated '%1. Stolling Road 00-12" and detachment from the Santa Clara County Lighting Service DisUict at their regular meeting of June 18, 2001. Resolut/on No. Page PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this ,2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOBS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk M~yor, City of Cupertino 2 EXHIBIT ANNE%A~ON TO ~E C~Y OF ~ERTXNO, CA ~IqTITT.~'r~: N. ST~LLING I~D. 00-12 All that certain real property sltuated In the County of Santa Clara, State of California, being all of hot 9 of Tract No. 631, GARDEN GATE VILLAGE, and a portion of Stalling Road as shown upon that certain Map filed for record in the Office of the Recorder of said County and State on May 23, 1949, in Book 22 of Maps at Page 56, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the Easterly prolongation of the Northerly line of said Lot 9, 10 feet Easterly from the Westerly line of Stalling Road with the Westerly boundary line of that certain annexation to the City of Cupertino entitled 'Stalling 2, Ordinance 57; Thence running along the Westerly boundary line of said annexation S0"I0'20"W 77.45 feet; Thence leaving said Westerly line 'and along the Southerly line of --. said Lot and the Easterly prolongation thereof, N89°54'W 135.00 feet to the Southwesterly corner thereof; Thence along the Westerly line thereof, N0°10'20"E 77.45 feet to the Northwesterly corner there6f; Thence. along the Northerly line thereof, S89"54'E 135.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 10,456 square feet or 0.240 of an acre, more or less. Date: Jan 8, 2001 APN: 326-08-053 Address: 10599 N. Stalling Rd. Cupertino, CA ' .... ,~oo ...... i~~-' '~L HSe'~W IDD.~O~ ~' ~ , !.S ~, ' ~/ , , 2- 280' ~~~. , N ~A~D,NA VALL~ ~ L~W~ ~ ~ PRO PO~ ~N~XATIO~ ~ ~E ~ -- ~__~.. C~TY d~ CUPERT/N~ ViCi ~[T¢2Map--- N. ~TELLIN6 ED. O0-1Z ~OT TO SCALE DAT~: ~4~ 8, 200/ 5~L~ t'~0 / _ - 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (408) 777-32110 CITY OF FAX: (408) 777-3366 CUPEILTINO Website: www.cupettino.org PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT STAIqr REPORT Agenda Item Number I{ Agenda Date: May 7, 2001 SUBa-ECT AND ISSUE Fee waiver request fzom the Iranian Federation Women's Club for their September 23, 2001, Fifda .Annual Iranian Am and Cultural event at the Quinlen Commqnity Center. BACKGROUND Pursuant to the City of Cupertino's facility use policy adopted by the City Council, a Cupertino-based, non-profit organization raising funds to benefit the commUl~lty shall receive Ii waiver of room rental fecs relative to their event. The sponsoring orl~nniTntlon pays the cost of staff and janitorial services, meets insurance requirements, etc. Staff has received a request f~om the Iranian Federated Women's Club for their Fifth Annual Iranian Arts and Cultural event on September 23. This organization will use the funds raised a~ this event to underwrite a one-day festival that will include a wide variety of community activities, such as dance, music, poetry, handicrafts, end food. The activity will be open to all. Waiver of these fees will result in a saving of $2,145 to the group; thc organization will be responsible for $480 in staffing costs. STAFF RECOMMI~NDATION City Council waive the mom rental fees discussed in this staff report, which is consistent with their use policy for the Quiulan Community Center. SUBMITTED BY: ~Smith, Director ~ David Knapp, City Manager Parks end Recreation g:~'ks and rmufion admin~fee waiversWee waiver sumnury IranJm f~n~d.doc Pnntedon Recycled PRoer Facility Supervisor for Cupertino Parks and Recreation Dept. 10185 N. Stelling Rd. Cupertino, CA 95014 Dear Julia, The Iranian Federated Women's Club and Payvand Cultural School are seeking funding and support in bringing our cultural perspective to this wonderful, diverse community through sponsorship of the Fifth Annual Iranian Arts and Cultural Event. This event is scheduled to take place at the Quinlan Community Center in Cupertino on September 23, 2001. The funding and support will underwrite a one-day festival that will include a wide variety of community activities: dance, music, poetry, handicrafts, and food. Need: Young Iranian Americans, like many immigrant children, face the difficulty Of integrating their Iranian identities in a new environment. They need to be able to be Americans who are proud of their cultural heritage. Our Organization and its Mission: The Iranian Federated Women's Club and Payvand Cultural School are non-profit corporations that work to aid Iranian Americans in learning to be good Americans while maintaining their own heritage through classes in language, dance, music, painting, and other activities. In addition, we contribute to our American environment by supporting various activities that integrate our children and young people in becoming Americans in a positive way. I would appreciate if you would be kind enough to wave the fee for use of the Community Room, Social Room, Crafts Room, Activity Room, and the inside of the building (like last year) on that day. Please do not hesitate to call me at (408) 865- 0969 if you have any questions. Thank you for your consideration and cooperation. Sincerely, Fariba Nejat, President RESOLUTION NO. 01- 101 A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN RECORDS (PARKS AND RECREATION AND SENIOR CENTER) WHEREAS, the City Council did by adoption of P~sohtion Nos. 8894 and 8930 establish rules and regulations for records retention ,nd des~uction; smi WHEREAS, it has b~u dcto'm;-,~d that c~tain ~cordz in ~xcess of two years old no longer contain da~a of any historical or sdmini~lrafive Si~On;~.ance; and WHEREAS, ~ d~osmnen~ request for p~,ulssioa to destroy all said records in excess of two years old has bccn approved by the City Clerk and the City Attorney purmant to Resolution Nos. 8894 and 8930; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cuper~._o authorizes destruction of the records specified in lhe schedule atu~ched hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of' the City Council of' the City of Cupexfiuo this __day of May, 2001, by the following vote: Vote M~mbers of the City Comlc'll AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of ~o RECORDS INVENTORY FOR MICROFILMING OR DESTRUCTION Department: City Clerk Contact: Kimberly Smith or Grace Johnson Page: I of I - File Name: Qplnlnn & Se~lior C.~lter dezlroy No. (to be u~ed File Name File Number and/er Subject, Application, Address or Location Date ranges Enter for microfiche Resolution, Ordinance, Permit (or most M = to be microfilmed card #) recent date) D = to be destroyed Park Rental Permits Quinlan Comm. Ctr. 1/96- D 10185 N. Stelling Rd 12/97 · · Cupertino, CA 95014 Quinlan Room Quinlan Comm. Ctr. 1/96- D Rental Permits 10185 N. Stelling Rd 12/97 · . . Cupertino, CA 95014 "." Quinlan Purchase Quinlan Comm. Or. 1/96- D :: Orders 10185 N. Stelling Rd 12/97 Cupe~no, CA 95014 · : .:'"::: · ". '. Membership Forms Blvd. Cupertino, CA 1999 "': .:. :::.:.: :" %: ..".' Senior Center 21251 Stevens Creek Prior to D '.'.;'.'.' ..:... '.. Senior Center 21251 Stevens Creek Prior to D · .... i Rental Permits Blvd. Cupertino, CA 1999 City Hall 10300 Torte Avenue _ Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (408) 777-3223 "' FAX: (408) 777-3366 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK MEMORANDUM To: Dave Knapp, City Manager; Carol Atwood, DirecWr of Admiulstrative Services;.Theresc Smith, Director of Parks and Recreation; Steve Piasecld, Director of Community Development; Ralph Qualls, Director of Public Works; Charles Kilian, City Attorney, HR Manager, Sandy Abe. From: Grace Johnson, Deputy City Clerk Subject: RECORDS FOR DESTRUCTION Date: April 18, 2001 Listed on the attached sheets are records fi'om the Parks and Recreation Department, Quinlan Center and the Senior Center, which are in excess of two years old and c~n therefore be destroyed in accordance with the City's records r,tention schedule. Please review the list and contact me if you believe any of these files are of historical or r ~' :nistrative significance and should not be destroyed. If approved, a resolution anthorizin~,~, desl~uction will be on the City Date Date NO O~CTION TO DESTRUCTION: Encls.: Destroy Park Rental P~mits 1/96-12/97, Quinlan Room Rental Pcrmits 1/95-12/97, Purchase Orders 1/96-12/97, Daily Deposits 1/96- 12/~.7, Senior Center membership forms, receipts nna rental permits previous to 1999. · - RESOLUTION NO. 01- 102 A RESOLLrrION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE C1TY AND DEVELOPERS KEITH AND LEE ANN KOLKER 10631 TUGGLE PLACE, AFN 375-34-066 WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council a proposed improvement agreement between the City of Cupertino and developers, Keith and Lee Ann Kolker, for the installation of certain rounicipal improvements at 10631 Tuggle Place and said agreement having been approved by the City Attorney, and Developers having paid the fees as outlined in the attached Exhibit A; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Mayor and the City Clerk are hereby authorized to sign the aforementioned agreement on behalf of the City of Cupertino. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a r~gular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of May, 2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino Resolution No. 01-102 Page 2 EXHIBIT "A" SCH~DUI.,E OF BOND, FEES, AND DEPOSITS DEVELOPMENT: Kcith and Lee Ann Kolker LOCATION: 10631 Tuggle Place A. Faithful Performance Bond: Off-site: $ 8,000.00 On-site: $ 2,000.00 EIGHT THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS B. Labor and Material Bond: Off-site: $ 8,000.00 On-site: $ 2,000.00 EIGHT THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS C. Checking and Inspection Fees: PAID BY PREVIOUS DEVELOPERS D. Indirect City Expenses: N/A E. Development Maintenance Deposit: PAID BY PREVIOUS DEVELOPERS F. Storm Drainage Fee: B~sin 2 PAID BY PREVIOUS DEVELOPERS G. one Year Power Cost: PAID BY PREVIOUS DEVELOPERS H. Street Trees: By Developer I. Map Checking Fee: N/A J. Park Fee: ZONE I N/A K. Water Main Reimbursement: N/A L. Maps and/or Improvement Plans: By Developers - RESOLUTION NO. 01-103 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND DEVELOPERS CHIAO-FU CHANG AND SUE-FAY L. CHANG 21730 ALCAZAR AVENUE, APN 357-19-012 WHEREAS, ther~ b.~ been printed to the City Council a proposed improv~raent agreement betw~m the City of Cupertino and developers, Chiao-Fu Chang and Sue-Fay L. Chang, for the installation of certain municipal improvements at 21730 Alcazar Avenue end said agreement having been approved by the City Attorney, and Developers having paid the f~ a~ outlined in the ath~hed Exhibit A; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Mayor and the City Clerk are hereby authorized to sign the aforementioned agreement on behalf of the City of Cupertino. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regnl~r meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of May, 2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino Resolution No. 01-103 Page 2 EXHIBIT "A" SC/-II~.DULE OF BOND, FEES, AND DEPOSITS DEVELOPMENT: Chiao-Fu Chang and Sue-Fay L. Chang LOCATION: 21730 Alcazar Avenue A. Faithful Performance Bond: Off-site: $ 8,000.00 On-site: $ 3,000.00 EIGHT THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS B. Labor and Material Bond: Off-site: $ 8,000.00 On-site: $ 3,000.00 EIGHT THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS C. Checking and Inspection Fees: $1,975 ONE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE AND 00/100 DOLLARS D. Indirect City Expenses: N/A E. Development Maintenance Deposit: $1,000 ONE THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS F. Storm Drainage Fee: Basin 2 $ 236.00 TWO HUNDRED TI-I]RTY SIX AND 00/100 DOLLARS G. One Year Power Cost: N/A H. Street Trees: By Developer I. Map Checking Fee: N/A $. Park Fee: ZONE I N/A K. Water Main Reimbursement: N/A L. Maps and/or Improvement Plans: As Specified in Item - RESOLUTION NO. 01-104 A RESOLUTION OF TH~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZ&TION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS FROM CHIAO-FU CHANG AND SUE-FAY L. CHANG 21730 ALCAZAR AVENUE, APN 357-19-012 WHEREAS, Chiao-Fu Chang and Sue-Fay L. Chang, have executed a "Quitclaim Deed and Authorization", which is in good and sufficiant form, qultelaiming all their rights in and authorimlng thc City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, to exm~ct water from the underground basin, underlying that certain real propen'y situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described as follows: All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of Caiifomia, as shown and delineated on the attached Exhibits "A" and "B". NOW, THRREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Cupertino accept said "Quitclahn Deed and Authorization" so tendered; and IT IS FURTI-]M.R RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said "Quitcl~,im Deed and Authorization" and this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of thc City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of May, 2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS APN 35%19-012 21730 Alcazar Avenue Chiao-Fu Chang and Sue-Fay L. Chang, hereinafter referred to as the "GKANTOR", this ~ ~'~ day of 20 v / , hereby grant, bargain, assign, convey, remise, release and forever quitclaim unto the CITY OF CUPERTINO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as the "GRANTEE", its successors and assigns, all the right, rifle, interest, estate, claim and demand, both at law and in equity, and as well in possession as in expectancy of the GRANTOR as owner of that certain real property situate in the County of Santa Clara, State of California, and specifically described as follows: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" & "B" to pump, take or otherwise extract water from the underground basin or any underground strata in the Santa Clara Valley for beneficial use upon the lands overlying said underground basin, and GRANTOR hereby irrevocably aufl~orized GRANTEE, its successors and assigns, on behalf of the GRANTOR and its successors in ownership or overlying lands in the said lots to take from said underground basin within the said lots any and all water which the owner or owners of said overlying lands may be entitled to take for beneficial use on said lands and to supply such water to such owner or owners or others as a public utility; provided, however, that nothing contained in this instrument shall be deemed to authorize GRANTEE to enter upon any of the lots delineated upon the above described map or to authorize GRANTEE to make any withdrawal of water which will result in damage to any building or structure erected upon said lots. This assignment, conveyance and authorization is made for the benefit of lots within the above described plat and description and shall bind the owner of said lots within said plat and description. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, GRANTOR has executed this instrument the day and year first above written. Sue-Fay LJhang .~. (Acknowledgment and Notarial Seal Attached) STATE OF CALIFOP. NiA } COUN~ OF SANTA CLARA } SS. o~ 3/.~o , .o~, ~.or. ., Ar.*,-~ /~.~ ~t /*~J , a NoCary Public in ~d for sa~d'C~gy ~d Sga~e, ~rso~lly appeared ~he ~sis of the pers~(s} w~se scribed to ~ wi=bin ins=~= ~d ack- the sa~ in h~/=heir au=~r~zed capa- city(ies), ~d t~t ~ ~r/~eir sig- ~=~e on =he ins~= t~ ~rs~(s), or ~he ~=i=y upon b~half of w~ the per- s~(s) ac=ed, ~e~Ued 2he ~=~n=. WI~SS ~ ~ ~d official s~l. (No=arial s=a~ or seal) 0 ~}j~,~... ~ ...~ // DESCRIB~ AT EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION OF LAND FOR OUITCLAIM DEED FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS All that certain real property situated in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California being all of Lot 20 as shown upon that certain Map entitled "Tract No. 300, Map of Noonan Subdivision-Unit 2", filed for record in the Office of the Recorder to the County of Santa Clara, State of California on May 6th, 1946 in Book 10 of Maps at Page 16. Refer to EXHIBIT "B", Plat, which is hereby made a part of this description. Date: August 29, 2000 City File No.: 52,264 Address: 21730 Alcazar Ave. APN: 357-19-012 E ×i-tll~l T"t~" I°LAT OF QLJITCLAI ~ DEED FOP. t. JIqDER~'ROUI,,ID WA-TE R 1~I~'H TD AODI?.~-5~: ~175o ALCA-ZI~ Atlk. CUP~ RT~o, CA.. City Hall ~ 10300 Torte Avenue C]~YOF Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 ~ (408) 777-3354 CUPERTINO F^x (408)777-3333 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SUMMARY AGENDA ITEM [ [0 AGENDA DATE May 7, 2001 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Resolution No. 01- [{}5: Approving Final Contract Change Order No. 13 for the Senior Center Project in the amount of $21,111.00, for a total conm~ct amount of $3,760,822.00. BACKGROUND On June 8, 1999, the Council approved a contract with McCrary Construction for the Senior Center Project in the amount of $3,357,800. Since that time, 12 Contract Change Orders (CCO) aggregating $381,911.00 have been approved for various additional items of work, including CCO No. 3 in the amount of $175,674.00, for the replacement restroom to serve Memorial Park. This is the final contract change order for this project. A number of minor changes and additions continued to become necessary as the building neared completion. All of these modifications are similar to those recommended in CCO #12 which was recently approved by the Council. Most are due to minor unforeseen conditions that would have been difficult to anticipate at the time the construction drawings were completed or are needed to adequately accommodate the programs in the center. The items in final CCO #13 include such things as the following: 1. Installation of Fire Marshall required electrical outlets behind the stoves. 2. Reconfiguration of elec~ical wiring and conduits to restroom fans. 3. Modification of electrical wiring to motor starters for the rooftop fans. 4. Relocate magnetic door holders for door to the reception hall. 5. Installation of 120v power to fireplace. 6. Installation of alarm on rollup fire door 7. Project overhead due to 10 additional working days All of the items result in a total cost of $21,111.00, which was negotiated with the contractor. Staff believes this represents a reasonable price for the work involved. This change order cost is within the approved project budget. 1 Ptfnt~d on Recycled paper ' ~ b -( STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 0~-I0~ approving final Contract Change Order No. 13 for the Senior Center Project in the amount of $21,111.00, for a total contract amount of $3,760,822.00. Submitted by: Approved for submission: Ralph A. Qualls, Jr. David W. Knapp Director of Public Works City Manager 2 RESOLUTION NO. 01- I05 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 13 FOR CUPERTINO SENIOR CENTER, PROJECT NUMBER 99-9210 RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Cupertino, California, that Change Order No. 13 for change~ to work which has b~en approved by the Director of Publlc Works and this day presented to this Council, be, and it h~reby approved in conjunction with thc project known CUPERTINO SENIOR CENTER, PROJECT NUMBER 99-9210 BE rr FURTHRR RESOLVED that funds are availablc and no furthe~ appropriation is necessary. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of thc City of Cupertino this __day of May, 2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino ~ Civy Hall 10300 Torr~ Av~m~u¢ CITY OF cuportino. CA 9SOI4-32S5 (408) 777-3354 CUPEKTINO F x(4o , 777-3333 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Summar AGENDA ITEM 1'~ AGENDA DATE May 7, 2001 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Resolution No. 01- ~0~: Approving Conlract Change Order No.1 in the amount of $12,955.00 for Homestead Road and Tantau Avenue Corridors Traffic Signals Upgrade Project, Project No. 9527 and Homestead Road Arterial Management Project Phase II Project No. 9530. The adjusted total contraet amount is $53,305.00 BACKGROUND On September 20, 2000, the City Council approved a contract for $39,350.00 with Republic Electric for the Homestead Road and Tantau Avenue Corridors Traffic Signals Upgrade Project, Project No. 9527 and Homestead Road Arterial Management Project Phase II Project No. 9530. -- Originally these projects were bid together to save on time and material costs. These projects include the installation of emergency vehicle preemption units, spread specmun radio assemblies, and electrical enclosures. Since that time, staffhas determined that it is cost effective and time efficient to also install two new traffic signal cabinets along with Projects No. 9527 and No. 9530. Funding for the traffic signal cabinet improvemems is in conjunction with the San Tomas Aqulno Project. The San Tomas Aquino Project will provide for bicycle paths, routes and lanes and the installation of two traffic signal cabinets, one at Tantau Avenue & Vallco Parkway and a second at Tantan Avenue & Pruneridge Avenue. The price for each traffic signal cabinet installation is $5,000.00. This cost is representative of current competitive pricing for traffic signal cabinet installation. The cost of the installation of the traffic signal cabinets is $10,000.00. Once the work began, the traffic signal technician inspecting the work became aware that there was a need for 3 larger puli boxes at 2 locations, Homestead & Wolfe Roads and Homestead Road & Tantau Avenue. The cost of the larger [No. 6] pull box and its installation is $627.00. Two were installed one at Homestead & Wolfe Roads and another at Homesmad Road and Tantau Avenue for a total of $1,254.00. The cost to saw cut and remove sidewalk and to replace the sidewalk for installation of another No. 6 pull box at Homestead Road & Tentau Avenue, is $1,701.00. This work is needed to accommodate all the necessary wiring to finish the work. 1 PrintedooRecycledPaper {'~{ A summary of the above items for the CCO No. 1 is as follows: Item Quantity Price Subtotal No. 6 pull box 3 $627.00 $1,881.00 Remove & install concrete LS $1,074.00 $1,074.00 Traffic signal cabinet 2 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 Total $12,955.00 The total cost of the work for this contract including this proposed change order is: Original Contract $39,350.00 Change Order No. 1 $12,955.00 Revised Contract $52,305.00 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 01- ]0{~ , approving Contract Change Order No. 1 for Homestead Road and Tantau Avenue Corridors Traffic Signals Upgrade Project, Project No. 9527 & Homestead Road, Arterial Management Project Phase II Project No. 9530 in the amount of $12,955.00, for total contract amount of $52,305.00. Submitted by: Approved for submission: Ralph A. Qualls, Jr. David W. Knapp Director of Public Works City Manager City Hall 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3202 (408) ???-3354 CITY OF FAX (408) 777-3333 CUPE INO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HOMESTEAD ROAD AND TANTAU AVENUE CORRIDORS TRAFFIC SIGNALS UPGRADE, PROJECT NO. 9527 AND HOMESTEAD ROAD ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT PROJECT, PHASE H, PROJECT NO. 9530 CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 Contractor Republio Electric 7120 Redwood Boulevard Novato, CA 94945-4114 The following changes are hereby approved: IA. Install (2) T$2 Type 1 Signal Controller Cabinets $10,000.00 a. TantnuAvenue & Vallco Parkway - b. Tantau Avenue & Pruueridge Avenue .... lB. Purchase & install 3 No. 6 pull boxes 1,881.00 lC. Additional work to sawcut, remove & replace sidewalk 1,074.00 (~ Homestead Road & Tanteu Avenue $12,955.00 Total Project: Original Con~act $39,350.00 Change Order No. 1 12,955.00 Revised Contract $52.305.00 CONTRACTOR CITY OF CUPERTINO Ralph A. Quails, Jr. Title Director of Public Works Date City Counc'fl: May 7, 2001 Resolution No. 01- RESOLUTION NO. 01-106 A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING CON'rP. ACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 FOR HOMESTEAD ROAD AND TANTAU AVENUE CORRIDORS TRAFFIC SIGNALS UPGRADE, PROJECT NUMBER 9527 AND HOMESTEAD ROAD ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT PROJECT, PHASE II, PROJECT NUMBER 9530 RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Cupertino, California, that Change Orde~ No. 1 for changes to work which has been approved by the Director of Public Works and this day presented to this Council, be, and it hereby approved in conjunction with the project known as HOMESTEAD ROAD AND TANTAU AVENUE CORRIDORS TRAFFIC SIGNALS UPGRADE, PROJECT NUMBER 9527 AND HOMF_,STEAD ROAD ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT PROJECT, PHASE II, PROJECT NUMBER 9530 BE ri' FURTHER RESOLVED that funds are available and no further appropriation is necessary. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this __ day of May, 2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino City Hall 10300 Tone Avenue Cupe~ino, CA 95014-3255 CITY OF Telephone: (408) 777-3220 CUPE INO DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SUMMARY Agenda Item No. I ~ Meeting Date: May 7, 2001 SUBfECT AND ISSUE Approval to replace the Accounting Technician position with the position of Finance Manager in the Finance Division of the Admiuis~ative Services Dep~utu,ent BACKGROUND In 1994, Administrative Services consisted of the Finance, Human Resources, and City Clerk Divisions. Since that time, the department has expanded to include Economic Development, Information Technology, Disaster Preparedness, Leadership Cupertino and Tomorrow's Leaders Today. With the depamnent's expansion, there is a need for a stronger assistant to provid~ the "hands on" managerial oversight that is crucial to the Finance Division. We are therefore proposing Chat we replace our vacant position with that of a Finance Manager. This will provide an opportunity to reorganize Finance and provide for a strong manager consistent with the other divisions in the Administrative Services Depamnent (see attached organization chart). FUNDING Annual funding for the new Finance Manager position would be approximately $121,000 including sala~ and benefits. Because this position would be replacing an Accounting Technician, costing $78,702 (salary and benefits), the net increase to the general fund is approximately $42,300. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval to ~place the Accounting Technician position with that of a Finance Manager effective July l, 2001. Submitted by: Approved for submission: Car~! A. Atwood David W. Knapp Director of Administrative Services City Manag~ Administrative Services Department Dir~clor/ Cit7 Trcasurar Carol At~ Adminislmtive Secretary -- Dotty Steenf~ I I I I I I I f Lcadct..hip [ Emcrgcncy Information Human Cily Economic Proframs [ P~rednen Technology F[nnnce Resources CIc~ Development t I I I I I I Gall Jensen Cupc~ino Marsha Gsrcla Manager Manager Man~cr Kimbcdy Smi~ Bad~un Nun~ Dmyl Stow Mariynh ~urntm Vacnnt Ssndy Abe Specialist Coordi~tor Intern Je~nif= Chang Tinn Hwang Technician Enforcement Nikki Nowack 8nnclm FIm'cntino Vacnnl Alex Wykoff Grace Jtytuts~ Quintou Adams City Clerk Account Clerk Account Clcd~ Persmnd Code Admini~ative Oaylcne Osl~wnc ~ Dixie Fsrley T~:hnidan Enforce~nenl Clcrk II blada Jinline~ ] [ Gazy Koenshrep-.s Katen Bet'nard I ~ ~fomm~t Re~gio~i~ lat~m ~ 6~i*rt~z I I ~ffT~ibt~ C~ndi~¢ Ki~ J~n~ifg City Hall 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 (408) 77%3354 CITY OF : i ! FAX (408) 777-3333 CUPERTINO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Summary AGENDA ITEM I ~ AGENDA DATE May 7, 2001 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Resolution No. 01-10'7: Releasing covenants on two expired deferred agreements for improvements on the property at 10157 Foothill Boulevard. (APN No. 342-14-116) BACKGROUND The fa-st deferred agreement was executed and recorded on January 31, 1978 and the second one was executed and recorded on April 13, 1984. The deferred agreements are for the installation of public improvements such as curbs, gutters, storm lines and asphalt street work. Both agreements had an expiration date of 5 years and 6 months from the date of the agreement if the City did not exercise its fights under the agreements. Apparently the performance requirements under both agreements (installation of street improvements) was deferred with the expectation that adjacent properties would develop within the 5 1/2 year timeframe allowing all improvements to be done together. For whatever reason the City did not exercise its right to require the improvements and now the agreements have expired. The property owners have now requested that the City clear thc expired deferred agreements off the current property title. Since these agreements have expired the City does not forfeit any benefit by releasing these covenants. In the future, should these properties redevelop or be improved above 25% of their value, the City could then evaluate the need to require any necessary impwvements at that time. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adoption of Resolution No. 01- 10't, releasing the covenants ruvnlng of two expired deferred agreements on the property at 10157 Foothill Boulevard (APN No. 342-14-116). Submitted by: Approved for submission: Ralph A. Qualls, Jr. David W. Knapp Director of Public Works City Manager P#nte~ on Recycled P~aer RESOLUTION NO. 01- 107 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AUTHORIZING THE RELEASE OF COVENANTS RUNNING WITH THE LAND AND RELEASING TWO EXPIRED DEFERRED AGREEMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10157 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD (APN NO. 342-14-116) WHEREAS, two deferred agreements were executed and recorded on January 31, 1978 and April 13, 1984 for public improvements such as curbs, ~utters, storm lines, and asphalt slrect work for property located at 10157 Foothill Boulevard; and WHEREAS, both airecments had an expiration date of 5 year and 6 months from the date of the agreement provided thc City did not exercisc its rights undcr the ai;reemant; and WHEREAS, the City did not exercise its rights to require the improvements and no longer have those rights due to expiration of said agreements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Cupertino: 1. That the City hereby authorizes the release of covenants running with the land for the property located at 10157 Foothill Boulevard and authorizes the Mayor to sign the release. 2. That the City hereby authorizes the release of the ~xpked deferred agreements and the clearance of said deferred a/reements from the current property title. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular mectin~ of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this __. day of May, 2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino City Hall 10300 Torre Avenue cuportino, CA 95014-3255 (408) 777-3354 CITY Ol: FAX (408) 777-3333 CUPEILTINO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Summary AGENDA ITEM ,~0 AGENDA DATE May 7, 2001 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Setting a public hearing for June 4, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. to consider modifying rates and charges proposed by the San Jose Water Company BACKGROUND The San Jose Water Company has recently notified the City of its intention to increase water rates for its Cupertino customers. A letter dated April 27, 2001 from Vice President Richard Balocco is attached for the Council's information. As noted in Mr. Balocco's letter, any new rates require City approval in accordance with the Water Lease Agreement between the City and the Water Company. Section 15.04.030 of thc Cupertino Municipal Code provides that a public hearing be set by the City Clerk to be held within 60 days of the request for a rate change. The ordinance further provides that noticing for the hearing be provided by the Water Company at its expense at least 14 days before the hearing date. Therefore, it is recommended that the hearing be scheduled for June 4 at 7:00 p.m. as part of that day's regularly scheduled Council meeting. Staff will provide a repor~ on the rate changes with background information and appropriate recommendations for the hearing date as part of the June 4 Council agenda. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council set a public hearing on San Jose Water Company proposed rate change for June 4, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. Submitted by: Approved for submission: ·Qualls, Jr. ~ David W. Knapp Director of Public Works City Manager F~ 4G8 27~79a~ April 27, 2001 Mr. David Kuapp City Manager ·. city of Cup ino 10300 Torre Avenue Cuperlino, CA 95014-3255 Dear David: Enclosed you will ~ a copy of the latest San Jose Water Company (S~'C) tariff rates which were approved by the California Public Utilities Commission (C?UC) on April 19, 2001. These new rates require approval by the City of Cupeffino as specified in Section No. 8 of the Water Lease Agreement between the City of Cupertino and S.IWC. San Jose Water Company's request for the rate increase was ~ed with the CPUC in Fchmaty of 2000. As required, at the time of the filing all SP~VC customers were notified of SP~VC's filing. A copy of the notice to Customers regard'u!g the filing ofthls application is enclosed for your review. The filing was extensively reviewed by the CPUC staff. With the CPUC's April 19th decision, all issues have been resolved and new rates have been authorized for SIWC. The rate change authorized by the CPUC will increase the average customer bill by approximately $2.32 per month, or about 8 cents per day. Also authorized as part of the rate change are surcharges associated with rccovcry, water quality and expenses associated with catastrophic events. A breakdown of some of the significant items rcco~miT~xi in the newly authorized rates is as follows: · A record $26 million Capital Replacement Budget for 2001 escalating to $28 million in 2002; · An increase of $3 million in depreciation expense to recover prior capital replacements not previously recosjnl-ed in rates. · A 250% increase in water quality expenses associated with compliance with new 26.-2- Mr. David ~Cn~ April 25, 2001 Page 2 A brief breakdown oft. he ~l~znses for SJWC: · Import water from the Santa Clara Valley Water District 20% · Tax paid to Santa Clara Valley Water District for p~mping of ground water 19% · Purchased powe~ (PG&E) 3% · Water dis~ibut~on cost including operation, maintenance and admini,~on 22% · Tax~ ~1 f~ ~0% · D~pr~ciation ~0% · Rat~ of return Although, th~ ave~'ag~ customer bill i~ incre~ing by about 8% this year, over time our rates havz inc~a~l by only a total of 12% when compared to 1992 or about ~.2% per year. Plca~z l~t mz know ifyo~ ne~! any additional iRformation to procz~ th/~ notification. Since~ly, Vi~, President, Corporat~ Commm-dcatiom F~lo~um Ang¢la ¥ip P~ Cit~ Hall 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Tzlephone: (408) 777-3213 FAX: (408) 77%3109 C]'['Y 0]: DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES CUPEP INO DIVISION OF HUMAN RESOURCES SUMMARY Agenda Item No. ~ Meeting Date: May 7, 2001 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Approval of a $250 monthly automobile allowance for the recently established classification of Senior Civil Engineer. BACKGROUND In February 2001, the City Council appwved the addition of a new Senior Civil Engineer position in the Public Works Department. As described in the February staff report, the Senior Civil Engineer classification was established at the same level of responsibility and compensation as City Traffic Engineer. Although the salaries for Senior Civil Engineer and Traffic Engineer are set at the same range, a disparity exists in respect to automobile allowance. Resolution No. 00-185, Policy No. 4, of the Unrepresented Employees' Compensation Program authorizes a $250 monthly automobile allowance for the Traffic Engineer as compensation for use of a personal vehicle on City business. The Senior Civil Engineer classification also requires regular use of a personal vehicle for Iransporiation to various worksites, City and inter-agency meetings, and public presentations to advisory committees, citizen groups, boards and commissions. Due to the comparable nature of these two engineering management classes and similar personal vehicle usage requirements, the recommended automobile allowance for Senior Civil Engineer is necessary to maintain equitable internal compensation relationships. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve Resolution No. 01- }0g mending Resolution No. 00-185, Policy No. 4, to add a $250 monthly automobile allowance for the recently established classification of Senior Civil Engineer. Submitted by: Approved for submission: Sandy Abe David W. ICnnpp Human Resources Manager City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 01- 108 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 00-185, UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM, TO ADD A $250 MONTHLY AUTOMOBILE ALLOWANCE FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER TO POLICY NO. 4, AUTOMOBILE ALLOWANCES AND MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENTS WHEREAS, City Council Resolution No. 00-185, Unrepresented Employees' Compensation Program, set forth a number of policies, including Policy No. 4, Automobile Allowances and Mileage Reimbursements; and WHEREAS, Policy No. 4 authorizes automobile allowances for specified classifications which requir~ the use of personal vehicles for City business as a condition of employment; and WHEREAS, the ~cently established classification of Senior Civil Engineer is required to regularly use a personal vehicle for said City business. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Cupertino hereby amends Resolution No.00-185, Policy No. 4 to add a $250 monthly automobile allowance for the classification of Senior Civil Engineer. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of ,2001 by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino Ci~ Hall 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (40S) 777-3220 CITY OF Fax: (408) 77%3366 CUPE INO DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SUMMARY Agenda Rem No. ;2.~. Meeting Date: May 7, 2001 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Correction of Fee Schedule for Stevens Creek Specific Plan BACKGROUND All user fees are reviewed each year in conjunction with the p~l~aration of the budget. To the extent possible, fees cover the cost of providing services. After the approval of the fee schedule on April 6, an error was detected in the square footage rate for the Stevens Creek Specific Plan. The correct rate is .044 per square foot inst~cl of.048 per square foot. _ RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 01-109 rescinding Resolution No. 01-087; amending the Stevens Creek Specific Plan to reflect the correct rate of .044 per square foot; and making user fees effective July 1, 2001. Submitted by: Approved for submission: Cfirol A. Atwood David W. Knapp Director of Administrative Services City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 01-109 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 01-087 AND ADOPTING A REVISED SCHEDULE OF USER FEES WHEREAS, the State of California requires fees charged for service rendered not to exceed the cost of delivering said services; and WHEREAS, a public hearing has been held to review user fees; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino has established guidelines for setting user fees; NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED that: 1. Rescind Resolution 01-187. 2. Adopt revised fee schedule that includes a correction to Schedule C, Stevens Creek Specific Plan. 3. User fees arc effective July 1, 2001. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of May, 2001 by the following vote: Vote Members of thc City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino CITY OF CUPERTINO SUMMARY OF USER FEES Resolution 01-109/May Fees Effective July 1, 2001 De~mhuent Schedule General A Engineering B Planning C Building D Recreation E CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule A - General Copy Service = per sheet $0.10 Microfilm/Microfiche Printout $0.50/frame Returned Check Charge $20.00 Late Payment on 30 Day Delinquent City 7% per annum Invoices Property Liens Administrative Fee $30 per book/block/parcel lien Municipal Code Book $76.00 Williamson Act Filings $104.00 Tape Dubbing - Audio or Video OTI-IS) Full Tape $20.00/tape Selective Dubbing $24.00/tape Fingerprinting Processing State Fee $32.00 Plus $12.00 City Administrative Fee Handbill Permit $86.00 Solicitor Ptii,it $86.00 Plus $44.00 Fingerprinting Fee Massage Establishment Administrative Fee $76.00 Duplicate Business Licenses $5.00 Taxi Driver Pc,mits - Administrative Fee $10.00 Library Community Room Use Fee $25.00 Non-Refundable Fee $100.00 Cleaning Deposit Business License Exemption Adminisirative Fee $35.00 Business License Database $100.00 New Business Monthly Reports 15.00/month Dangerous Dog Registration Fee Annual Registration $170.00 Sign Removal (Public Right-of-Way) $5.00/sign 1 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule A - General (continued) GIS Maps Standard pre-formatted maps $15.00/map Customized maps (based on complexity) $50.00-100.00 Data on CDROM $15.00 Police Disturbances Actual Cost * Abatement Fee Actual Cost * Research Fee (For reformation requests Actual Cost * greater than 1/2 hour.) Graffiti Cleanup Actual Cost * Damage to City ProperW Actual Cost * Grounds Streets Facilities Traffic - Engineering Traffic - Maintenance Code Enforcement Actual Cost * * Actual cost is: 1) Employee hourly rote plus 40% for benefits and overhead, and 2) cost of materials, contractors and supplies. 2 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule B - Engineering Street Cuts Permit to excavate in public right-of-way (improvement costs up to $216.00 $3,300). Permit to excavate in public right-of-way (improvement costs 5% of over $3,300) Improvement Costs Grading Permit To insure grading conforms to City ordinances and council approvals. Minimum Fee or 6% of Improvement Value $182.12 Parcel Map/Tract Maps To insure maps conform to state map act and council approvals. Parcel Map $493.00 1-4 lots Tract Map $493.00 + $10.65 each lot over 4 Plan Checking and Inspection Review only (no permit issued) $344.00 Fern,it Fee or $2,268.00 Residential 5% of Site Improvement minimum Commercial/Office/Industrial 6% of Site Improvement Annexation (plus county filing fees) $665.00 Certificates of Compliance To verify lots were not created in violation of local ordinances or state map act. $698.00 Encroachment Permit $160.00 Residential $204.00 Non-Residential To allow private facilities or improwments to be placed in public right-of-way. To allow a storage box to be placed in public right-of-way. $160.00 Residential CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule B - Engineering (continued) Lot Line Adjustment $360.00 City must verify that lots afier adjustment conform to zoning and setbacks. Power Cost Developer is responsible for one year power cost for slreetlights. The latest effective PG&£ rate schedule approved by the PUC. Soil and Geology Report $30.00 Short Repor~ Plus any materials/service fees. $179.00 Long Report Engineerins Copies Microfiche 7.70/copy Engineering Copies 8.80/copy Microfilm 9.85/copy Bluelme 4.$0/copy Banners $282.00 Transportation Pcmfit State Fee ($16.00 Single) State Fee ($90.00 Annual) Telecommunication Facility Fee (5% increase per year) Installation Rate $1.50/lineal font of conduit/year Occupancy Rate $0.75/lineal foot of leased conduit/year 4 CITY OF CUPERTI~O Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2002 Schedule C - Definition of Planning Fee Services Full A~lication An application which typically involves all steps of the development review process including Pre- application Review, Environmental Review Committee, the Planning Commission, and the City Council. The application requires an advertised public hearing before the Planning Commission and a public hearing or agendized review before the City Council. Applications requiring the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) are included in this category. Thc application fee for particularly complicated applications and those requiring the preparation of an EIR will be based upon an hourly rate as described in the fee schedule. Limited AI~lication An application which involves all steps of the development review process outlined in thc Full Application description with the exception of thc City Council. Minor AI~lication An application which involves minimal steps in the review process and is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. The staff evaluation and report preparations are less extensive. The application requires Planning Commission review. Miscellaneous Aimlication An application which typically involves a non-noticed review by the Planning Commission. The application does not typically require pre-application meetings or Environmental Review and involves minimal staff preparation. Examples of this application are interpretation or clarification of conditions of approval or ordinance requirements, sign exceptions, fence exceptions, and tentative map and use permit extensions. Appeal A request from the project applicant or interested party to reverse or amend a decision made by staff or an advisory body. An appointed public official serving on the board that made the decision subject to the appeal, an appointed public official serving on a board that is directly affected by the dec/sion and the City Council members are exempted from the fee requirement. Directors A!~lication An application which receives final approval by staff either via an advertised public hearing or non-hearing format. The application may involve a pre-application meeting and/or Environmental Review committee review. CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109AVlay 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule C - Definition of Planning Fee Services (continued) Temporar~ Siam Permit A staff review of a temporary sign application which inchid~s an evaluation of the sign request, the entry into the temporary log end sit~ review b~ Code Enforcement Officers. The p~,mit fee is in addition to the submit'mi of a deposit to guarantee removal of the sign upon expiration of the temporary permit. Housin~ Mitigation Fee Fee collected is USed to construot new affordable residential units for Cupertino residents end employees. The fees mitigate the need for affordable units caused by expending offices creatin~ new jobs and new residential development, offiee, P-,8.D, induslrial and residential development. NOTES: Combined applications which are processed simultaneously (i.e., filed at th~ same time) will be classified based on highest rating. Mixed use applications will be classified based upon the highest intensity and review process. The Director of Community Development will have discretion to classify projects based upon the above criteria. 6 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule C - Planning Full Application Zoning $2.540.00 Tentative Map $2,540.00 Use Permit $2,079.00 Applicable base fee plus hourly staff rate in excess of 48 hours $49.00 Limited Application Use P¢~ i~fit $1,459.00 Tentative Map $1,564.00 Amendment $1,203.00 Minor Application Use Permit $1,403.00 Tentative Map $1,403.00 Hillside Exception $1,336.00 Miscellaneous Application General $526.00 Architectural and Site Approval $449.00 Sign/Fence/Height Exception $188.00 Tentative Map and Use Pemdt Extension $510.00 Planning Commission Interpretation $432.00 R-1 Design Review/Exception/Second Story Deck $561.00 Director Tentative Map - Lot Consolidation $881.00 Variance $970.00 Minor Amendmenffremporary Use Permit $199.00 Temporary Sign Permit $43.00/ calendar year Appeal Amount to be refunded if appeal is granted. $138.00 Housing Mitigation In-Lieu Fees Residential $1.07/sq. it. Offiee/Industrial/R&D $2.13/sq. it. Stevens Creek Blvd. Specific Plan Fee ...~ n,~t.,,.v,v.a .... n $.044/sq. it. 7 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109AMay 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 · -- Schedule C - Planning (continued) General Plan Amendment Direct costs for staff, consultants, and materials. Sign $2,479.00 agreement before application is aec~ted. (Retainer) Development Agreement Direct cost of City Attorney plus full application zoning fee. $2,479.00 Sign agreement before application is accepted. (Retainer) 8 CITY OF .CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building Valuation Schedule OCCUPANCY AND TYPE REMODEL COST PER SO. Fr. COST PER NEW SO. Fr. 1. APARTMENT HOUSES *Type I or II F.R. $37.87 $115.26 Type V - Ma~omy or Type III $31.22 $ 93.68 Type V - Wood Frame $28.87 $ 86.56 Type I - Basement Garage $18.31 $ 39.55 2. AUDITORIUMS Type 1 or 11 F.R. $39.37 $110.63 Type 11 - l-Hour $28.87 $ 80.12 Type 11 - N $28.83 $ 75.82 Type 111 - l-Hour $28,87 $ 84.18 Type I 11 - N $28.87 $ 79.89 Type V - 1-Hour $28.87 $ 80.57 Type V - N $28.63 $ 75.14 3. BANKS *Type 1 or 11 F.R. $50.00 $156.23 Type I1 - l-Hour $49.81 $115.15 Type 11 - N $49,75 $111.42 Type 111 - l-Hour $51.03 $127,13 Type 111 - N $50.97 $122.49 Type V - 1-Hour $40.52 $115.15 Type V - N $40.48 $110.29 4. BOWLING ALLEYS Type II - l-Hour $24.13 $ 53.79 Type 11 -N $24.13 $ 50.29 Type 111 - 1-Hour $24.15 $ 58.53 Type 111 -N $24.13 $ 54.81 Type V - 1-1 Hour $24.10 $ 39,55 5. CHURCHES Type 1 or 11 F.R. $35.51 $104.75 Type 11 - l-Hour $28.84 $ 78.54 Type 11 - N $28.83 $ 74.69 Type 111 - l-Hour $28.87 $ 85.43 Type 111 -N · $28.87 $ 81.70 Type V - l-Hour $28.87 $ 79.89 Type V - N $28.83 $ 75.15 *Add 0.5 percent m total cost for each story over ~hree **Deduct 11 percent for mini-warehouses ***Deduct 20 percent for "shell only" buildings The Building OIT~cial is authorized to implement new Building Valuation Schedules approved by the LC.BO. CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building Valuation Schedule OCCUPANCY AND TYPE REMODEL COST PER SO. Fr. COST PER NEW SO. Fr. 6. CONVALESCENT HOSPITALS *Type 1 or 11 F.R. $51.14 $146.90 Type 11 i-Hour $37.03 $101.93 Type 111 - 1-Hour $37.03 $104.53 Type V - l=Hour $36.99 $ 98.54 ?. DWELLINGS Type V - Masonry $34.66 $102.27 Type V - Wood Frame $34.66 $ 97.52 Basements Semi-Finished $14.92 $ 24.52 Un£mished $14.92 $ 18.76 8. FIRE STATIONS Type I or I1 F.R. $40.46 $120.80 Type 11 - l-Hour $30.89 $ 79.44 Type 11 - N $30.86 $ 74.92 Type 111 - 1-Hour $30.89 $ 87.01 Type 111 - N $30.89 $ 83.28 Type V - 1-Hour $30.93 $ 81.59 Type V - N $30.86 $ 77.41 9. HOMES FOR 'rite ELDERLY Type 1 or 11 F.R. $38.20 $109.50 Type 11 - 1-Hour $30.89 $ 88.93 Type 11 - N $30.89 $ 85.09 Type 111 - 1-Hour $30.93 $ 92.55 Type 111 - N $30.90 $ 88.82 Type V - 1-Hour $30.90 $ 89.50 Type V - N $30.89 $ 86.33 10. HOSPITALS *Type I or 11 F.R. $59.42 $172.33 Type 111 - 1-Hour $49.97 $142.61 Type V - 1-Hour $46.44 $136.05 *Add 0.5 percent to total cost for each story over three **Deduct I 1 percent for mini-warehouse ***Deduct 20 percent for "shell only" buildings ****Add 25% for hazardous occupancy or high toch The Building Official is authorized to implement new Building Valuation Schedules approved by the LC.B.O. 10 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building Valuation Schedule OCCUPANCY AND TYPE REMODEL COST PER SO. Fr. COST PER NEW SO. Fr. 11. HOTELS AND MOTELS *Type I or 11 F.R. $38.09 $106.67 Type 111 - 1 -Hour $35.78 $ 92.32 Type 111 - N $30.03 $ 88.03 Type V - l-Hour $30.06 $ 80.46 Type V - N $30.03 $ 78.76 - 12. INDUSTRIAL PLANTS **** Type 1 or 11 F.R. $23.05 $ 60.12 Type 11 - l-Hour $23.00 $ 41.81 Type 11 - (Stock) $23.00 $ 38.42 Type 111 - 1-Hour $23.02 $ 46.10 Type 111 - bl $23.02 $ 43.39 Tilt=Up $23.02 $ 31.64 Type V - 1-Hour $23.02 $ 43.39 Type V - N $23.00 $ 39.78 13. JAILS Type 1 or 11 F.R. $58.24 $167.92 Type 111 - l-Hour $54.79 $153.57 Type V- 1-Hour $44.02 $115.15 14. LIBRARIES Type 1 or 11 F.R. $42.86 $122.83 Type 11 - 1-Hour $30.03 $ 89.84 Type 11 - lq $30.03 $ 85.43 Type 111 - 1-l-Hour $30.06 $ 94.92 Type 111 - N $30.06 $ 90.17 Type V - 1-Hour $30.06 $ 89.27 Type V - bl $30.03 $ 85.43 15. MEDICAL OFFICES **** Type I or 11 F.R. $51.02 $126.11 Type 11 - l-Hour $38.16 $ 97.29 Type 11 -N $38.16 $ 92.43 Type 111 - l-Hour $38.20 $102.49 Type 111 - N $38.16 $ 98.31 Type V - l-Hour $38.16 $ 95.15 Type V - lq $38.16 $ 91.87 *Add 0.5 percent to total cost for each story over lhree **Deduct 11 percent for mini-warehouse ***Deduct 20 percent fur "shell only" buildings ****Add 25% for hazardous or high tech occupancies The Building Offi¢iei is authorized to implement new Building Vnlnefion Sehedules approved by the LC.B.O. 11 CITY OF CUI~RTI~O R~soluflon 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effeeflve July 1, 2001 Schedule D = Building Valuation Schedule OCCUPANCY AND TYPE REMODEL COST PER SO. FT. COST PER NEW SO. Fr. 16. OFFICES Type 1 or 11 F.R. $46.36 $112.66 Type 11 - 1-Hour $31.15 $ 75.48 Type 11 -N $31.15 $ 71.87 Type 111 - 1-Hour $31.18 $ 81.47 Type 111 -N $31.22 $ 77.97 Type V - 1-Hour $31.15 $ 76.28 Type V- N $31.15 $ 71.87 17. PRIVATE GARAGES Wood Frame $14.92 $ 25.65 Masonry $14.92 $ 28.93 Open cavport~cove~d decks/pomhes $10.30 $ 17.52 Uncovered decks $10.12 $ 15.50 18. PUBLIC BUILDINGS Type 1 or 11 F.R. $53.31 $130.18 Type 11 - 1-Hour $40.48 $105.43 Type 11 - N $40.43 $100.80 Type 111 - 1-Hour $40.52 $109.61 Type 111 - N $40.48 $105.66 Type V - l-Hour $40.43 $100.23 Type V - N $40.43 $ 96.62 19. PUBLIC GARAGES Type I or 11 F.R. $23.05 $ 51.64 Type 1 or 11 Open Parking $23.00 $ 38.76 Type 11 - lq $23.00 $ 29.94 Type 111 - 1-Hour $23.00 $ 39.10 Type 111 - lq $23.00 $ 34.84 Type V -l-Hour $23.00 $ 35.60 20. RESTAURANTS *Type 111 - 1-Hour $57.85 $102.83 Type II1 -N $57.85 $ 99.33 Type V - 1-Hour $52.08 $ 94.13 Type V - N $49.58 $ 90,40 *Add 0.5 percent to total cest for each stor~ over tluee **Deduct 11 percent for m/nj-warehouse Deduct 20 percent for shell only buildings ****Add 25% for haT~,xtous or high tech occupancies The Building Offieiui is authorized to implement new Building Valuafion'Seheduie~ npproved by the I.C.B.O. 12 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building Valuation Schedule OCCUPANCY AND TYPE REMODEL COST PER SO. FT. COST PER NEW SO. FT. 21. SCHOOLS Type 1 or 11 F.R. $57.98 $117.41 Type 11 - l-Hour $42.71 $ 80.12 Type 111 - 1-Hour $42.71 $ 85.65 Type 111 - N $40.39 $ 82,49 Type V - 1-Hour $40.39 $ 80.34 Type V - N $40.34 $ 76.61 22. SERVICE STATIONS Type 11 -N $39.81 $ 70.96 Type I 11 - l-Hour $39.82 $ 73.90 Type V - 1-Hour $39.77 $ 62.94 Canopies $39.68 $ 29.61 23. STORES *Type I or 11 F.R. $35.79 $ 87.01 Type 11 - l-Hour $32.24 $ 53.22 Type 11 -N $32.28 $ 51.98 Type 111 - 1 -Hour $32.32 $ 64.75 Type 111 - N $32.28 $ 60.68 Type V - 1 Hour $32.25 $ 54.47 Type V - N $32.24 $ 50.40 24. THEATERS Type 1 or 11 F.R. $46.36 $115.94 Type 111 - 1-Hour $33.46 $ 84.41 Type 111 - N $32.39 $ 80.46. Type V - 1-Hour $31.15 $ 79.44 Type V - N $29.99 $ 75.15 25. WAREHOUSES** Type I or 11 F.R. $32.24 $ 52.09 Type 11 or V-l-Hour $16.10 $ 30.96 Type 11 orV-N $16.10 $ 29.15 Type 111 - 1-Hour $16.10 $ 35.14 Type 111 - N $16.09 $ 33.45 *Add 0.5 percent to total cost for each story over three **Deduct 11 percent for mini-wsrehousc ***Deduct 20 percent for "shell only" buildings ****Add 25% for h~rdous or high tech occupancies The Building Official is authorized to implement new Bu0ding Valuation Schedules approved by the I.C.B.O. 13 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building Valuation Schedule EQUIPMENT AND AIR CONDmONING Comm~cial $ 4.41 Residential $ 3.73 Sprinkler Systems $ 2.77 RETAINING W.~IJ.$, PER SO. FT. (HEIGIlT X LENGTH) AREA ABOVE GRADE Masonry $ 26.79 Concrete $ 23.58 The Building Oflieinl is authorized to implement new Building Valuation Sehedulas approved by the I.C,B.O. Address Changes $245.00 14 C~'I'~ OF CUPERT1/qO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building Permit Permit Valuation $I - $3,000 $77.00 $3,001 - 25,000 $87.00 for the first $3,000 plus $10.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000. $25,001 - 50,000 $300.00 for the first $25,000 plus $8.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000. $50,001 - 100,000 $500.00 for the first $50,000 plus $6.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000. $100,001 - 500,000 $788.00for thc first $100,000 plus $4.00 for ca~h additional $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and includ'mg $500,000. $500,001 - 1,000,000 $2,609.00 for the first $500,000 plus $3.00for each additional $1,000 or fi'action thereof, to and including $1,000,000. $1,000,001 - $4,,~40.00 for the first $1,000,000 and up plus $2.00 for each additional $1,000 or fi'action th~of. PLAN CHECKING Structural and Non-Stxuctural 85% of building p~..it fcc for each plan submitted. Each additional identical repeat plan for multi-unit rcsidontial developments will bc assessed at $22.20 each unit. Energy 30% of building permit fcc for each plan submitted. Each additional identical repeat plan for multi-unit residential developments will be assessed at $22.20 each unit. Repeat plan checks that c~cccd 2 reviews will be charged an hourly rate at $55.50 per hour. 15 CITY OF CUT~O Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building - Electrical Fees New Residential Buildings and Remodels that add additional square footage Thc following fees shall include all wiring and electrical equipment in or on each building, or other electrical equipment on the same premises constructed at the same time. Permit Fee $35,52 New multi-family residential buildinl~s (apartments and condominiums) having three or more living units not including the area of garages, carports and other non-commercial automobile storage areas conslxucted at the same time, per square font $ 0.06 New single and two-family residential buildings not including the area of garages, carports and other minor accessory buildings constructed at the same time, per square foot $ 0.07 For other types of residential occupancies and alterations, additions and modifications to existing residential buildings, use the UNIT FEE SCHEDULE New commercial buildings and completely remodeled s~aces not including the Area of garages, per square foot $ 0.12 Commercial alterations and modifications to existing buildings, use the Unit fee schedule 16 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building - Electrical UNIT FEE SctlEDULE Remodel - No additional square footage Permit Fee $ 35.52 Residential Appliances For fixed residential appliances or receptacle outlets for same, including wall-mounted electric ovens; counter mounted cooking tops; eleclric ranges, self-contained room console, or through-wall air conditioners; space heaters; fond waste grinders; dishwashers washing machines; water heaters; clothes dryers; or other motor operated appliances not exceeding one horsepower (I-IP) in rating each $ 4.44 NOTE: For other typas of air conditioners and other motor-driven appliances having larger electrical ratings, sec Power Apparatus. Nun-Residential Appliances For residential appliances and self-contained factory-wired, non-residential appliances non exceeding one horsepower (tiP), kilowatt (KW), or kilovotampere (KVA) in rating including medical and dental devices; fond, beverage, and ice cream cabinets; illuminated show cases; drinking fountains; vending machines; laundry machines; or other similar types of equipment, each $ 4.44 NOTE:For other types of air conditioners and other motor-driven appliances having larger electrical ratings, see Power Apparatus. Services For services of 600 volts or less and not over 200 amperes in rating, each $ 22.20 For services of 600 volts or less and over 200 amperes to 1,000 amperes in rating, each $ 44.40 For services over 600 volts over 1,000 amperes in rating, each $ 88.80 17 CITY OF CUPERTINO Re. solution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective .Iuly 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building - Electrical USER FEE SCH ~:OULE (continued) Remodel - No additional square footage Si/ns, Outline Lighting end Marquees For si/ns, outline lighting systems or marquees supplied from one branch circuit, each $ 22.20 For additional brench circuits within the same si/n, outline lighting sysmn or marquee, each $ 4.44 Miscellaneous Apparatus, Conduits, Conductors, end Special Circuits For eleeirical apparatus, conduits and conductors for which a permit is required but for which no fee is herein set forth $ 25.53 Power Device/Apparatus For motors, generators, transformers, rectifiers, synchronous converters, capacitors, industrial heating, ak conditioners and heat pumps, cooking or baking equipment end other apparatuses, as follows: Rating in horsepower (HP), kilowatts (KW), kilovolt-amperes (KVA), or kilovolt-ampercs-rcactive (KVAR): 1 unit $ 44.40 2 tbrough 5 units, each additional $ 16.65 6 end over, each additional $ ll.10 NOTE: 1.For equipment or appliances hav/ng more than one motor, Irensformer, heater, etc., the sum of the combined ratings may be used. 2.These fees include all switches, circuit breakers, conlractors, thermostats, relays and other d/rectly related control equipment. 18 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building - Electrical UNIT FEE SCHEDULE (continued) Remodel - No additional square footage Busways For trolley and plug-in-type busways, each 100 feet or fraction thereof $6.11 Note: An additional fee will be required for lighting f'mtures, motors and other appliances thst sre connected to trolley and plug-in-type busways. No fee is required for portable tools. Receptacle, Switch and Lighting Outlets For receptacle, switch, lighting or other outlets at which current is used or controlled, except services, feeders and meters. First 20 each $1.11 Additional outlets, each $0.67 NOTE: For multi-outlet assemblies, each 5 £eet or fraction thereof may be considered as one outlet. Lighting Fixtures For light'mg £mtures, sockets or other lamp holding devices First 20 each $1.11 Additional fixtures, each $0.67 For pole or platform~mounted lighting fixtures each $1.1 l For theatrical-type lighting fixtures or assemblies each $1.11 19 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building - Mechanical Fees New Residential Buildings and Remodels that add additional square footage. Thc following fees shall include all mechanical equipment in or on each building, or other mechanical equipment on the same l~mised constructed at the same time. New multi-family residential buildings (apa~ h.ents and condominiums) having three or more living units not including the area of garages, carports and other non-commereial automobile storage areas ¢onstru~-t~d at the same time, per square foot $0.06 New and single and two-family residential buildings not including the area of garages, carports and other minor accessory buildings ¢onsiructecl at the same time, per square foot $0.07 For other types of residential occupancies and alterations and modifications To existing building, usc the unit fee schedule New commor~ial buildings and comolctely remodeled soaces not including The area of garages, per square foot $0.12 Commercial alterations and modifications to existing buildings, use thc unit Fee schedule 20 CIT~ OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building - Mechanical Fees UNIT FEE Sc~H~:OULE Remodels - No additional Square Footage Permit Fee $ 35.52 For the repair of alteration of, or addition to each heating appliance, refrigeration unit, cooling unit, VAV boxes, absorption unit, or each heating, cooling, absorption, or evaporative cooling system, including installation of controls regulated by this Code. $ 12.21 For each air-handling unit, A/C units, heat pumps to and including 10,000 cubic feet per minute, including ducts at~ached thereto. Does not apply to central type. $ 8.33 NOTE: This fee shall not al~ply to an air-handling unit that is a portion of a factory-assembled appliance, cooling unit, evaporative cooler or absorption unit for which a p~,,.it is required elsewhere in this Code. For each air-handling unit A/C unit, heat pump over 10,000 cfm $ 14.43 For the installation or relocation of each commercial or industrial-type hood $127.65 For the installation of each residential hood that is served by a mechanical exhaust, including the ducts for such hood $ 8.33 For the installation or relocation of each forced-air or gravity-type furnace or burner, including ducts and vents attached to such apphance, up to and including 100,000 Btu/h $ 12.21 For each ventilation system which is not a portion of any heating or air conditioning system authorized by a permit $ 8.33 For each ventilation fan connected to a single duct $ 6.11 For the installation or relocation of each forced air or gravity type furnace or burner, including ducts and vents attached to such appliance over 100,000 Bto/h $ 14.43 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building - Mechanical Fees UNIT FEE SCHEDULE (continued) Remodels - No additional SquaFe Footage For the installation or relocation of each floor furnace, including vent $12.21 For the installation or relocation of each suspended heater, recessed wall heater or floor-mounted unit heater $12.21 For the installation, relocation or replacement of each appliance vent installed and not included in an appliance permit $ 6.11 For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor to and including three horsepower, or each absorption system to and including 100,000 Btu/h $12.21. For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over three horsepower to and including 15 horsepower, or each absorption system over 100,000 Bm/h and including 500,000 Btu/h $22.20 For the installation or relocation of each boiler or cOmpressor over 15 horsepower to and including 30 horsepower, or each absorption system over 500,000 Btu/h to and including 1,000,000 Btu/h $31.08 For thc installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over 30 horsepower to and including 50 horsepower, or for each absorption system over 1,000,000 Btu/h to and including 1,750,000 Btu/h $45.51 For the installation or relocation of each boiler or refrigeration compressor over 50 horsepower, or each absorption system over 1,750,000 Btu/h $77.70 For each appliance or piece of equipment regulated by this Code but not classed in other appliance categories, or for which no other fee is listed in this Code $ 8.33 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building - Plumbing Fees New Residential Buildings and Remodels that add additional square footage The following fees shall include all plumbing equipment in or on each building, or other plumbing equipment on the same premises constructed at the same time. New multi-family residential buildings (apa, tments and condominiums) having three or more living units not including the area of garages, carports and other non-commercial automobile storage areas conslructed at the same, per square font $0.06 New single and two-family residential buildings not including the area of garages, carports and other minor accessory buildings constructed at the same time, per square foot $0.0'7 For other types of residential occupancies and alterations and modifications To existing building, use the unit fee schedule New commercial buildings and comoletely remodeled soaces not including The area of garages, per square foot $0.12 Commercial alterations and modifications to existing buildings, use the unit fee schedule CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 .-. Schedule D - Building - Plumbing Fees ~ FEE S(~Ht:IDULE Remodel - No additional Square Footage P~mit Fee $35.52 For installation, alteration or repair of water piping water ~reating equipment $ 8.33 For repair or alteration of drainaga or vent piping, floor, area, condensate piping $ 8.33 For each plumbing fixture or trap or set of fixtures on one trap (including water, drainage piping and backflow protection therefor) $ 8.33 For each gas piping system of one (1) to four (4) outlets $ For each gas piping system of five (5) or more, per outlet $ 1.11 For each industrial waste pre-lrealment interceptor, including its trap and vent, excepting kitchen type grease lraps functioning as fixture traps $16.65 '-- Kitchen type trap and/or system $ 8.33 For each building sewer, sanitary sewer, and each trailer park sewer $19.98 Storm/rainwater systems per dram $ 8.33 For each water heater and/or vent $ 9.99 Water service $ 8.33 Re-pipe per fixtur~ $ 8.33 24 :Z.2.- ~..'? CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule D - Building - Plumbing Fees UNITS FEE SCI~,DULE Remodel - No additional Square Footage (continued) For each lawn sprinkler system on any one meter, including backflow $12.21 protection devices therefor Five (5) or more, each $ 0.67 For atmospheric type vacuum breakers/backflow not included in item 1 1 to 5 $ 9.99 over 5 each additional $ 2.00 For each private sewage disposal system $62.16 For each cesspool $31.08 25 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 -~-- Schedule D O'l'~t ~:R BU~,F)I~G INSPE~-I'ION FEES Private Swimming Pools For new private, residential, in-ground, swimming pools for single-family and multi-family occupancies including a complete system of necessary branch circuit wiring, bonding, grounding, underwater lighting, water pumping and other similar electrical equipment directly related to the operation of a swimm'mg pool, each including plan check and energy. $500.00 For other types of swimming pools, therapeutic whirlpools, spas and alterations to existing swimming pooh, use the UNIT FEE SCHEDULE Temporary Power Service For a temporary service power pole or pedestal including all pole or pedestal-mounted receptacle outlets and appurtenances, each $57.50 For a temporary distribution system and temporary lighting · -- and receptacle outlets for conslruction sites, decorative light, Christmas ~ree sales lots, fu~eworks stands, etc. each $ 7.75 Inspection outside of the normal business hours $80.00/hr. (minimum charge two hours) Inspection for which no fee is specifically established $60.00/hr. (minimum charge one hour) Re-inspection - A fee may be assessed for each inspection or re-inspection when such portion of work for which inspection is called is not complete or when corrections called for are not made $I00.00 26 ~IT~ OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule E - Recreation Recreation classes and excursion fees shall be determined as follows: Classes 1. Determine the maximum hourly rata paid to instructor. 2. Multiply the instructor's hourly rata by the number of class meetings. 3. Det~,mlne tbe minimum number of participants and divide into the instructor's cost. 4. Add redirect overhead percent - 32%. 5. Add 20% to establish non-resident fee. 6. Add cost for specialized equipment or supplies. S~ecial conditions: Fur classes taught by contract instructors, the redirect overhead is ordy added to the City's percentage. Excursions 1. Transportation cost divided by the number of participants plus overhead transfer. 2. Add 20% to establish non-resident fee. 3. Add any admission cost, supplies or leadership cost. Additional factors that may be used m d~ermine the class ur excursion user fee: The total number of participants in a given activity may generate additional revenue whereby the total program cost may be reduced. Classes that traditionally have waiting lists may have the user fee increased. Programs in competition with adjacent cities or the private sector may require fees to be increased or decreased to remain competitive. 