12. 1 Results WayCOMMUNITY DEVELOPPAENT DEPARTMENT
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
(408} 777-3308 • FAX (40.3) 777-3333
CUPERTINO
SUMPvIARY
Agenda Item No. ~ ~
APPLICATION SUMMARY:
Consider a Major Amendment (M-2009-02) modifying the:
• Architectural and Site Approval (ABA-2008-05)
• Use Permit Modification {M-2008-03)
• Tree Removal Permit {TR-2008-06)
• Director's Minor Modification (DIR-200f3-32}
Meeting Date: Tiny 21, 2009
for the purpose of extending the expiration date of these approvals for six years,
phasing construction, clarifying conditions of approval,. and modifying the traffic and
signal improvement condition. See Attachrrcent A -Letter from ECI Two Results, LLC,
dated March 24, 2009.
* Since the applicant's initial submittal, the request to extend the expiration date of these
approvals has been changed to five years. See Attachment B -Letter from Gibson,
Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, applicant's attorney, dated June 9, 2009.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Major Amendment per the
model resolution.
Staff further recommends that Condition of .Approval No. "4b" be deleted in its entirety
since the condition has already been fulfiilecL.
BACKGROUND:
On September 17, 2008, the City Council appxoved the redevelopment of the 19.8-acre
Results Way office park (ABA-2008-05, PSI-2008-03, TR-2008-06), consisting of the
demolition of five buildings containing about 139,b32 square feet and the removal of
303 trees, and the development of three r~ew, two-story office buildings containing
155,500 square feet, atwo-level 204-space parking structure, surface parking areas and
12-1
Tim KeI1y {for ECI) M-2009-02 July 21, 2009
landscaping improvements that include planting 321 new trees (see Attachment C). In
addition, on November 4; 2008, the Director of Community Development approved a
facade remodel of Building #5 (DIR-2008-32} to do a minor remodel on an existing
building consistent with the design of newly approved office buildings (see Attachment
D).
Typically, development approvals expire two years from the date of the approval. In
this case, the Council approvals expire in September 2010, and the Director's approval
of the minor remodel expires in November 2010.
Due to difficult economic conditions, the applicant, John Hamilton representing ECI
Two Results LLC, is requesting:
1. An extension of all development approvals, including the Director's Minor
Modification, to a date five years from the granting of the approval of this
extension;
2. Construction phasing flexibility; and
3. Modification of Condition No. "4b" relating to street improvements. In this case, the
applicant is proposing to provide $200,000 towards street improvements to reduce
traffic congestion and increase pedestrian/bike safety around the project site (see
Attachment B).
The applicant's objectives are to provide assurances to their existing tenants and
potential new tenants that t11ey will be able to remodel Building #5 and construct new
buildings as the economy improves and their space needs increase.
DISCUSSION:
On June 9, 2009, the Planning Commission considered the modification request and
recommended {5-0 vote) the following:
1) Approval of M-2009-02 per the model resolution, revising condition #4b {see
Attachment E}; and
2} Adoption of the Applicant's Letter dated June 9, 2009, related to the voluntary
financial contribution (see Attaclunent B)
Please refer to the June 9, 2009 Planning Commission staff report and meeting minutes
for the detail project summary and discussion (see Attachments F & G).
12-~
Tim Kelly (for ECI) M-2009-02 July 21, 2009
Public Input
One resident spoke in favor of the project, ar~d two letters of support were received
from the Chamber of Commerce and from t:he Monta Vista Senior All-Night Party Co-
Chaix (see Attachment I).
Additional Staff Recommendation:
Condition "4b" requires the applicant to provide 10 feet of dedication towards street
improvements along the McClellan frontage. Since the Planning Commission hearing,
staff has discovered an existing roadway ea:;ement recorded in 1971 along the
property's McClellan Road frontage. Therefore, the current dedication requirement is
no longer required and staff recommends deleting the McClellan Road dedication
condition (Condition no. 4b) from the Planning Commission resolution. Staff's
recommendation for deletion is highlighted on the Planning Commission resolution
(see Attachment E).
Prepared by: Colin Jung, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Gary Chao, City Planner
Submitted by:
Aarti Shrivastava
Director of Community Development
Attachments:
Approved by:
David W. Knapp
City Manager
Attachment A: Letter from ECI Two Results LLC dated March 24, 2009
Attaclunent B: Letter from Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, applicant's attorney, dated
June 9, 2009
Attaclunent C: City Council Action Letter d;~ted September 19, 200$
Attachment D: DIR-200$-32 Approval
Attachment E: Planning Commission Resolution No. 6657
Attachment F: Planning Commission Staff report dated June 9, 2009
Attachment G: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated June 9, 2009
Attachment H: Sheet L-1.2 titled "Parking, F:efuse & Circulation Plan
Attaclurient I: Email and letters from the public
Attachment J: Mitigated Negative Declaration & Notice of Detexmination
H: Groups/Planning/PDREPORT/CC/2009/M-2005-02 cc
12-~
CAPITAL PARTNERS LLC
March 24, 2009
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Re: Results Wa~Permits
Dear Mr. Piasecki:
Attachment A
On September 17, 2008, the City Council adopted a mitigated negative declaration (EA-2008-06)
al~d approved Architectural and Site Approval (ASA-2008-OS), use permit modification (M-2008-03) and
Tree Removal (TR-2008-06) for partial redevelopment of the One Results Way pffice Park, involving
demolition of five buildings and construction of three new office buildings, a garage, surface parking and
various other site improvements. As a separate matter, on November 4, 2008, you approved Director's
Minor Modification (DIR-2008-32) ofASA-2008-OS for fagade remodeling of Building S in the Office
Park.
By this letter the property owner ECI Two Results LLC ("Results") requests approval to extend
and amend the four approvals. We believe these changes can be approved relying on the previous
negative declaration. .
New Office Complex Approvals
A. Currezrt Expiration Dates.
When ASA-2008-05., M-2008-03 and TR 2008-06 were approved, the resolutiorls adopted by the
City Council and the Conditions of Approval did not mention expiration dates. As explained below, our
reading of the Municipal Code suggests that each approval potentially expires two years after the
• _ - approval date (September 17, 2010) if it is not "used" by then.
1. M-2008-03. The use permit modification was required under the property's
"P(MI,)" zone as a non-minor modification to the earlier approved development plan for the site (City
Code section 19.48.110.B). The city regulations governing approval of conditional use permits ("CUP")
apply. According to Code section 19.124.100.A., a CUP apparently expires if it is not "used" in two
years, and a CUP "shall be deemed to be 'used' when actual substantial and continuous activity has taken
place upon the land ... or, in the event of the erection of a structure or structures, when sufficient building
activity has occurred and continues to occur in a diligent manner."
