CC 03-22-06
APPROVED MINUTES
CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Adjourned Meeting
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
CUPEIQ1NO
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
At 5:35 p.m. Mayor Richard Lowenthal called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers,
10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Lowenthal, Vice-Mayor Kris Wang and Council members Patrick Kwok, Orrin
Mahoney and Dolly Sandoval. Absent: None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
· An email dated 3/22 from Michael Pyle sent to City Attorney Charles Kilian regarding
item number 2.
· An email dated 3/21 from Jim Moore regarding item number I.
· An email dated 3/22 from Mahmood Kutubuddin regarding item number 1.
· A site plan regarding Val1co
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Lee Song reported on a death camp in Sujiatun, Shenyang City, Liaoning Province, China. He
noted that at least 6,000 Falun Gong followers were being subject to death and the harvesting of
human organs. Mr. Song urged the Council to issue a resolution condemning the death camp and
urging the immediate release of all remaining prisoners. He further urged everyone to contact
President Bush, their Senators and Congressmen to request an immediate international
investigation.
Jennifer Griffin referred to a decision made at the last Council meeting to replace the sycamore
tree on the Toll Brothers' property. She urged Council to consider replacing this tree with one of
the same species and to put the replacement near the current location of the tree.
Shiloh Ballard said that she worked as a housing advocate for the Silicon Valley Leadership
Group. She invited all interested parties to attend a tour on Saturday, May 13 to look at
affordable housing in the area. Projects of varying densities in the east side of the valley would
be included in the tour. For more information call 408-501-7864 or visit www.svlg.net.
March 22, 2006
Cupertino City Council
Page 2
CONSENT CALENDAR - None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Consider an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to deny a modification
to a Tentative Map (TM-2005-03) to provide access for Lot 2 from Lindy Lane,
Application No. M-2005-04, Bret Moxley (KnopP residence), 21925 Lindy Lane,
APN No. 356-25-014. The appellant is John Knopp. (continued from March 21)
City Planner Cynthia Wordell reviewed the staff report. She said if the General Plan
policies 2.53 and 2.56 were to be upheld to maintain the rural character of the hillside,
this would be best achieved by utilizing the current easement. She said that the Planning
Commission believed the Council's direction had been clear that there were to be no new
Lindy Lane driveways as a result of subdivision activity, and the Commission had voted
4-0-0 for denial of the subdivision modification request.
Appellant John Knopp noted that they had purchased the property 29 years ago and their
decision to subdivide the property was part of their retirement plan. Their two options
were to use an easement from the Schmidt's property or use access off Lindy Lane.
While there was an unrestricted easement on the Schmidt's property, the Schmidt's were
opposing the Knopp's use of the easement, citing too much traffic as a concern. Knopp
said that without access off Lindy Lane, their property would be landlocked, which was
affecting their ability to sell the second lot. He said the only remaining option would be
to go to court, which he would prefer not to do, and so he was appealing to Council for
Lindy Lane access. Mr. Knopp said there were no technical objections to the proposed
driveway, and there would be no damage to the existing trees, and the driveway would
provide better access for emergency vehicles.
Ron Berti commented that this additional driveway off Lindy Lane would result in three
driveways right next to each other. He believed this caused visual clutter and was also a
safety issue. Mr. Berti noted that there was another option for a driveway to the west of
the proposed driveway, but he acknowledged that this option was steeper and might
require a retaining wall.
Marion Schmidt stated that they had sold the lot 40 years ago and it was understood that
if it was ever subdivided, access would be off Lindy Lane. She further stated that the
increased traffic from having three families access their driveway would provide hardship
to them.
Jennifer Griffin urged protection of the oak trees on the proposed driveway off Lindy
Lane. She referred to a new rubber material that had been used in the city for sidewalks
and suggested this might be an option for the driveway because it would not negatively
impact the existing trees. She also commented that the proposed 18 foot width of the
driveway was excessive.
John and Julia James did not support another driveway off Lindy Lane and stated their
concern about the trees.
March 22, 2006
Cupertino City Council
Page 3
Simon Ko noted that this was a difficult neighborhood situation and he hoped that the
neighbors would be able to work something out. He also noted that the 18 foot driveway
was excessive.
Charlie and Candan Taysi urged that this appeal be denied. They suggested that there
was already a fourth driveway off Lindy Lane which could be used. The proposed
driveway resulted in a negative impact on the rural atmosphere and the trees.