27 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule E - Recreation Facility Use Fee Schedule (StaffUse Only) CLASSWICATIONS: Priority of Use Group I: City of Cupertino activities that are open to the public. Official city sponsored programs. Group II: Clubs with 51% resident membership, recreation programs and events with full or affiliated city co-sponsorship and open to the pobhc. Group IH: Programs and events sponsored by Cupertino based non-profit recreation, education or community service organiT~tion with 51% resident participation. These organizations must show an official structure and status. Group IV: Private, special interest or business groups for functions not open to the public. These functions would include parties, banquets, receptions, industrial conferences, seminars, trade shows, etc. Group V: Programs and events sponsored by non-resident non-profit recreation, education or community service organization. These organizations must show official structure and status. Group VI: Cupergno Businesses using the Cupertino Room of the Quinlan Community Center for promotional and business related purposes other than negotiation or direct sale. 28 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule E - Recreation Quinian Community Center ROOM RENTAL SCHEDULE PER HOUR Cupertino Room Monday- Thursday Friday - Sunday Group II N/A $12 Group III $25 $75 Group IV $135 $225 Group V $45 $135 Group VI $260 $260 Classroom Group II N/A $12 Oroup III $20 $60 Group IV $45 $90 Group V $25 $75 Conference Room Group II N/A $12 Group IH $10 $25 Group IV $40 $60 Group V $25 $50 Security Staff Security staff is required when alcohol is served at any City facility: $25.00 per hour. Overtime Fee Functions exceeding the permitted reservation time shall be charged $150.00 for any time up to the fucst half hour, and $150.00 for every half hour thereai~er. This charge will be deducted from the security deposit. This applies to all City facilities. Security Deposit A security deposit shall be required for Groups III, IV, V, and VI. Security deposit is due at time of reservation. The Departmant Director may also require a deposit based on the nature of an ewnt. The security deposit will be refunded if no damage occurs, rooms are lef~ in clean condition, and p~.uits conclude on time. Quinlan Community Canter Cupertino Room - Groups IV, VI $750 All Other Rooms - Group IV $300 Group II, ri, V - All Rooms $300 29 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 -- Schedule E - Recreation Monta Vim Recreation Center Creekside park BhildJng Room Rental Schedule Per Hour Monta Vista Recreation Center Creekside Park Buildin~ Multi-Purpose Group IH N/A N/A Group IV N/A N/A Group V N/A N/A Classroom Group HI $10 Group IV $25 $30 Group V $15 $20 Conference Room/Kitchen Group IH $5 N/A Group IV $20 N/A Group V $15 N/A Security Staff Security staff is required when alcohol is served at any City facility: $25.00 per hour. Overtime Fee Functions exceeding the permitted reservation time shall be charged $150.00 for any time up to the first half hour, and $150.00 fur every half hour thereafter. This charge will be deducted from the security deposit. This applies to all City facilities. Security Del~osit A security deposit shall be required fur Groups IH, IV, V, and VI. Security deposit is due at time of reservation. The Depaflment Director may also require a deposit based on the nature of an event. The security deposit will be refunded if no damage occurs, rooms are left in clean condition, and permits conclude on time. 30 ~l'r~' OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule E - Recreation Senior Center Room Rental Schedule Per Hour Reception Room Evenings and Weekends * Croup II $10 Group III $40 Group IV $125 Group V $75 Classroom, Conference Room, Arts & Cra~ Room, Bay Room Group II $10 Group IH $35 Group IV $50 Group V $40 *Senior Center rooms are not available for rental Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Security Staff Security staffis required when alcohol is served at any City facility: $25.00 per hour. Overtime Fee Functions exceeding the permitted reservation time shall be charged $I 50.00 for any time up to the first half hour, and $150.00 for every half hour thereaf[er. This charge will be deducted from the security deposit. This applies to all City facilities. Security Deposit A security deposit shall be required for Groups IH, IV, V, and VI. Security deposit is due at time of reservation. The Department Director may also require a deposit based on the nature of an event. The security deposit will be refunded if no damage occurs, rooms are lef~ in clean condition, and permits conclude on time. Cupertino Senior Center Reception Hall - Group IV $750 All Other Rooms - Group IV $300 Group II, HI, V - All Rooms $300 31 CITY OF CUTERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 Schedule E - Recreation OUTDOOR FACILITIES Mc~nori~l Soithall Field Cupertino residents/businesses only $25.00 Non-Residents $40.00 Field can be reserved fur a maximum of 2 hours THERE IS NO FEE FOP. CURRENT SOP-iBALL TEAMS PLAYING IN CUPERTINO LEAGUES Field preparation $36.50 (includes dragging, watering, chalking, and bases) Field Attendant (2 hour minimum) $ 8.25/hr. Field Attendant is required any time lights ur field preparation is requested. Lights (in the evening) $ 5.00/hr. Memorial Park Amphitheater Cupertino resident/Resident business $55.00 Non-resident/Non-resident business $75.00 Memorial Park Gazebo Cuperbino resident/Resident business $55.00 Non-resident/Non-resident business $75.00 Picnic Areas (Daily Rate) Effective Februa~ ?, 2001 Cupertino residents $ 55.00 Cupertino business $ 75.00 Non-residents $ 80.00 Non-resident business $100.00 Electricity at Memorial ur Linda Vista Park $ 25.00 32 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-038 February 7, 2001 Fees Effective February 7, 2001 Schedule E - Recreation BLACKBERRY FARM PICNIC GROUNDS General Administration: Weekends & Holidays Weekdays ADULT (13 years and over) $8.00 $5.00 CHILD (6 through 12) $6.00 $4.00 Children under 6 are free when accompanied by their parents Group Rates: Adult Child Adult Child (13 & over) (6 through 12) 100 - 500 persons $7.00 $5.00 $4,75 $3.75 501 - 1,000 persons $6.50 $4.50 $4.50 $3.50 1,001 or more persons $6.00 $4.00 $4.25 $3.25 BLACKBERRY FARM GOLF COURSE Weekends Weekdays 9-Holes $13.00 $11.00 Junior & Seniors (under 16 and over 62) N/A $10.00 Second Nine (all players) $11.00 $10.00 All green fee prices; deduct $1.00 when you present a Cupertino I.D. All ~'oups and tournaments pay the full rate (Cupertino resident still applies). Staff is authorized to set merchnndise fees according to current cost. BLACKBERRY FARM RETREAT CEN'i'~R Conference Room $49.95/person 33 CITY OF CUPERTINO Resolution 01-109/May 7, 2001 Fees Effective July 1, 2001 - Schedule E - RecFeation CUPERTINO SPORTS CENTER Resident: Day Use $ 7.00 Single Monthly $ 55.00 Couple Monthly $ 75.00 Family Monthly $ 95.00 Single Annual $350.00 Couple Annual $700.00 Family Annual $840.00 Non-Resident: Day Use $ 10.00 Single Monthly $ 55.00 Couple Monthly $ 75.00 Family Monthly $ 95.00 Single Annual $350.00 Couple Annual $700.00 Family Annual $840.00 ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS 1. Annual fee for Juniors (17 years and younger) of $240.00. 2. Annual fee for Seniors (62 years and older) of $315.00. 3. The Cupertino Tennis Club will be charged $10.00/hour per court for all C.T.C. sponsor~i activities other than U.S.T.A. leagues and practices. 4. All competitors in C.T.C./U.S.T.A. leagues participating at the Sports Center must purchase an annual pass. 5. An annual pass holder may purchase one block often (10) guest passes per year for $60.00. A guest must be accompanied by the pass holder who purchased the guest pass. 34 [_[,,l~.~,/ 10300 Tone Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 CITY OF (408) 777-3308 C U PEPxTINO vax (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department SUMMARY AGENDA NO. ~ AGENDA DATE May 7, 2001 SUMMARY: File No. 03-Z-01 (03-EA-01), City Council-Initiated PREZONING of approximately 107 acres of land developed with single-family detached residences from County to Pre-RI-10 (Single-family Residential Zoning District, 10,000 square foot minimum lot size.). The area is generally bounded by Orcenleaf Drive, Beardon Drive, Elenda Drive, Hazelbrook Drive, Ann Arbor Avenue, Gardena Drive and Stelling Road, and is commonly known as Oarden Gate. RECOMMENDATIONS: On unanimous votes (5-0), the Planning Commission recommended: l) Adoption of a negative declaration (file no. 01-EA-01) for the.prezoning project, and 2) Adoption of the "pre-R1-10" zoning ordinance no. 1879 for Oarden Oate BACKGROUND: The City Council directed staff to initiate a prezoning of Oarden Oate on February 13, 2001. Prezoning is a necessary step before the City Council can consider an annexation of the area. Prezuning informs affected residents about the development regulations and allowed and conditionally allowed land uses before the properties are annexed into the city. Prezoning has no legal effect on properties until they are annexed into the city. The Planning Commission heard this item on March 26, 2001 (Exhibits A-2 & B-2). DISCUSSION: Public: The public's comments primarily focused on the proposed annexation. Four residents of Garden Gate spoke in favor of annexation. One city resident asked if a certain County block (Gardena Drive) was included in the annexation; she was told it was included. Two Garden Gate residents expressed skepticism about the benefits of annexation. Staff: The existing County zoning is RI-10. This prezoning is identical to ones approved for other Garden Gate lots that have been previously prezoned and annexed. The prezoning is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation and it would not allow the further subdivision of any of the individual properties, which range in size fl'om 9,100 to 19,100 square feet. Plannin~ Commissioners: The commissioners reviewed the differences between the County and Cupertino zoning regulations and asked about the legal status of existing Garden Gate homes that do not meet Cupertino standards. Staff stated that many of the newer residences would be considered legal, if they had County building permits, but may be nonconforming to the standards in the zoning ordinance, such as setback and building height. The nonconforming feature could not be expanded or increased under the City RI-10 zone following annexation. Many residences in Cupertino are considered legal, nonconforming structures. Most of the San Jose-approved homes that annexed into Cupertino in 1979 as part of the Cupertino/San Jose boundary re-alignment, are legal, noneonforming because of their two 5-foot side setbacks. Most of the two-story residences built in Cupertino in the last l0 years becarae legal, nonconforming stx'uctures when the City's new R.-I ordinance went into effect in June 1999. One ¢oramissioner asked about the appropriateness of the prezoning given other R-I options and other prezoning alternatives available. Staff stated that "pre-R.l-10" was the most appropriate zoning district. The County zoning is R.I-10, which is what residents are familiar with. The prezoning is consistent with the General Plan and existing land uses and would not allow higher density housing or further subdivision in the neighborhood, which is what many residents are expecting. Prepared by: Colin Jung, Senior Planner i ~~: APPROVED BY: Dave Knapp Director of Community Development City Manager Enclosures: Planning Commission Resolution No. 6085 and Pmzoning Ordinance No. 1879 Exhibit A-2: Planning Commission staff ~-port dated March 26, 2001, including Initial Study & Negative Declaration Exhibit B-2: Drat~ Planning Commission Minutes for March 26, 2001 g:plannin~/pdr~-porr/cc/cc03 zO I 2 ITY OF UPERTINO NEOATIVE DECLARATION May 7, 2001 As provided by the F. nvironmcntal Assessment Procedure adopted by the City Council of the City of Cupertino on May 27, 1973, and amended on March 4, 1974, January 17 1977, May 1, 1978, and July 7, 1980, the following described project was grained a Negative Declaration by the City Council of the City of Cupertino on May 7, 2001. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION 03-EA-01 Application No.: 03-Z-01 Applicant: City of Cupertino Property Owner: Various Location: Territory generally bounded by Cu~enleaf Drive, Beardon Drive, Elanda Drive, Hazelbrook Drive, Ann Arbor Avenue, Gardena Drive, and Stelling Road. DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST · -~. PRE-ZONINO of approximately 107 acres of developed land from County to pre R-10 (single family residential with a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet). FINDINGS OF DECISIONMAKING BODY The City Council granted a Negative Declaration since the project is consistent with the General Plan and there are no si~iflcant environmental impacts. Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development CERTIFICATE OF THE CITY CLERK This is to certify that the above Negative Declaration was filed in the Office of thc City Clerk of the City of Cupertino on City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 1879 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO PREZONING APPROXIMATELY 107 ACRES, DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENCES AND GENERALLY BOUNDED BY GREENLEAF DRIVE, BEARDON DRIVE, ELENDA DRIVE, HAZELBROOK DRIVE, ANN ARBOR AVENUE, GARDENA DRIVE AND STELLING ROAD, COMMONLY KNOWN AS GARDEN GATE, TO PRE-RI-10 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET) ZONING DISTRICT WHEREAS, an application was initiated by the City (Application no. 03-Z-01) for the pmzoning of property to PRE-RI-10 (Single-family Residential Zoning District); and VfrI~REAS, the property is unincorporated, within the City's urban service area and has no City prezoning; WHEREAS, the prezoning is consistent with the City's general plan land use map & existing uses: WHEREAS, the prezoning will enable the property owner to develop his property in accordance with City residential developroent standards; WHEREAS, upon due notice and after one public hearing the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that the prezon'mg be approved; and WHEREAS, a map of the subject property is attached hereto as Exhibit B as a proposed amendment to the Master Zoning Map of the City of Cupertino. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the property described in attached Exhibit A is hereby prezoued to PRE-RI-10, Single-family Residential Zoning District; and that Exhibits A & B attached hereto are made part of the Master Zoning Map of the City of Cupertino. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after its passage. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the __th day o1' May, 2001 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the day of ,2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino g:planning/ord/o~lO3zO 1 EXHIBIT A For Prezoning Annexittion Garden Gate All of thet certain property situate in Santa Clara County, California described as follows: BEGINNING at the South--'comer of Lot 151 on the Westerly line of North Smiling R~d as shown on that certain Tract Map entitled, "Tract No. 882, GARDEN GATE VILLAGE, UNIT No. 2", flied for record on Februmy 20, 1950 in Book 26 of Maps at pages 24 and 25 Sent~ Clam County records; thence along the Southerly line of said tract end the original lines of inco~ ~ etlon of the City of Cupertino N59°52'30'W 1283.03 feet to the Southwesterly comer of said tract; thence along the Westedy line of said tract N00°04'05'W 863.43 feet to the No--fly comer of said tract;, thence leaving said original lines of incorporation and proceeding along the Nor~erly line of said tract end the Southerly line of the annexations to the City of CuperlJno dasignaKd aa Hoi,,r~sad No. 1C and Stelling Park 65-6. S89°57'40'E 599.05 feet to the Northwestmty comer of the annexation to the City of CupeCdno designated as Granola Dr. 00-02; thence along the westerly line of said ennexation South 124.89 feet to point in the Northerly line of Granola Ddve as shown on the map for said Tract 682; thence along said line and the Southerly line of said annexation East 75.00 feet; thence along the ~ line of ~ 8.nnex~;on North 125.3:3 ~ to a point in the Southerly line of TraGt 631 as shown upon that certain Map entitled, 'Tract No. 631, GARDEN GATE VILLAGE', filed for record on May 23, 1949 in Book 22 of Maps, at page 56 Santa Clam CounH records; thence along said Southerly line N59°64'W 9.29 feet to the Southwesterly comer of said tract;, thence leaving said Southerly line and proceeding along the Westerly line of said Tract 63t and the Easterly line of said ennexation Stalling Park 65-6 N00063'35'W 511.50 to the Southwesterly comer of Lot 48 and the Southwe~.erly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as Lavina Ct. 00.11; thence along the Southedy line of said lot and annexation Lavine Ct. 00-11 S59'64'E 100.00 feet to a point on the cul-de-sac bulb of Lavine Court as shown on said map for Tract No. 631; thence along the boundary of said court and a nontangent curve to the fight with a an initial tangent bearing N00'06'00'E, a radius of 40.00 feet, an internal angle of 60°09'40" and a lenu~;~ of 42.00 feet; thence leaving said bulb and proceeding along the Northeasterly line of said lot and annexation N48'05'50'W 176.24 feet to the Westerly line of said Tract 631 and the Easterly line of said annexation Stelling Park 65-6; thence along said lines N0°03'55'W 649.76 feet to the Northwesterly comer of said tract and the Southwesterly comer of the ennexstion to the Cibj of Cupertino designated as Homestead 71-5; thence along the Northerly line of said tract and the. Southerly line of said annexation S59°54'55'E 624.28 feet to the Westerly line of North Stelling Road es shown on said map for Tract 631; ti'mnce S59°64'59'E 10.00 feet to a point in the Westerly line of the ennex~on to the City of Cupertino designated as Cupertino Stelling 2; thence along said line 800°10'20%'V 649.86 feet to the Norltmastmty comer of the ennexation to the City of Cupertino' designated as N. Stelling Road 99-06; thence along the Northerly line of said annexation S89°64~/V feet to the Northwesterly corner of said ennexatlon; thence along the Wesmdy line of said ennex,~;on S00'IO'00'W 77.45 feet; thence along the Southerly line of said ennexatJon' N59°64'E 135.1)0 feet to the Westerly line of the aforementioned annexation Cupertino Stalling 2; thence along said Westerly line S00'10'20'W 77.45 feet to the Norl~heasterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as N. Stalling Road 00-12; thence along the NorlYmrly line of said annexation S09°54'UV 135.00 feet to the Northwesterly comer of s~ annexation; thence along the Wsatedy line of said annexation S00°10'00'VV 77.45 feet; thence along the Southerly line of said annexation N89°54'E 135.00 feet to the Westerly line of the aforementioned annexation Cupertino Stalling 2; thence along said line S00'10'20'W 110.65 feet to the Southwesterly comer of said annexation; thence along the Southerly line of said annexation N89*51'20'E 50.00 feet to the Northwesterly comer of Tract No. 783 as shown upon that certain Tract Map EntYded 'Tract No. 783. GARDEN GATE VILLAGE ADDITION', tilad in Book 30 of Maps at pages 30-33, Santa Clara County Records; thence along the Northerly line of said tract and the original limits of incorporation of the City of CuperlJno N89°51~0'E 890.60 feet to ltm Northwes~dy comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as Greenleaf Dr. 99-03; thence along the Westerly line of said annexation South 137,26 feet to a point on the Northerly boundary of Greenleaf Dr.; thence along said boundary East 74.50 feet; thence along the Easterly boundary of said annexation North 137.45 feet to the aforementioned Northerly boundary of Tract 783 end the original line of incorporation of the City of Cupertino; thence along said lines N89°51'20'E 330.31 feet tot the centerline of Bsardon Drive as shown on said map of Tract 783; thence along said centerllne S00°05'45'W 332.02 feet to a point on the prolongation of the Northerly line of Greenlsaf Drive.; thence along said prolongation and said Northerly line N89°50'50'E 326.45 feet to the Northeasterly comer of said tract; thence along the Easterly line of said tract S00"04'00'E 600.87 feet to the Northeasterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as Fargo Drive 98- 15; thence along the Northedy line of said annexation Wast 87.15 feet; thence along the Westerly line of said annexation South 115.00 feet to the Northwesterly comer of th~' annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as Hanford Dr. 97-11; thence along t Westerly line of said annexation South 115.00 feet to the Southwesterly comer of said annexation and a point in the Northerly line of Hanford Dr. as shown on the map for Tract 783; thence along said lines East 40.12 feet; thence along a tangent curve to the lelt with a radius of 170.00 feet, an internal angle of 16"09' and a length of 47.92 to a point on the Westerly line of said tract and the original limits of the City of Cupertino; thence along said lines S00°04'E 186.7t feet to the Northeasterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as Garden Gate Drive #99-02; thence along the Northerly line of said annexation West 87.61 feet thence along the Westerly line of said annexation South 120.00 feet to the Southwesterly comer of said annexation and a point in the Northerly line of Garden Gate Dr. as shown on the map for Tract 783; thence along said lines East 87.72 feet to a point on the Westerly line of said tract and the original limits of the City of Cupertino; thence along said lines S00"04'E 60.00 feet to the Northeasterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated aa Garden Gate Drive #98-07; thence along the Northerly line of said annexation West 74.70 feet; thence along the Westerly line of said annexation South 134.15 feet to the Southwesterly corner of said annexation and a point to a point on the Southerly line of said tract and the original limits of incorporation to the City of CuperlJno; thence along said lines S89°56'55'W 913.89 feet; thence leaving said Southerly line and proceeding along the original limits of incorpo, a~on to the City of Cupertino $00"01'50'E 334.15 feet; thence S89°56'05"W 640.08 feet to the Easterly boundary of Stalling Road; thence along said boundary North 660.15 feet to the Southwesterly (3)mar of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as N, Stalling Road #00-01; thence along the Southerly boundary of said annexation East 125.00 feet; thence along the Easterly boundary of said annexation North 75.00 feet; thence along the Northe boundary of said annexation West 125.00 feet to the Easterly boundary of North Stalling Roau, thence along said boundmy North 75.00 feet to a point in the Southerly line of the annexation to the C'~y of Cupertino designated as N. Stelling Road #98-03; thence along the Southerly boundary of said annexation East 125.00 feet; thence along the Easterly boundary of said annexa~n North 171.24 f~aet; thence along the Northerly boundary of said ennexa'don West 185.00 feet; thence along the Westerly boundary of said annexation South 190.61 feet to a point in the original limits of incorporation to the City of Cupertino and to the point of BEGINNING. Together with the parcel of lead described as follows: BEGINNING at the Northwesterly comer of the eanexation to the City of Cupertino designated as N. Stelling Road #99-06; thence along the Northerly line of said eanexation S89°54~/V 10.00 feet to the Westerly boundary of North Steliing Road; thence along said boundary S00°10'20'W 77.45 feet; thence S89'54%~V 10.00 feet to the Wastedy line of the aforementioned annexation Cupertino Stelling 2; thence along said line N00°10'20'E 77.45 feet to the point of BEGINNING. Excepting therefrom the parcel of land described as follows: BEGINNING at the Southwesterly corner of the annexation'to the City of Cupar~no designated as N. Stelling Road #98-03; thence along the Westerly boundary of North Stelling Road North 300.00 feet;, thence East 60.00 feet to the Northwesterly corner of Lot 99 as shown on the aforementioned map of Tract 783; thence along the Northerly boundary of said lot East 125.00 feet; thence along the Easterly boundary of said lot South 75.00 feet; thence along the Southerly boundary of said lot _ West 125.00 feet to a point in the Easterly beundmy of No~d~ Stelling Road; thence along said bounda~ South 225.00 feet; thence West 60.00 feet to the point of BEGINNING. Being portions of the aforementioned Tract numbers 682, 631 and 783 and a portion of North Stelling Road Santa Clare County, California and containing 106.86 ac~as more or less. Date: March 16, 2001 03-Z-O! ._ CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertin% Cdi~orni~ 95014 I~SOLUTION NO. 6085 OF TH~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF TH~ CITY OF CUPF_~TINO REcedING APPROVAL TO PI~.7.ONE TO PKF-,-RI-10 (SINGLE-FAMILY R~-SIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT) APPROXIMATELY 107 ACI~S GENERALLY BOUNDED BY GREENL~-AF DRIVE, BEARDON DIOr'E, ELENDA DRFv~, HAZ~.LBROOI~ DRIVE, AI~rN ARBOR AVENUE, GARDENA DRIVE AND STELLING ROAD. SECTION h FINDINGS WHEREAS, file plnnnln~ Commission 0fthe City of Cupe~ino received an application for a pre-zoning, as described on this Resolution; and ~, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on the subject application; and WHEREAS, the p]snnlng Commission finds that file subject pm-zoning meets the following requirements: a) That file pre-zonln_~ is in conformance with the General Plan of the City of Cupertino, b) That file properties involved are adequate in size and shape to conform to the new pre- zoning ~signation. c) That file new pre-zone encourages the most appropriate use of land. d) That file proposed pre-zone is otherwise not det~nentel to file health, safety, peace, morals and general w~lfam ofp~rsons residing or working in fil~ neighborhood of subject parcels. e) That the pre- zone promotes th~ orderly development of the city. NOW, TI-~REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That afar careful conside~ttion of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and oilier evidenee submitted in tl~is mat~er, fil~ application for pro-zone is i~reby recommended for approval; and That tl~ subconelusions upon which the findings and conditions Sl~¢ified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application No. 03-Z-01 as set forth in the Minutes of the Plsmdng Commission Meeting of Mamh 26, 2001, am incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. Resolution No.6085 03-Z-01 March 26, 2001 P~ge -2- SECTION II: PRO/ECT DESCRIPTION Applfcation No: 03*Z-01 Applicant: City of Cupertino Location: Territory generally bounded by Greenleaf Drive, Beardon Drive, Elenda Drive, Hazelbrook Drive, Ann Arbor Avenue, Gardena Drive and Stelling Road. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Recommendation of approval is based on a Legal Description titled: "Exhibit A: For Prezoning Annexation C_mrden Gate" and Exhibit B tiffed: "(}arden (3ate Zoning Plat Map", except as may be arnc'nded by the Conditions contained in this Remlution. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of March, 2001, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following mil call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Auerbach, Chen, Corr, Patnoe and Chaiquemon Kwok NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/ Steve Piasecki /s/ Patrick Kwok Steve Piasecki Patrick Kwok, Chair Director of Community Development Planning Commission g'./pdrepo~/re~/r03 zO 1 EXHIBIT .- CITY OF CUPER'r~/O 10300 Tom Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: 03-Z-01 (01-EA-01) Agenda Date: March 26, 2001 Applicsnt: City of Cuperlho- Property Owner:. Various Property Loeation: Territory generally bounded by CrreenleafDrive~ Beardon Drive, Elenda Drive, Hazelbrook Drive, Ann Arbor Avenue, Cmrdena Drive and Stelling ROad. Application Summary: City Counc'fl- Initia~ed PRE-ZONING of approximately 107 acres of land developed with single-fam/ly detached residences from County to pre-R1- 10 (slngle-~mmily residelltiai) RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommelld: 1) Adoption ora neEafive declaration (ffie no. 01-EA-01) for the prezonin§ pwject. 2) Approval of the prezoninE (fflo no. 03-Z-01) in accordance with the model resolution. Project Data: General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (1-5 dwellings/gr, ac.) Present Zoning Dssi~nafion: County RI-10 Proposed City Pre-Zoning Dssi~nafion: Pre-RI-10 Gross Acres: appwximately 107 acres Consistency with: General Plan Yes Zoning N/A Within Urban Serviee Area? Yes Environmental Assessment: NeF~ive Declaration BACKGROUND: A pre-zoning project must be approved before the City can initiate proceedings to annex the C-arden Gate area to Cupertino es authorized by the City Council at its February 2, 1998 meeting when it reviewed and adopted a County island annexation strategy (Exhibit A-l). All nni~coq~orated territory must be tn'ezuned and within the City's urban service ares/sphere of infl~nee beforo a City may proceed with an amlexation. The proposed prezonln_a_ area is developed solely with single-family detached residences, their accessory sw~-ctures and the connecting streets (See Prezoning Plat Map).. Thc area is pwposed, for "RI"( Single-Pamily Residential) prezoning. The "notches" in the map depict individual lots that have been previously pre-zoned and mostly annexed to Cupertino. DISCUSSION: The Discussion Section will address three subject areas pertaining to the prezoning: I ) Comparison of City & County zoning standards, 2) Legal, Nonconformity Issues and 3) .a~ss~anment OflVl*inlmum Lot Sizes City sad Cosaty Zsaial Stsadards Sm~ believes a conventional R1 -type p~z, oning is most appropriate for the area. The area developed under a County RI zoning and residents who have remodeled or redeveloped their properties should be familiar with the concepts of building setback. building height, as well as other zoning t~m,inology. The continuing dialogue among residents, the City and the County on zoning, development end annexation issues has had the intended effect of creadng a better informed neighborhood. A County/City comparison o£the residential development standards is shown below: ' Comparison of Santa Clara County and Proposed Cupertino Residential Development Standards for Garden Gate Development Standard Santa Clara County Cupertino Building Height 28 feet 28 feet Lot Coverage N/A 45% Ma~, Floor-to-Area Retio (FAR) 45% 45% (~) Building S~back, Front (1' story) 25 feet 20 feet Building Setback, Si~ (1s~ story) l0 f~et on eneh side 10 feet on one (from property llne) side and $ feet on the other side Building Sethlmk, Rear (I't story) 25 feet 20 flint (#) (from property line) Building Setback, Front(2"a story) . 5-foot offset from l~storywnll 25feet(*) (from property line unless stated otherwise) Building Setback, Sid~ (2'a story) 5-lout offset from I= story well 10 feet (*) (from property line unless stated othenvise) Building Setback, Rear (2~a story) 25 feet 25 feet (from property line) Basement Allowed. Counts toward FAR Allowed. Does not count townrd FAR. 2 ---. Notes: The side setback on a comeF lot is sllghtly greater ~han ~or an interior lot in the City end the County. ((~) Two story homes wi~ a FAR gream' ~an 3S% require City design review approval, (#) Rear, one-story building setback may be reduced to lO feet under certain circumstances. (*) In Cupertino a setback surcharse of 1 $ feet applies to the front & side setbacks, $ of the 15 fcet must be bn the side. An overall comparison of both sets of standards is difficuit. To say one set of standards is more onarous or protective than thc othe~ is too simplistic. In general, howc¥cr, thc City's re~lafions will result in more interesting two-story building forms that are more in scale with the neighhorbood. Legal Nonconformity Changes in the County zonln~ ordinencc uadoubtMly created a certain number of legal, but nonconforming houses; that ia, houses that were built to one act of standards but wcrc rende~d nonconforming in one real, Ct-Or another by a change in thc zoning standards. For example, a Garden Oatc honsc with a floor area ratio greater than 45% is considered legal, nonconforming in the County since the County adopted a 45% FAR maximum in 1999. Thc same thing will happco if Garden Gate isprezoned and annexed to Cupertino; acertnln number of houses will be rendered legal, nonconforming by virtue of the differances in the development standa~la between the City and County. This is not unusual; a large number of existing Cupc~no resid.ances are considered legal, nonconforming in one respect or another. When San Jose and Cupertino reorganized its -- boundaries in 1979, most of the hundreds of San Jose residences that came into Cupertino became legal, nonconforming structures. Building a~tivity in these areas will continue as always as long as the nonconforming features of buildings are not increased. Assignment of Minimum got Sizes Before proposing the prezoning designations, staffreviewed all of the lot sizes in Garden (}ate to determine if there was a geographic pattern to the lot sizes. Lot sizes are attached to the City residential zoning designation to indicate the minimum net lot area needed for land division. For example, a 20,000 square-foot lot zoned R I- 10 (single-family residential with a minimum net lot area of 10,000 square feet) may be subdivided into two lots if it met all zoning standards, subdivision standards and was approved by the City. The lot sizes range from 9,100 to 19,100 square feet in Garden (}ate with the typical lot size somewhere between 9,600 and 10,600 square feet. The proposed prezoning, pre-RI- 10, is designed to discourage inappropriate future subdivision of this established neighborhood. Under this pre-zoning, 10,000 square feet would be the minimum necessary per lot for subdivision purposes. Thus, (}arden (}ate lots would not be subdividable in the City. Next Steps The pre-zoning is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on April 16, 2001. A subsequent snnexation proceeding which will be heard by just the City Council is tentatively scheduled for June 200i. Enclosures: Mod~l l~solufion ERC Recommendation, lniti~ Study Exhibit A-l: City-adopted Annexation Stra~, for County Po~k~ls & City Council M~'~tins Minut~ Prozoning Map Prepared by: Colin Jung, S .e~.or Plnnn?r. ~. j~¢ ~.~. Approved by: Steve Piasecld, Commumty Development Director I~:plmn~i~,/pd~m~Yp~J~0ilz01 4 03-Z-01 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Tor~ Avenue Cup~dno, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO PREZONE TO PKE-RI-10 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT) APPROXIMATELY 107 ACRES GENERALLY BOUNDED BY GREENLEAF DRIVE, BEARDON DRIVE, ELENDA DRIVE, HAT. RLBROOK DRIVE, ANN AKBOR AVENUE, GARDENA DRIVE AND STELLING ROAD. SECTION I: FINDINGS WHERFAS, the Planning Commi~ion of the City of Cupertino received an application for a pre-zoning, as described on this Resolution; and WI-IR. KEAS, the necessa~'y public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Plennin~ Commission hss held one or more public hcarings on the subject application; and -- ~, the plsnnln~ Commission finds that the subject pre-zoning meets the following requirements: a) That the pre-zoning is in conformance with the General Plan of the City of Cupertino, b) That the properties involved are adequate in size and shape to conform to the new pre- zoning designation. c) That the new pre-zone encourages the most appropriate use of land. d) That the proposed pr~-zone is otherwise not delrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of subject parceis. e) That the pre- zone promotes the orderly development of the city. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after' careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for pre-zone is hereby recommended for approval; and That the subconclusious upon which the finrl!~Es and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application No. 03-Z-01 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of March 26, 2001, are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. Resolution No. 03-Z-01 March 26, 2001 Page -2- SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No: 03-Z-01 Applicant: City of Cupertino Location: Territory generally bounded by C-menlcaf Drive, Beardon Ddve, Elenda Drive, I-Iazelbrook Drive, Ann Arbor Avenue, Crardena Drive and Stelling Road. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Recommendation of approval is based on a Legal Description tiffed: "Exhibit A: For Prezoning Annexation (hni~n C-ate" and Exhibit B tiffed: "Garden Gate Zoning Plat Map", except as may be amended by the Conditions contained in figs Resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of March, 2001, at a Regular Meeting of thc Planning Commissio!l of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Steve Piasecki Palrick Kwok, Chair Director of Commtmity Development Planning Commission g:/pdreport/resh~3z01 - EXHIBIT A For Prezoning AnnexatiOn Garden Gate All of that certain property situate in Santa Clara County, California described as follows: BEGINNING at the Sout~ corner of Lot 151 on the Westerly line of North Stalling Road as shown on that certain Tract Map enl~ed, "Tract No. 682, GARDEN GATE VILLAGE, UNIT No. 2", filed for record on Februm~/20, 1~50 in Book 26 of Maps at pages 24 and 25 Santa Clara County records; thence along the Southerly line of said tract and the original lines of incorporation of the City of Cupertino N89°52'30'W 1283.03 feet to the Southw~[edy comer of said t~act; thence along the Westerly line of said tract N00°04'05'W 863.43 feet to the N(xthwesterly corner of said tract; thence leaving said original lines of incorporation and proceeding along the Northerly line of said tract and the Southerly line of the annexations to the City of Cupertino designated as IIo,,,¢~t~,ad No. 1C and Stalling Park 65-6. S89°57'40'E 599.05 feet to the Northwesterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as Granola Dr. 00-02; thence along the westerly line of said annexation South 124.89 feet to a point in the Northerly line of Granola Drive as shown on the map for said Tract 682; thence along said line and the Southerly line of said annexation East 75.00 feet; thence along the F_.~tedy line of said annexal~n North 1~.5.33 feet; to a point in the Southerly line of Tre~t 631 as shown upon that certain Map entitled, 'Tract No. 631, GARDEN GATE VILLAGE', filed for record on May 23, 1949 in Book 22 of Maps, at page 56 Santa Clara County records; thence along said Southerly line N89"54'W 9.29 feet to the Southwesterly comer of said tract; thence leaving said Southerly line and proceeding along the Westerly line of said Tract 631 and the Eastady line of said annexation Stalling Park 65-6 NQ0°Q3'35"W 511.50 to the Southwesterly comer of Lot 48 and the Southwesterly corner of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as Lavina CL 00-11; thence along the Southerly line of said lot and annexation Lavina Ct. 00-11 S89°54'E 100.00 feet to a point on the cul-de-sac bulb of Lavina Court as shown on said map for Tract No. 631; thence along the boundary of said court and a nontangent curve to the right with a an initial tangent bearing N00'06'00"E, a radius of 40.00 f~et, an internal angle of 60°09'40' and a leny[h of 42.00 feet; thence leaving said bulb and proceeding along the Northeasterly line of said lot and annexation N43°03'50'W 176.24 feet to the Westerly line of said Tract 631 and the Easterly line of said annexation Stelling Park 65-6; thence along said lines N0°03'55'W 649.76 feet to the Northwesterly comer of said tract and the Southwesterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as Homestead 71-5; thence along the Northerly line of said tract and the. Southerly line of said annexation S89°54'55'E 624.28 feat to the Westerly line of North Stelling Road es shown on said map for Tract 631; thence S89"54'55'E 10.00 feet to a point in the Westerly line of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as Cupertino Stalling 2; thence along said line S00'10'20'W 649.86 feet to the Northeasterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino' designated as N. Stalling Road 99-06; thence along the Northerly line of said annexation S89"641N 135.00 feet to the Northweatedy comer of said annexation; thence along the Westerly line of said annexation S00"t0'00'W 77.45 feet; thence along the Southerly line of said annexation N89°54'E 135.00 feet to the Westerly line of the aforementioned annexation Cupertino Stalling 2; thence along said Wastedy line S00°10'20'W 77.45 feet to the Northeasterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as N. Stalling Road 00-12; thence along the Northerly line of said annexation S89'54'W 135.00 feet to the Northwesterly comer of sa! annexa~n; thence along the Westedy line of said annexation S00°10'00'W 77.45 feet; there= along the Southerly line of said annexation N89°54'E 135.00 feet to the Westedy line of the aforementioned annexation Cupertino Stelling 2; thence along said line S00°10'20'W 110.65 feet to the Southwesterly comer of said annexation; thence along the Southerly line of said annexation N89°51'20'E 50.00 feet to the Northwestody comer of Tract No. 783 as shown upon that certain Tract Map Entitled 'Tract No. 783, GARDEN GATE VILLAGE ADDITION', filed in Book 30 of Maps at pages 30-33, Santa Clara County Records; thence along the Northerly line of said bact and the original limits of incorporation of the City of Cupertino N89'51~0'E 890.60 feet to the Northwesterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated es Graenlaaf Dr. 99-03; thence along the Westerly line of said annexation South 137.26 feet to a point on the Northerly boundary of Greenlaaf Dr.; thence along said boundary East 74.50 feet; thence along the Eestedy boundary of said annexation North 137.45 feet to the aforementioned Northerly boundmy of Tract 783 and the original line of incorporation of the City of Cupertino; thence along said lines N89°51'20'E '330.31 feet tot the centerline of Eaardon Drive as shown on said map of Tract 783; thence along said centerline S00°05'45'W 332.02 feet to a point on the prolongation of the Northerly line of Graenleaf Drive.; thence along said prolongation and said Northerly line N89'50'50"E 326.45 feet to the Northeasterly comer of said tract; thence along the Easterly line of said tract S00°04'00'E 600.87 feM to the Northeasterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as Fargo Drive 98- 15; thence along the Northerly line of said annexation West 87.15 feet; thence along ~he Westerly line of said annexation South 115.00 feet to the Northwesterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as Hartford Dr. 97-11; thence along ti' Westerly line of said annexation South 115.00 feet to the Southwesterly comer of annexation and a point in the Northerly line of Hanford Dr. as shown on the map for Tract 783; thence along said lines East 40.12 feet; thence along a tangent curve to the left with a radius of 170.00 feet, an internal angle of 16°09, and a length of 47.92 to a point on the Westerly line of said tract and the original limits of the City of Cupertino; thence along said lines S00°04'E 186.71 feet to the Northeasterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as Garden Gate Drive ;~99-02; thence along the Northerly line of said annexation West 87.61 feet; thence along the Westerly line of said annexation South 120.00 feet to the Southwesterly comer of said annexation and a point in the Northerly line of Garden Gate Dr. as shown on the map for Tract 783; thence along said lines East 87.72 feet to a point on the Westerly line of said tract and the original limits of the City of Cupertino; thence along said lines S00°04'E 60.00 feet to the Northeasterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as 'Garden Gate Drive #98-07; thence along the Northerly line of said annexation West 74.70 feet; thence along the Westerly line of said annexation South 134.15 feet to the Southwesterly comer of said annexation and a point to a point on the Southerly line of said tract and the original limits of inco, po~alJon to the City of Cupertino; thence along said lines S89°56'55'VV 9t3.89 feet; thence leaving said Southerly line and proceeding along the original limits of incorpo~-;.;on to the City of Cupertino S00°01'50'E 334.15 feet; thence S89°56'05'W 640.08 feet to the Easterly boundary of Stalling Road; thence along said boundary North 660.15 feet to the Southwesterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupe~no designated as N, Stalling Road ;1~-01; thence along the Southerly boundary of said annexation East 125.00 feet; thence along the Easterly boundary of said annexation North 75.00 feet; thence along the Northe,' boundary of said annexation West 125.00 feet to the Easterly boundary of North Stalling Roa~., thence along said boundary North 75.00 feet to a point in the Southerly line of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated .as N. Stalling Road #98-03; thence along the Southerly boundary of said ennex~on East 125.00 ~ thence along the Easterly boundary of said ennexafic~ North 171.24 feet; thence along the Northerly boundary of said annexation West 185.00 feet; thence along the Westerly boundary of said annexation South 190.61 feet to a point in the original limits of incorporation to the City of Cupertino and to the point of BEGINNING. Together with the parcel of land described es follows: BEGINNING at the No~esterly comer of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated as N. Stalling Road #99-06; thence along the Northerly line of said annexation S89'54'W 10.00 feet to the Westedy boundary of North Stalling Road; thence along said boundary S00°10'20'W 77.45 feet; thence S89°54~V 10.00 feet to the Westerly line of the aforementioned annexation Cupertino Stalling 2; thence along said line N00°10'20'E 77.45 feet to the point of BEGINNING. Excepting therefl'om the parcel of land described as follows: BEGINNING at the Southwesterly corner of the annexation to the City of Cupertino designated es N. Steiling Road #98-03; thence along the Westerly boundary of North Steiling Road North 300.00 feet;, thence East 60.00 feet to the Northwe~.erly comer of Lot 99 as shown on the aforementioned map of Tract 783; thence along the Northerly boundary of said lot East 125.00 feet; thence along the Easterly boundary of said lot South 75.00 feet; thence along the Southerly boundary of said lot West 125.00 feet to a point in the Easterly boundary of North Steiling Road; thence along said boundary South 225.00 feet; thence West 60.00 feet to the point of BEGINNING. Being portions of the aforementioned Tract numbers 682, 631 end 783 and s portion of North Stalling Road Santa Clara Count, Califomla and containing 106.86 acres more or less. Date: March 16, 2001 CITY OF CUI~TINO 10'400 T~ A~nu~ 408777,*3308 PR~ DES~ON: Un~ T~e U~t Un~ Unit IfNon-Resideutial, Building Area ~.f. FAR IViax. Employees/Shi~ Parking P. equired Parking Provided Project Site is W{tMn Cupertino Urban Service Area YES ')(., NO A) GKNKRAL PLAN SOURCES D) O~lwE AG~ I) Cupeflbm Om~d Ptm. Lind Uso ameu~ 23) Cmmt~ Pl-m{,,~ l}epomnem 3)~~P~~ 4)~~~~ ~ ~~ ~Sp~D~a D~~~dU~ ~ ~t~~lD~ 8) N~ ~~ 3~ C~ ~ S~I D~ 14) ~ ~ ~ ~ AG~ 20) ~ ~Mm W~ ~ ~) ~A ~ W~ ~ Su~ ~)~W~ 4~d~ 1) ~mpl~ ~ ~ ~u~ ~ 4) ~ ~!~l-~ ~y ~s m~me, ~el · ~ ~i~ S~y C~ ~. B~ SPA~S O~Y ~N A ~fi~ PI~ ~ m ~s~nd ~c~ly, ~E~IC ix~ ~ NOT ~v.~ ~ssibl~ on ~ ~. · e m~ ~s~ ~h ~ ~on h ~ A ~u~ O. You ~ ~ ~ o~ ~ ~l~t C~. so~; · ~ so~ ~s) ~ ~ "So~' ~1~ ~ ~ ~ -~~du~(~ ~ ny que~o~ you m~ ~l~g~e~ ~p~ ~ [~1%1~ 1'1~()<'1{%~1~(; I)l:l~ ~% ~ mi~on ruult in tho mnovnl of m nnmrd Juom~o ~ commm~d pupmu Oacludln8 Itms 3) ~mm~t prlm~ I8:i~ulturnl Ired [] [] S,39 (Om I ~ II sob) m nott-qrtcultm] use o~ impdr tl~ qrimdtursl Im2du~vJty of 4) Involve lands mm~tl~ E) DRAINAGE/FLOODING Inter'f~: substantially wilh 8round [~ 20,36 2) Submmis]ly cimnse the dlr~ioo, rnto or flow o~ quntlly of po,rind- warns, o~ v,~-~nnds eitl~' thro~h diruc:t [~ [] [] I'--J ' J--J 20,36,42 MdltJom ,m- v~thd~wab, ~ ~ ,G.~-~~-~._-- [3/ [] [] [] [] · ~o~ 4) brvoh, e, ,~dd dnlnqe dunnd [~J/ [] [] [] [] 36.42 wn~u? S) Be Ion1~d b, flooclw~ or [~ [] [] [] [] 38 floodpldn m? F) FLORA AND FAUNA divml~ o~ numbm of ~nf spec~ re~tctlnS mis~flou or movoment';' ~' f~, mtlomb m' planls? 1} Came sn Inn'ease in tmt~ which is sulb~ In mlsdon to the aisdng 2) ~-,.4ny publi~ m' ph'u~ s~et 3) Inhume ~c :,=,,,~h to S) Court a mJu~ in publi~ - -- pm'kfngOt~lMes. ~ enseuder denund h' [] [] [] [] tS,16 · '/) Inhlbltus~o~dtefluflvonmdmof transpo~on to Mtvm,. mRomobi]. ~ [] [] [] [] ,. 19.34.3, usase? FO HOUSING 1) Reduf~ the supply of affordable housins In ~m emnmuniq~, o~ ruult In ~be [~ [] [] [] [] 3.16 dispiacme~t of persous f~om ~hdr 2) Inc~aso tim co~t of housing in the .3,16 ofh~in8 ~ ~ h ~h~ 3) C~.ate a substandal demand ~ new [~ [] [] [~] [] 3.16.47 I ) Involve tho applicaflmk ufo, [~ [] [] [] [] . 32,40,42,43 2} ]n~olvo ~k ofexplo~on or ~ fmms of tmconl~ned ]~lome of 3} Involve tim femoral ,..m~nde~ [~ [] [] [] [] 33.42.43 m), now um~,lp.und chmhml or fbol 4) Be Iomml in. mu of semomd fire ~ [] [] [] [] 2,32 S) EmpIo~ tBhno]os3, which could [~ [] [] [] [] 40,42 m~'mdy d~ publir~ s~e~, In tho ~ent of · WILL THR PRO,I'~CT... S~...~RCR Not SIBnificant Sl~nll'hmnt Cumulative Slsnili~aml (Mlttpdon (14o NO · ~.~) ~a~ WILL THE PROJECT~.. N~ ~nibn~ slinl~Jm Cumu~ve SOURCE siinificsnt ovntJst~n NO ~ 2)Atb:tsdwsel~apropa~'bistoflc [~/ [] [] [] [] 1.10,41 I WILL ~ PRO3~CT... YES NO I. Have ~m potsnfial to sub~,,~ially degrmie tbe qua~y of ~he anvh~mmant, to ~'~' ~-~ or wildlif~ populal/on to drop bdow self-sumionble levels; to threaten or eNminnte a plant or mizen1 community; to reduce the number of or rmtrict ~he range ora rm'o or andangered plant or animah to .eliminate imperator examples of the major p~iods of Califomin's history or disadvantage of tong in~ ~,~mta~ ~ of an individual project are submmJve whm vi~ved in c~tion with ~1~ ~ of l~t projects, o~r ~Tr~t proj~'ts, and pmbeble ~tm~ projects) on b.mm~ beings, either directly or indirectly7 I hereby certify that the information provided in ~ Initi~ Study is true and correct to the best 9f my knowledge md belief; I certify that I have used l~o~e~ diligence in z~sponding accurately to all questions herein, md have consulted appropriate source referan~s when nec~ry to eumire full and complete disolom~re of relevant environmcolal data. I hereby acknowledge than any substantinl errors ,~*~ within this Initial Study may mmso delay or discontinuanoe of related project ~view proecdures, and hereby agree'to hold harm]ess tho City of Cupertino, its staff and authorized agents, from the comoquenoes of such delay or discontintmaco. Praparer's Signature 'int per 's sam,* IMi~ACT AREAS: ~ L~ UsdGmnea'alPl~ [] C~oioglc/S~mic I-T,,-,,ni, ~ ~~ ~ Housing q S~~ ~ ~ ~l~g ~ Flora & Fau~ ~ T~s~mfion ~ ~~olo~ ~ ~d~&S~ ~ Air~li~ ~ Noi~ ~1~ S~i~fi~ ~ ~ ~ A~ ST~ EV~UA~ON ..~ ~ ~e b~s of tis ~ S~y~ ~e ~~ ~~i~o ~C) Fin~: I ~. ~ ~:bl~ one ' ~at ~0 p~s~ ~j~ ~ NOT bye a ~t eff~ ~ ~ ~v~ nd recommends ~ a ~GA~ DE~ON be ~d. ~ ~ ~0 ~j~ ~d ~e a ~ifi~t ~ ~ ~.~v~ no si~fi~ e~ will ~ur b~ ~fi~ me~ ~ ~ h ~e ~j~ ~C ~ ~ a ~GA~ DEC~RATION Urban l~oclcets Annexation Estimates ' · 'i 10-20=97 Garden Monta Rancho Gate Vista Rinconada Total Impact on Cit3, Revenues Utility tax - FG&E 10.714 i 6,998 4~t,315 61,027 Utility tax- Phone 4,821 I 3,149 19,492 27,462 Fmpehi~e Fee - C-a=.~oage 7.976 i 5,210 32,248 45,435 Franchise Fee - Water 2,464 ! 1,449 8,966 12,879 Franchise Fee - PGE 8.928 5,832 36,096 ! 50,856 Franchise Fee -TCI , 900 630 3.780: 5,310 Motor Yehicle I 40.400 28,280 169.680 , 238,360 Ga.~ Tax Subvention I 30,441 21,_308 127,851 ', 179,600 Property tax ! 15,700 8,856 47,494 ~ 72,049 Total Estimated Revenue [ $122,344 S81,T13 ~488,922 I $692,978 Impact on CitT Expenditures [ Law Enforcement ! 63.559 44,492 266,949 ! · 375,000 Code ~,~¢oxccment (Officer and car) I 10.000 7,000 42,000 ', Public Works [ Street Trees 9,600 0 38,400 I 48,000 Street Swecping 1,620 0 6,480 8,100 Leaf Pickup I 15,000 0 60,000 75,000 Storm I 4,000 0 16,000 20,000 S~-et Lights t ~ 3.360 0 13.440 16,800 Crabs, Gutters & $ictewnll~ 6'100 0 24,400 30,500 Strcet ~ainte~n~ee 18,460 0 73,840 92,300 Total Est/ranted Expendiuues $131,699 $51,492 $~41,~09 $724,700 I Net Cost Per Year -$9,356 $30,221 -$S2,.q871 -$31,722 ·Pcr Santa Clara Count~ Sheriff'Depa.t~nent I Per Public Works Department. Monta Vista streets are slread ~ annexed to Cir, so there is no new right=of-way costs. I I. I Urban Pockets Annexation Estimates ~ · 10-20-97 i Garden Mont~ Rancho i Gate Vista Rinconnda Total Revenue Assumptions: : · 1. No new sales tax - purchase patinas in place, 2. Number of Households ; 372' 243 3. Properv/Tax: ; Total assessed value 71,363~.22! 40,252,8421 215,880,298[ x I% tax rat~ 71B,632i 402,$28~ 2,158,803i x Cupertino's sha~ ~ 2.2% $15,700! $8,856[ $47,494] 4. Utility Tax - PG&E: Avsl rate of SI,200' I-IH * 2.4% 10,714 5. Utility Tax - Phone Avg rat~ of $540' HH * 2.4% 4,821 3,149[ 19,492[ 6. Gsrbaso Fra~.~ise: Oho can rate of $14.89' 12*HH* 12% $7,976 $$,2101 $32,2481 7. Wa~r Fran~l~ise: [ Avg rate of $276 * 8% incr* 2%f~ * HH $1,449] $8,966 Avg rate of $276 * 20% incr* 2%f~e * HH $2,464 8. PG&E Avg rate of $1,200' I-IH * 2% $8,928 $5,832 $36,096 9.Moter Vehicle $40.40/pop * populaiio~ pro]action $40,400 128,280[ $169,680 I 0.Populalion proj~ion 1,0~) 700] 4~00 1 I.TCI Franchise 5%*60%*$30*pop $900 $630[ $3,780 exeel~ann~on of mban po~k~ts 10300 Tone Avenue .r Cupertino. CA 95014 Co~iW Devmlopment Deponent · · ~UM~ARY AGE~A'NO. AG~A DATE Febm~ 2. 1998 SUM'MA~Y: PROPOSED ANNEXATION STI:LATSGY F0K CUPEI:~TII~O'S UN~COP, POI~kTED ~. ~. P0C~S: MO~A'~ST~G~GA~&~CHO~CON~ ~s'mpom ~. ~.~ · .~r p~s~ m ~on ~e~ for Cup~'s ~co~o~t~ pockeU. ~e rein s~m~s ~e outcome of recent neighbo~o~ mce~gs ~d -- BACKGRO~: Urba~ P~cke~ Pro~ In l~e 1997, ~e Ci~ md Co~ b~ a joint U~ Pocke~ Pro~ ~ed on identi~in~ nei~borhood conc~ ~tM~ ~ t~nlnco~omted poc~ of Mon~ Vi~ ~en Ga~ ~d ~cho ~co~ wMch ~ve ~ e~d~c~ ~p~ceden~d levels of ~identi~ redewl?pment ~. . -~) D~n~ ~e follo~l sk mon~, ~e pro~ c~e to ~p~e ~e possibili~ of ~n$ the ~ ,. ~_ pock~ to the CiW ~ a me~ of impm~ ~b~ s~ces ~d ob~ s~onl~ dewlopment '.. '~7' con~ls on ~sidenfi~ ~developm~t. 26-pa~e "~e~on ~r Book" w~ch con~i-~d ~om~on about ~e potenti~ ~p~ o~ · ~exation on pocket ~siden~. A s~ of ~ ~i~orhood m~eth~s ~ held to hear n~i~hborhood conch, pro.de ~on ~d ~r ques~o~. Ci~, Count, L~CO and S~te Polici~ re~ardin~ For mo~ ~ 20 y~ Ci~, Co~ ~d Lo~ Atency Fo~a~on Co~ssion (LAFCO) policies, in S~ CI~ Co~ ~e ~1 ~ted ~t ~m ~elopment shoed occ~ only wi~in cities md ~at ~co~m~d, ~ ~ ~o~d ~en~ly ~ ~exed ~ ~eir ~u~o~ndinE chi~s. The~ urb~ d~velopment ~licies ~ ~b~hed to help consol urb~ d~velopmenK to provid~ for mom efficient delive~ of ~b~ ~, ~d to ~duce ~ co.ion ~d duplication. of effort ~t ms~ ~om ~tmented, local S~t~ policy, ~ expressed ~ou~ ~te ~on la~, dso r=co~zes ~ it is i~ ~e ove~ll public inte~st ~at ~b~ pocke5 be ~xid to ~k ~dint cities. Annexation O~oor'tunit~ lite opportunity for large scale annexation of developed areas, as is currently bein~ contemplated by-the City and the residents of the u~i~corporated pockets of Moata Vista, Garden Gate and Raztcho Rinconada is very infi~quent, Riven the confluence of SUl!pon required by residents, city and. count. The la,~t time such an oppommity occurred ~ in the late 1970's when a larlle portion of West San Jose that extended past De Anza Boulevard and almost into Monta Vista wa~ de-annexed from San los/aud aunexed to Cupertino. The joint City/County Urban Pockets Pro/ram provides the logical vehicle for the City to cornplele its boundaries by annexing most the pockets wirh~ its urban service ~ea and th~ oppon"unity for pocket residents to become p.a~ o£Cupertino whose decisions are mostly likely to affect their neighborhoods. The prezoning a~d annexafioa process is graphically depicted in Exhibit DISCUSSION: D~scription of Pockets (See ~hil~it.B) :p~ncho Rinconada SUrf is using "Rancho P,.inconada" ~s a catch-all term to refer to several sub-neighborhoods co,~,~ouly known to pocket residents ~s C~sa Del -%1, l~ncho Kincons&, Loree Estates and B~H,,_~on Bridge. These contiguou~ ~ress, located at the e~-tern edge of the City, are the l~gest, imhabited, ,,-~,~cor~orated pocket within Cupertino's urban service are~. It consists of 1,504 parcels, totalin~ 327 ~cres, with a population of ~out 4,200 residents. Lind use within the ~.-ea is predominantly sin~le-f~r~ly residential, with some cornmcreial develop.meat along Stove,s Creek Boulevard. The are~ has not been pre,ned, except for the ~tevens. Creek Boulevm'd corridor which h~ been prezoned "P" - Stevens Creek Boulev~'d Conceptual zoning. . I. ~") Over the l~st several years, I~ncho Kincona& h~s been experiencing a significant ram of private i :''-'' redevelopment, with'older, single-story homes being, demolished and replaced with lar~er, two sto~/homes. C-~rden Gate G~rden ~e, Cupertino's second l~rgest, inlmbited, unincorpoi'a~ed pocket straddles Stellin$ Road notch of Stevens Creek Bouicwrd md is completely surrounded 372 parcels, totMing 112 acres~ with a population estin~ed at 1.000 residents. The ~ is primarily single-family residential, with one cornmerci~l building. Prezonin§ h~s not yet occurred in ~arden Gate, with thc exception of two residential lots that were prezoned by · the City C0. uncil pre-Kl-10 on Nov-~uber 3, 1997. Like tt~ncho Pdnconad~; ~len Gate has also been experiencing a significant ~nount of p. rivate residential redevelopment activity in recent year~. Annexation Ool~ortunitv The oppon'unl~ for large scale a~uexalion of deviloped areas, as is currently being contemplated by the City and the residents of the unincorporated pockets of Monta Vista, Garden Gate and l~]llcho Rillc0II~da is very inf~¢que~t~ given the confluence of support required by residents, city and. count~. The last time such an opportunity occurred was in the late 1970's when a large portion of West San Jose that extended pa~ De Anza Boulevard and almost into Monta Vista was de-allnexed from San Jos~ end ~nnexed to Cupertino. The joint City/County Urban Pockets Program provides the logical vehicle for the City to complete its boundaries by annexin~ most of the pockets within its uzben service area and the opporrtmity for pocket residents to become a p.a~ of Cuperiino whose decisions are mostly likely to affect their neighborhoods. The prezonin§ a~l s-~exation process is graphically depicted in Exhibit A. DISCUSSION: :..! D~seriptioa of Pockets (See Exhibit B) P. ch0 l ,inconada S~ is using "P,.~cho Rinco~u~la" as a catch-all term to refer to several sub-nalE, hborhoods commonly known to pocket ~sidents as Casa Del Sol, Rancho Rinconacla, Loree Estates and ._ Barrington Bgdge. These conti~uous areas, located at the eastern edge of the City, are the largest, i,~!~Abited, ~mlncorporated pocket within Cupertino's urben s~vice 1,504 parcels, totaling 32? aercs, with a population of about 4,200 residents. Land use witl~i,~ the area is predominantly singie-£amUy residential, with some commercial develop?mt along Steveas Creek Boulevard. The arc& has not been prezoned, except t'or the Stever~s .Creek Boulevard corridor which h,< ban prezoned "P" - Stevens Creek Boulevard Conceptual zonlr~g. redevelopme,~t, with older, single-story homes being, demolished end replaced wi~h larllcr, two story homes· Garden Gate Garde~ Gate, Cupertino's second largest, kihabited, u.nincorpo~ated pocket straddles Stellinll l~,oad north of Stevens Creek Boulevard and is completely surrounded by the City. It consists of 372 parcels, totaling 112 acres, with ~ populalion estimated at 1,000 residents. The area is primarily singie-fsmily residential, with one commercial building, Prezoning has not yet occurred in Garden Gate, with the exception of two residential lots that were prezoncd by · the City Co. uricil pre-R.l-10 onHovember 3,199'7. Like P,~ncho Rinconada, Garden Gate hu also been experiencing a significent amount ot~ private resideniial redevelopment activity in recent years. Mon~ Vi~ · Monta ¥ista is located westerly of Highway 85 and southerly of Steve~ CrEek Boulevard. · between De An~ College and the BlackbenT Farm. Although generally thought of as a single .]~ni~cozporated pocket, Monta ¥is~a is in fact composed of about 120 individual, noncontiguous, u~i,corporat~d p6ckets, ranging in size from one parcel to 42 parcels. The 243 p~cels in u'-i,~corporated Monta ¥ista total about 54 acres. The entire Monta Vista area l~s~ already been prezoned and most of the streets have been -~-exed to. C.uportino. Thc checkerboard pocket pattern in Monta Vista is the result of an lucre.re, ent~d ,-.ncxalion ping:am based on the private redevelopment of houses which triggered =ration to the City. Results of Community Meetings a,~d Informal Surveys .. To --~wer residents' questions and provide them with information on.annexation, TA~ ¢i~ .~oc~t~ Report: ~lm~e,r.~on dn~er Boog was publL~hed and mailed to all households and l~roPer~ owners. Another round of cor~munit~ meetings for each area was held in l~t~ October and No,~mbcr 1997 to further answer and discuss any resident questions. Informal surveys o.f annexation sentiment werei taken at the community meetings and through postcard included with the "Pockets l?.epott." Residents were encouraged to indicate their' support for or opposition to annexation. The survey response rate ~ low, indicating that the majorit7 of residents may ~ot feel strongly one way or thc other about the annexation issue C£rd~ibit Out of those who r~sponded, the results varied among the three areas. In Rancho Rinconada, an overwhelr~iug majority (two-thirds) of the respondents was in favor of annexation; thc Garden Gate respondents were 40 to 50% in favor 'of annexation; and in Monta Vista most of the !...'"~._ respondents were opposed to annexation (Exhibits C &: D)? ~ '" Of the three pockets, there t~s~ been proactive, resident-sponsored, support for annexation in only one pocket, Rancho Rinconada. The support group has been active for months, educating neighbors, &athering petition siE~,tures and informing residents of upcoming City meetings. · Some of their literature (Exhibit E) and some of their petitions favoring annexation (Exhibit F) are enclosed. Potential Impacts of Annexation on Pocket Residents and the City The CuI~er~ino i°o¢/cef$ .~eporf brought together information dcveloped by City and County staffs on the potential impacts of mmcration on pocket residents. In addition; city staff analyzed thc. estimated revenues and costs of annexing ~ three pockets. The most important findings are as follows: ' · ' Annexation Imoacts on PoCket Residents · Closer-to:home government.that is more likely to understand and be rasponsive to their concerns than is likely.if the pockets ~emain unincorporated. ' 3 · Bet~ and additional serv/ces, such as, traffic enforcement, street sweeping & sidewalk · . ; Keduction in service inefficieacies and confusion for area residents in reg .ard to who ar~ their service providers. ' ' · · No reassessment ofpropen'y values based on s~exation. No change in propen~ tax rates. City and CounVj property tax rates are identical. · Negligible impacts on other taxes anal fees. Slightly lower special assessments, a utili{y lex, ' and slightly lower garbage colle~ion fees. [_~. ' · Reasonable development limits on new construction. Annexation Imf)acts on the · Negligible impact on City revenues. Exhibit O shows estimated annual rcvehues and expenditures upon s,~,~exation of each pocket. Upon annexation of all three areas, the net - cost per yeas to the .City in ~trrent dollars is eat/mated to be about $32,000. o ~..nable City to come closer to completing its boundaxies by annexing most of the remalninll unincorl~rated pockets within its tit-ban service area which will reduce }udsdictional coffusion for City staff.. · Evant~A!l~y inot'¢ase the City's population to over $0,000 residents (current population is 44,g00) which would qualify the City to receive additibnal Community Development Block ,./~."-"~'..7 ~rants (CDBG) flora the federal Sove, mment in the mount cf $1?S,000 to $610,000. These ftmds would have to be used r~si~ly on capital projects benefiting low and very Iow income "' households and would not .di~ct!y b~efit the City's General Fund. Prezoning and ,&,,nexstlon Process Process Descrit)tion The process of pr=zoning and annexation is graphically depicted in Exhibit A. This model is applicable to C_rarden ~ate and Rancho Rinconada. TI~ process for Monta Vista ii different because it ha~ already been prezoned and a diffe~nt annexation law applies to are~ -~maller than 75 acres. State law provides that in such small areas, A,~,~exafion can be authorized without formal elections. l~rezo~i~g is the legislativi proceas ofpredetermln~ng the City zoning r~Eulations that will apply' to. unincorporated lands upon .annexation to the City. They have no regulatory effect on -nlncorporated lands until the aane~ati, on is completed. Notice' is sent to affected property owners and those witkin 300 feet oft. he affected territory. Public hearings must be held before the Planning Commission and then the.City Council. The Planning Commission makes a z~commendation 'to the City Council. The Planning Commission is' currently, reviewing the 1~-1, Single-family Residential Zoning District reguiations. Because of the gene/'ally smaller and narrower lot sizes in Rancho Rinconada,. this are~ may warrant a special zoning designation or slightly different zo,~ini/development standards. Annexation is the legislative process of including ~r adding lands to a city, and thereby bringing it under the land use and general governance authority of thc City. Lands must be prezoned before they can be annexed. The State. Legislat'u~ e~acted special legislation for Santa Clara County. that gave the authority for conducting annexation proceedings involving urban pockets within city urban service areas to the individual city councils no~ LAFCO. Kefening to. Exhibit A. the first step is the public, notice sent to all property owners and residents · .~ ~.~ in the affected territory. A public hearing(s) is held before the City Council and public testimony :.:."::t~.' is taken. The written protests are received by the. City Clerk and the public' hearing is closed. Written protests are thezi vali~ted and counted. The A,~nexation must be submit~ to ~ vote of the regist .e. red voters within the pocket if either of the following occurs: · 1. Written protests are received and not withdrawn f~om at least 25%, but less than $0% of the registered voters residing within the affected territory, or 2. Written profests'are received and 'not withdrawn f~om at: least 25% of the number of landowners who also own at least 25% of the assessed value of land within the affected te.~it:ory. Stat,' law is very specific about the information that mus~ be contained in a written protest. Missing information can invalidate a writt~.n protest. Written protest requirements are shown in. ,:i~ "~ Exhibit H. If an election is required, the City would incur election costs ~stimated at $0.20 per. ~- :'i" :' ballot for a regular election, and $2.50 per ballot for a special election plus setup costs. For all three pockets, if written protests are received and not withdrawn from mom than 50% of the registered voters within, the affected territory, the annexation proceedings for that: pocket am terminated without an election. TiminR S~t:~ can begin a City-initiat~ pmzoni,~g and annexation program once it receives City Council authorization. If the recommended annexation strategy is adopted, staff can star~ the prezoning project for one pocket in late February 1995 and conclude the prezoning by May/June 199~, a 3 and ½ month process. Axmexation is a sequential process and follows after environmental review and prezoning actions have been taken. ~,n annexation hearing can be held in mid-summer. If there is insufficient pro,est to ~quire an election, the auncxation will be effective by October 1998. Re~:ommended Principles to Guide A,,i~exation Since a large scale, City-initiated armexation of urhan pockets has not occurred irt Cupertino in many years and since .-nexatlon policies and processes can be comp!icated, it may be desirable to establish some basic principles to guide thc overall process before b6ginning prezouing and annexation lzarings affectin~ individual pockets. Principle #1: All of the residents within the three pockets should have an opportunity to'snner~ · Principle #1 is recommended in r~co~nition of the fa~t that annexation opportunities such as those currently available are a very rare occurrence. Conse. quently, these opportunities should be afforded to all residents ~ithin the thr~e pockets that have been the focus of this special joint City/Coimty study. Princ. iple #:la: An..nexa~o? of pocke.ts should result in logical City boundaries which · .,a. ~ are easy to se~ice, Principle #:lb: Annexation of Garden Gate and Rancho Rincouada should generally occur in large, couti~uous blocks aud not on a piecemeal basis. Parcel-by-psrcd annexation should only be considered by the City when it results in logical City boundaries which are eas~ to service "- and does uot create additional pockets. Principles ~2a and #2b expresses the previous City Council's desire to not follow'the incremental Monta Vista model in conducting A~exations. The f~-~m~ ented, confusing and inefficient system cf govt,.merit se.~ice responsibilities these checkerboard A~xation patterns create has ongoing, adverse consequences for the community, the City, the County and other service providers. Thes~ adverse consequences will continue for debacles until the entire pocket has been annexed. "'> ~ Kesidents and property owner~ suffer under such conditions since there is no single locul government to which they can turn to address the concerns and needs of their neithborhocds. With checkerboard ~,~nexation pa~-n~, even simple, local problems may require coordinated, interjurisdictional action dispropo~onate to the magnitude of the problem. Parcel-by-pamel annexations in Crarden Crate and Rancho Rinconada should be carefull~ scrutinized for their longer-term effects. Sta~ feels a piec~neal approach to annexation is onl~ warranted under special circum.,~,,~es and under certain conditions. For encarnpl¢, annexing a pocket area to unsure that !e redeveloping use is consistent with the City's teneral plan land use policies. This situation is applicable to~ 1) the unincorporated section of the Stev~us Cre~k corridor in Rancho Rinconada which is developed with numerous .older, single-family residences, but is ' planned for nonresidential or higher density residential in the City; and :l) the county- conumcrcially zoned properties in C-arde~ ~ate (Party Am~ica site) which has bcen planned for a low density residential use or a tiublic/q .u.asi-public use in the City for more than a decade. Principle//3: In Moats V. ista, opportunities should be provided for individual .. property owners to annex (and where possible adjacent parcels.should be included to create logical annexation boundaries.) Because ~f past piecemeal annexation practices in Moats V/sm over a long period of time, the opportunity to create some rational Boundaries in Moats Vista has Iong since past. Due to Moats Vista's' unique history, h is unrealistic to. expect that all of Monta Visa can be annexed during this current effort.' Nonethales-~, there are some Moats Vista residents who are interested in aanexin~ to ~{~penino and many others who have expressed no preference one way or the other. These residents should be Provided with the opportunity to annex, notwithstanding the ~ppnsition of others in their neighborhood. .'f~.ff[.::['. ',.