12-4
'iL3,(~b~Q~;,l/~a~SRpad. Suite 250 650.373.1230te1
~. elmont li ornia 94002 650.373.1617 fax
wvrw.ecpalc_com
Steve Piasecki
March 24, 2009
Page 2
2. ASA-2008-05. Similarly, tl:~e Architectural and Site Review approval expires if
not "used" in two years. The approval is deemed used if "actual substantial and continuous construction
activity has taken place." (Code section 19.134.100.B)
3. TR-2008-06. The "Protected Trees" regulations (Chapter 14.18) do not appear to
have any expiration. Section 14.18.150 states that an application for tree removal made as part of a
development project will be considered and decided concurrently -which implies that the same expiration
date would apply.
S. Extension of Approvals.
Results remains committed to building this fast-class office complex as soon as it can. As the
City is well aware, present economic conditions make it difficult to foresee when demand for office space
will warrant constructing the three new buildings. Results needs assurance that it may build when the
time comes, and can spread out the phasing of the buildings, without having to repeat the time consuming
permitting process. This assurance is needed so Results can arrange financing with lenders and negotiate
leases with potential tenants of space that is not yet guilt. This is especially critical given the substantial
site work and infrastructure required at the beginnin€; of the project. Results also needs the flexibility to
decide the order of construction among the buildings, which may vary depending_on the needs of new
tenants.
1. ASA-2008-OS and M 2008-•03. Results requests that the City amend both ASA-
2008-OS and M-2008-03 by adding the following condition.
Subject to the following terms and conditions, fihis approval shall allow for development
of the three new office buildings together or individually and in any order, at the
applicant's discretion. Approval of the applicant's request to build each individual office
building shall be subject to the requirement that the then-existing office buildings on the
property plus the proposed new building will have sufficient parking, roadways, utilities
and other accessory facilities to function properly without the remainder of the project.
• The applicant shall have six (6) years fron-~ approval of this amendment to apply for a
building permit for each or all of the three office buildings, along with applications for
- _ -~ associated demolition of existing buildings and necessary site work {including
landscaping and tree removaUreplacement). The applicant thereafter shall be allowed
such time as reasonably required to obtain each building permit and complete each office
building.
Subject to Condition 31 as amended, the applicant shall satisfy all offsite improvements,
public art requirements, and installation of :!andscaping and improvements on both sides
of the site's front entry, or pay specified in Lieu fees, as a condition to occupancy of the
first office building; provided, force majeure circumstances, or delays by the City
processing plans, completing inspections, or making decisions regarding said obligations,
12-5
EOI05001/776295-1
1301 Shoreway Road, Suite 250 Belmont, California 94002-4151 sal 650.373.1230 Fax 650.373.1617
Steve Piasecki - ~ -~""'~
March 24, 2009
Page 3
shall allow the applicant to occupy its office buildings even if the required improvements
are not completed or fees are not paid.
Sheet L-1.2 "Parking, Circulation Plan" dated August 14, 2008 as identified in Condition
of Approval No. 1 shall be used to identify the parking improvements required to support
each office building, and to define the limit of work for each office building's related
improvements; provided, the Director of Community Development may approve
reasonable adjustments that the applicant may request, which adjustments shall not
require approval by the Planning Commission or City Council so long as the Director
designates them as minor modifications under Municipal Code Chapter 19.132.
The applicant shall have the right to implement an interim parking plan before all three
new office buildings are completed, in lieu of the final parking layout shown on Sheet L-
1.2, so long as the Dixectar determines in his/her reasonable discretion that the proposed
interim plan satisfies pazking requirements at that stage of project development. As an
illustration but not as a limitation, the applicant may elect to construct Building A first
and provide a surface parking lot in the area of the planned garage and Building B,
deferring construction of the garage until it actually is needed_
2. TR-2008-06. TR-2008-06 should be amended by adding the following
statement:
This permit shall remain in force until the earlier of (a) completion of all the tree removal
it authorizes or (b) expiration ofASA-2008-05 and M 2008-03.
C. Amendment to Traffic/Signal Improvement Condition.
Condition of Approval No. 31 (which is worded the same in both ASA-2008-OS and M-2008-03)
currently requires Results to (a) fund certain traffic and signal improvements at the Bubb RoadlResults
Way intersection, (b) offer land for dedication and improve the property's McClellan Road frontage for
road widening, and (c) fund restriping and concrete safety barriers on McClellan Road.
1. Bubb Road/Results Way Intersection. Results remains committed to perform
this work as described in Condition 31. To clarify its timing, please add the following to the end of the
first paragraph:
The applicant and the City shall cooperate in good faith to have this work completed
prior to occupancy of the first new office building. However, force majeure
circumstances, or delays by the City processing plans, completing inspections, or making
decisions regarding said obligations, shall allow the applicant to occupy its office
buildings even if the required improvements are not completed.
2. McClellan Road Improvements. Results understands that the City may prefer
improvements at the nearby intersection of Bubb Road and McClellan Road, instead of the road
12-s
i~oiosooin~6z9s-i
1301 Shoreway Road, Suite 250 Belmont, California 94002-4151 see 650.373.1230 Fa~c 650.373.7617
Steve Piasecki
March 24, 2009
Page 4
widening, restriping and safety barrier work along 1~TcC1e11an.Road as described in Condition 31. To
implement this option the following should be added to the end of the second paragraph in Condition 31:
Tn lieu of the applicant dedicating land and performing the above-described
improvements on McClellan Road, the City may elect to have the applicant reimburse the
City up to $125,000 of its hard and soft costs to install other improvements at or near the
intersection of Bubb Road and McClellan Road as the City may determine and design.
If the City elects to require the McClellan Road frontage improvements, then subject to
the timing qualifications below the applic2u~t shall perform the work when the City so
elects, and the applicant and the City shall cooperate in good faith to have this work
completed in a timely manner; provided, the City shall not require such work to be
completed before the fast new office building is ready for occupancy. Occupancy of the
office building shall not be delayed if force majeure circumstances, or delays by the City
processing plans, completing inspections, or making decisions regarding the McClellan
Road frontage improvements, delays their construction. If the City has not previously
made its election, it shall notify Results which option the City selects within 30 days after
Results submits its building permit application for its first new office building, in order to
provide enough time for Results to complete the road improvements and not delay
occupancy of the building. If the City doers not make its election by that date, Results
may occupy the new building even if the ro,id. improvements are not. started or completed
and even if the City has not yet made its election, and Results thereafter will proceed in a
timely manner to complete the_road improvements once the City elects that option.