Karen Knopp stated that when they had applied for their subdivision they had been told
access off Lindy Lane was possible and would provide good access for emergency
vehicles. She noted that this subdivision would result in only one more home and that no
further development would take place, so it would still be a rural neighborhood. They
had tried to work this situation out with their neighbors but had been unable to do so, and
she asked Council to grant the appeal.
Council members stated that it was important to maintain the rural atmosphere of Lindy
Lane, and it was also important to be consistent because others had been told they could
not have access off Lindy Lane when developing. This was a dispute between neighbors
which could not be resolved by Council.
Wang/Mahoney moved and seconded to deny the appeal of the Planning Commission's
decision to deny a modification to a Tentative Map (TM-2005-03) to provide access for
Lot 2 from Lindy Lane. The motion passed unanimously.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (continued)
Lloyd Martin referred to the letter sent to the Fair Political Practices Commission concerning
Councilmember Mahoney's business relationship with Hewlett Packard. Mr. Martin did not
believe that this letter contained all of the facts pertaining to this possible conflict of interest
situation such as the length of employment history, pension information, etc. Mr. Martin
believed full disclosure was important.
Councilmember Mahoney stated that he had made an unbiased decision regarding the Toll
Brothers' project and he stood by his decision.
PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued)
2. Val1co ordinances (continued from March 21)
a) Conduct the second reading of Ordinance No. 1975: "An Ordinance ofthe
City Council of the City of Cupertino Rezoning a 5.19-Acre Parcel From
Planned Development (Regional Shopping) to Planned Development
(Regional Shopping/Residential) at 10123 N. Wolfe Road." (Vallco)
March 22, 2006
Cupertino City Council
Page 4
b) Conduct the second reading of Ordinance No. 1976: "An Ordinance ofthe
City Council of the City of Cupertino Modifying a Development
Agreement (I-DA-90) to Encompass the Development Proposed in
U-2005-16, ASA-2995-11, Z-2005-05 and TR-2005-04 for a 137 Unit,
Two and Three Story Residential Condominium Development at 10123
N. Wolfe Road." (Val1co)
Senior Planner Aki Honda reported that the applicant had provided the following
items requested by Council at their 2/27/06 meeting: 1) Signed copies of REAs
(real estate agreements) between Val1co and Sears and JC Penney; 2) Draft
CC&R language, approved by the City Attorney as to form, to maintain the
existing sound wall along the western perimeter of the property; and 3) The
design for the parking garage showing a maximum height of32 feet, with parking
spaces numbering 560 instead of 746. City Planner Cynthia Wordell presented
diagrams ofthe parking structure.
Director of Administrative Services Carol Atwood presented an overview of the
fiscal impact of this project and said that the condos were an integral part of this
project to help make it feasible. She said that the developer was projecting retail
sales tax at $450 per square foot, and that staff had reevaluated this number to
$385 per square foot. This would generate to the city an additional $4.2 million
per year into the General Fund, and over the next 30 years the redevelopment
project would provide additional tax increments to the city, of which $24 million
would be generated for housing set-aside monies (low and very low income
housing) and $49 million would be generated back into the regional mall for
economic development.
Mike Rohde, Val1co Fashion Park Representative, stated that the Vallco project
was an innovative mixed use project which would provide an energetic,
cosmopolitan experience and connectivity between housing and retail as well as
generating sales tax and providing jobs. Mr. Rohde commented that five other
developers had already attempted revitalization projects at Val1co and he urged
Council to approve the plans for this important part of the city.
Emily Chen, Val1co International LLC, stated that in addition to the financial
aspects of this project, of primary importance to them was having this opportunity
to contribute to the community. She noted that this was a turning point for this
project because the condos were the last piece of the total design for Val1co. Ms.
Chen noted that this project involved private funding only, and no bonds.