~.. A measured, mor~ proactive anuexation approach by the City is warranted to solve thc i;~,., jurisdictional confusion and inefficiencies of the current situation City staff also hopes to work with County staff to identifT oilier ak,tagies the County can implement to accelerate the annexation of Moats Vista. · Principle//4: State Law Guides th,~ Annexation Process Existing s~ate law presents adequate end reasonable guidance in determining what lcvel of community support is required for au auncxation to occur---and it does so in v~ays that take into account thc need for logical and efficient w-,~cipal boundaries, the need for efficient armexation processcs,.and the fights of the residents to have a meaningful voice in annexation decisions. State lav~ implicitly recognizes that 100% ~ommunity support for annexation is an unrealistic and .:/~ ~) . unattainable standard, and therefore does not require unanimous consenL · ')"~' ' State law also contains an implicit presumption ~at s,~r~exation of urban pockets is in the overall public good because it allows for more efficient delivery of services and clearer governmental responsibilities. Thus, it puts the burden of proof on opponents of annexation to demonstrate that there is significant commun/ty opposition, rather than on the proponents to demonstrate significant community support. It also contains the implicit presumption that voter silence moans consent. Thus, those not e×pressifig their explicit opposition to annexation ate presumed to be providing their consent for it to occur. If there is greater than 215% and less than '~0% protest, the decision making authority is given to the voters to decide.' Thus, if it is de. monslrated that there is significant neighBorhood opposition to annexation, it is the community itself that makes the annexation decision. Thc City Council c~n terminate the annexation process until the election is held. Once the election is held, thc City is bound by the ~esults of the elect/op. '? Wkh reg~d to annexation clec~ons, thc ~ddi~onal American p~ice o~ 'majority ~lcs' applies. So ~moFe ~m ~0% o~e voters ~p~ove, ~e ~exat[on is app~ved. Or, if more than ~0% of ~ yoten dinppmve. ~e ~ex~tion is de,ed. Some Co~c[[ memb~ h~ve exp~ssed ~ ~e~ ~ .n~g o~y pm~ o~e~ ~t app~ve. ~ 100% approval approach is ~c md'~d m~ ~ a Monm Vi~ ~afion pa~ ~t is b~ed on a pmpe~ by ~op~ ~xafion of ~pprov~g prope~ o~e~. Note ~t Sm~ ~w do~ ~t pm~de for fo~ elecfio~ for ~e~on of s~l~ pock~ such ~ Monm V~ ~ fi~g ofpw~ pefi~o~ ~ op~sidon to ~e ~e~on substitutes for an elocon. ~, ~e h a ~ ~ 50% ~ ~tcs~ ~c ~e~on is denied. R~ommended G~e~l ~n~s~on Procedur~ It is rccomm~cd ~t ~ follo~g ~en~ p~ed~ ~de~ ~ ~ed Io f~ilimte City Co~c~ ~c~ion ~ n~ghbo~ood ~Folvem~t ~ ~o~ ~d ~e~on. ,., ?' 1. Addr~s One Po~et at a T~q sta~g ~ ~o ~conada, then Garden Gate and l~y Mon~ V~ta B~a~e of ~oced~ d~e~ ~ to ~ ~e po~nfi~ for ~o~io~ ~omm~ed t~ni ~e Ci~ ~s one ~et ~ a ~. S~ce ~cho ~nco~ ~ ~e -- · ~c~ level of ~ve n~bo~ood ~t~t ~ ~g ~ C~o ~ sup~ne~ o~b~g oppo~ by a ~ of 2 to 1, ~ ~co~en~ bcg~ng ~ ~cho. · suppo~ is s~ ~y ~out ~ ~ so s~ ~co~ends ~e an~ pocket be ~cluded ~ one ~on ~pos~. ~ ~d~ ~le, moa ~sid~ Mve e~ss~ no ~f~nce for or ag~nst ~e~ion. No orgnniTcd, '~ve mppo~ ~ yet append ~ ~ nei~borhood. A mino~ of If ~e ~cho ~co~ n-ne~on ~ ~cess~y conclude~ s~ ~co~ends sending a notice to p~p~ o~e~ ~ ~n~ of.O~ ~ soliciEng suppo~ for ~e~tion. ~e~ is a si~i6c~t geo~ ~ff~e ~ ~po~ ~e Co~cil could consider dividing the ~a ~ ~16 ~ong logic~ bo~ ~d hold ~ on ~ch ~lf sep~ely. ~is would ~low ~e ma]ofi~ on ~h side to'decide whe~ it ~ to ~ or not. Agne~on of.p~ls ~in Mon~ V~ ~11 ~ ~e most p~blemaic oP~e ~e ~ due to ~e n~ber of s~te pocke~ (20), ~e ~ co~ opposition of some long-time ~siden~ to ~ixafion ~ ~ible s~e law llmi~io~ o~ ~ ~afion of ~difio~ pocke~. It is quite l~ely ~t ~e effort ~cn~d ~ be ~afly ~m~ffio~te to ~e n~ber of p~els ~nexed. Stn~ ~mm~nd, a me~ bu~ mo~ pm~five ~e~on approach ~ ~ed in ~e p~L - foc~g on n~n~g ~ose who ~t to ~ ~e~ possibly ~ong ~ some of ~ose who a~ ~cren~ ~e Ci~ shoed condor ci~-~a~d ~afio~ only in ~ose pocke~ ~t show n clc~ majofi~ (sfl~t ~d favo~) al ~ co~ to ~e p~pe~ o~e~. ~en Mon~ Vis~ prope~ o~en ~ ~q~d ~ ~ci b~ca~e of pirate ~development ~tivifics, s~ suggcs~ that notices be sero to the other pocliet residents inviting them to piggy-back on the annexation · at no cost to them. In addition, the City could agree to waive its annexation fees and pay the · County fees (about $2,700 total) if the annexing property owner could.persuade sufficient pocket .neighbors to also annex to the City. The pros and cons of this approach can be discussed in. detail at a subseqt/ent City Council meeting. 2. Conduct City-Initiated Annexation Hearings at No Cost to Property Owners Throughout' th'.e public 'outreach process over She past six months, it has been emphasized that there would be no costs to pocket residents if th~ annexed in conjunction with a city-initiated process; Most costs a~ fixed axed not geared toward the size of the annexed tenitory. l~ec~mmended Specific Annexatio.n Procedures Rancho l~,inconada 1. City-Initi~teii A?e~aduns a. Since residents have already expressed a stron~ interest in annexation, hold City-initiau~l prezoning and annexation heari~s for the cntir~ area at no cost to property owners. b. If a~t election is.~quired and ,n,~a~fion of the ~ntim area fails, then examine if there · ' was strong support in a sub-area contiguous to the City and annex that portion at a later date. (Note: State law requires the City to wait one year before bringing back a proposal to annex any or all ofa~ area.where annexation was rejected by the ¥Oters.) 2. Property Own'r-Initiated Annexations (including development-related annexations) a. No provisions should be made for parcel-by-parcel, property owner-initiated annexations in Rancho .l~tconada, except for areas prezoned "P' where annexation is a requirement · of redevelopment. b. Properties in unamaexad areas ar~ allowed to developed in the County under County development standards. Garden Gate 1. City-Initiated Annexations. a. If the Rancho Rincenada annexation is successful, encourage (5arden Oate residents to petition for ,,n-exatiun, then initiate prezoning and annexation of the entire ama or in logical, contiguous blocks at.no cost to prop~ty owners. 2, Property Owner-Initiated A.t{nexatio .ns (including development -misted annexations) a~ No provision should be made for parcel-by-parcel, property owner-initiated ~ annexations in Garden Gate, except to ensure that redeveloping uses are consistent with the City's .General Plan policies, the annexation creates logical, contiguous, service boundaries and, does not create additional prickers. b. Properties in unamtexed areas are allowed to developed in the County under County · · development stand/zcls. Monta Vista 1. City-Initiated A~,~,xations a. Sand invitations .(with a return postcard) to all property owners inviting them to indicate their desire to be. snnexed (or not to be annexed). Based on responses, City should conduct annexation proceedings for those pockets or portions of pockets where a majorit7 (silant and favoring) exists, at no cost to the property owners. ,.4¥ ~ ' 2. Property Owner-Initiated Annexations (including developmant-related annexations) · . For those parcels not annexed duri~ this process, s~ex them as they are developed or as future owners request =~-nmtion. invite pocket neighbors to piggy-back on applicant- sn,~exation at no cost to the neighboring property owners. b. As an alternativ.e, th~ City will waive its annexation fee and pay Count~ and state annexation fees i.fthe applicant persuades a sufficiant number of pocket property owners to annex their proper'ties with the applicant. c. City staff should work with County st~to devise additional Cou/tty-implemanted inducements to annexation Staff recommends that the City Council: · 1) Endorse the described annexation sa~egy for the Cupertino unincorporated pockets of Monta Vista, Garden Gate snd l~ancho P-,Jnc~nada and that strategy include the following elements: A. Guiding Annexation Principles, B. The (3eneral Annexation Procedures and C. The Specific Am~exation Procedures 2) Authot'ize stuff to knplement this ~.k,~gy by initiating a prezonin~ hearing for Rancho. Rinconada, and upon completion, return ~o Council to Lnifiate subsequent annexation proceedings for thc area. Enclosures: Urochibi~ A: Ciry-ln|t|ated Annexation and Pri-ZoifinE Process Ovcr~icw ~0 Exhibit B: Pocket Maps snd Profiles Exhibit C: Neighborhood Pocket M~eting Schedule Exhibit D: Annexation Interest Postcard Survey R~sults Exhibit £: Resid,'nt-Produced Armexe~ion Literature (2 s~nples) Exl~ibit F: Sampling of Annexmion Petitions from Rancho Rincona& l~.esidents Exhibit (3: City Revenue/~xpcnditure Analysis' for Annexation of Urhen Pockets dated 10/20/97 Exhibit H: Requirements for. Valid Wrinen Protests to Annaxation Submitted by: App~ d by: Robert S. Cowen · '~.:~.-~___ Dir~ctorofCommunitTDevelopmcnt ~ ~ pl~nln~/cc/cc~odr~ts I .. l:ebruary 2, 1998 Cupertino City Council me~u~/~h~Jl,,b~...n,.amed "TCI Media Center" to acknowledge the effort that company is making to~'b'~~nk,~I!lsrH, t,( ..,.,,S..~.~tt~_~.,c.o..n.c_urred with the ) Discussion of m~.nsxation ak~teg7 for unincorporated pockets in Cupertino. Community Development Director Bob Cowan reviewed the staff report. He said the pockeB include the Rsncho ltitlconsl~ ~re~, which i$ actually four separate subdivisions; the O~rden Crate ~r~a; and Monta Vista, which is 'a unique situation because of the long pattern of development which has ulre~d7 tatken place them, which huu created 20 separate islands. The county initiated the program and is working with the city to conduct community meetings regarding possible annexation. Cowan reviewed a chart showing the ... x next steps in the process, beginning with prezoning. Everyone within the proposed -_...¢...at unnexation area plus a 300 foot radius ~round them will be notified of the prezoning heau4.ng if th~. c0mcil ~cid~ to pmc~d. Ms. Jennifer Orit~'on said that zoning of the lt~ncllo Rinconada are~ will be ~dressed on Thm'sclay at un ~I1 d~y meeting. The residents want the zoning changed so thet they can protect some of the current standards. She is pm'ticularly concerned about the throe- month lag bec~nse a lot of homes have been demolished in the last week. She hoped there would be an ~grecment between the city and the county to ohmg¢ the county zoning as quickly as po~iblc to better match the Cites stendards. Mr. Steve Smith, 18831 Hunter Way, said he was one of five spewers tonight represeatting und ad hoc committee culled the Rancho Pock~ gnnexation Committee 'which is advocating u~nexation- Their main issues are redevelopment in n~w homing - construction, protection of street trees md heritage trees, md urban blight. I-Ie said that (.'..-') the problems in this neighborhood m very much lil~ the problems which the City of Cupertino has ~iread7 begun to address. Smith gave ~n overview of the histou of Rancho Rinconada and said that economic m~trket forces h~ve triggered redevelopment with extremely l~rge houses. Existing Santa Clm County housing standards ailow houses to be built right up to setbacks and heights up'to 35 feet, and these housas intrude on the residents' enjoyment of the neighborhood. There are aiso issues about housing · style; some people prefer to preserve the more rustic atmosphere, and they want some protection of their views md ~ylight ~ccess. The trees ~re protected by the County ordinance, but there is a consistent lack of enforcement to the point that developers openly disregard the orHinunee. Ms. Maxine Lahesh ~/i[l that one the Rancho Pocket committee has ~t up a committee, ._ circulated petitions, md in conjunction with the neighborhood association, has started to achieve understanding and commitment within their ¢0mrrul0ity. She compared the four major points of incorponttion from 1954 with the major points for annexation in 1998. The currant goals are t6 preserv, the residential atmosphere; permit residents to receive maximum protection from the encroachment of unsupervised development end a potential destruction of longqstablisbed community and environmental benefits; bring local February 2, 1998 Cupertino City Council Page 6 problems under local control by local representation in government.; and to fulfill the long-term goal of the City of Cupertino to .nnex Rancho tUnconada and stimulate a common community spirit within the City's sphere of influence. She noted that last year she attempted to join the City's Parks and Kecreation Commission but was not allowed to do so be.cause she was not a Cupertino resident. This policy does not coincide with the City's long-term goal to stimulate a common community. Ms. Cathy Thalar, 10115 Stem, commented on the number of changes in this community which included physical, emotional, and financial changes. It is the council's public trust to insure that the financial well-being of Cupertino residents is always considered. Based on the report, it would cost just under $35 per house to .,~,~ex. She conducted an informal survey of about 75% of the neighborhood ~nd found 5 for-sale signs, 1] cleared lots with some foundation present, 15 homes in various stages of building construction, 40 houses ~,~.~.[~ that are less than twelve months old, and about//0 homes that have already been · -i- remodeled. All of these houses will add to the properly tax basis'and even at a'2.2% percent increase, it would more than cover the $35 per house cost. Mr. Marc Auerbach, discussed the committee's pro/tess with the l~etitin~. Some petitions and polls were already included in the council backup materials, and a number of additional homes have since been polled. He showed a map illustrating the area where they had polled· 594 houses. They received 351responses, with $8 percent in favor of annexation, 16 percent opposed, and 26 percent undecided. He added that the support for annexation is not restricted to only one pocket in Rancho Rinconada. Mr. Wayne ~eichel, 10557 Gascoi~ne, said that he purchased his home in Rancho Rinconada because it offered excellent schools for his daulehter, had an excellent location, and he perceived it to be a comrmlnlty which was improving rather than decaying. .~.. "[] Althoul,,h k has a colorful history and there is some undesirable redevelopment goin~ on, .. ;;. most of it is attractive and positiv~ for the neighborhood. The majority of tear-downs and re-builds are homes which were not well maintained. Hew homes mingled with the older, well-maints;ned homes, continue to enhance the community. He said that Rancho Rinconada will be a valuable addition to the city. He said the neighborhood association is dedicated to briv~$ the community together and keepiniz the residents informed of neighborhood issues. Quarterly presentations have included emergency preparedness, neighborhood watch, trash pickup and recyclins:, and annexation. They also produced the quarterly Town Crier newsletter and maintain a neighborhood e-mail list to distribute news. He said that annexation of the entire Rancho Rinconada area should take place at once and not piecemeal because it would be counterproductive to their efforts to bring the neighborhood together: .The most oppomme time to proceed is now while information is fresh. Mr. Al DeRidder, 19146 Anne Lane, said that he had forwarded a letter to council which was in their packet. He read a copy of that letter and said that he was not opposed to the annexation but objected to the method o['implementing the process. He believed that the residents of the affected area should have a right to vote on the matter. He conducted a · survey of neighbors along Tantau Avenue. Of the 30-35 pcopl? he spoke to, only 3 were Februsry 2, 1998 Cupertino City Council Pa ¢ 7 definitely in favor of immediate annexation. ~ ~t o~e msidcn~ ag~ed ~at would like to Mve ~e iss~ put on ~e ballot ~d ~ si~ed Ms pefitiom si~ do not meet ~e 25 point negative ~put req~emen~ of~e state law, believed it ~ a good ~pmscn~fivc co~t ofw~t ~c co~ wo~d believe is fi~t thing to do. Bme~ s~d ~ Ms home is v~ close to ~e ~o ~co~a ~a ~d he ~quenfly fides Ms b~ ~u~ ~t nei~borhood. He w~ ~ favor of preceding ~d felt ~e ci~ co~d do a good job of protec~ ~e ~a's b~uty ~d providing sc~ces to ~e cifizem. Jmes'sdd one of~e m~om ~ comider ~s ~ation ~ to have a gov~ent ~t's more m~omive to ~ ~id~B nee~. ~ ~ bo~ ~i~ iss~ ~d q~i~=of= co~ M~cs to be comid~ ~d ~ feb ~t~e ~cho ~co~ ~a ~d fit ~cely ~to ~e CiV. ~ose r~idmB ~y me ci~ schools ~d fibres, ~d .~:,.~ p~cipa~ ~ 1o~ ~-~ ~d ~omm~ s~ice orEs~i,afio~. She felt s~ngly ' ~t resid~ ~o~d not be fomcd to ~ but ~ shoed be welcomed some~g ~ ~t to do. ~ ~ also pl~ to ~e~ ~ Sup~isor S~M~ about · some bf~e cm~ l~d ~ong ~e ouBidc edge of~e neighborhood which co~d benefit msidcn~ of Cup~o. Sm~n s~d Cup~o v~u~ ~ a~ve ci~. One of Ms conce~ ~o~ ~fion h~ been ~ net cos~ but ~ p~ situation appem to be a w~ o~. He is ~o conc~ed ~out ove~l q~f-lifc Bsu~ wMch co~cil ~I1 be working on ov~ ~e ne~ few wee~. ~m ~ ~0 ~ M~ comm~ for p~k sp~e. He s~d he ~ ~me ~pa~y ~ ~. De~dd~s for ~ elec~on to deci~ ~ quesfio~ but he woffid mse~e ~ opiffion on ~t ~fil lat~. ~ g~er~, ~ ~ ~ favor of~e ~ve been hot deb~ on setb~ ~d q~f-~e iss~s. ~e C[~ 2 not ~ a position to go out ~d seek mom m~d~, but ~y do jo~ k ~ ~fic~ly ~po~t that ~ey do so became ~ey ~t to be C~g s~d he ~med ~ ~e co~enB of ~ o~er co~cil memb~s. M~e co~ pocke~ ~oose ~ ~ex to Cupc~o ~ ~II be welcomed, ~d in pmpos~ ~ been ~o long ~ co~. C~g s~d ~ ~ oilily ~ted ~ m~r put to a vo~ of ~e public ~ ~, but now ~t he ~ a be~er ~dc~d~g of ~o~ ~d precis of ~on he is mom co~o~ble ~ not holing ~ ~lifo~a s~ ~ a ~ec~c ~on wMch says ~t ~e s~ does not mq~ a vote but mg~ sil~ ~ ~v~g comet on ~ ~e of ~sue. Ch~ ~dhe ~uld -- prefer to ~t ~1 ~er ~tion ~ received ~m ~e residen~ befo~ he decided ~e~ ~ suppo~ ~ elec~on. He s~d ~ ~c Ci~ ~d work closely ~ ~ co~ to enco~te ~e adop~o~ ofdevclopm~t s~ wMch would mom closely ~tch tose of Cu no. February 2, 1998 Cupertino City Council Page Burnett moved to adopt the staff recommendation as set forth in the staff report, as follows: Endorse the described annexation strategy including the followin~ elements: ~tidinl~ annexation' principles, the general .nnexatinn procedures and the ~pecific annexation procedures. Authorized staffto implement this strate~ by initiating a prezoning hearing for Rancho P, inconada, and upon completion, ret~'n tn Council to initiate subsequent annexation proceedings for the area. lames seconded and the motion carried ~-0. "q\~Titie 16 o~ the Cup~o Municipal Code for the ?urpos~ o~ Conforming the ? .~visionS "'-.'.~the Code to the 1Tecl~d~mants of State and Fede=al Law, Conformin$ the ?mv~sions to be Consistent with ?resent City Practices, Ellmi~rini~ l~.¢dunclant .nd ?~ovisioos, Clazi~ing Old ?~ovisious with New Laz~,~gc, and Cun~oHdat~g aud Various ?revisions. ., '~ '~.: ~'~!" s~;d tb~t there were some m|no~ proo:~'~ag~ correctioas that would be made next reading on this item. The City Clerk r~ad the tide of the or~i,~-,~ce, and lames seconded to read the ordinance by title only, and that the City would constitute the ~ r~ading thereof. The motion carried $- 0. 20. Appeal of Prima Skin Care (continued from January 20). City Attorney Charles Kilian Ms letter tn Council on this matter, and said their notice of appeal had on~ legal ¢ · " Mr. Smithton.said that there is no the license is revoked. However, there is - ] an argument as to when it v/as revoked, position is that it was vilid until revoked, and it is his position enforcement office acted as if it .was revoked, told the applicant ii and as a result she chan~ed the nature of bar business and her licens If the license was revoked by the City they shouldn't have he. be able to revoke it al~ain in the hearing. He said the applicant ~ not asking to ha.v.e her h~s.~ e reinstated. In fact she is closing the business and re-negotiating the lease wi.th, the lan~IR.rd. However, the way the ordinance is worded, it will prevent her from obtaining work as'~.licansed m .as. sa~e therapist in other communitias that have similar ordinances. He asked~at council set decision, aside and make it a condition that the applicant cease dein~ anl~tLusiness.at this location, and that she not apply for an establishment license for at least fly.ars m the · " . . _ '"'~' , city. ~lian sai.d that, for ? record, the City c.o.uld not revoke on a code enfo~ament of~r's mistaken interpretation that there was no hcense. That is why there are_due, pmce.s.s ~. hearings. In fact, there was a license whether the code.enforcement_officer_knew.it or The fact that it was not being utilized becaus~e, the apph .cant did not havc a therapist EXHIBIT CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Tone Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 DRAI~ SUBMi't-r~:D (408) 777-3308 MI~N~GTES OF ~ REGULAR M~E~t'IplG OF TIIE PLANNING COM3~ISSION ]H~LD ON MARCH 26, 2001 ROLL Commissioners present: Auerba~h, Chen, Corr, Patnoe, Chairperson Kwok, Staffpresant: Steve Piasecki, Di~ctor of' Community, Development; Ciddy Cit~ Planne~, Colin Jung, Senior Planner; Vern Oil, Carmen Lynangb, Public Works; Eileen Murray, APPROVAL OF MIN~'I's:S: M'mut as of the March 12, 2001 r~gular Planning Commission meeting Com. Pamoe requested that Page 2, Item 2, be corrected to his statement regarding the Metricom agenda item. He requested that the and replaced with the following text: "Com. Patnoe noted for the record that he had Metricom; he, wever, the company was no longer a client He sought advice from the (?ity ,~ttorney's o~ce and the of interest present and he was able to participate and vote on thi~ MOTION: Com. Corr moved to the minutes of the March 12, 2001 Planning Commission SECOND: Com. Auerbanh VOTE: Passed 5-0-0 WRt'I-[I~N Chair Kwok noted receipt of a letter from Jim Nappo relative to traffic Randy Lane and Stevens Creek associated with the office development on Creek Blvd.; and a latter from George Monk, dated March 25 relative to the Lake Apartments landscaping project. None 2. Application No.: 09-ASA-01 Applicant: St. Joseph's of Cupertino (Diocese of San Jose) I n*-~+le~*~. 10110 Nth. I'}~An:*n I~lvd. Planning Commission Minutes 2 March 26, 2001 MOTION: Com. Auerba~h ...',~,ed to postpone Application 09-ASA-01 to the April 9, 2001 Planning Comuds~,~n meeting. SECOND: Com. Chen VOTE: Passed 5-0-0 6ONSEvN'r CALENDAR: Application poltl~n~d t~ April 9~ 2,001 ~ PUBLIC I-I~ARING; 3. ' Application Nos.: 03-Z-01, 01EA-01 Applicant: City of Cupertino Location: Area generally bounded by Greenleaf Drive, Beardon Drive, Eleada Drive, Hazalbrook Drive, Ann Arbor Drive, Gardean Drive and Stalling Road (commonly known as Garden Gate) City initiated prczoning to Pre-RI-10 (single-family residential prozoning district) of approximately 107 acres commonly known as Garden Gate Tentative City Council date: April 16, 2001 Chair Kwok noted for the record that the application was an RI-10 single-family residential prezoning with a minimum of 10,000 square feet; not annexation. He said thc annexation hearing would be heard by City Council as early as mid-June; however, the public was welcome to present testimony about annexation, although no action would be taken on annexation. Staff orcsentation: Mr. Colin Jung, Senior Planner, reviewed the history of City Council action taken regarding annexation of county pockets, as outlined in the attached staff report. Referring to the Garden Gate Zoning Plat Map, Mr. Jung reviewed the City and County Zoning Standards, Assignment of Minimum Lot Sizes, and Legal Nonconformity as outlined in thc steff report. I-lc clarified that the prezoning has no legal effect on thc properties until such time as the City Council decides to proceed with thc annexation of the property, which could start as early as mid-May, with a potential annexation hearing date of mid-June. Mr. Jung answered questions relating to lot sizes, legal nonconformity issues and noticing requirements. Chair Kwok clarified that the two actions before the Planning Commission were the approval or denial of the negative declaration for the prezoning project; and the approval or denial 'of thc prezoning in accordance with the model ordinance. Chair Kwok opened the public hearing. Mr. Steve Piasncki,'Dircctor of Community Development, clarified that the action by the Planning Commission was a recommendation to City Council on the prezoning, not taking final action on prczoning; the City Council will take the final action to approve or deny the prezoning. Mr. Les Bowers, 21181 I-Iazelbrook Drive, Cupertino, representing the Garden Gate Neighbors For Annexation, a group within Garden Gate, said that he had been active in the neighborhood support group for a considerable time, and reported that back in December 1999 thcre was a Planning Commission Minutes 3 March 26, 2001 .- l~etition of 62 names submitted in favor of annexation to the city, and that there was residential favorable action prior to that date. He said when annexing Rancho Rinconada, things got quletcr in Garden Gate and they became motivated when the county came out with the Garden Gate Annexation Answer Book. The neighborhood organization has bonn active in soliciting thc neighborhood, passing out fliers, eliciting interest of other residents in the neighborhood relative to taking action toward annexation. He said they have met with considerable success and will complete tho activity and summarize it to the city in May and June. Mr. Bowers said that Garden Gate is close to Stevens Creek, bounded by Highways 85 and 280, is close to Memorial Park. DeAnza College, and groat schools, and all of thosa things put them in a favorable position with realtors. Ho asked that the city move as quickly as possible for annexation so that the futnre and final development of (]arden (]ate can be a balanced type of project that would provide integration and a great neighborhood to live in. Mr. Jim Limbaratos, 20724 Garden (]ate Drive, said he was in favor of annexation, which would provide tho opportunity to vote for the people in office and different propositions affecting thc area and residents. Mr. Mihai Buffs, 20917 O~nleaf Drive, said that he was opposed to annexation. He referred to the Answer Book and presented a rebut~l to tho eight benefits listed. He said of the eight benefits, he found benefit Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, $ and 7 to be abs~a'act and intangible. He questioned how to measure tho eff~tiveness, and said tho language relating to the statement that there would not be significant increase in taxes worried him. He said he did not sen the concrete benefits of street sweeping and crossing guards as a problem (benefits 6 and 8); and questioned if strent sweeping was really necessary; end said there was already a crossing guard provided. He commented that il' -- the listed benefits were the most impottsnt benefits of annexation, were they really worth thc trouble. He said he was not convinced that the benefits listed warranted annexation and he would like to sec benefits. Mr. Beffa said that he had a personal concern relative to the issue of past variances for future buildings; since he had variances on both sides and was not aware of how it would be affected by annexation. Mr. Piasecki suggested that Mr. Beffa arrange to meet with Mr..lung to review ~he Answer Book and address his issues ofconccre. Mrs. Jessica Rose, 10410 Ann Arbor Avenue, said that she was part ufa group of young families in the neighborhood, who were concerned about safety issues, and felt the city would be more responsive than the county on enforcement of issues relative to safety, crossing guards and speed limits. She said as new development occurs, there is an opportunity to improve the neighborhoud, and currently the existing residents are not being considered. She said she felt the city would bo more considerate of the existing residents when building homes relative to issues of safety and privacy. Ms. Melissa Hilton, 20861 Fargo Drive, an area resident for 16 years, said that she has seen thc area grow considerably in traffic and would like to petkion for annexation. She clarilqcd that she was part ufa group that worked for $ yenrs on getting a crossing guard, and said it took that long for the city and county to agree on a one-year temporary payment. She said there has been significant decrease in problems and the crossing guard is an important issue as a child was hit a few years ago while crossing Stelling Road. She said that it would not be a permanent guard *- unless annexation takes place. Ms. Hilton said that issues such as safety and cleaner streets would be part of the city, and she looked forward to having guidelines for development of new homes Planning Commission Minutes 4 March 26~ 2001 which the city currently has. She said she was hopeful for annexation to the city of Cupertino, m reap those benefits. Ms. Anna Polman-Black, 21118 Gardens Drive, asked if they were considering annexing the other half of Gardens Dri~ve, and said she would be in favor of annexation of thc other half. She said it would eliminate the car cemeteries in the neighborhood and the homes with 8 or more cars parked in front. Mr. Piesecki said that the particular portion of Gardens would be part oftbe prezoning action presented this evening, and eventually part of the future annexation effort. Mr. Robert Stein, 20731 Fargo Drive, said that a previous speaker referred to the concerted eltbrt being made to approach those people who live in the neighborhood regarding annexation, and said he had not been approached by either side. He said he shared the same sentiments of an curlier speaker, and in reading the annexation booklet, found many of the references to be vague, not specific, except the most tangible, the street crossing guard. He said he reiterated at thc last meeting that he did not understand why tho crossing guard is not a school district issue, why they do not provide a crossing guard, or why it is not a staff person's duty to supervise the children's crossing. Relative to the issue of street improvements, in the booklet presented, he said he raised the issue, if additional street lighting was going to be put in, street repairs made and repavcd as required, would the city do it; what would the timeframe be for the work and would thc residents at least be informed when the repaying would be done. Mr. Stein pointed out that the streets are very clean as the residents sweep the curbing around their homes, and hc said he was not convinced that the street sweeping was necessary as a supposed benefit of annexation. Hc questioned wbethet there would be additional street lighting, and was informed that it would have to be a bond issue or something the residents paid for themselves. He concluded that he was not convinced that annexation was beneficial at this point. Chair Kwok closed the public hearing. Com. Auerbach clarified that it was a prezoning for Garden Gate, not an annexation hearing, and thanked thc speakers for their comments and opinions, and said there would be continued opportunity to debate both sides in tho future. He pointed out that the Planning Commissioners were looking for findings of whether the prezoning meets the criteria set forth; He said he Iblt ii met the findings on all five counts and was in conformance with the General Plan, Ho said in terms of making the boundaries of Cupertino more regular and being able to service the pocket neighborhoods, the properties were thc right size and shape, uniform in nature and sit well with the existing ordinances. It also encourages appropriate use of land as they discuss the kinds of things they are attempting to do in Cupertino relative to the new urbanist principles that having controls over thc various boundaries here, being able to work both sides oftbe streeL as it were, is very important to that and to maintain the strength of neighborhoods because.thc neighborhood is affected by the surrounding area. Com. Auerbach said it was not detrimental to the health and safety of anyone and does contribute to the orderly development of the city. Com. Patooe concurred with Com. Auerbach's comments and said he felt they should also consider filling in the pocket mentioned by Ms. Polman-Black as there were issues about thc community that go beyond the issue of street sweeping or crossing guards, which include consistency and making Cupertino a livable place, friendly and aesthetically pleasing. Com. Patooc said he was hopeful that the project would move forward, and although not discussin§ annexation, the opportunity was provided to make a statement about it in this forum. Planning Commission Minutes ~ Mamh 116. 11001 Com. Corr said that he found the conditions wera met and if it was to move forward, there was support that the RI-10 zoning is the appropriate zoning for recommendation to the City Council should they determine through the ongoing process to annex the Garden Gate area. MOTION: Com. Aunrba~h moved adoption of the negative declaration on Application No. 01-EA-01 SECOND: Com. Curt VOTE: Passed 5-0-0 MOTION: Com. Auerbach moved approval of Application 03-Z-0I in accordance with the model resolution SECOND: Com. Patnoe VOTE: Passed $-0-0 Chair Kwok thanked the public for their input and said that when the annexation proposal is scheduled to be on the Cit~ Council agenda, the residents would be notified of the hearing. Mr. Piasecki reported that the Planning Commission recommendation is tentatively scheduled to bo heard by thn City Council on April 26th, and invited persons interested in addressing thc City Council on the topic to attend that meeting. Chair If, wok noted that tbe matter could be appealed to the City Council within 14 days. Com. Corr suggested that the two speakers c~noemed about the crossing guard issue, talk to Mrs. Hilton as she was well informed about the pmcass. ~l. Application t'Io.: I ~1 U 98(M) Applicant: Lake Biltmore Apartments Location: 10159 So. Blaney Avenue Modification to a Use Permit for a new landscaping plan and creation of a aqd other amenities. Planning Commission decision unless appealed Postponed from March 12, 2001 Planning Commission meeting Staff oresnntation: The video presentation reviewed ~lication for a modification to a Use Permit for a new landscaping plan and creation nfs The applicant also proposes to remove the waterways and. replace with lawns, Staff recommends approval of the application in accordance with the model Ms. Vera Gil, Senior Planner, site plan, reviewed the background of thc applioation and illustrated the location proposed amenities and landscaped areas. She reviewed the 1998 Planning City Council a~tion to deny the request to drain the ponds. However, during the ~ of the 24 new units to the development, all but one pond was drained. Staff is s!. ~ recommending that a pedestrian pathway be provided allowing iadividuals to enter throu,,L~the Adobe Inn site and walk out to Stevens Creek Boulevard and also a path allow~ng)p .,v~duals to cut through to Blaney Avenue. M~il reviewed the reasons for the previous Planning Commission's denial to remove thc ponds ORDINANCE NO. 1879 AN ORDINANCE OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF CUPERTINO PREZONING APPROXIMATELY 107 ACRES, DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENCES AND GENERALLY BOUNDED BY GREENLEAF DRIVE, BEARDON DRIVE, ELENDA DRIVE, HAZELBROOK DRIVE, ANN ARBOR AVENUE, GAR, DENA DRIVE AND STELLING ROAD, COMMONLY KNOWN AS GARDEN GATE, TO PRE-RI-10 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET) ZONING DISTRICT WHEREAS, an application was initiated by the City (Application no. 03-Z-01) for the pre, zoning of property to PRE-R1-10 (Single-family Residential Zoning Dislrict); and WHEREAS, the property is unincorporated, within the City's urban service area and has no City prczoning; WHEREAS, the prezoning is consistent with the City's general plan land use map & existing uses; WHEREAS, the prezoning will enable the property owner to develop his property in accordance with City residential development standards; WHEREAS, upon due notice and after one public hearing the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that the pre, zoning be approved; and WHEREAS, a map of the subject property is attached hereto as Exhibit B as a proposed amendment to the Master Zoning Map of the City of Cupertino. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the property described in attached Exhibit A is hereby prezoned to PRE-RI-10, Single-family Residential Zoning District; and that Exhibits A & B attached hereto are made part of the Master Zoning Map of the City of Cupertino. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after its passage. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the ~ day of May, 2001 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of thc City Council of the City of Cupertino the day of .2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino g:planning/on:l/ordO3zO 1 .~ 10300 Tone Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 ~ (408) 777-3308 (4o8 77-3333 CU PEI INO ommumV Development uepartment SUMMARY AGENDA NO. ~/~ AGENDA DATE May 7, 2001 SUMMARY: APPEAL of Planning Co~nmission Denial of Use Permit application14-U-98(M) a modification to Use Permit 14-U-98 for a new landscaping plan and creation of a tot lot and other amenities. Applicant: Claris Weaver, Prometheus ProperOg Owner: Lake Biltmore Apartraems, a California Corporation Property Location: 10159 South Bla~ey Avenue, corner of Rodrigues Avenue. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council can take any of the following actions: 1. Uphold the appeal and overturn the Planning Commission decision, thereby approving the revised landscaping plan to remove the ponds. 2. Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission decision, thereby denying the revised landscaping plan. 3.Continue the application for more information or refer it back to the Planning Commission. BACKGROUND: The Biltmore apartment complex was constructed in 1970. At that time, water features (man-made ponds) were considered a popular amenity for tenants. The applicant now considers the man-made ponds outdated, difficult to maintain and a liability for small children. Consequently, the applicant is proposing to remove all the ponds and replace the area with lawn, rocks, plants and shrubs, and a tot- lot or play area as shown on the preliminary landscape plan (Sheet-l). Removal of the water requires no other agency permits. The applicant has described the project modifications in the attached project description. On March 26, 2001, the Planning Commission denied the modification of use permit 14-U-98 to remove the ponds and re-landscape the Biltraore Apaxtments, per the attached Resolution No. 6084. Staff originally recommended approval of the application. The applicant subsequently appealed the denial and is asking the City Council to overturn the Planning Commission decision and approve the application. APPEAL of Plann/ng Commission Denial of Use Permit npplication14-U-98(M) May 7, 2001 Page 2 DISCUSSION: Waterway Removal: In 1998, Prometheus added 24 units to the development and proposed draining the ponds to facilitate the construction of the new units. As part of the 1998 development proposal, Prometheus commissioned an ornithologist (bird specialist) report to determine the method and permitting requirements for duck removal. The 1998 survey showed 37 mallard ducks on-site. The ducks were both domestic and semi-wild stock. As part of the 1998 use permit application, the applicant requested permission to drain the ponds as par~ of the landscape plan. However, the Planning Commission and City Council denied this request. During the construction of the 24 new units, the property owner drained ail but one of the ponds. Thirty-three of the mallard ducks were semi-wild, and when thc ponds were drained they most likely flew offto another local water arch. The 3 domestic birds were to be removed by a wildlife handler, tested for disease and euthanized. Prometheus states that all the ducks have left the property by their own volition. Given mating and feather molting season, the ornithologist made recommendations on when the ponds may be drained. Prometheus plans on following these recommendations should the ducks return. A condition of approval in the model resolution integrates the ornithologist's recommendations. Amenities: The removal of the waterways allows for the addition of amenities the applicant believes will add to the residents' quality of life. A tot-lot, or play area, will be added to the property near the existing swimming pool. Also being proposed are several barbecue grills, picnic benches and park benches that will be scattered throughout the site. The new landscape area (drained ponds) accounts for 30,200 square feet ( 7/10 ths of an acre) of the ten acre site. Resident Survey: A resident survey, reviewed by city staff, was distributed to each of the 111 occupied units in November 2000. Of the 54 responses (48.6% response rate) the property manager received, 42 households supported the proposed landscape modifications, nine preferred the existing landscaping with waterways and three had no preference. Site Drainage: The applicant has met with the City Engineer to discuss the removal of the ponds and the et]Eet on the site drainage. The Public Works staff believes that the proposed site drainage will not pose a problem. However, they would like the applicant to assure them that the elimination of the ponds will not increase runoff. An appropriate condition of approval has been added to the model resolution. Planning Commission Meeting On March 26, 2001, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed modification to the' use permit. Three of the five commissioners believe that the lakes provide a unique ambiance that some tenants and neighbors find appealing (see at~ached letters). Also, some of the commissioners were concerned by the fact that the lakes were drained despite a Plann'mg Commission denial of a previous request to drain the ponds. G:\Planning\PDREPORT~CC\ccl4u9g(m)appeai.doc APPEAL of Planning Cor~mlssion Denial of Use P~rmit applicationl 4-U-98(M) May 7, 2001 · -- Model Conditions of Avoroval Should ~e City Council choose to approve the modifications W the use permit, staff has enclosed some conditions of approval that should be considered. Mosl of the conditions are standard; however, one addresses pedesu-ian access on the site. The condition r~uires the applicant add a walkway along the western edge of the parcel from Rodrigues Avenue tI~ough the parking lot to the gate being provided by Pinn Brothers on the Adobe Inn site and a walkway from the western property edge to Blaney Avenue. The city council has repeatedly stressed the importance of the public accessing walkways through developments. The city required the Pinn Brothers to record a similar pedestrian easement when they applied to construct a hotel on the Adobe Inn site adjacent to the Billmore. The pedestrian easement allows pedestrians to walk from Stevens Creek Boulevard through the hotel site to the Biltmore propel~y. Initially, staffrecommandad the walkway be available to the general public to walk from Rodrigues to Stevens Creek Boulevard. The pedestrian would save about ~A mile if they were able to walk through the Biltmore Apa~huent site instead of walking around to Blaney Avenue and then back down Stevens Creek Boulevard. The applicant opposed the condition and staff suggested the Planning Commission amend the condition to apply only to residents of the Biltmore Apartments instead of the general public. PREPARED BY: Veto Gil, Senior Planner SUB~ ED~~: APPROVED BY: ~ec~./~i~actor ~ David W. Knapp, City Manager of Community Development Attachments: Planning Commission Resolution No. 6084 Plan Set Model Resolution 14-u-gg(M) as recommended by staff Exhibit A: Project Description dated January 31, 2001. Exhibit B: Appeal Application Exhibit C: Coyote Creek Riparian Station report dated October 21, 1998. Exhibit D: Letter from George and Mary Monk dated March 25, 2001 Exhibit E: Letter from Barbara Langworthy dated March 29, 2001 Exhibit F: Planning Commission Minutes from March 26, 2001 G:~Planning~PDREPORT~CC\cc 14u98(m)appeal.doc 14-u-gg(M) CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torte Avenu~ Cupertho, California 95014 RESOLLrI/ON 6084 (Danial) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TI~ CITY OF CUPERTINO DENYING A MODIFICATION TO A USE PERMIT FOR A NEW LANDSCAPING PLAN AND CREATION OF A TOT LOT AND OTHER AMENITIES SECTION h FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Pla~.i.g Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a modification to a Use Permit, as described on Page 1 of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the applicant has not ~net the burden of proof required to support said application; and WHEREAS, the Planui~g Commission finds that the application does not racet the following requ/rements: I) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; 2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a m---er in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of this title; 3) The ornithologist report has been conducted and concludes that the man-made lake removal and subsequent duck removal is not a significant environmental impact if their r~commendations are followed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for use permit modification is hereby denied; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based are contained in the public hearing record concerning Application 14-U-98(M), as set forth in the Minutes the Planning Commission Meeting of March 26, 2001, and are incorporated by reference as though tully set forth herein. SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: 14-U-98(M) Applicant: Lake Biltmore Apa~h~ents Location: 10159 South Blaney Avenue Resolution 6084 (Denial) 14-U-gg(M) Mar~h 26, 2001 Page-2. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of Mar~h, 2001, at a regular meeting of the Planning Comminsion of the City of Cupertilao, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Cot-r, Patnoe and Clmirpemon Kwok NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Auerbach ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Chcn ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/ Steve Piase¢Id /~/Patrick Kwok Steve Piasecld Patrick Kwok, Chairperson Director of Community Development Cupe'~ino Planning Commission ~/plmnin~r~/14u98m crrY OF CIJI~RTINO 10300 Ton~ Avenue Cuperdno, California 95014 MODEL P~SOLUTION OFTHE PLANNING COMMISSION OFTHE CITY OF CL4~RTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MODIHCATION TO A USE PERMIT FOR A NEW LANDSCAPING PLAN AND CREATION OF A TOT LOT AND OTHER AMENItieS SECTION I: FINDINGS WI-IEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino ~'.eived au applicarion for a modification to a Usc Permit, as described on Page 1 of this Resolution; snd WHI~REAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and WHNREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the application meets the following requirements: 1) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; 2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of this ritle; 3) The ornithologist report has been conducted and concludes that the man-made lake removal and subsequent duck removal is not a significant environmental impact if their recommendations are followed. NOW, THEREFOILE, BE rr RF_.SOL~: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for use pemfit is hereby recommended for approval, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public heating record concerning Application 14-U-98(M) as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Connnission Meeting of March 12, 2001, md are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION H: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: 14-U-98(M) Applicant: Lake Biltmore Apartments Location: 10159 South Blaney Avenue Model Resolulion 14-U-98(M) March 12, 2001 Pa~-2- SEc-nON IH. CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEIqT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Approval is based on the Prellmlnar~ Landscape Renovation plan (sheet 1) dated January 30, 2001 and Grading & Drainage p!s~, (GPI) & (GP2) dated Oaobcr 20, 1995, except as may be amended by the conditions contain~ in thi~ resolution. 2. NOTICE OF FEES. DEDICATIONS. RESERVATIONS OR OTHER F. XACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pu~uant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exaction's. You are hereby further notified thnt the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exaction's, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Seodon 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exaction's. 3. LANDSCAPE I~EVIEW The applicant shall submit a comprehensive landscape planting plan and irrigation plan in conformance with chapter 14.15, Xeriscape Landscaping, of tl~ Cupertino Municipal Code. The lake surrounding the pool and clubhouse shall be maintained. 4. BIRD REMOVAL If ducks are present on the site, the ornithologist reconm~endations in the Coyote Creek Riparian Station ~port of October 21, 1998, shall be followed for the removal of the man-made lakes and duck removal. 5. CONSTRUCTION HOUR I_2M1TATIONS Construction is Limited to '/:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m., Monday- Friday and from 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, while construction occurs on the outside of a building. 6. PEDESTRIAN ACCESS Applicant shall provide a paved pedestrian path from Rodrigues Avenue along the side of builclings seven, 21, nine and ten to the mutual gate being provided by the adjacent property owner (the Adobe Inn hotel site). Applicant shall also provide a paved pedestrian path from the western edge of the propen'y to Blaney Avenue. This path shall lead from the north south pedestrian path along the edges of buildings five, four, 20, and the clubhouse ~o Blaney Avenue. Said pedestrian path shall be clearly outlined as it crosses parking lot and driveways by use of paint, paving stone or pigmented asphalt. Thc ~t~plk-,-t zhall ¢~r into o- ak.-s--ar~ with ths sky allc~'ing th~ gsneral publio to trax~r~ tha Model Resolutio,~ 14-U-98(M) March 12, 2001 SECTION IV: CONDrllONS ADMINISTERED BY ~ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Grading sh~l! be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cuper~o Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required. Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. 8. DRAINAOE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Surface flow across public sidewalks may be allowed in the R-l, R-2 and R-3 zones unless storm drain facilities are deemed necessary by the City Engineer. Development in all other ZOnln~ districts shall be served by on site storm drainage facilities connected to the City storm drainage system. If City storm drains are not available, drainage facilities shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City F. ngineer. Also, the City of Cupertino requests storm drain calculations to ensure that additional storm water will not be contributed into the City's storm drain system. 9. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utili~.e Best Management Practices {BMP's), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in your grading and street improvement plans. Erosion and or sediraent ¢on~rol plan shall be provided. 10. IMPROVEMI~NT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits. Fees: a. Checking & Inspection Fees: 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $2,130.00 min. b. Grading Permit: 6% of Site Improvement Cost c. Development Maintenance Deposit: $1,000.00 d. Storm Drainage Fee: NIA e. Power Cost: N/A f. Map Checking Fees: N/A g. Park Fees: N/A h. Bonds: - Faitlfful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements - Labor & Matelial Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement - On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. -The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said char~ or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. Model Resolulion 14-U--98(M) March 12, 2001 ClTY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF F_.NGINEERINC~SURVEYING CONDITIONS (Section 66474.18 California Government Code) I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV of this Resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices. Ralph Quails, City Engineer PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of March, 2001, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Noir. s: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COiVIMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Steve Piasecki Patrick Kwok, Chairperson Director of Community Development Cupertino Planning Commission g/plannhg/r~ 1~u98 EXHIBIT A January 31, 2001 - Revised We are requesting an amendment to development approval applications 14-U-gg and 31-BA-98 and are proposing the following new landscape plan at the existing Biltmore Apa,h,~ents: The existin~ man-made lakes are proposed to be filled with appropriate ~l material and landscaped over in order to create more useable open space for the residents. The existing man- made lakes are a dated amenity that result in a waste of a Iremendous quantity of water and significantly limit the amount of useable open space for residents. A portion of the newly created useable open space will be used for a new children's "tot-lot" with play equipment, two water features, grass meadow areas, picnic areas with picnic tables, benches, harbeques; all of these planned amenities are to be for the enjoyment oftbe project's residents. Prelin,.inar~ landscape and drainage plans accompany this apphcation. The draiuage plans reflect a pre-application moeting with Ralph Quails and Carmen Lynaugh on lanuary 23, 2001. Wc have dislribuied a stu-wey, reviewed and approved by the City prior to distribution, to each of the 111 l~amts currently livir~ at the property. Due to the current interior remodeling and exterior residing we have 48 vacant units. Copies oftbe responses received back were given to Vera (Sil at our pre-appliustion meeting, lanuary 2, 2001. The surveys were dislributed by our site management staff, door-to-door, in early November 2000. Tenants were also contacted by phone and encouraged to respond to the survey. Ample time has been given for response. Of the 54 responses (representing ,18.6% of the occupied apartments) we received: 42 prefer the new plan, 9 prefer the existing plan, and 3 have no opinion one way or the other. We have concluded that the residents that did not respond to the survey most likely did not have a slrong opinion on the subject. The tenant population at this complex has changed since the time of our ofigiual development approvals. We now have many more children. Of the total current tenant population of 2.46, we have 68 children. T~s lanclseape plan will give them a place to play safely. To accommodate the construction work on the exterior of the buildings, we drained all but one of the lakes on the property when we began construction in May 2000. Most of the ducks left the property at the time the lakes were drained. At one point in our cur~nt exterior consU'uetion all of the ducks had left the property. If any ducks are present at the time we are allowed to proceed with this proposal, we will follow the procedures outlined in the October 21, 1998 report from the Coyote Creek Riparian Station (copy attached). We have discussed the issue of pedestrian access with our neighbors developing the Adobe Hotel project. Both ownership parties determined the pedestrian gate wouldnot he advisable for either the hotel or our apartment community as there would not be an appreciable benefit for the hotel guests or apartment residents. Please see the attached letter to Colin Sung, dated October 31, 2000. EXHIBIT C 0c~J~ 21, t991 ~5o Brld~ PL, Im~. IL~i~d City, CA ~,,065.1517 Dear Mr. Moss: I ~ ~ ~dd ~ of~ ~i~o~ Ap~.~S, ~o on ~= 20, 199~ w~m I ~' t~ d~ ~ ~ ~ ~ h~mt. ~ ~to ~~d~. D~c s~ ~ J ltlafll: illki&l.ql~ rill 4llltl,lJiJ liMit: CiKJ'll~d'l'.COrl J -' City of Cupertino III. APR 3 2001 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 . (408) 777-3223 APPF, AI, EXHIBIT B 1. Application No. [~-~-~ 2. Apptic~tCs): ~ ~t~(g~ ~~ 3. Appellm~s): ~ ~ ~ ~ ~e, add.s, ~O F~~ ~~ phone n~b~ ~ ~ 4. Decision 0fDimctor ofCo~uni~ D~elopment ~ecision of Piing Co--sion ~le~e ch~k one) 5. Date of dete~imtion of Dir~r or mailing ofnoti~ of Ci~ decision: B~is of appel: Please complete fon~, include appeal fee ors I:}~-~nd return to the attention of the City Clerk P.O. hi~o the shiny to fly. ?t~e_~_ domestic stock individuals should be removed by & wildlife bendle~, prehribiy before ~ po~' am drained. ~-.ne whm cka~, nwy be ffLihtlea due to wins feu~r raok. PreFerably tmlo~ would bo perfbrmed b~ote the end et'winter, sleee in the late sprin8 or early sutuner k is po.bin, tbeuih un. n8 muld ae,~ut on site, h.~psrh8 Femovil efforts. 3- Any r~mu~tlan s~-"~t~ not beini conducted on the pot~Ja tben~el~el eo~kl or. cut either bet'om d~hS reno~zi wi~ouz say problem ~"~8 m tho Mallards, 4- The reT~4~ oftble poed~ do~ not eon~tute 8 l;~;~e-sqt mv:,romneut. I he. ct with tsimds to the dur, ks oF po~ wikfLL~. The petals are man.mech, eor, cmte ~ ,~l the water is ehemiei~y u'tated. No nmi~m rlj~arhn hsh~mt o~min on ,its. nn4 b ~,~a~n ,~td the ponds b isn~a~M native pltnU. No fish or other vertebrt~ (~ogs, ct~) were o b m~..d or L'~ likely to be u~n~ th= ponds C-eor~e & Ma~ Monk 19985 Price Avenue, Cupertino CA 95014-3338 · 408-446-1025 March 25, 2001 EXHIBIT D City of Cupex~o 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3202 Attll: planning Commhsion Re: Lake Biltmore Landscaping I continue to oppose removal of the lakes at Lake Billmore as follows: I. This is tho developers' second nm at removing the lakes. Aider their first · DrRined most lakes aid turned them into an eyesore · Subjected the residents to months ofcon,i~uction · Scared residents with their asbestos removal techniques, then · Asked them if they wanted their envirol~ment improved. Presenting the inevitable "YES" vote ss s petition to remove the lakes is a sha~ 2. The "petltioa' as presented fails to meet the standards muuily required by the City. It contains clearly biased leading questions carefully scripted to mask the smwey's intended use, not the explicit v~ording normally required in City petitions. (See attached examples) 3. Lake Biltmore has enhanced this neighborhood. The proposed conversion has no eom.nelllnl! l'easola and will make the development indistinguishable from other apa~iment developments that normslly add little to a neighborhood. This developer has shown how little they can be trusted by their repeated violations while removing asbestos from the apa~,,,ents. They are not a good neighbor, not any friend of Cupertino, and not deserving of any lrust or accommodation by the City. I ask that you reject this petition and direct them to complete the plan as previously approved. George M. Monk EXHIBIT E ldr. Pa~ck Kwol~ Chai~non Mr. Charl=s Car, Vice-Chairperson Mr. O~ff ~oe, Pl~n~g Co~ssion~ Mr. M~ Aue~h, Planing Co~ssio~r ~a ~, E~g Co~ioner City Wo~, Ci~ Pier ~p~o ~ Pl~g ~sion 103~ To~ Avenue ~p~o, ~ 95014 Re: A~p~otion Nu~: 14-U-9~M) A~vli~t: ~eus ~ M~a~nt for ~e Bfl~o~ Ap~nu Ladies Ired C-~ntlerm'n: I at~endeA the March 26, 2001 m~eiing of ~e ~no Pl~ni Co~ssion ~ a 13-y~ ~idcnt of L~c Bil~o~ Ap~ ~ho h~ ~n ~nc~ about ~e de~lo~' pl~ for ~e complex. I was so relieved ~a you p~vely questioned ~e de~lo~n' j~c~om for re.rig to the Planing Con.ion, ~g to undo a p~ ~ ~qu~ ~e~ to k~p ~e 1~. M~y p~ople worked ~ ~ ~ ~at coat.ion from ~em ~cau~ we ~ so p~sionate h ~ng "ch~ct~" of ~e ~a. ~e s~y ~ &~ ci~ to ~st~ ~=k ~s~on ~at "moat ~op~ don't w~t ~e 1~" wasn't ~ obj~five, n~t~ qu~on~. Ipoh~ ~t out lo ~em at ~e ~. But f~y, obj~ctiviF w~n't the~ go~. You we~ ~t ~ un~ntm&ng ~t when the I~es or not ~n~n~, ifs ~ly a f~ qu~fion m ~k p~ple if ~ey'd ~ to "~ep them". I ~ow ~at ~most e~e who ~mem~n ~e l~es lov~ ~em. P~n~ md c~l~ deligh~d duc~ to.&er. (By the way, I don't buy ~e "sd~y issue' concern b~ause ~e~ of ve~ young children in ~e complex don't l~t ~ek ~il~a ~ ~d, since ~e~ ~ no d~te '~".) I ~st di~'t a~nd ~e ~ng b~ it's ~n a~nt to me &a &e ~1o~. in spi~ of havi~ b~n ~uk~ by ~ P~n~g Co~ssion over a ye~ ~o to ~p the I~e, had ~ inlention of doing so. So i~ne my joy whe~ ~e of you de~ &ek apphcaion to ~ve ~m alii I belie~ &at ff we ~move ~1 ~e l~s, we ~fly di~sh one of ~e ~test so~es of beauF in our city ~d e~a~ divinity ia ~n~ op~om for ~o ~sidm~. 1 for one wo~d rather not live in a homogeneous, bland complex. In a world wbem most decision-makers don't acknowledge the value of aesthetics, it was so gratifying to hear Mr. Patnoe acknowledge that aesthetics are important. I pwfoundly thank you for your integrity and courage in doing the right thing with Prometheus' latest petition. If we can continue to be vigilant about Prometheus' end-mn attempts, we will have ensured that Cupertino continues to have a lovely oasis in a largely concrete, impersonal age. I honestly believe that keeping Lake Biltmore's park-like ambiance is key to keeping Cupertino's "heart" alive. It's not only balm to the people who live here, but its tall ~rees and silly ducks provide a smile to many work-weary commuters heading down Rodrigues or Blaney Avenue. Thank you for making a decision that respects people's need for beauty and character around their homes. By the way, I think a compromise is certainly possible whereby some lakes are preserved and some are cunvetied to play or picnic areas. The lake closest to the pool and club house is the most visible and I would hope, the most important to retain. Sincerely, Barbera I..angworthy Home phone: 408-253-7876 Work phone: 650-358-8375 F. mail: barbera lan~.,wotahy@hyperiun.com City Manager, David Knapp Mayor Sandm lames Viea-Mayor Richard Lowanthal Council Member John Statton Council Member Don Burner Council Member Michael Chang Planning Commission Minutes 5 Mamh 26, 2001 Com. that the conditions were met and if it ~ EXHIBIT F is the appropriate zoning for re¢orr -- should the} ~ the ongoing process to annex the Gn MOTION: C6m. moved adoption of the on No. 01-EA-01 SECOND: VOTE: Passed 5-0-0 MOTION: Com. 03-Z-OI in accordance · SECOND: Com. Patnoe VOTE: Passed $-0-0 Chair Kwok thanked thc said that when the annexation proposal is scheduled to be on the sld~nts would be notified of the hearing. Mr. Piasecki reported t Planning Commmmon is tentatively scheduled to be heard on April 2~th, interested in addressing the City Council on 1 meeting, noted that the matter could be appealed to the days. ~ spcaken crossing guard issue, talk to Mrs. Hilton as she was well informed about the process. 4. Application'llo.: 14-U-98(M) _ Applicant: Lake Biltmore Apartments Location: 10159 So. Blaney Avenue Modification to a Use Permit for a new landscaping plan and creation of a tot lot and other amenities. Planning Commission decision unless appealed Postpaned from March 12, 2001 Planning Commission meeting Staff presentation: The video presentation reviewed the application for a modification to a Use Permit for a new landscaping plan and creation of a tot lot. The applicant also proposes to remove the waterways and replace with lawns, plants and shrubs. Staff recommends approval of the application iu accordance with thc model resolution. ]Vis. Vera Gil, Senior Planner, referred to the site plan, reviowed the background of the application and illustrated the location of the proposed amenities and landscaped areas. She reviewed thc 1998 Planning Commission and City Council antion to deny the request to drain the ponds. However, during thc construction of the 24 new units to the development, all but one pond was drained. Staff is also recommending that a pedestrian pathway be provided allowing individuals to enter through the Adobe Inn site and walk out to Stevens Creek Boulevard and also a path allowing individuals to cut through to Blaney Avenue. Ms. '~i1 reviewed the reasoas for the previous Planning Commission's denial to remove the ponds _ from the apartment ~omplex site. She said that the applicant surveyed the present tenants of the Plennin~ Commission Minutes 6 March 26, 2001 ap~,t~,lent complex relative to the proposed removal of the ponds, and out 0t' 54 responses received, only 9 were opposed to the new plans 1o remove the ponds. She noted that the swim pool would be fenced off.from the tot lot for safety purposes. Com. Corr expressed concern that the original application to ~emove the water ponds was denied by the Planning Commission and the City Council, and the result being that during construction of the new units, the applicant drained the ponds and is now submitting another application to remove the drained ponds from the landseapinl~, tvis. Gil said it was her understanding that it was unclear to tho applicant that they should not drain the ponds during construction. Immediately ai~r the ponds were drained, some residents notified the Planning Department, and staff worked out an asreemant with the Biltmore management that at least one pond should remain in tact. Thc applicant wes notified that they would have to apply to lhc Planning Commission to re-iaudseapq the area if'they did not fill tho ponds with water. Com. Auerbanh said that it was not clear why thc ponds had to be drained to facilitate access 5y construction equipment, as he did not sec any ponds with bulldozer tracks or co,ers to accommodate heavy equipment. Mr. Rod Standard, Sr. Vice President of Promethius, said that his history with the company included working on the original development which created.the lakes at the complex over 20 7care ago. He said the current proposal is in keeping with today's market demand and the applicant's intent to upgrade a result of thirty years et' wear, tear and obsolescence on the property. The inke systems originally incorporated in the landscape .at Biltmore are obsolete, and he said he felt lhey were an affront to .resource conservation because of' thc type of. design, configuration and size. He said it was also riifficult to ignore the environmental concerns involved with managing an open body ofwatar such as the ponds. He said it was the owner's position that thc landscape area currently consumed by the current water features could be more wisely put to use to better 5enefit the property ud better serve the residents of'tho apartments.- Piaus include converting the space into not only open space, incorporating new plant material, but also to create resident usable features, including tabins, benches, BBQs, children*s play area and two hard surf`see fountains that will sewe to offset the white noise created by the water. He reviewed the updates to the pmpe~'ty, including washe~ and dp/ers in ali the units, secured covered garages, improved interior finishes of'the units and the clubhouse, and complete overhaul of the complex. He noted that the complex was now known as Biltmore.. Mr. Standard noted that the applicant was opposed to the ri~luiremant for an easement through the property, lie said they felt it would not serve the property or create a sa~e environment, and said there ,,vas a practical formal roatter of'not being able to Bet approval for such an ensoment through the lender. IMf. Piasecki noted that relative to the easement requirement, thc condition was reworded to state that it would be an agreement between the property owner and the city, and there would be no fc~nal recorded eesencnt on the property. Ms. Wordcll clarified that there may have been an inf'ercnce that the reaidants were not polled previously, and that is why they were polled this time. She said when the previous application was submitted, the residents were in favor of the ponds remaining; and it was important to staf~ to ~et another reading since the Planning Commission overturned the staff' position which had previously recommended that they could remove the ponds. The second polling revealed there · was more support ~or removal of'the ponds. lVlr. Slanderd explained ~at the times have changed; s~ating that type of' amenity is much more ~t' - . an envirom~ental concern; people are more cognlz~nt of' those issues and don't find it so Planning Commission Minutes 7 March 2~, 200 I attractive; lifestyles hsve also changed and the resident profile of L~k¢ Biltmore changed as weU: combined they create an environment where he said he beli~ed the lakes are not an attractive amenity, lie said there would be some people who would prefer to look out across an expansive water ~'eaturc in an spat~nent complex, buthe felt it was a minority. Cora. Auerbach disc~_~d the sample of the survey provided by Mr. Monk and said that the amenities wore listed and choices were not actually listed. Mr. Standard explained that thc City Council required that the applicant design the survey and they asked For approval rites on the survey. The survey was presented and approved, (sta~ revealed later than it was approved at staff level); and the survey filled the city's need to survey the residents. Mr. Standard indicated that there was an ongoing effort to inform residents of the ~ppiieant*s intentions fi-om the beginning, and he said he felt a yeoman's effort had been made to keep the residents informed. He said ti~e survey contained accurate information and they welcomed comments from the public. ~vfr. Standard said that as a practical matter they objected to an easement or pedestrian walkway through tho property as it would appear that they were encouraging traffic that perhaps should not be there, and it creatas a concern about who might be on the property. He pointed out that the location of the proposed easement would create traffic in areas that could not bc controlled, as it would create one moro access point to tho paddng area of thc property. He said they would not put .a breach in a wall at such a point in a property that wouJd allow people to be traversing the property perhaps for the wrong reasons, as they had a genuine concern about security and safety and the integrity of the traffic going through the access. He said they were not opposed to creating a gate to allow residents in and out of the property, but were at a loss to understand who would bc comin8 onto thc property to get through that would have any need to 8o that way. Cora. Auerbach said that it involved more discussion, but the goal was to try to create a more walkable community for Cupertino, and the property was a lasga area of land that otherwise people would have to go around, and it is quite open today. Mr. Standard said that the property would remain open, but had controlled access from other areas, and they were concerned about opening the back end of the property to traffic, encouraging the wrong traffic to come through there. Responding to Corn. Con's question, Mr. Standard said that the proposal was for removal of all lakes, including the one that is currently filled. Mr. Standard explained the reasons for the absence of thc ducks, and why the ponds wore drained during construction. He pointed out that they now had to request approval to remove the psnds since construction was completed. Chair Kwok read the contents of Mr. Monk*s letter and asked Mr. Standard to comment on the letter. Mr. Standard said that the process of reconstructing Lake Biltmorc was brought about by obsolescence and was a costly and cumbersome project. He said they attempted to expedite thc process as best they could and wore not attempting to run rough shod over anyone, but rebuilding an spain., est complex of such a huge size and type of scope was a difficult process. Mr. Jolm'Cahalan, landscape architsct, summarized the rcUons for undertaking tho project. Ho said when the lakes wore built it was state of the mt technology, using a clay material which over time breaks up and loses some of its integrity, resulting in water loss. He noted that thc conditions of thc lakes after such a long period were unappealing aesthetically; and they would be taking unusable space (the ponds) and turning them into usable open space for lawn areas, BBQs, picnic tables and play are~. Ho said in the Bay Area whenever you can recapture open space it is a real plmnning Ce=remission Minutes g March 26.2001 bmefit mi ~e~ ~) the projHt. He said there were not plms to ~d my ~s m fl~e~ were well over 100 ~s plm~ m pm of~e origin~ pmje~. ~K~k ~ &~ m~g ~r public inp~. ~. Sung Ye~ 10169 So. BI~ Avenue, said ~at n~ ~m~t ~mpl~ genially include o~n s~ ~nd ~hildmn's play ~, ~d if~e subj~ complex h to be conside~d a m~em ~mple~ ~o~ f~m~s w~ld be n~ ~ of ~e c~plex. He said cu~ntly the complex d~s not have much o~n sp~e ~r the child~n to pl~ ~d play ms and g~n sp~e ~uld be bme~c~l to ~ve. Mr. Yen said ~at he liv~ in ~e ~mple~ when the~ we~ water ponds ~d ~hen h~ in~ a~ut ~e ~ of~ w~r ~nd ~, he w~ told that the~ w~ no h~ of ~cide~, whi~ is no ffu~e of ~ ~ciden~ involving small children. He co~ent~ ~at when ~e duo~ ~ in ~e ~ ~em ~ duck ~s in ~e ~lk~ys and other ~. He sgd he fe~ moa ~ople would prefer ~n s~ ~er t~n ~e ~nds. ~. ~e Mo~ 1~5 ~i~ Av~u~ mid ~t he s~t a I~r ~p~sing his opp~ition to ~min~ ~e I~ in~ I~dfill. Addm~ing ~mmen~ m~e ~lier, he ~id ~e mt lot had ~en sppmv~'~d will ~ain ~dlms of ~er impli~ ~t ~ ducks ~ died ~d ~e I~es ~ not n~, he mid the duckswill b~d back md m~m. He ~id to ~e ~e n~ for open s~ ~ j~ti~cation flor ~ovsl of te ~nds is · no~, ~ 42 n~ ~en~ w~ built ~e~ ~e~ ~ o~n sp~e. Mi. Monk su~ ~ ~m his le~n He said he enjo~d living n~r ~e ~en~; ~ have e~c~ ~e nei~d md ~ p~ of~e co~uni~. He ~id he felt the n~ ow~m want to ~ a diain~ive s~ in~ a clon~ indiain~is~ble clo~r ~ ~me ~e comple~s in said ~ ~mm~ ~ m~e ~in~ce up ~y time ~ey w~t to, b~ ~ bl~e ~eir I~k of maintemnce or u~ ~at ~ a r~n ~ ~e ~e I~ out ag~ w~ ano~er nom~r. He ~id he felt the~ ~m no compellin~ ~ons h~ over ~ y~ ~ t~e ~e ~s ouL He said it w~ the applicant's s~ond mn at mmovin~ ~e 1~; a~r ~eir fi~ ~ilum, ~ey ~i~ht~ all local msiden~ with their asbestus ~movin$ ~chniqu~. ~ey dm~ ~e I~ ~ mske them into ~ eyesores. subje~ed r~idena ~ monks of ~n~ion; ~d ~ ~em if t~y w~t ~eir environment impr~. Mr. Monk mid he felt ~e p~i~on ~ a sh~; s~ing a dangerous pm~dent by allowing multiple ~tes p~sented fails ~ met minimum smnd~s actually required by ~e c~, them is no s~s For p6itiom, but ~is one conmim lea-in qu~ion~ ~lly omt~ ~ hide ~e su~ey's intended use. ~e d~elop~ shows how li~le ~ ~ be ~ by m~ c~e violations, ~ey am not a ff~ nailer, nor s ~iend of Cup~no; ~ do n~ d~e any tm~ or accommodation. He conclu~d ~ ~king ~ ~e Pl~ing Commission rej~t ~e p~i~ion ~d di~t ~em to complain · e p~ m ori~in~ly Char K~k ~1~ ~e ~blic h~ing. ~m. Co~ que~ioned ~m~ing ~e ~ms ~m ~ ~e~ on ~e pro~ to ~ ~ement ~e people ~uld ~ allo~d ~ ~s ~mugk Ms. Ellen Mu~y, ~si~t City A~mey, cl~ed t~ ~ ~ a ve~ ~n~ di~in~on; sold ~e will ~ no a~m~t wi~ futura ~ ~d ~ ~m~t wi~ tis owner is ' memingl~s mla~ve pm~ md ~11 ~ wi~ ~e pmpe~, ~l~s ~ ~o ~s iL Com. ~ que~ion~ Planning Commission Minutes 9 March 26. 