If the City elects to require the in-lieu payment, Results shall reimburse the City up to
$125,000 of expenses incurred by the City for improvements at the Bubb
Road/McClellan Road intersection, payable after Results receives documentation
showing such City expenses, but not earlier than occupancy of the first new office
building. If the City fails to make its election between the McClellan Road frontage
improvements and reimbursement of costs for the Bubb Road/McClellan Road
intersection improvements by the time the applicant is ready to occupy its final new
off ce building under this appraval, the applicant shall pay the City $125,000 for the
City's future use for circulation improvements as the City sees ft, and such payment
shall fully satisfy the applicant's obligation cinder this condition.
Building `.i Approvat
A. Current Expiration Date.
Your November 4, 2008 report to the City Council and Planning Commission that announced
approval of DIl2-2008-OS for Building 5 did not mention an expiration date. Municipal Code Chapter
19.132 does not specify any Iifespan for an Administrative Approval. The two-year standard for ASA
approvals apparently applies, meaning that DIR-2005-32 potentially expires on November 4, 2010.
12-7
E0105001/776295-1
1301 Shoreway Road, Suite 250 Belmont, California 94002-4151 rei 650.373.1230 F~ 650.373.1617
Steve Piasecki ~~
March 24, 20Q9.
Page 5
B. Extension of Approval.
As explained above, economic conditions make it difficult to foresee when demand for office
space will warrant renovating Building 5. Results needs assurance that when a potential tenant eventually
becomes available, it will be able to act quickly to negotiate a lease, secure financing and obtain building
permits .without having to repeat the ASA review and approval process. Results asks that DIR-2008-32
for Building 5 be amended by adding the following:
The applicant shall have six (6} years from approval of this amendment to apply for a
building permit for Building No. 5, along with applications for demolition and other
approvals necessary to implement the building permit.
C. Linkage to ASA-2008-05.
DIR-2008-32 for Building S was described as a minor modification of ASA-2008-OS, which was
approved in September 2008 for the three new office buildings. ASA-2008-OS contains a list of
Conditions of Approval adopted by the City as part of the new development. Both Results and the City
intended and understood that Building S would proceed separately and independently from that project,
subject only to designing the Building 5 facade and entry plaza to complement the new buildings and
open spaces, and ensuring that the redesigned interns[ roadways, parking and utilities continue to serve
Building 5. To avoid potential future misunderstanding, Results requests that DIR-2008-32 be amended
by adding the following:
The only ASA-2008-OS Conditions of Approval that shall apply to Building 5 and the
work authorized under D1R-2008-32 are Section III, Conditions 6, 7, 11, 14, and 15, and
the Condition added by the City Council on September 17, 2008 requiring that the
dumpster serving Buildup 5 not be located along the ,property Iine with adjoining
residences.
Minor Corrections
On September 19, 2008, the Deputy City Clerk sent Results the final version of the approvals
granted by the City Council for ASA-2008-OS, M-2008-03, and TR-2008-06. We have noted the
following minor errors in that document, which we request be corrected in the official City records.
- 1. Irl the first line on page 1, the use permit modification should be listed as
M-2008-03 instead of "M-2008-0 i ."
2. In the middle of page 1, the date of approval by the City Council should be shown
as September 17, 2008 instead of "September 16"
E0105001/77b295-1
t2-a
1301 Shoreway Road, Suite 250 Belmont, California 94002.4151 sei 650.373.1230 Fax 650.373.1617
Steve Piasecki
March 24, 2009
Page 6
Thank you for your cooperation processing this application. Please let us know what other
materials the City may require.
Yours,
ECI Two Results LLC,
a California Invited liability company
By: Embarcadero Capital Investors Two LP, a Delaware limited partnership,
its sole member
By: Embarcadero Capital Partners LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
its sole general partn0r.
By: Hamilton Partners LP, a California limited partnership, manager
By: Hamilton Ventures :[nc., a California corporation,
its sole general partner
By:
cc: Blake Reinhardt
Tim Kelly
Edward Shaffer
12-9
EO! 05001/776295-1
1301 Shoreway Road, Suite 250 Belmont, California 94002-4151 sst 650.373.1230 Fax 650.373,1617
Attachment B
GIBS~N, DUNK &CRUTCHERLI
LAWYERS
p REGISTERED LLMITED LLABILITY PARTNERSHtP
INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS
555 Mission Street, Suite 3440 San Francisco, California 94105-2933
(415}393-8240
. www.gibsonduaa.com
NSekbri~gibsondunn.com
June 9, 2009
Duect Dial
(41S) 393-8334
Fax No.
(415} 374-8435
Ms. Aarti Shrivastava
Director of Community Development
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Mr. Ralph Qualls
Director of Public Works
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Re: Application RSA-2008-OS, M-2008-03, TR-2008-069 (1 Results Way)
Dear Ms. Shrivastava and Mr. Quails:
Client Na.
This letter replaces our prior letter, dated June 4, 2009, in its entirety. My client, ECI
Two Results, LLC ("Developer"), has submitted a request for amendment of the above-
referenced approvals, which request is caiendared for consideration at the Planning Commission
meeting of June 9, 2009. Among other matters, the Planning Commission will be considering an
amendment of Condition 31 that would delete the requirement to improve Land off the McClellan
Road, fund costs for travel Iane restriping and instals raised concrete safety barriers as described
in the second paragraph of Condition 31. However, in the interest of facilitating improvements
that might benefit the project, Developer has agreed to make a voluntary contribution to the City
in the amount of Two Hundred Thousand Dollazs ($200,000.00) for soft and hard costs
reasonably incurred by City for improvements and incentives to reduce traffic congestion and
enhance pedestrian safety to be used in an area west of Highway 85 that is located no more than
1/2 mile from the site (the "Improvement Area"). Developer will pay this contribution in the
form of cash ar by posting a letter of credit, due at the time of building permit issuance for the
first new office building to be constructed pursuant to the project approvals.
L05 ANGELES NEW YORK WASHINGTON, D.C. SAN FRANCISCO PALO ALTO LONDON 12 - 10
PARIS MUNICH BRUSSELS DUBAI SINGAPORE ORANGE COUNTY CENTURY CITY DALLAS DENVER
GIBS~N, DUNN &CRUTCHERLLP
Ms.Aarti Shrivastava
Mr. Ralph Qualls
June 9, 2009
Page 2
We are in the process of working with the City Attorney to finalize a legally binding and
enforceable agreement that will memorialize this contribution. The final agreement will lie
executed and delivered to the City prior to City Council consideration of the approvals, to be
effective upon the date such approvals become final and unappealable. Thank you for your
consideration.