The following spoke in favor of the Vallco application for housing:
Ann Woo (Director of Art Center in V al1co)
Hamid Abtaini (speaking also for Sung Kim and Choong Kim)
Robert Dejpour
Bobby Montanye
Jian Chen (Director of New Concepts day care)
March 22, 2006
Cupertino City Council
Page 5
Linh N ging
Paul Mahamongkol
Frank Ho
John Laine
Yuan-Sing Chang
Daniel Friedeberg
Rich Tygerson
Anna Tang
Tenny Tsai
Mark McKenna (representing the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce)
Jerry Nelson
Their comments included:
· City will benefit from Val1co revitalization
· Local shopping important; it will help the business community
· Creates jobs and provides local entertainment
· Well located, well designed
· Portion of the site will be dedicated for day care center
· Mixed use (housing and retail) good idea, and an urban living environment is a trend
of the times
· Supported by many residents (petitions circulated) - those at meeting are not
representative of all in the city
· Wall could be totally landscaped for mitigation
· Parking issues had been resolved
· Condos are one piece of the project - without condos the project is in jeopardy
· Brings housing to jobs
· Builds community in Cupertino
The following spoke against the Val1co application for housing:
Rahul Vadodkar
Jennifer Griffin
Eleanor Incerpi
Edith Pedersen
Carol Bunn
Rajeev Joshi
Lawrence Luk
Eric Sun
Veronica Lam
Linda Chui
Shilpa Joshi
Al DiFranceso
Arthur Lu
Linda Soohoo
Vipin Samar
Ardith West
Tom Roellig
Helam Luk
Lloyd Martin
Michael Pyle
Chris Hsu
William Huang
Eva Chow
Sherry Ren
Michael Chui
Juan Chin
Julie Bay
Danny Luk
Shnkar Iyer
Lisa Warren
March 22, 2006
Cupertino City Council
Page 6
Ed Puccinelli
Sue Chang
Martin Yu
Eric Yang
Shuyi Chen
Sean Huang
Bei-Shen Sywe
Michel Gerin
Alok Gupta
Lucy Tuttle
Steven Scharf
Rich McGrath
Paul Lin Kaw
Stuart Chessen
Janice Ishii
Kathy DiFrancesco
Nelson D'Souza
Linda Cheung
Connie Zhang
Edward Deng
Varsha Joshi
Yi-ke Wang
Matt Kernahan
Margaret Wang
Their comments included:
· Cupertino growing too fast - slow down and scale back
· Creates an isolated community, not a good location for families
· Lack of communication between developer and neighborhoods; the developer will benefit
and not the city
· Possible conflict of interest on the part of council members
· Should not be compared to Santana Row
· There is clear opposition to this project - it will be put to a referendum
· Loss of property values and negative impacts on the community
· It is the developer's responsibility to deal with their financial issues. The condos should
not be the break point for the success of this project
· Against high density housing, and opposed to condos next to single family homes
· Current parking spaces needed for retail
· Negative impact on schools, traffic, crime, and the quality of life
· Council should be listening to residents; there is frustration with the public hearing
process. This is not a financially sound proposal, and the plan is piecemeal
· Covenant regarding wall should include a guarantee for perpetuity that the wall could not
be removed.
· Supported revitalization of Vall co but opposed to housing because it leaves no room for
retail expansion in the future
· Is Val1co violating the agreement with AMC? (parking and pedestrian bridge issues) -
The AMC lease prohibits housing
It was also noted that Patty Chi had submitted a DVD to Council which included statements
by 31 residents in opposition to this project.
March 22, 2006
Cupertino City Council
Page 7
Three issues were raised during the public hearing that Council clarified. First, there seemed
to be a misconception that the housing issue was new to this project. Council confirmed with
staff that the 1991 development agreement for this land included a residential entitlement.
Thus, there has been some expectation of housing on Vallco land for 15 years. Second, the
possibility of a conflict of interest was raised. In response Councilmember Kwok stated that
he was not related in any way to Emily Chen nor has he received any campaign monies from
her. Third, a city-wide mailing had been sent regarding this project.
Council discussed various issues related to this project including the covenant for the wall. It
was agreed that the City Attorney would work with resident Michael Pyle and the
developer's attorney Mr. Wong on language that would strengthen this covenant, and if
agreement could not be reached this matter would come back to Council.
Emily Chen, Vallco International LLC, responded to questions raised by Council concerning
the financing of this project. She stated that the bank looked at the entire project when
considering the financial backing for this project and the entitlement for 137 condos was
needed to give the developers the needed additional $15-$20 million to put into the
revitalization. Currently the theatre costs were approximately $60 million and the garage
costs $37 million to $45 million. The theatre was not a money-maker for the developer but
was critical to the project because it generated business, increased foot traffic and gave
interested parties confidence in the project. Ms. Chen noted that the city had required that a
theatre had to be built before the Rosebowl project, which had been approved a year earlier,
and which was collateral for the bank loan.