200 I when an easement is granted or made s condition ora petition ilke this, does the city not have some responsibility in terms of either maintaining that easement or doing something to having some oneness to it rather than just having it there. Ms. Murray said generally not; the city has many easements between adjacent property owners as this would be with the hotel, but the city is generally not a party to the easement. Mr. Piasecki clarified that they were optimistic that the applicant with the removal of' the easement requirement would joia in a cooperative community spirit and try to help implement a more walkable community in the area, and stafffelt it would also enhance their application. Given that they are objecting to it, staff suggests removal of thc second paragraph of Condition 6, which states they shall enter into an agreement. Staff concurs with legal counsel that it has little weight otherwise and without the applicant's concurrence it does not seem like a viable concept; therefore staff recommends that it be removed. Com. Patnoe asked for clarification on Mr. Monk*s earlier comment about the children's play area; whether or not it would still be put in if the removal of the lakeswas rejected. Mr. Standard clarified that be the lakes run, sin, the tot lot would be under two feet of water, so the area designated for the pinykrround or any other area that would be feasible for this type of structure would have to consume what is currently occupied by water, lie added that all lakes would be removed, es keeping some lakes would be inconsistent landseaping, and thc soil bottom lakes are problematic and .obsolete. He said in today's litigions society, as property owners~ they have to be concerned about the safety ofthnh' residents. Com. Corr expressed concern about laving something brought forward, it becoming convoluted, resulting in the applicant coming back and stating that they did not understand it and it wasn't quite what they meant. He said that Mr. Monk had some good points about the survey. Com. Corr said he did not feel that Promethius was a bad neighbor and not a friend to Cupertino. He said they have done a gnod job. He said in this particular case, he was not in favor of taking the lakes out, and said it was an end tun on what was discussed before. Com. Patnoe said that as a Planning Commissioner he believes the uniqueness of the community should be preserved, and he felt the lakes at the Lake Bil~more complex were what made the complex unique. He said he felt the site is better served with the lakes there; therefore he would not support the application for removal. Com. Auerbsch agreed that the applicant came to this in a bad way. Hc said on thc other hand after having walked the property, there is almost no green space on the property and there were a significant number of children playing on thc prnpcrty and around the pool on a Sunday atlernoon. Children would have to play on the front lawn or across the street at a nearby park. He said while he felt it was regrettable how the applicant came into this position, they should not be punished for their bad behavior and daptive thc tenants of an improvement in thc amenities to the property. He added that there is a tremeadons output frnm geese and ducks which could present problems. Com. Auerbach said he supported the resolution. Com. Chun said it was a difficult decision, and although she would like the water back in place, she was concerned about the safety issue for children relative to potential accidents by the water ponds. She said she was also concerned a~.out the safety in the pedestrian pathway. She said although Cupertino is s safe area, the property is adj~ceot to a hotel, and the requirement for a pedestrian pathway or the requirement for the applicant to provide an easement might result in Planning Commission Minutes tn March 26, 2001 unknown hotel patrons wnlkinl~ through thc prol)crty which would create a safety issue for children. Relative .to the amenities which would provide more green space, she said she could envision a park-like enviromnant :for children to play in and also the BBQ area for families to have activities cinsc to their rnsidances. Com. Chon said with tho information provided tunight~ she would support the landscape proposal. Com. Chon expressed concern with the inconsistency in doing the plan and the implemantatian of the plan. She said she would support the approval of the re-landscaping with conditions that the applicant ensure quality construction work; noise control; quality techniques for tho asbestos removal; provide the least disturbance to the residents and the best quality landscaping for the residents in the future. Mr. Piasccki said that the best quality landscape component is misted to this particular application; and the remainder is almost complete and the city has been monitoring it with the building code in mind. Problems were encountered in the beginning and the applicant was r~luired to remove people from the buildings so they could do remodel work in the buildings. He said wording could be included in the conditions that they shall provide the best quality plant roaterials or they have to upsize some of the trees to 24 inch box. Chair Kwok said that when the Lake Biltmore complex was opened in 1970, the name was Lake Biltmore, and the name remained the same when remodeled in 1998. The ponds were there and it has bean the trademark for the people who want to live there. He said he was not in favor of removing all the lakes. During the construction in 1998 although there was conditions sot forth about protecting the environment and yet there were not good efforts in keeping the ducks in place, resulting in only 3 0fthe 37 remaining. Chair Kwok said they looked at the open space and landscaping when the statcrneut was made that in the lest 1998 request for extension, there were n lot of tress in there, and in 2001 they said they would not put any more trees in. He said he had reservations about the grean concept of the complex, and would not support the project. MOTION: Core. Chon moved to approve Application 14-U-98(M) with tho conditions added requiring the developer to reduce the noise level and ensure minimum disturbance to the residents during thc construction; nnd also make sure the best state of the art construction techniques apply to the construction of the landscape; and remove second paragraph of Condition 6, consistent with earlier comments. SECOND: Corn. Auethach Com. Chon clarified that the condition applied to the whole project. She said she wanted assurance that the lakes were removed properly and the projects completed according to the plan. She said she also wanted to address Mr. IVlonk*s concern about the disturbance from the construction and removal of lakes. NOES: Chair Kwok, Corns. Con', Pateoe VOTE: Failed 2-3-0 Mr. Piaseski clarified that the wording in the model resolution required correction to reflect that the application does not meet the requirements co~talned in the modal resolutinn. Aisc, oil Page I of thc model resolution, vn:)rding to be changed to ... ' the application for use permit is hereby denied.* Planning Commission Minutes I I March 26, 2001 MOTION: Com. Petnoe moved to deny Application 14.U-98(M) including stated modifications to the model resolution SECOND: Com. Corr NOES:' Com. Auerbach ABSTAIn: Com. Chun VOTE: Passed 3-1 -I Chair Kwok noted the de~lsion could be appealed to the City Council within 14 calendar days. OLD BUSINESS: 5.~ 12-SP-00 Review of 2001/2002 City Council and Planning Commission Goals. Ms. '~Vordell presented the proposed goals and projects For 2001/2002 outlined in the staff repo~ which we, re established at two previous Planning Commission meetings. She also noted that there were recbmme~ded goals and project for removal. Ms. Wotdel~!atified the ABAG goals; Not since 19Si'has ABAG given the jutisdintions in this area a target oT~adequata sitos for housing by housing type affordable, and this last year the cities in the Bay Are~'~Lvere given theEr new adequate sites goals. Cupertino had 2700 housing units, and during this ?at h~w mandates that a housing elemen.t bo adopted that addresses providing those housing umts. M~, Pissecki ;~aJd that there is p.ending legislation at the state level that would indicate that if yood~ not have an a~eapted housing element approved by the state, it would be considered incomplete'or not meeting the standards. Ms. Wordell addressed th~e~lssue of proliferation of signs and noted that st~ff felt it was a code enforcement issue. Chair If, wok said that he hoped the multi-language signs would remain s priority since Cupertino had~ large multi cul!.ural population. Com. Patnoe requested that the multi-langoago sign issue rema~ on the goa. ls ?t. Mr. P. iasecki suggested removing the double asterisk on the multi language ~i~ns, and m.d~oata that ~f time permits, address the issue. He pointed out that there wore many~q~ajor projects and the General Plan update to address. Ms. Wordell noted that private development and private projects wore similar, ideas, but different sources of the list derived from the Pls~. lng Co~mission and the City Councd. The proposed g°als'and projects for 2001~002 were acknOWledged; staffwill present the item eta future date for further discussion. X~ NEW BUSINESS: None k, REPORT OF '~'~ ~: PLANNING COM2V~SSIOI~ Eavironmatal Review Committee: Com. Aherbanh reported that there was a review of the Garden G~ta annexation. . ~ Housing Committee. No meeting was held. ~\ Mayor's Breakfast: Com. Corr reported on the issuesk~iscussed at the m.ayor's breakfast. Libre.,y Commission - thc process is continuing relative to the architect interviews. City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue ._. Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 CITY O1: FAX (408) 777-3333 CUPEILTINO Community Development Department SUMMARY Agenda ltem No. ~' Agenda.Date: May 7,2001 Application: 02-Z-01, 6-U-97(M), Application Summary: gezoning and modification of a use permit to transfer 3,220 square feet of the Forum property P(Institufional) to Oak Valley properties P(Res) RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission recommends: 1. Approval of 02-Z-01 2. Approval of 6-U-97(M) Applicant: Brian Kangas Foulk (for Al Powell and Donald Krctsch) Property Owner: Al Powell and Donald Krotsch Property Location: 23657 and 23667 Black Oak Way BACKGROUND: Two property owners at Oak Valley (lots 36 and 37) pwpose to incorporate a small section of the adjacent Forum property into their two lots at the Oak Valley development. Thc Forum property is zoned P(institutional), and the Oak Valley property is P(Res). As shown in the Rezoning Diagram, their rear property lines are slightly notched below the properties to the southeast. The hatched area will be purchased from the Forum and added to their properties. DISCUSSION: The aerial view in the plan set shows the configuration of the lots and the Forum property. A smaller scale aerial view (Exhibit B) is also provided to show the area more clearly; the dark lines around the properties are fence lines, not property lines. Thc red line is the proposed propen'y line. The area to be rezoned has no functional use tbr Forum; it is an open area between the lots and the Forum parking lot. A "v" ditch for drainage is located along the rear edge of the proposed lots. The property owner of Lot 36 already extended his rear yard into the subject area. The extension of these lots is a logical colLflguration for the area. The rear property lines will be even with properties to the southeast, and there is no logical reason for additional lots to pursue extending into the Forum property. Lots to the northwest of these 2 properties (lots 29-35) abut the emergency access road and lots to the southeast comprise an even boundary, with no need to smooth it out. Public Issue~: One Oak Valley resident spoke in opposition to the rezoning, citing concerns about the property owner already extending his yard and the precedent that would be set for other lots to extend. Planning Commission Issues: Chairman Kwok stressed that it is not acceptable for property owners to begin projects prior to approval. Enclosures: Model Ordinance 1880 Planning Commission Resolutions 6089 and 6090 Planning Commission Minutes April 9, 2001 Exhibit A - City Zoning Map Exhibit B - Aerial Letter from applicant, Brian Kangas Foulk, February 28, 2001 Plan Set Prepared by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner Submi d by: Approved by: Dave Knapp Director of Community Development City Manager G:planning/pdreport/oeJco02z01 ORDINANCE NO. 1880 AN ORDINANCE OF ThE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO REZONING 3~20 SQUARE FEET OF FORUM PROPERTY FROM P(~STITUTIONAL) TO P(RES) FOR 23657 & 23667 BLACK OAK WAY WHEREAS, an application was received by the City (Application No. 2-Z-01) for the rezoning of Forum property from P(Institutional) to P(RES ); and WHEREAS, the re'zoning is consistent with the City's general plan land use map, proposed uses and surrounding uses; and WHEREAS, upon due notice and atier one public hearing the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that the rezoning be granted; end WHEREAS, a map of the subjeot property is attached hereto as Exhibit A as a proposed amendment to the Master Zoning Map of tbe City of Cupertino, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the property described in attached Exhibit A is hereby rczoned to · ~' P(RES); end is made part of the Master Zoning Map of the City of Cupertino. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days aRer its passage. INTRODUCED at a regular m~dng of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the 7th day of May, 2001, and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the day of ,2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino G:Planning/ord/Ord2z01 EXHIBIT A ZONING PLAT MAP REZONE: 3.220 SQUARE FEET FROM: PLANNED INSTI'~JTIONAL TO: PLANNED RESIDENTIAL _POINT OF BEGINNING LOT 55 705 M 44-51 LOT 56 ~ ~ SOUTHWESTERLY EDGE OF 70,~ U 44-51 EXISTING CONCRETE -- VALLEY GUTTER II _ THE FORUM 'J K282 OR 1590 m No. gearin~j Distance r,, L1 N 39'32'47" E 10.57 ~ L2 S 51'09'44' E 14.6g' ~ L3 S 52~16'41' E 17.4~' L4 S 4g·38'45' E 18.68' ~ i L5 S 47'28'38' E 21.20' LOT ,.37 L6 S 47't8'42" E 22.46' 705 Id 44-51 L7 S 48'4g'4g' E 19.g0' L8 S 52~6'42' E 18.54' L9 S 42·49'00' E 20.62' LIO S 59'12'19' E 16.70' Lll S 33"J4'32" £ 1Rql' AREA TO BE REZONED _ L12 S S6'42'45' w 25.31~ 5.22aSO. FT.~'~ (ARF..A rXCE~'II=JJ FROM K282 O~ 1390) 705 M 44-51 Si~t~lum EXHIBIT "B" Subject AREA TO BE REZONED 540 Price Avenue OAK VALLEY - UNIT 5 - ~ ~ ~ Redwood City. CA 94063 Job No. 20000250-50 [ngl,~ . ~ · ~ 650/482-6300 650/482-6399 (FAX) By CCC Date ~ Chkd. BAB SHEET 2 OF 02-Z-O1 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Tone Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6089 OF TH~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO KECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO REZONE 3,220 SQUARE FEET OF FORUlVl PROPERTY FOK 23657 & 23667 BLACK OAK WAY. SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the pl~nnln~ Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a rezonin~, as described on this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accor~s~ce with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the PIs~iug Commhsion has held one or mo~ public headugs on the subject application; and WHEREAS, the planning Commission finds that the subject rezonlng meets the following requirements: a) Tha! ~he rezonin~ is in conformance with the C-eneral Plan of the City of Cupertino, ._ b) That the properties involved ~e adequate in size and shape to conform to the new pre- zoning dcsi~nalion. c) That the new rezone encourages the most appropriate use of land. d) That the proposed rezone is otherwise not d~i~imental to the health, safety, peace, morals and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of subject paw¢ls. e) That the rezoning pwmotes the orderly development of the city. ' NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, tesgmony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for rezone is hereby recommended for approval; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application No. 02-Z-01 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meetin~ of April 9, 2001, are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. Resolution No. 6089 02-Z-01 April 9, 2001 Page -2- SECTION II: PRO~ECT DESCRIPTION Application No: 02-Z-01 Applicant: Brian Kangas Foulk (for Al Powell and Donald K_retsch) Location: 23657 & 23667 Black Oak Way SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBIT Recommendation of approval is based on a Exhibit B, Zoning Plat Map, dated 2/16/01. 2. LOT LINE ADJUS~ A lot line adjustment shall be submitted to and approved by Cupertino staff. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of April, 2001, at a Regular Meeting of the Pls--{u~ Commi-~sion of ~he City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Pamoe, Chan, Auerbach and Chairperson Kwok NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ATrEST: APPKOVED: /s/Steve Piasecki /s/Pairick Kwok Steve Piasecki Patrick Kwok, Chsir Director of Community Development Plmmhlg Commission g:/pdrepor~/res/rO2zO 1 06-U-97ClvO .._ CITY OF CUPF. RTINO 10300 Tone Avenue Culm'tino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6090 'OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOIVlMENDING APPROVAL OF A USE PER_MIT TO TRANSFER 3,220 SQUARE FEET OF THE FORUM PROPERTY TO 2365? & 23667 BLACK OAK WAY. SECTION h FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Pluming Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use Permit, as deseribed on Seetion II, of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the pIAnnln~ Commission h~ held one or more public hearings on the subject application; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support this application, and has satisfied the following requ/rements: 1) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; 2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino · Comprebemive Genelal Plan and the purpose of this rifle. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of mops, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for a Uso Permit is hereby recommended for approval; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and condirions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concernln_.o Application No. 06-U-97 (M) as set forth in the Minutes of the PlAnning Commission Meerin~ of April 9, 2001, are incorporated by reference as thou~,h fully set forth herein. · 7 Resolution No. 6090 06-U-97 (M) April 9, 2001 Page -2- SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No: 06-U-97 Applicant: Brian Kamgas Foulk (for Al Powell and Donald Kretsch) Location: 23657 & 23667 Black Oak Way SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXI-HBIT Recommendation of approval is based on Exhibit B, Zonln~ Plat Map, dated 2/16/01. 2. LOT LINE ADIUSTIVIENT A lot line adjustment shall be submitted to and approved by Cupertino staff. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of April, 2001, at a Regular Meeting of the p~nnnlng Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Patnoe, Chen, Auerbach and Chairperson Kwok NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COIVIIvlISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/Steve Piasecki /s/Patrick Kwok Steve Piasecki Patrick Kwok, Chair Director of Community Development Planning Commission g'dpdr~pot~h~s/rO6u97(M} Mr, Hen~ L~e~ 10154 ~dy ~e, said that the medi~ cma~d a hn~n~ when the thinks stopping to unl~rnimm block ~e side of the r~; and the tracks have to go down to the cul de s~ m turn ~. He pmsm~d photos illu~ating ~e bl~ge cau~d. Mr. Lyne ~inted out · e ~ f~r wi~&e I~e ~e~ mining around in ~ ama occupi~ by small children. He mques~ &at &e m~ be removed because ofs~ f~m. He comment~ that the residents su~ed w~ all op~ ~e med~. Mr. Gerald Tsm~ 10134 ~dy L~e, ~id &at ~ause of his hou~ I~ation, he w~ impac~ by the I~ tracks m~ing mm~n his ~. He question~ why such large tracks used the street since ~em was a size msffi~i6~ si~ at ~e en~nce m ~e ~t. Mr. Chong clarified that the m~i~ion w~ not enfomeable ~r ~c~ delivering to the W~dwor~ ~use their intended business w~ in &e neigh~rho~ He also expressed concern a~ut tracks and cam in the memh~dise pickup ~a and the pm~lems ~ey caused with open d~m and blocking traWm flow. Mr. Chong said ~at removal of~e m~ian would allow ample r~m for the delive~ tn~cks to ~k into &e W~dwor~ driveway ~d ~0t use the nei~bo~o~ ~e~ for turnaround. ~. ~im Nap~, 10124 ~dy ~ne, summ~d that &e problems encountered included wa~lc ba~s wi~ ~ople driving m ~e leR of~e medi~; ~ck mm~ound in front of the houses: and no ~nefit to ~ining ~e median. He said ~at if the medi~ ~ removed, the trucks would be able to turn and b~k into ~e lot for unloading and.then pull out and go onto S~vens C~k. Chair Kwok cloud ~e public he~ng. Com. Auerb~h n~d ~at the issue w~ ~ c~plc 0~ ex~ina~ measures being ~ken to appe~c concerns a~ut d~elopment and ~tc flow in advance of identifying any mai problem being idcntifi~. MO~ON: Com. Aue~h moved to approve Applicatidn. 10-U-85 SECO~: Com. PaYee VO~: P~scd 5-0-0 5. Application Nos.: 02-Z-01 and 06-U-97(M) Applicant: Brian ~ngas Foulk L~ation: 23657 & 23667 Bilk O~ Way Reining ~d modification of a use pe~it to chan~ approximately 3000 square feet from the Forum pm~ P (In~imtionfl) m O~ Valley Properties P (Res) Tent~ive Ci~ Co,oil ~te: M~ 7, 2001 Staff omsen~tion: The vid~ pmsen~tion reviewed ~e application for m~ning and m~ification of the usc ~it to ~sf~ 3,220 square ~ of Forum pmpe~ to ~o lots in the Oak Valley Developmen~ as outlin~ in ~e ~ff m~. S~ff f~ls that thc extension of the Io~ is alogical configuration for ~e a~. Stuff ~ommends approval of the application; thc appli~tion will be p~senmd to Ci~ Council on May 7, 2001. Ms. Ciddy Wo~ell, Ci~ Planer, ~icwed the issues: m~ning of the Forum pmpe~ for the small ~a from insf~mtional ~ residential; ~cnd ~e Oak Vall~ u~ pc~it m show ~e Iota Planning Commission Minutes 4 April 9. 2001 would be expanded; and lot line adjustment at staff level. She referred to an aerial view of thc area which illustrated the fence lines of the two lots, which does not interrupt any developed usc and staff feels would not be a precedent for other lots along those property lines being able to take advantage cfa similar opportunity. Staff feels that it is a unique situation, that the property would be evened out and it was not a useful area for oth~r kinds of uses and other properties would not be able to take advantage of the situation because of the road. Staff recommends approval of thc application to the City Council. Ms. Margaret NeRo, representing Brian Kangas Foulk, said she was available to answer questions. Chair Kwok opened the meeting for public comment. Ms. Wendy Chartoff, Oak Valley Road resident, presented photos of the homes in thc area, and said that one of thc two homes requesting lot extensions had already completed the lot expansion and were just now requesting permission to do so, which was not the proper process. She noted that there wei'c several other homes in tho development that could extend their lot lines, and she reiterated that they were not following the law. She said she also felt it would set a precedent to allow the two homes to ex~end their lot lines. Ms. Wordcll explained that one of thc property owners had pmccedad to expand their lot llno prior to thc application, and was now seeking approval of tho application. She said she did not foci it would sat a precedent as there wore not other similar opportunities, and they could not go into public open space lands which are adjacent to some of thc lots, nor use of space that was useful to the Forum or any other entity.: She said the property in quastion was unique and small in size. Chair Kwok said it was important that the public be aware of the appropriate rules to follow and not move forward on projects without receiving approval beforehand. Ms. Chartoff referred to the photos and pointed out that thc expansion of two lots was not a small in her opinion. Ms. Wordcll noted that the untended area of Forum property was at thc edge of the property and was not put to use presently. Com. Auerbach confirmed that the area was unused and inaccessible at thc boundary of the Forum property. Chair Kwok closed the public hearing. Com. Aucrbach said he was not opposed to the application as it was a unique situation, lie expressed concern about more lands being consumed by pot~utial lawn, not directly related to thc present issue, lot 38 to the south has a large amount of green effluent coming off the landscape into the culvert which dumps into the State of California land, at the end. MOTION: Com. Chon moved to approve Application 02-Z-01 and 06-U-9?(M) SECOND: Com. Corr VOTE: Passed 5-0-0 OLD BUSIIqESS ~ . 6. Discussion of Planners Institot~. March 21-23, 2001; Monterey, California Brian I(angan [hulk Engineers · Sunrsyors · Planners Februax3t 28, 2001 BKF Job # 2000250-50 City of Cupertino Planning Commission 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 RE: Justification Letter for Application No. 02-Z-01 Rezoning a portion of the Forum property from P (institutional) to Oak Valley properties P (ReMdential) Dear Planning Commissioners: The project proposes to rezone approximately 3,220 square feet from the Lands of the Roman .Catholic Bishop of San Jose leased to Forum Lifecare from Planned (institutional) to Planned (residential). Approximately 1,023 square feet will be transferred to Lot 36 (23667 Black Oak Way) and 2,197 square feet will be transferred to Lot 37 (23657 Black Oak Way) from the Lands of the Roman Catholic Bishop of San Jose. Once the property is rezoned an application for a lot line adjustment between Lots 36 and 37, Unit 5 and Lands of the Roman Catholic Bishop of San Jose will be subrmtted. The land to be transferred sits between an existing parking area and a residential neighborhood. Its integration with lots 36 and 37 would allow a re, configuration of the area for pool and landscape utility. The lot line adjustment would make the property lines consistent with the Oak Valley subdivision. Furthermore, the new configuration would also allow for use of the area between the residential lots and existing parking We appreciate your review of the project. Sincerely, BRIAN KANGAS FOULK Margaret E. Netto Senior Planner cc: Mr. Al Powell, Mr. Don Kretsch Monseigneur Michael Mitchell 540 Price A~enue · Redwood City, CA 94063 · (650) 482,6300 · FAX (650) 482-8399 A -II ' City Hall 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 (408) 777-3354 CI'~ OF FAX (408) 777-3333 CUPE INO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Summary AGENDA ITEM 2~ AGENDA DATE May 7. 2001 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Report on bids and award of contract for Pavement Restoration Project 2001-02 to the low bidder, Silicon Valley Paving, Inc. in the mount of $170, 540.20 and approval of a contingency of approximately 10%. BACKGROUND The pavement restoration project is an annual street maintenance effort budgeted each fiscal year. The scope of work consists of the removal of old deteriorating pavement sections and replacement of surface pavement areas on various streets throughout the city. All of the City's streets arc reviewed and locations in need of repairs are measured and recorded for this project, The bids received reflect unit prices for the tyl~, s of work required such as pavement "dig-ont" (removal) and replacement of pavemem in either 4 inch or 6 inch sections. The following is a summary of bids received for the referenced project: Bidder Base Bid G. Bortolotto & Co. $ 264,290.00 E1 Camino Paving Inc. $ 233,310.00 Engineer's Estimate $ 225,500.00 Top Grade Construction $ 214,800.00 O'Grady Paving Inc. $ 189,900.00 Silicon Valley Paving, Inc. $ 170,540.20 Funds are available in the adopted 2000-10 budget. The low bidder is Silicon Valley Paving, Inc. for the amount of $ 170,540.20. A contingency of $17,000.00 is requested for unforeseen conditions and additional work as may be determined during the course of the work. The Iow bid is approximately 25% below the engineer's estimate and is a very good price for the work involved. STAFF RECOMMENDATION That the City Council award the project to the low bidder, Silicon Valley Paving, Inc. in the amount of $170,$40.20, and authorize a contingency of $17,000.00 for a total project cost of $187,540.20. Submitted by: Attest as to bids received: Ralph A. Qualls, Jr. ~g Kimberly Smith Director of Public Works City Clerk Approved for submission: David W. Knapp City Manager City Hall · ~ 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 CITY O1: Telephone: (408) 777-3220 CUPEI INO (408)777.3366 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SUMMARY Agenda Item No. ~g Meeting Date: May 7, 2001 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Cupertino Community Services (CCS) Affordable Housing Project BACKGROUND In February 1999, the City Council approved $1.6 million in funding towards the CCS affordable housing project on Stevens Creek Boulevard. At that time, Cupertino National Bank was to provide a loan to finance the conslructinn costs. Due to increased interest rates, CCS considered alternatives to this conventional loan. Several options were explored, including the application for a 10-year, 3% fully amortized loan from CI-IFA and the issuance of tax exempt bond financing. In December, 2000 a CHFA loan was awarded to the City in the amount of $2 million dollars to be used for this project. This loan would vest to the City of Cupertino as general obligation debt and the City would be required to fund the cash flow shortfall of meeting the debt service obligations during a ten-year period. Staff is reconunending that this loan not be accepted because it will tie the City financially to this project for a 10-year period, restrict our own debt capacity by $2 million dollars, and leave the City with an estimated $700,000 to pay off or refinance in 2008. Another option for the City to consider is to issue tax-exempt bond financing for this project. It is estimated that the project can afford approximately $1.5 million of bonding and Greater Bay Bank has expressed an interest in buying the entire issue. Tax exempt bonds do not constitute a general fund obligation, but pass through to Cupertino Community Services (CCS) for payment obligations. This scenario will provide a better financing option for CCS than a conventional loan and keep the financial responsibility with CCS. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council decline the CHFA loan and direct staff to issue tax-exempt bonds for the affordable housing project. Submitted by: Approved for submission: .- Carol A. At'wood David W. Knapp Director of Administrative Services City Manager City Hall ~ . 