Ver;~ truly yours,
~~ f
Neil Sekhri
cc: Carol Korade (via email)
John Hamilton (via email)
Blake Reinhardt (via email)
NHS/nhs
100569462 3.DOC
12-11
Attachment C
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 (408) 777-3308
To: Mayor and City Council members
Chairman and Planning Commissioners
Fxom: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developmen
Prepared by: Colin Jung, Senior Planner
Date: November 4, 2008
Subject: Director's Minor Modification (DIR-2008-32) of a previously approved
Architectural and Site Approval (file no. ASA-2008-05) for a facade remodel of Building
#5 at an existing office park located at one Results Way.
Chapter 19.132 of the Cupertino Municipal Code allows for administrative
approval of minor changes in a project. The Director reports his decision
to the City Council and Planning Commission in tune to allow any
Council member or Planning Commissioner to appeal the decision within.
fourteen calendar days.
BACKGROUND:
The. applicant, Tim Kelly of KA Real Estate, representing Embarcadero Capital Partners,
proposes to remodel the facade of an office building (Building #5} at the One Results
Way Office Park. In September 2008, the City Council approved a partial
redevelopment of this office park that would demolish five buildings and construct
three new ones and a parking structure. .
DISCUSSION:
The intent of the facade remodel is to bring. Building #5 in closer design consistency
with the newly approved office buildings (Exhibit A). The facade plans axe being
reviewed under a separate planning pexmit because the applicant decided to accelerate
the Building #5 facade remodel ahead of the redevelopment of the office park.
The facade changes involve:
1} Removing an existing plywood cap from the top of the building;
2) Demolishing selective concrete wall panels and replacing them with a new
window system;
3) Removing existing window system and lowering the sill height 6 inches to
prepare for the new window system; and
4) Demolishing the existing building entry improvements and constructing a new
entry plaza to match the new buildings (See plan set details and color elevation
of proposed remodel).
No changes are proposed to the abutting approved landscape areas.
1~2-12
DTR-2008-32 One Results Wa Pa e 2
ACTION:
The Director of Community Development deems the facade remodel minor and
approves the change a.s described in the plan set exhibit entitled:
"Results Way Campus/Results Way/CupE~rtino, CA," consisting of 14 sheets labeled:
X1.01, A1.11, A2.11, and Colored East IIevation.
This approval of the modification is effective November 4, 2008. The fourteen calendar
day appeal period will expire on November 18, 2008.
Enclosures: Plan set
Exhibit A: Approved Color Elevations for approved buildings A, B & C
and Existing Building #5 (three sheets)
G/planning/pdreport/DIR/ DIR-2008-32
12 - 13
Attachment D
,~
CUPERTINO
September 19, 2008
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CITY HALL
1 d3dd T~RRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (4-d8) 777-3223 • FAX: (408) 777-3366
.Re: Consider A 1_pp ication Nos. ASA-2008-05, {EA-2008-0~, M-2008-D~, and TR-2008-06,
Tim. Kelly (Emb'arcadero Capital Partners), 1 Results WaY, APN Nas. 357-20-041 and 357-
20-045: '
a) Neg_ztive Declaration
b) Architectural and Site Approval and amendment to Development Approval for the
demolition of five buildings containing about 139,632 square feet and the
development of three new, two-story office buildings containing 155,500 square feet,
a twa-level, 204 space parking garage, surface parking Iot and landscaping
iumproven~.ents at an existing 19.$ acre office park
c) Tree Removal request to remove 303 trees on approved landscape plan and replace
them with 321 trees at the existing off.cepark
~.7~ _
At its September ~' 200$ meeting, the Cupertino City Council approved the project with the
following conditions:
o ADOPTED A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
^ OKAY TO REMOVE THE FENCE '
. REQUIRE ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING AT THREE LOCATIONS WHERE
STREETS EXIT ON THE WEST SIDE, IN ORDER TO SCREEN RESIDENTLAL
AREAS FROM VEffiCLE HEADLIGHTS ` '
^ AMEND CONDITION N0.31 REGARDING TRAFFICISIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
TO REQUIRE THAT THE PROPOSED CHANGES BE SENT TO CITY COUNCIL
• FOR APPROVAL AT A LATER DATE.
^ ADD A CONDITION REGARDING GARBAGE DUMPSTERS FOR BUDDING 5 _
^ REQUIRE THAT THE HVAC EQUIPMENT BE BUFFERED AND/OR MOVED
AWAY FROM~THE RESIDENTL~L AREA WITHOUT R~~TIlT ~-
IlYIPA:CT ON THE AESTHETICS OF THE BUILDINGS
^ ACCE~'T THE TREE PLAN AS PROPOSED (WHICH INCLUDES REMOVING •
THE SWEET GUM TREES) .
12 - 14
ASA-2008-OS September 19, 2008 2
The ASA conditions are as follows unless amended above:
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINIS'T'ERED BY THE C01~9~y1UNTI'Y DEVELOPMENT
DEPT. - ~ •
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
The approval is based on Exhibits titled: "Results Way Campus, Results Way, Cupertino
CA" consisting of 27 pages labeled X1.01, C1.00 through C3.00, L-1.0 through L-i.2;
PERSPECTIVES, Ao.ol, A0.02, ~~-A2.01, A-A2.02; A-A3.ii, A-A3.12, B-A2.a1, B-
A2.02, B-A3.11, B-A3.12, C-A2:03., C-A2.02, C-A3.11, C-A3.12, G-A2.01~, G-2.02, G-
A3.11, G-A3.12, including .one color rendering of the project, dated "August 14, 2008",
except as may b e amended by the conditions contained in this resolution.
2. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
Approval is granted far the demolition of five buildings containing about 139,632 square
feet and the development of three, nf:w, two-story-office buildings containing about 155,000
- square feet; atwo-level, 204-spaces parking garage, surface parking lot and landscape
improvements at an existing 19.8 acre office/industrial park (Results Way Campus).
3. DEVELOPMENT ALI.OCATIOrI
. The applicant sliall receive' a general plan Monta Vista Area office development allocation
of 11,015 square feet.
4. BICYCLE PAR~.ITG •
The applicant shall provide• bicycle:,, • parking facilities for the proposed development 'in
accordance with the City's Parkzn~; Regulations under Chapter 19.100 of the Cupertino
Municipal Code. - -
S. GREEN BUIIfDlNG
At the building permit stage, the applicant shall qualify the new buildings to achieve a
LEER Silver certifiable designation for the core and shell.