Councilmember Kwok's comments included: The revitalization of Vall co would bring many
public benefits including new jobs, and new entertainment venues; The quality-of life-issues
must be weighed for the immediate neighborhood as well as the entire community.
Councilmember Mahoney's comments included: It was the Council's responsibility to
promote economic development in the city, not the developer's; if the condos were not
approved it put the Val1co project in jeopardy, and the momentum for revitalization project
could be lost; he believed the impact from traffic would be minimal with the wall remaining
in place, and that the visual impact was minimal with mitigation measures such as
landscaping.
Vic-Mayor Wang's comments included: Condos can't support retail because they would not
generate enough shoppers; Cupertino was a suburb, and shouldn't be compared to Santana
Row; housing is not a long-term solution to the success of the mall; a day care center would
generate even more traffic; and a parking analysis is needed to identify sufficient parking for
each venue. Wang also said the increased housing numbers approved in the revised General
Plan were for a 10 year period and should not be used all at once.
Councilmember Sandoval's comments included: She had voted against this issue at an earlier
meeting; she was not in support of a walled-in community and believed there should be
pedestrian/bicycle access to provide a safer environment for the children going to school; She
believed there was a need for housing in the Cupertino and that this project was good for the
economic development of the city and would benefit the entire community.
March 22, 2006
Cupertino City Council
Page 8
Mayor Lowenthal comments included: it was in the best interest of the community to
revitalize Vallco and the addition of condos was needed to achieve this 'goal; there would be
a much greater impact on traffic from the 3500-seat theatre than from 137 condos; there had
been consensus to revitalize Vallco and Council had requested the theatre be part of this
project; and Cupertino had to comply with ABAG housing requirements and this proposed
housing helped meet those goals.
Mahoney/Lowenthal moved and seconded to read Ordinance No. 1975 by title only and that
the Acting City Clerk's reading would constitute the second reading thereof. Ayes: Mahoney,
Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes: Kwok and Wang
Sandoval requested that the BMR units be increased from the regular 15% to 20% and that
park fees be increased to supplement the General Park Fund. It was noted that the current
park dedication fees to be paid by the developer were $1,077,300.
Emily Chen, Val1co International LLC, volunteered to add an additional 5% of all BMR one-
bedroom units and to pay an additional sum beyond the normal park dedication fees in the
amount of $423,000 to be paid in 2010. She also agreed to amend the use permit for this
project to reflect these changes. (As a point of clarification it was noted that the regular 15%
BMR units were a mix of one - three bedrooms. The 5% increase specifically related to one-
bedroom units.)
Mahoney/Lowenthal moved and seconded to enact Ordinance No. 1976. Ayes: Mahoney,
Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes: Kwok and Wang
Mahoney/Sandoval moved and seconded to continue the second reading of Ordinance No.
1976 to the April 4, 2006, City Council meeting. Motion carried with Kwok voting no.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
3. Consider Application Nos. U-2006-02, ASA2006-04 (EA-2006-04) for Val1co
restaurants, Mike Rohde (Vallco Fashion Park), 10123 N. Wolfe Road,
APN No.3 16-20-064 (continued from March 21)
a) Negative Declaration
b) Use Permit and Architectural and Site approval applications to construct
a 5,910 square foot restaurant (Islands Restaurant) and a 6,020 square foot
restaurant (California Pizza Kitchen) on the northwest corner of Stevens
Creek Boulevard and N. Wolfe Road
Wang/Kwok moved and seconded to continue Item 3 to the April 4, 2006, City Council
meeting. The motion passed unanimously.
March 22, 2006
Cupertino City Council
Page 9
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 1: 1 0 a.m.
id
For more information: Staff reports, backup materials and items distributed at the meeting
are available for review at the City Clerk's Office, 777-3223, and also on the Internet at
www.cupertino.org.Click on Agendas and Minutes/City Council/Packets.
Most Council meetings are shown live on Cable Channel 26 and are available at your
convenience from our web site. Visit www.cupertino.org and click on Watch Meetings.
Videotapes are available at the Cupertino Library or may be purchased from the Cupertino
City Channel, 777-2364.