10300 Tone Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 CITY OF Telephone: (408) 777-3220 CUPERTINO (408)77%3366 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SUMMARY Agenda Item No: ,9,~ Meeting Date: May 7, 2001 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Extension of Agreement for Consultation Services with ACI Real Properties, Inc. BACKGROUND In 1996/97, Apple Computer was in the midst of a significant restructuring. Part of this restructuring included decisions about the location of various sales and marketing facilities, which had economic impacts on the City of Cupertino. In May of 1997, the City entered into a five-year consultant agreement with ACI Real Properties to provide an incentive for Apple to generate new sales tax activities within thc City. Apple has approached thc City and asked for a five-year extension on this agreement, which is set to expire on June 30, 2002. No other changes in terms or conditions have been proposed. The agreement with ACI has both advantages and disadvantages, as set forth below: Advantages · Provides the City an average of $1.1 million in sales tax per year as opposed to $290,000 prior to the agreement. · Increased corporate involvement. DisadvantaRes · Removes approx'unately $810,000 per year from total municipal sales tax receipts and remits these monies to ACI Real Properties. RECOMMENDATION Direct staff of council's preference. Submitted by: Approved for submission: --' Carol A. Atwood David W. Knapp Director of Adm'mislrative Services City Manager Brian Kang ulk Engineers · Surveyors · Planners February 23, 2001 BKF Project No. 20000250-50 DESCRIPTION OF REZONING AREA All that real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, being a portion of the Lands of the Roman Catholic Bishop of San Jose as said lands are described in that certain document filed for record on September 2, 1987 in Book K282 of Official Records at page 1390, in the Office of the Recorder of Santa Clara County, and being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the most northerly comer of Lot 36 as said lot is shown on that certain map entitled "TRACT 9078 OAK VALLEY - UNIT 5" filed for record on July 9, 1998 in Book 694 of Maps at pages 44 through 51, inclusive, in the Office of the Recorder of Santa Clara County; thence North 39032'47" East, a distance of 10.57 feet to the southwesterly edge of the existing concrete valley gutter; thence along said southwesterly edge of said concrete valley gutter the following ten courses: 1) South 51°09'44" East, a distance of 14.69 feet; 2) South 52°16'41" East, a distance of 17.48 feet; 3) South 49°38'45" East, a distance of 18.68 feet; 4) South 47028'38'' East, a distance of 21.20 feet; 5) South 47°18'42" East, a distance of 22.46 feet; 6) South 48049'49" East, a distance of 19.90 feet; 7) South 52o56'42'' East, a distance of 18.54 feet; 8) South 42049'00" East, a distance of 20.62 feet; 9) South 39°12' 19" East, a distance of 16.70 feet; 10) South 33°34'32" East, a distance of 18.91 feet to the northeasterly prolongation of the southeasterly line of Lot 37, as said lot is shown on said map; thence along said lines South 56o42'43'' West, a distance of 25.31 feet to the most easterly comer of said Lot 37 and the beginning of a non-tangent curve to the left, from which point a radial line bears South 56042'43'' West; thence along said line and the northeasterly line of LOt 36, as said lot is shown on said map and along said curve having a radius of 600.00 feet, through a central Exhibit "A" ~ Page 1 of 2 3.~ angle of 17°28'15", an arc length of 182.95 feet to the POII~-T OF BEGINNING and having an area of 3,220 square feet, more or less. A plat showing the above description is attached hereto and made part hereof as Exhibit "B'. This description was prepared by me or under my direct supervision. A. Bilbo, B.v.~.p:~. ~:.';;~ !'.' '. Bradley 4 I Expires: 3/31/02 ~ .~_..,~&~. .. Exhibit "A" Page 2 of 2 I ~ STATE OF · CALIF. ZONING PLAT MAP REZONE: 3.220 SQUARE FEET OAK VALLEY FROM: PLANNED INSTITUTIONAL UNIT I TO: PLANNED RESIDENTIAL / AREA TO BE REZONED SEE SHEET OAK VALLEY_- 2 OF 2 RANCHO SAN ANTONIO COUNTY PARK 260 MAPS 28-52 LANDS OF THE ROMAN CATHOUC CHURCH VALLEY. LEASED TO FORUM UNIT ~. UFECARE ' '~' 282 OR 1593 COUNTY OF' SANTA CLARA / 450 MAPS 41 LANDS OF THE CATHOLIC FOREIGN MISSION SOCIETY OF AMERICA 478 OR 11 OAK VALLEY / UNIT 1 ,-- Subject AREA TO BE REZONED II1~11~~1111[ 540 Price A~-nu. OAK VALLEY - UNIT 5 Redwood City, CA 94063 Job No. 20000250-'50 r. aek~.~ · ~ · ~,.aaem 650/482-6500 650/482-6599 (FAX) By CCC Dote 2/16/01 Chkd. SHEET 1 OF 2 ZONING PLAT MAP REZONE: 3,220 SQUARE FEET FROM: PLANNED INSTITUTIONAL TO: PLANNED RESIDEN'RAL ...POINT OF BEGINNING LOT 55 /'. 705 U 44-51 FL1 LOT 36 ~ .-,*--- SOU'IHWESTERLY EDGE OF 705 M 44-,51 EXISTING CONCRETE -- VALLEY GUTTER , _ THE FORUM '~ K282 OR 1390 ~ No, Beorin9 Distance ~ r- L2 S 51'09'44" E 14.69 ~ L4 S 49°58'45- E 18.68' o -- L5 S 47'28'~8" E 21.20' LOT 37 o° r- L6 S 47'18'42" E 22.46' 705 M 44-51 ~ m L7 S 48°49'49" E 19.90' ~ ~ -- LB S 52'56'¢2' E 18.54' ~ 42'49'00" E 20.62' L9 S ~ m LIO S 39'~2'19' E 16.70' -- J~ ~ Lll S 33":54'32" E 18.91' AREA TO BE REZONED ~ _ L12 S 56'42'43' W 25.31' ~.~ (AREA EXCE~,i~.u FROM K282 OR 1390) o EXHIBIT "B" / Subject AREA TO RE REZONED I1~1111~~1~ 540 Price Avenue OAK VALLEY - UNIT 5 Redwood City, CA 94063 Job NO. 20000250-50 Er~a~.~ · ~ · ~ 650/482-6300 650/482-6399 (FAX) By CCC Dote 2/16/01 Chkd. BAB SHEET 2 OF 2 ORDINANCE NO. 1877 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING CHAPTER 2.06 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO CITY COUNCIL ELECTIONS AND CAMPAIGN FINANCE DISCLOSURE WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 1757 was enacted on May 19, 1997, and implemented a number of reforms related to City Council campaign financing; and WHEREAS, the City Council amended those provisions by enacting Ordinance Nos. 1797 and 1818; WHEREAS, The City Council wishes to further refine the procedures related to campaign finance disclosure; NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS: Chapter 2.06 of the Cupertino Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Chapter 2.06 CITY COUNCIL~CAMPAIGN FINANCE 2.06.010 Purposes. A. Thc proper operation of democratic government requires that elected officials be responsible to the people; that monetary contributions to political campaigns on behalf, or against, a candidate, while a legitimate form of public participation in the political process, should not be so great as to p~mit particular individnals or organizations to exercise a controlling or undue influence on the election of City Councilpersons. B. This chapter is intended to minimize the potentially con'upting influence and appearance of corruption caused by excessive contributions to City Council campaigns or on behalf of, or against a candidate, by providing for reasonable conlribution limits for candidates and "independent committees" as par~ of the election process. C. This chapter also is intended to lessen the potentially corrupting pressures on candidates, officeholders, and committees, for fundraising by establishing sensible time periods for soliciting and accepting campaign contributions. D. This chapter also seeks to enable each City voter to cast an informed vote by requiring that candidates disclose all campaign contributions prior to a City election and by '- requiring independent expenditure committees to reveal the source of their funding prior Ordinance No. 1877 Cupertino City Council Page 2 to a City election consistent with free speech principles contained in thc Constitution of thc United States and the State of California. (Ord. 1757 § 1 (par0, 1997) 2.06.020 Statutory authority. Section 85706(b) oftha California Government Code, adopted by the voters of the State of California on November 6, 1996, as part of Proposition 208, authorizes the City to impose lower contribution limitations or other campaign disclosures or prohibitions that are as, or more, stringent than set forth under thc applicable provisions of state law. (Ord. 1757 § l (part), 1997) 2.06.030 Definitions. Unless other, vise pwvided in this ch~ter, all words and phrases in this chapter shall have the same meaning as are defined in Title 9 of the California Government Code as then exists on thc date of enactment of this chapter or as it may be later amended. Words and phrases not specifically defined shall be construed according to the context and approved usage of the language. (Ord. 1757 § 1 (part), 1997) 2.06.040 Conflicts with provisions of state law. Where conflict occurs between any provision established by this chapter and any provision of applicable state law, the more restrictive or stringent of any such provision shall apply. (Ord. 1757 § ! (pat't), 1997) 2.06.050 Constitutionality. If any section, subsection, senten~, clause, or phrase of this chapter is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this chapter. Thc Council declares that it would have passed this chapter, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases had been declared invalid or unconstitutional. (Ord. 1757 § 1 (part), 1997) 2.06.060 Construction. The provisions of this chapter, and all proceedings under it are to be construed liberally with a view to effect its purposes and to promote justice. (Ord. 1757 § I (part), 1997) 2.06.070 Prohibited acts defined. Whenever in this chapter, any act or omission is made unlawful, it shall include causing, allowing, permitting, aiding, abetting, suffering, or concealing the fact of such act or omission. (Ord. 1757 § 1 (pm), 1997) 2 Ordinance No. 1577 Cupertino City Council Page 3 2.06.080 Penalty for violations. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, imprisonment for a t~m not exceerli%v six months, or' by both such fine and imprisonment. (Ord. 1757 § 1 (pa~t), 1997) 2.06.090 Remedies cumulative. All remedies provided for in this chapter shall be cumulative and not exclusive. All remedies contained herein shall be in addition to any crimirlal or civil penalties contained in Section 83116 et seq. of the California Government Code or any other applicable provision of state law. (Ord. 1757 § 1 (part), 1997) 2.06.100 Conlribution limits. A. Except as provided hea-oiusfler, no person, other than small contributor commil'tee~ or political party committees, shall make to any candidate for City Council or to the candidate's controlled commltt¢¢, and no sllch candidate or tho candidate's conffolled committee shall accept from any person, a contribution or contributions totaling more than one hundred dollars for each election in which the candidate is attempting to be on the ballot or is a write-in candidate. B. No small contributor committee or political party committe~ shall make to any csfldidato for City Council or the conh'olled committee of such a candidate, and no candidate shall accept from a small contributor commi~f, oo or political party comtnittee, 8. contribution or contributions total'mE more than two hundred dollars for each elecfiun in which the candidate is attempting to be on the ballot or is a write-in candidate. C. The forgiveness of any debt constitutes a campaign contribution and any forgiveness greater than the contribution l'tmits contained herein, either for a candidate or an independent committee, is prohibited. D. The provisions of this section shall not apply to a candidate's contribution of his or her personal funds to his or her own campaign committee. Candidat~ can conlribute to their own campaigns at any time before or after the election. The pwvisions of this section limiting campaign contributions shall apply to contributions from a spouse. (Ord. 1797 (part), 199S; Ord. 17S7 § 1 (part), 1997) E. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2.06.100 and except as provided hereinafter, any committee making independent expenditures of one thousand dolla~s or more shnll not accept from any person any contribution in excess of two hundred fifty dollars for each election in which the commit'too is participating. 2.06.110 Restrictions on when contributions may be accepted. 3 Ordinance No. 1877 Cupertino City Council Page 4 A. No candidate or committee may accept contributions more than six months prior to the election for which the contributions are to be utilized. B. No candidate may accept conttibufions later than five/oml~e,-days prior to thc election. In thc event that a candidate incurs more debt hi his or her campaign than can be paid by contributions, the candidate must retire the debt from his or her own personal funds prior to January I of the year following the election. Failure to ~cire the-debt by that date constitutes a violation of this chapter. C. No committee makins independent expenditures of one thousand dollars or more may accept contributious later thanfive fo"-- days before the election. Any debt incurred by such committee which is not retired from campaign contributions prior to January 1 of the year following the election constitutes a violation of this chapter. D. This section shall not apply to any funds zaiscd for the purposes described in Section 85305(d) of thc Caiifomia Government Code (related to attorney's fees, cost of recounts, and other costs described in Section 85305(d). (Ord. 1757 § 1 (part), 1997) 2.06.120 Disclosure statements. A. Fon'y days prior to a City Council election, all candidates and independent expenditure committees shall file with the City Clerk two originals of the first pre-election disclosure report required by thc Fair Political Practices Commission disclosing thc n~me, address, employer and contribution amount of all persons making contributions exceeding ninety- nine dollars. Contributions requiring disclosure include "in kind" contributions of a fair market value of nlnety-nine dollars or more. In addition, committees making independent expenditures of one thousand dollars or more must also disclose the name, address, and employer of all officers of thc committee. Thc filing per/od for thc initial disclosure is January 1st of the even numbered year prior to the election through forty-five days prior to the election, and the deadline is 5:00 p.m. in the City Clerk's Office. Facsimiles and postmarks are not acceptable. B. Thc following disclusurc statements must be filed by candidates and independent expenditure committees twelve days prior to a city election: (1) Two originals of thc second pre-election disclosure statement required by thc Fair Political Practices Commission. The filing period is forty-four days prior through seventeen days prior to the election; and (2) A City of Cupertino disclosure statement must be filed by candidates and committees CODtainirlg the same information as thc disclosure statement required by the Fair Political Practices Commission. The filing period is sixteen days prior through fourteen days prior to the election. The deadline for both of these disclosure statements is S:00 p.m. in the City Clerk's Office. Facsimiles and postmarks are not acceptable. 4 Ordinance No. 1877 Cupertino City Council Page 5 C. The following disclosure statements must be filed by candidates and independent expenditure committees four days prior to a city election: A City of Cupertino disclosure containing the same information us the disclosure statement required by the Fair Political Practices Commission. The filing period is forty-four days prior through four five days prior to the election. The deadline for both of the~e disclosure statements is 4:00p. m. in the City Clerk's Office. Disclosure statements must be personally delivered; facsimiles and postmarks are not acceptable. D.C,, The City Clerk shall make all disclosure statements available to the public upon request and by posting them on the Cup,ri'line Internet website by thefirst e~.gh~ day prior to the city election. D. Four day~. prior to a city election, c, ommitt~ IIknklng independent sxpmditures of one thou~-and dollars or more shall file a City of Cuperlino disclosure statement. The filing period for the City of Cup,~/ino disclosure it: thirts~,, dayc prior to the election through four dayt prior to tho election, and the d~adl'me is 5',00 p.m. in the City Clerk's Facsimiles and po~anar~ are not ao~p~bls. E. On January 31 st of the year following a city election, all candidates and independent expenditure committees shall file semi-annual disclosure statements with the City Clerk as required by the Fair Political Practices Commission. The filing period for the final disclosure is from the sixteenth day prior to the election through December 31 of the year of the election, and the deadline is 5:00 p.m. in the City' Clerk's Office. Facsimiles and postmarks are not acceptable. F. The filing of the above-described disclosure statements do not relieve candidates or committees from filing disclosure statements as requ'n~xl by the Fair Political Practices Act. (Ord. 1797 (part), 199S: Ord. 17S7 § 1 (pan), 2.06.130 Audits, appeals- and complaints. A. The City Clark ~hall engage the e~rviceo of an independent auditor xvho ab_all rsvi~v, in d~tail, all campaign di~.olotatre statmne.ita. Within five dayz after the initial di~closur~ r, tata_ent~ proscribed by Section 12.06.1 are film with the City Cia-k, the auditor shall g.opare and submit to the City Clerk a · written rupert deocribing any and all violations with rtmpact to this chaptc: which have appsured from the statmnents on fils. Tho clark shall disssminttta the report to the public C. Any pcrnon, including a candidate, wielding to cont~t any portion of the auditofl ..~ort regarding any initial disclora~re s~at~anent or wi~hlng to file a separate complaint against a candidate or commltteo alleging a violatisn or violation~ of thio chapter aball do so in Ordinance No. 1877 Cup~'tino City Council Page writing fil~d with the City Clark ~vithin five days of the public rel~as~ of the auditor's report regard'rog initial di~losure etat~m~nts. D. Within five days afier the filing of any such conteot or complaint, aheering opts to the public shall be held by an indopzadent admini~rafive judge engaged by the City, xvho xvill decide the mm'its of any such cont~.~t or complaint. Within five days after the ~ompl~ion ofth~ h~aring, the judge mil i~ue a written d~iaion, xvhich will bo made available to the public. E. Within threo days after the second pm elscfon disclosure pcriod for candidatsg a~ de~cribod in Section 2.06.130B-ha~ elapsed (nine days prior to the election) the auditor shall prepare and submit to the City Clerk a ~cond ~pon describing violationc of this chapter ~vhich have occurred since the first reporting period. The Clgrk shall diss~ninate the report to the public forthwith, F. Any per~on, including a candidate, wishing to conteet the auditor's report rogurding any second pm eh~tion discloc, um statement by a candidate or wi~_ing to file a separate complaint ag&net a candidate or indepcadot ~xpznditum coramitteo regard'mg a violation or violation~ of this chapter which are allegM to have occurred during the s~ond reporting po~'od may do eo in the same manner d~cribcd in sub~ction C of this s~?~ion; provided ho~v~ver, that such cont~0t or'complaint muet bo filed within t~v~nty four hour~ of the public release of the auditor's report regarding the second discloma-~. Within forty eight hours of the filing of any such conteot or complaint (six days prior to the election), a hearing opm to the public will bo held by the ind~pcndant administrative judge regarding the contact or complaint. No later than noon on the fourth day prior to the election, the indop~nd~nt adminietra.five judge will ie, sue and make public a written opinion regard'rog e~h appoal or complaint. G. Tho amendment of any disclosur~ statement, xvhich is the subject of a viohtion determination, made by the auditor must be filed xvithin forty right hour~ of the auditor's H. Whenever any cont~t or complaint is fil~d with the City Clerk pursuant to this chapter, or ~vhensver a h~'ing before the iud~p~ndent adminietrative judge ia eaR, the Ci~rk shall provide xvritten nofic~ to the contee, tant, the complainant, the relevant candidate or ind~rp~ndant committ~o of the filing or h~aring through either p~onal daliv~y or fax within V,v~nty four hour~ of the filing and/or twenty four hours prior to any h~aring, a~ the ca~ may be. Any notice of hearing shall contain the dat~, time, and place of eawh hearing and shall have :.o~ded to aid notic~ a copy of thie chapter. I. With re~p~t to any disc, losum a~.a'.amant required by this chapter to be fil~d aRzr an election, the audit and appel procedure dz~xib~i in S~tion 2,06.140B, C and D shall bc followed. (Ord. 1757 § 1 (IXatt), .1997) 6 Ordinance No. 1877 Cupertino City Council Page 7 2.06.1'10 Hearing prooecdingc. A. The indepandant ='~_m'mir, trative judge ahail condu~t ail haaringc dascribed in ~sotion 2.06.1'10 in a manner consictr~t with the Rui~ of "Procedure for Conducting Hearing" d~,cribod in Appendix A att~hsd to this chapter. B. The judg~ ohall ur, e hi~ or her indepcndant judgment as to the ~vidance prsnantsd. C. The burden of proof ~vith r~psct to any content or complaint shall bo on the party making the contast or complaint. Tho burds., of proof of any fact i~ upon the pcrson ar, am'ting the fact. The burden of proof as to any fact ir- by a p.,rondsrancs of the avidsnc~. D. Notwithstanding :nything to the contrary contained in r-ubsection C of this section, any f~tual determination or finding of fact m~.de by the City's auditor contained in his or her r~pon e~_nll con~tituta a r~buttable pr~numption nr to the truth of the dstern?~--~tion or B. At the conclunion of the hv°-ing~ tha judg~ may, in his or her discretion, ord~ any party to r~mburse the City for any costs associated with the hearing, including audit costs. (Ord. 1757 § 1 (p~t)~ 1997) 2.06.150 CriIDinai proceedings. Any criminal proceedings against any person for a violation of this chapter will be prosecuted by an independent city prosecutor selected by the Presiding Judge of the Santa Clara County Superior Court. (Ord. 1757 § 1 (part), 1997) 7 Ordinance No. 1877 Cupertino City Council Page 8 Appendix A Rulas of Pwcedum for Conducting Hzaring 1, Parties The partien ahall con~i~t of the contestant oF ap~sllant, the candidate or ol"ficen: of the indepandent committee which are ch~rb~t with the violation or violations- of this Chapter, and the City. 2. Indgpondgat Admlrlilttttttive ludg~ The Judge will have the authority to conduct the hearing and the manner ofprocecclings, to rule on qu~fion~ of evidence and the relevancy thereof, to maintain order at the hearing, to int~'pret and apply the0e rule~ of proc~ure, and to do all other acts nece~ary to provide a fair and orderly hem'ing. 3, Heari~ Clerk The City Clerk ahall be charged with t-bill and kegping recordc, and ~,hall ko~ in big or her po~e0~iun any exhibits'or documents offered as evidence, The City Clerk shall make the nece~ary ~ants for the takinS of a stanollraphic record of the te~timuny xvhanever suoh record ie requented by one or more parti~. The requenting party shall pay the co~t of such a record. Attendance at Hearing Thc indo~'ndant admini~rative judge shall have the poxver to require the exclu~iun of any wime~ or wito~s~ during the testimony of other witnesses. 5. Oaths ltefom proceeding with the tentimony of any witne~, the indapandant admini~ative judge ~all r~luim withes,, to terlify und~ oath or affirm to th~ Iruth. The oath or affirmation ~,.nll bo administered by the city etak. 6. Order of Pro~eoding ^ h~ning chall bo opoi.ed by the judg~ The h~aring clol.-k shall record in the m'mutas the place, time, and dat.' oftha convaning of the heating; the pm~ance of the partias, and their m,.p~ctive coun~l, if any. Prior to the pren~ntation of any opining ~tat~ments or the offoring of any evidance, thm'~ rdmll be antered into the record for r~id hearing all ~x~hibits, proof~ of sm-vic~ audit 8 Ordinance No. 1877 Cupertino City Council Page 9 · -- r~porta, affldavita, di~cloaum r~at~.,cnta, or oth~. ~rid~.c~ pra~eat~d to or filed with th, City Clerk reg~uding the matt~, bzfore tho judge.. At the boginning of the hearing, the judg~ may a~k for statem~t~ clarifying the involwd. The auditor may thc~ pr~ent hig r-tort and fil~dlnga and th~..afier ~hnll bo subject to qu~tion~ or oth~-. ~xamin~on by ths partite. Th$ other partisa may th~n p~c~snt thsir claims, proof, and witno~ss~,, xvho shall thsmafi~r submit to qu~stiong or other ~xnmlnation by all other partita. Th~ judgo may, in his or her di~r~ion, vary this procedure, but shall afford all parti¢c, a full and fair opportunity to pro~nt all material or relevant proofs. Exhibits, who offered, my be mceivsd in evid~'ac~ and ~vhen rsc~iv~d, sl~l bo numl~rsd °_nd made part of the r~ord of the h~c.'ing by the City Cl~rk. The cl~rk shall al~o r~c~ord alia of nams~ and -..ddre~.ass of all wimc~.s~. 7. Hearing in th$ Abs~n~ of a Party Ths h~aring may proo¢¢d in thz ab~oce of any party, xvho, after du~ notice, fail~ to bc Evid,ncs a) Each party ~hall haw th~ righiz: to call and ~ins wimz~eo, to introduce zxhibit~, to cro~ ~xamin~ opposing wime0~ on any mattzr r~l~vant to the zv~n though that m.~..*ter wa~ not covered in the direct examination, to impoach an}' wimsc,~, regardl¢~ of xvhich pa~ first c~all~d him or her to ts~tify; and to robut th~ evid~cs against him or h~. If a party dooa ~ot t~ify in hi~- or her own b~half, he or she may bo aallzd ."'-~ ~xo-'-~-'zd as if under cro~z examination, providzd, ho~vw~r, that no wim~l ~all bo r~quired to t~.tify if such te. mimony would tend to incriminais him or her in any ~Ub~lu~nt oriminal proc¢oding. b) Th~ h~ring aocd not be oonductod acc~ording to tw. imical ruleg r~lating to ~hdcno~ and wim~o~z~. Any r~l~vsnt ~videnes ~mll bo -..dmitt~d if it ic the sort of zvidencz on which ~_-.,por~iblz p~..oon~ ore accu~om~d to r~ly in tho ~nduct of seriou~ affairs, r~gardl~ of the ~xiat~nce of any common law or ~tutory role whioh might make improl:;r th~ ~dmi~ion of~h ~id~nc~ over objection in ~ivil aotion~. H.'~'~ay ~vidsnc~ may bo o~d for the purpo~ of ~uppl~m~nting or ~xp]ainln~ other slrid~lc~, but ahall not bc suffioi~nt in itr~lf to support a finding unl~6s it would b~ zdmiaaiblz ova'. obj~lion in civil agiiong. Th~ rulz~, of privilcg~ r. hal] bc off~ctiv~ to the ~'t¢.,1 that thoy ~ otherwig~ l~qllirsd by atatut~ to bo mool~ized ~ the h~sring, and irrelevant and unduly ..~.otitious ~vidsnc~ shall bo excluded. 9 Ordinance No. 1877 Cupertino City Council Page 10 9. Closing the Hearing The judga shall require of all partio~ xvheth~r they have further proof~ to offer or ',.vimeooeo to be heard. Upon receiving negative replis~, the judge may allo~v argument by councel or a pan~ to the proee~4;-~g reg.'ding the evidence. After the conclur, ion of such argument, the hearing shall bo ctor, ed and a minute thereof shall be mcordsd. The matt~o ahall then bo taken under submisoion, and the judg~ shall thersaRer announcs his or her dscision. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days aRer its passage. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupv~'cino this 2nd day of Apz~l, 2001, and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of ,2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: BurneR, Seines, Lowenthal NOES: None ABSENT: Chang ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino 10 ORDINANCE NO. 1878 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF CUPERTINO PREZONING A .24 GROSS ACRE PARCEL, LOCATED AT 10S99 N. STELLING ROAD, (GARDEN GATE AREA) TO PRE Rl-10 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT. APN: 326-08-0~3, LIN-HAI NAN WHBREAS, an application was received by the City (Application no. 01-Z-01) for thc prczo~ing of property to RI-10; and WHBREAS, the rczonin~ is consistent with the City's general plan land use map, proposed uses and surrounding uses; and WHEREAS, upon duc notice and after one public hearing the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that the rczoning be granted; and WHEREAS, a map of the subject property is attached hereto as Exhibit A as a proposed amendment to the Master Zoning Map o£the City of Cupertino. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the property describe in attached Exhibit A is hereby rezoned to · Rl-10 Single Family Residence; and that Exhibit A attached hereto is made part of the Master Zoning Map of the City of Cupertino. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after its passage. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the 2nd day of April, 2001 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of thc City Council of the City of Cupertino the __ day of May, 2001, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: . APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupe~ino ~. [_i~l~..~/ Cit7 Hall 10300 Torre Avenue C]'f~ OF Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 CUPEI INO (408) 777-3354 FAX (408) 777-3333 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Summary AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE May 7, 2001 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Informational Report on thc Stevens Canyon Road Improvement Project BACKGROUND On July 27, 2000 the Council rejected ail bids on the Stevens Canyon Road Improvement Project and directed staffto revise the scope of the project to stay within the construction budget of $1,000,000. Staff has met with Brian-Kangas-Fanlk (BKF) over the past few months to amend the scope of the project to a more basic improvement program with constant pavement cross-section on the roadway. In addition, a separate minor paving and drainage project for a portion of the road from Santa Lucia Avenue to Miramonte has been included in the originai project (From Miramonte to the entrance to Stevens Creek County Park). The projects were put together because the City will typically receive better unit prices on a larger project than would typically be the case by breaking into two smaller ones. The current estimate for the combined project is $945,000. The combined budget for beth projects is as follows: Design $ 105,000 ConsUuction Management 90,000 Construction 945,000 Contingency 160,000 Total $1,300,000 BKF will prepare a final Engineer's Estimate once the Construction drawings have been completed. It has taken longer than expected to develop a comprehensive bid package because of several drainage and retaining wall redesigns which required some additional field survey work and because there are portions of right-of-way in the current alignment that the City must acquire before going out to bid. The current schedule from the consultants is as follows: Completion of Construction Drawings July 2001 Advertise Project/Receive Bids August 2001 Award Contract September 2001 Begin Construction October 2001 Complete Construction February 2002 Staff had reviewed the proposed revisions with Councilmember Bumett as the original sponsor of the project. This report is for the Council's information only and no action is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Acceptance of the Report. Submitted by: Approved for submission: Ralph A. Quails, Jr. David W. Knapp Director of Public Works City Manager 32-2-- City Hall 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 · (408) 777-3354 CI~Y OF FAX (408) 777-3333 CUPE INO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Summary AGENDA ITEM 33 AGENDA DATE May 7. 2001 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Report on Proposed Gateway at the intersection of De Anza Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard BACKGROUND The current Capital Improvement Program contains fund'mg (including contributions from adjacent developments) to create special pedestrian cwsswalks with higher quality end distinctive pavement trea~nents in all four directions at the intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard and De Anza Boulevard. During discussions of several developments during the '- General Plan Workshop held on February 2, 2001, Councilmember Lowenthal suggested that staff consider some kind of gateway aWacture or monument in the center of the intersection to complement the pedestrian crosswalk paving pwposed to be installed in the 2001-2002 Fiscal Year as part of the Kimpton/Prometheus pwject. The Council has requested that staff study the feasibility of installing a monument in the center of the intersection on De Anza Boulevard at Stevens Creek Boulevard and report back to the Council before reviewing the CIP in May 2001. In the General Plan traffic capacity is referred to in terms of Level of Service (LOS). Specifically "Policy 4-2: Traffic Capacity and Land Use Limitations" states: "...in order to accommodate development which furthers a unique community gathering place on Stevens Creek Boulevard, the intersection of Stevens Creek and De Anza Boulevard... may maintain a LOS 'E +'". This intersection is also on the Santa Clara County Congestion Management Program (CMP) network. The intersection was built out in 1986 as part of the De Anza Boulevard Widening Project. All approaches have double left turn lanes. This intersection has a traffic signal that is coordinated to adjust for AM, Mid-Day, and PM peak traffic volume periods on weekdays. The intersection now operates typically at LOS "D" during the PM peak hour period.. ANALYSIS Design Assuml~tions Staff has designed a pedestal for a gateway monument of undetermined size to be placed in the -- center of the intersection with sufficient clearance as now exists in thc turning movements. A pedestal 17 feet in diameter with 10 feet of clearance from Waffic in opposed turning movements could be accommodated by eliminating the outside left mm lanes in all four directions. If a water feature (a geyser or high bubbler type of fountain or some other moving water treatment) were the desired gateway design, as been suggested, additional clearance may be required to ensure that the water does not interfere with traffic during a windy day. It does not appear likely that such additional clearance can be found within the geometric configuration of the existing City right-of-way that would then conversely limit the size and design ora water feature. Traffic Analysis and Impacts Staff analyzed traffic operations and traffic safety in the intersection, with the proposed monument in the canter. A diagram of the intersection under these conditions is attached to this report. In terms of traffic operations, staff reviewed the intersection Level Of Service (LOS) and design queues with the number two left turn lanes removed from all four directions. Complete traffic studies were not done but the Transportation staff projected estimates from the most recent traffic counts, which are less than six months old and considered current for purposes of this analysis. In s,rnm_ary, during the AM peak hour periods, the intersection level of service will degrade at all four approach movements to LOS F including all left tums. The through traffic is impacted primarily by the increase in design queuing. With this design eJimi~ating the inboard left turn lanes all left mm queue capacities become over saturated (i.e., demand exceeds capacity) for both AM and PM peak hour periods. For example, the northbound left turn pocket on De Anza Boulevard must be increased from 400 feet to gOO fect to handle 32 vehicles, which is the current stacking capacity. A queue length of this magnitude is not practical for normal traffic operations. In terms of traffic safety, in peak periods the traffic will tend to spill out into through lanes, which creates the potential for accidents or at the very least unanticipated lane changes and swerving movements to avoid the stacked lanes over a significant distance. It is also likely that in adverse weather there will be the potential for sideswipes by vehicles into the platform in the middle of the intersection or against the monument itself. Essentially the combination of narrow left turn paths and "jamming up" of the intersection at peak hours create a significant potential for vehicles to hit a fixed object in this intersection. Alternative Considerations While the existing conditions and potential impacts practically and effectively preclude the installation of a gateway monument in the center of the intersection, there are potentially other options. The traffic entering Cupertino to whom presumably a "gateway" would b~ most relevant are largely flips that are southerly on De Anza and easterly on Stevans Creek. The other directions are mostly flips leaving the city or traversing within it. 2 An opportunity presents itself with the ultimate completion of Four Seasons Park, which will be done in conjunction with the Kimpton Hotel and Prometheus Housing projects. This site is an excellent "viewpoint" for a gateway statement for traffic entering the City in these two prevailing traffic directions. Since this project is going to proceed in the coming fiscal year, if the Council wishes to pursue this idea further it would be in order to request that staff study this option in conjunction with the design and development of Four Seasons Park and report back with proposals in the coming year. STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council request that staff discontinue any further pursuit of a mid-intersection monument at Stevens Creek and De Anza and report back to Council in the early part of 2002 with proposals for a gateway feature in the design of Four Seasons Park. Submitted by: Approved for submission: Ralph A. Quails, Jr. David W. Knapp -- Director of Public Works City Manager Attachment 3