6. DEMOLITION REOUIItE NT'S
All demolished building and site materials shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible
(which industry practice currently results in recycling up to 80°ro of total volume, depending
on the individual materials), subject: to the Building Official approval. The applicant sha11
provide evidence thaf materials will be recycled prior to issuance of final demolition
permits. ~ .
7. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIO~RES`ERYATION~O~O~R ~X-z~C-'T3{~~iB
The Conditions of Project -Approval set :forth herein may include certain fees,
_ dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant 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 exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day
'- ~ approval period in which you may ;protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and
- other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun: ~~ you
ASA-2008-05 September 19, 2008
fail to file a protest within.this 90-day~period complying with all of the requirements
of Section 66020, you will be legally barred fram~later challenging such exactions.
S. PUBLIC ART
The applicant shall provide public art in accordance with General Plan policy 2- 66.
Public art selection will be reviewed by the Fine Arts Commission.
9. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTIEASEIYIENTS
Prior to building permit approval, the applicant shall file a lot line adjustment application to
realign existing property lines. around proposed buildings and record appropriate easements
where utility lines, storm drainage, vehicular movements, garbage enclosure access and
parking may cross proposed property lines.
10. LANDSCAPE AMENITY
Applicant shall provide a landscape amenity next to the cafe.
11. INTERPRETATION OF P{NII.~ ZONING USES
Zoning CAde section 19.60.030{A} shall be interpreted. by the Director of Community
Development to allow a broad range of office uses related to high-tech, bio-tech, venture
capital, research and development and similar businesses, as well•as professional, financial
anal advisory firms supporting such industries, so long as the. overall occupancy of the
property reflects the City's goal to emphasize "tech park" type usage.
Mare commercially-oriented office uses, such as, insurance services, realty, patient-serving
medical and dental uses, that have no relation to the "tech park" emphasis for the property
and no connection with other allowed tech park-type occupants of the property shall not be
included in this directive for interpretation, except the Director, may allow small stand-alone
general, commercial services that are incidental and complement the primary occupancy of.
the property, such as a small bank or professional office, and except as otherwise permitted
or conditionally permitted in the ML zone. .
12. REPLACEMENT TREE PLANTING
'the replacement tree-replanting plan shall include the planting of trees to fill in the
. landscape gaps in the project's westerly landscape strip.
13. POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT •
The applicant shall investigate a power purchase agreement prior to building permit
approval.
14. SITE LIGHTING
new an rep acement ou oor g`h~ng shall meet city s~andar~ .
15. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN
The applicant shall prepare a plan for the management of onsite construction impacts on
the surrounding neighborhood as part of the building permit plan set submittal.
12 - 16
ASA-2048-05 September 19, 2008 4
15. ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ANALYSES
The applicant should prepare a traffic report, comparing the difference between existing
traffic conditions and project.generate:d traffic impacts on local signalized intersections and
deliver that report for City Council co,asideration.
SECTION N: CONDITIONS ADMIN~ISTEI~'.ED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.
17. STREET WIDENING
Street widening arid dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and
specifications and as required by the City Engineer. -
18. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVElYIl~NTS
Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall •be installed in •accordance with
grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer.
19. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATi~]N
Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as approved by the City Engineer. Lighting
fixtures shall be positioned so as to.preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to
adjoining properties, and shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in
which the site is Located.
24. FIRE HYDRANT
Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department
as needed,
21. GRADING
Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter
16.48 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required.
Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board as
appropriate. ~ _ ~ .
22. DRAINAGE .
_ Drainage shall ba provided• to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Pre- and post-
developm~ent calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control
measures are to be installed.
23. iTNDERGROUND UTILITIES
The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No.
331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall
. - cooxdinate~ith_affe.~ted_uiilii~ p~o~!ici~r~f_or installation of under ound utili devices. The
developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans
- shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer. _
24. IlVIPROYEMENT AGREEMENT
The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino
providing for payment of fees, includuig but not limited to checking and inspection. fees,
storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for under grounding of utilities. Said
12-17
agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction pez7nits.
ASA=2008-OS ~ September 19, 2008 _ ~ 5
Fees: '
a. Checking & Inspection Fees: $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cast or
$3,847.00 m.i.z~imum
.b. Grading Permit: $ 6% of Site.Improvement Cost ar $2,239.00
minimum ~ .
c. Development Maintenance Deposit:, $ 2,000.00
d. Storm Drainage Fee: $ 47,528.83
e. Power Cost: '~* _ ' .
f. Map Checking Fees: ~ N/A
g. Park Fees: N/A
h. Street Tree By Developer
*'~ Based on the latest effective PG&E rate schedule approved by the PUC
Bonds:
a. Faithful Performance Band: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements
b. Labor & Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement
c. On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements.
The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adapted 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 change or changes, the
fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule.
25. TRANSFORMERS '
Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall
be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is
not visible from public street areas. The transformer shall not be located in the front or side
building setback area.
26. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES .
Utilize Best Management Practices {BMPs}, as'required.by the State Water Resources Control
Board, far construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading
and street improvement plans.
' 27. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES
The applicant shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtances installed to ~ City
Standards and sha11 reach an agreement with San Jose Water for water service to the subject
_ _ development.
2S. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT ~ .
The applicant must obtain a Notice of Intent {NOI) from the State Water Resources Control
Board, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP},
use of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control storm water runoff quality,
and BMP inspection and maintenance.
12 - 18
ASA-200$-OS September 19, 2008 6
29: AMENDED DEVELOPMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES BMP~
• REpUIREMENTS
The applicant must include the use and maintenance of site design, source'control and storm
water treatment BMP's, which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. A
Storm Water Management Plan, Stonn Water Facilities Easement Agreement, Storm Water
Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement, and certification of ongoing operation and
maintenance of treatment BMP's are rt;quired. ~ '
30. EROSION CONTROL PLAN
The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil
Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on
site. Erosion control notes shall be si:ated on the plans.
31. TRAFFIC/ SIGNAL IMPROVEME:YTS
The developer shall fund traffic signal improvements at the Bubb RoadlResults Way
intersection. The improvements include installing new pedestrian signal heads, a new traffic
signal cabinet, a new traffic signal controller, new traffic signal loops, and replacing
damaged pavement on the Results Way approach, removal of traffic control island{s},
pavement restoration and Lane re-striping.
The developer shall also offer for dedication and improve Land off the McClellan Road
frontage for road widening. The applicant shall also fund the cost of: 1} travel line re-
striping on the affected segment of M+:Clellan Road, and 2) the installation of raised concrete
safety barriers to protect a potential student drop-off area on the south side of McClellan
Road.
32. TRASH ENCLOSURES '
The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs
Manager.
33. REFUSE TRUCK ACCESS
The developer must obtain clearance from the Environmental Programs Manager in regards to
refuse truck access for the proposed de~~elopment. ~ '
T'he Tree Removal conditions are ~s follows unless amended above:
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTE:R.ED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT. •
I. A PPROyAL~CTLOI~T •
The applicant is approved to remove or transplant the 303 trees on site and depicted in the
Results Way Campus plats set page tilled: "Tree Disposition Plan" dated 8/14/08, consisting
of one sheet labeled L-1.1, except as may be amended by the conditions of this Resolution.
2. TREE REPLACEMENTS
The applicant shall plant replacement trees per the City's• Protected Tree Ordinance and in
accordance with the approved Landscape Master Plan dated 8/14/08 and labeled L-1.0. The
' replacement trees shall also be used to fill in the landscape gaps in the westerly landscape
strip between the single-family residehsces and the office park.
ASA-2008-OS - September 19, 2008
7
For any additional protected trees that are removed due to construction damage, hazardous
conditions or death, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with
the Protected 'frees Ordinance. Species and size of replacement trees shall be reviewed and
approved by the Community Development Department.
3. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication
requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. -Pursuant to Government Code
Section 66020(4) {1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the
amount of such fees, and a description of the dedicati.ons,'reservations, and other exactions. .
You are hereby fuztlier notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest
these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, 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 Section 66020, you will be legally barred from
later challenging such exactions.
4. TRANSPLANTED TREES -
Trees nos. 88 and 89 identified in the tree survey shall be transplanted in lieu of the
proposed tree nos. 131 and 174. -
5. EVALUATION Op' PROTECTION OF TREE N0.179 {COASTAL REDWOOD)
Applicant shall evaluate the potential to protect tree no. 179 by modifying parking lot and
driveway-improvements to minimise grading and provide pervious surfaces in the drip zone
among alternatives. Evaluation shall be reviewed by the City Arborist. Final decision for
removal and any replacement shall be made by the Director of Community Development.
The Modified Use Permit conditions are as follows unless amended above:
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMiJNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
The approval is based on Exhibits titled: "Results Way Campus, Results Way, Cupertino
CA" consisting of 27 pages labeled X1.01, C1.00 through C3.00, L-1.0 through L-1.2,
PERSPECTNES, A0.01, A0.02, A-A2.OI, A-A2.02, A-A3.11, A-A3.12, B-A2.01, B-
A2.02, B-A3.11; B-A3.12, C-A2.01, C-A2.02, C-A3.11, C-A3.12, G-A2.01, G-2.02, G-
A3.11, G-A3.12, including one color rendering of the project, dated "August 14, 2008",
except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution.
2. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
Approval is granted for the demolition of five buildings containing about 139,632 square
feet and the development of three, new, two-story office buildings containing about 155,000
square feet; atwo-level, 204-space parking garage, surface parking lot and landscape
improvements at an existing 19.8 acre office/industrial park (Results Way Campus).
3. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION
The applicant shall receive a general plan Monta Vista Area office developmen~al~cation
of 11,015 square feet. - -
ASA-2008-OS September 19, 2008 ~ ~ 8
4. BICYCLE PARHING
The applicant shall provide bicycle: parking facilities for the proposed development izi
accordance with the City's Parking Regulations under Chapter 19.100 of the Cupertino
Municipal Code. ~ - ~ _ .
5. GREEN BUILDING ~ ~ '
At the building permit stage, the applicant shall qualify the new buildings to achieve a
LEED Silver certifiable designation for the core and shell.
6. DEMOLITION RE~UIREMENT~~
All demolished building and site materials shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible
• (which industry practice currently results in recycling up to SO% of total volume, depending
on the individual materials), subject to the Building Official approval. The applicant shall
provide evidence that materials will be recycled prior to issuance of final demolition
permits. .
7. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIOr~TS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project- Approval set forth herein may include certain fees;
dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant 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.'ou are hereby further notified that the 90-day
approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and
other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you
fail to file a protest within this 90-da;y period complying with all of the requirements
of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from Later challenging such exactions.
8. PUBLIC ART
The applicant shall provide public art in accordance with General Plan policy 2- 66.
Public alt selection will be reviewed ley the Fine Arts Commission. •
9. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT/EASE~YIENTS
Prior to building permit approval, the; applicant shall file a lot line adjustment application to
realign existing property iin.es around proposed buildings and record appropriate easements
where utility lines, storm drainage, vehicular movements, garbage enclosure access and
parking may cross proposed property lines.
10. LANDSCAPE AMENITY
Applicant shall provide a landscape amenity next to the cafe.
1i. INTERPRETATION OF P(1YII,) ZONING USES .
Zoning Code section 19.60A30(A} shall be interpreted by the Director of Community
Development to allow a broad range; of office uses related to high-tech, bio-tech, venture
capital, research and development and similar businesses, as well as professional, financial
and advisory firms supporting such industries, so long as the overall ,occupancy of the
property reflects the City's goal to emphasize "tech park" type usage.
12-21
.ASA-2008-OS September 19, 2008 ~ ~ 9
More commercially-oriented office uses, such as, insurance services, realty, patient-serving
medical and dental uses, that have no relation to the "tech park" emphasis for the property
and no connection with other allowed tech park-type occupants of the property shall not be
included in this directive for interpretation, except the Director may allow small stand-atone
general commercial services that are incidental and complement the primary occupancy of
the property, such as a small bank or professional office, and except as otherwise permitted
or conditionally permitted in the ML zone. _ '
12. REPLACEMENT TREE PLANTING .
The replacement tree-replanting plan shall include the planting of trees to fill in the
landscape gaps in the project's westerly landscape strip.
13. POWER PURCI3ASE AGREEMENT
The applicant shall investigate a power purchase agreement prior to building pernut
approval.
14. SITE LIGHTING
All new and replacement outdoor lighting shall meet city standards.
15. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN
The applicant shall prepare a plan for the management of onsite construction impacts on the
surrounding neighborhood as part of the building permit plan set submittal. '
16. ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ~ '
'I he applicant should prep~.re a traffic report, comparing the difference between existing
traffic conditions and project generated traffic impacts on local signalized intersections and.
deliver that report for City Council consideration.
SECTION N: CONDITIONS ADMIlVISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.
_ 17. STREET WIDENING
Street widening and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and
specifications and as required by the City Engineer.
18. CURS AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS
'Curbs and gutters,- sidewalks and related strictures shall be installed in accordance with
grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer.
19. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION
.Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as
fixtures shall be positioned so as to
to
ad}oining properties, and shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone
in which the site is located.
20. FIRE HYDRANT ,
Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the ~ City and Santa Clara County Fire
Department as needed..
by the City Engineer. Lighting
12-22
ASA=2008-OS ~ Septembe<r 19, 2008 - 10
21. GRADING
Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter
16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required.
Please contact Army Corp of Engina:~s and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board as
• appropriate.
22.. DRAINAGE .
Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Pre- and post-
development calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control
measures are to be installed.
23. UNDERGROUND iJTILITIES
The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No.
331 and other related Ordinances a~ad regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall
coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground .utility devices. The
developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. ~ Said glans
shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer.
24.. IlVIPROVEMENT 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 fetes and fees for under grounding of utilities. Said
agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits.
Fees:
a. Checking & Inspection Fees:
$3,847.00 mTnimu111
b. Grading Permit:
minimum
c. Development Maintenance Deposit
d. Storm Drainage Fee: •
e. Power Cost:
f. Map Checking Fees:
g-Park Fees:
h. Street Tree
$ 6% of Off.-Site Improvement Cost or
$ 6% of Site Improvement Cast or $2,239.00
$ 2,000.00
$ 47,528.83
*~
N/A
N/A
By Developer
** ..Based on the latest effective PG&E rate schedule approved by the PUC
Bonds:
d. _.. F_aixhfiiLP.erfartnance.B.on,3:10DJ~ofO~sit~and=Qn-sitelmproxement.G
e. Labor & Material Bond: 130% of Off-site and On-site Improvement •
. f. ~ On-site Grading Bond: l0i)% 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 change or ct~at~es, the
fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule.
ASA-2008-05. September 14, 2008 ~ 11
25. TRANSFORMERS .
Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall
be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is
• - not visible from public street areas. The transformer shall not be located in the front or side
building setback area.
26. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control
Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading
and street improvement plans.
27. DEDICATION OR WATERLINES
The applicant shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtances installed to City
Standards and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water for water service to the subject
development.
28. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT
The applicant must obtain a Notice of Intent~{NOI) from the State Water Resources Control
Board, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP},
'use of•canstruction Best Management Practices ,(BMPs} to control storm water runoff quality,
and BMP inspection and maintenance.
29. AMENDED DEVELOPMENT_BEST :MANAGEMENT PRACTICES '_ (BMP~
REQUIItEMENTS
The applicant must include the.use and maintenance of site design, source control and storm
water trea~nent BMP's, which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. A
Storm Water Management Plan, Storm Water Facilities Easement Agreement, Storm Water
Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement, and certification of ongoing operation and
maintenance of treatment BMP's are required.
30. EROSION CONTROL PLAN
The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil
Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on
site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans.
31. TRAFFIC/ SIGNAL IlVIPROVEMENTS
The developer shall fund traffic signal improvements at the Bubb Road/Results Way
intersection. The improvements include installing new pedestrian signal heads, a new traf~.c
signal cabinet, a new trafFzc signal controller, new traffic signal loops, and replacing .
• damaged pavement on the Results Way approach, removal of traffic control island(s),
pavement restoration and lane re-striping. '
The developer shall also offer for dedication and improve land off the McClellan Road
frontage for road widening. The applicant shall also fund the cost of i) travel line re-
striping on the affected segment of McClellan Road, and 2) the installation of raised concrete
safety barriers to protect a potential student drop-off area on the south side of McClellan
Road.
12-24
ASA-2008-05 September 19, 2008 12
32. TRASH ENCLOSURES
The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs
IVlanager.
33. REFUSE TRUCK ACCESS
The developer must obtain clearance from the Environmental Programs Manager in regards to
refuse truck access for the proposed development.
Please review conditions carefully. If you have any questions regarding the conditions of
approval, please contact the Department: of Community Development at 408-777-3308 .for
clarification. Failure to incorporate conditions into your plan set will result in delays at the.
plan checking stage. If development conditions requixe tree preservations, do not clear the
site until required tree protection devices ~~xe installed.
The conditions of pralect approval •set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication
require.u~ents, reservation requirements, and oflier exactions. Pursuant to Government Code
Section 66020(d){1), these conditions cans~titute written notice of a statement of the amount of
such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are
hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees,
dedications, and other exactions, 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
Section 66020, you will be legally barred firom later challenging such exactions. •
Any interested person, including the applicant, prior to seeking judicr'al review of the city
council's decision in this matter, must firs~`file a petition for reconsideration with the city clerk
within ten days after the council's decisio~7. Any petition so filed must comply with municipal
ordinance code ~2.~8.096. •
Sincerely:
t, , ,
Grace Schmidt 'mo't
Deputy City Clerk •
cc: Community Development
Tim Kelly / Debbie Blehm
KA Real Estate
• 652 Bair Island Road, Suite 300
Redwood City CA 94063
Blake Reinhardt
Embarcadero Capital Partners
1301 Shoreway Rd, #250
Belmont, Ca. 94002 •
12-25
CITY OF CUPERTINO
M-2009-02
. 10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
Attachment E
RESOLUTION NO. 6557
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MODIFICATION OF AN ARCHITECTURAL
AND SITE APPROVAL (ASA-2008-05), USE PERMIT MODIFICATION (M-200$-03), DIRECTOR'S
MINOR MODIFICATION (DiR-2008-32) & TREE REMOVAL PERMIT
(TR-2008-06) TO EXTEND THE EXPIRATION DATE OF THESE APPROVALS FOR FIVE YEARS,
PHASING CONSTRUCTION, CLARIFYING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND MODIFYING
THE TRAFFIC AND SIGNAL IlVIPROVEMENT CONDITION FOR AN APPROVED
REDEVELOPMENT OF AN EXISTING 19.8 ACRE OFFICE PARK (RESULTS WAY CAMPUS)
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.: M-2009-02
Applicant: Tim Kelly (for ECI Two Results, LLC)
Location: 1 Results Way
SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR MODIFICATION OF USE PERMIT ASA DIRECTOR'S MINOR
MODIFICATION & TREE REMOVAL
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application to
modify an Architectural & Site Approval, Use Permit Modification, Director's Minor
Modification and Tree Removal Permit, as descz7bed on Section II of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the necessary 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 this matter; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and
has satisfied 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; and
2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the
Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan and the Cupertino Muricipal Code; and
3) The Planning Commission finds that the actions contemplated hereunder are within the
scope of the Negative Declaration and that {1) there are no substantial changes proposed
in the project which will require major revisions of the previous negative declaration
due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) there are no
substantial changes occurring with respect to the circumstances under which the project
is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous negative declaration
due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and (3} there is no
new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not ha~~ _ 2s
Resolution No. 6557 M-2009-02 3une 9, 2009
Page 2
been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous Negative
Declaration was adopted, that shows any of the following:
(A} The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous EIR or negative declaration;
{B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in the previous EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternativE~s previously found not to be feasible would in
fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project,
but the project proponents decline to adopt file mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D} Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those
analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on
the environment, but the project proponents 3ecline to adopt the mitigation measure or
altexnative."
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted
in this matter, the application to modify the Architectural & Site Approval, Use Permit
Modification, Director's Minor Modification and. Tree Removal Permit are hereby recommended
for approval, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on
Page 2 thereof; and
That flee subconclusions upon which the finding; and conditions specified in this resolution are
based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. M-2009-02 as set
forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 9, 2009, and are incorporated
by reference as though fully set forth herein.
SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.: M-2009-02
Applicant: Tim Kelly {for ECI Two Results, LLC)
Location: 1 Results Way
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED B~Y THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
1. PAST APPROVALS
The conditions of approval of: ASA-2008-05, M-2008-03, and TR-2008-06 as approved by
the City Council, and DIR-2008-32 as approved by the Director of Community
Development remain in effect, except as may be amended by the conditions contained
in this resolution.
2. EXTENSION OF PERMIT EXPIRATIOr( DATES
The following permit approvals, file numbers: ASA-2008-05, M-2008-03 and TR-2008-06
are extended for a time period of five (5} years from the date of City approval of the
amendment.
File No. DIR-2008-32 is also extended for a time period of five (5} years from the date of
City approval of the amendment, provided that the separate implementation of~~hg~
Director's Minor Modification does not vest M-2008-03 or ASA-2008-05.
Resolution No. 6557 M-2009-02 Tune 9, 2009
Page 3
3. CONSTRUCTION PHASING
The approved development described in file nos. ASA-2008-05 and M-2008-03 may be
developed in phases and the applicant may proceed with the construction of all or any
of the three buildings and parking structure in any order, at the applicant's discretion.
Applicant in its discretion may submit a building permit for each of the approved
structures separately or submit a building permit for the entire approved development
with detailed plans for .the first building and a list of deferred submittals for the
subsequent new buildings as may be permitted under the California Building Code.
Concurrently with the submittal of a building permit (or deferred submittal) for each
new building, applicant shall submit a phasing plan for approval by the Director of
Community Development, showing that the then-existing office buildings on the
property plus the proposed new buildings, which will have sufficient parking,
roadways, utilities and other accessory facilities to function properly with the
subsequent phases. Irt addition:
• In the first development phase, the applicant shall satisfy all offsite
improvements, phase one public art requirement and install the landscaping
and improvements on both sides of the site's front entry, or pay specified in
lieu fees, as a condition of occupancy of the first new office building, except
where fees are required as a condition of the building permit.
• That Sheet L-1.2 titled "Parking, Refuse & Circulation Plan' dated August 14,
2008, is used to identify the parking improvements required to support each
building and to define the limit of work for each building's improvements.
The Community Development Director has the authority to approve
reasonable, minor adjustments of the plans.
• That the applicant shall have the right to implement an interim parking plan
before all three, new office buildings are completed, in-lieu of the final
parking layout shown on Sheet L-1.2.,, so long as the Community
Development Director determines that the proposed interim parking plan
satisfies parking, parking lot lighting and circulation requirements at that
stage of project development.
4. TRAFFIC SIGNAL & ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
Condition of Approval No. 31 in file nos. ASA-2008-05 and M-2008-03, is revised in its
entirety as follows:
a} The developer shall fund traffic, signal and roadway improvements at the Bubb
Road/Results Way intersection. The improvements include installing new
pedestrian signal heads, a new traffic signal cabinet, a new traffic signal controller,
new traffic signal loops, and replacing damaged pavement on the Results Way
approach, removal of traffic control island(s), pavement restoration and lane
restriping.
i-t
hl
-
€ the
di . ,.c ,.
,.as,- c
..
,,,,.< .,,
~,-
T „++
~'~it is
~ta~
-
s
~aya
e
a
e-o
n _
_
~
__
_
g
ge
s
ee-
=z- - --
12-28
Resolution No. b557 M-2009-OZ ~ ,June 9, 2009
Page 4
dc~The City Council shall have an opportunity to review and approve the traffic, signal
and roadway improvement plans for this project prior to building permit issuance.
5. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RES]~RVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication
requirements, reservation requirements, ~~nd other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code
Section 66020{d) {Z), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount
of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are
hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest These fees,
dedications, reservations, and other exactions, 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 Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging sudz
exactions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9~ day of June 2009, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Chairperson Cziefer, Vice Chair Brophy, Kaneda
Lee, Miller
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: none
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: none
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: none
ATTEST: APPROVED:
/s/Aarti Shrivastava
Aarti Shrivastava, Director
Community Development Department
/s/Lisa Giefer
Lisa Giefer, Chair
Planning Commission
12-29
G: `Plailiiing ~ PDREPORT~ RES ~ 2009 ~ M-2009-02 res.doc
Attachment F
CITY OF
CUPERTtNO
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408} 777-3251
FAX (408} 777-3333
Community Development Department
5U1VI1VIARY
Application: M-2009-02 Agenda Date: June 9, 2009
Applicant: Tim Kelly
Owner: ECI Two Results, LLC
Property Location: l Results Way
Environmental Determination: Categorical Exemption
APPLICATION SUMMARY:
The applicant has requested a Major Amendment {file no. M-2009-02) modifying the:
• Architectural and Site Approval (file no. ASA-2008-05)
• Use Permit Modification (file no. M-2008-03)
• Director's Minor Modification (file no. DIR-2008-32)
•3 Tree Removal Permit {file no. TR-2008-06)
For the purpose of extending the expiration date of these approvals for six years from
the date of approval of the extension, phasing construction, clarifying conditions of
approval and modifying the traffic and signal improvement condition.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission find that the scope of the project revisions are within the
scope of the previously adopted mitigated negative declaration; and recommends
approval of the majox modification {M-2009-02) per the model resolution (Attachment
1).
BACKGROUND•
On September ~;~2008, the City Council approved a Use Permit Modification {M-2008-
03}, Architectural & Site Approval (ASA-2008-050) and Tree Removal Permit (TR-2008-
06) (Attaclunent 2) to allow for the private redevelopment of the 19.8-acre Results Way
office park, consisting of the demolition of five buildings containing about 139,632
square feet and the removal of 303 trees, and the development of three new, two-story
72-30
Tim Kelly{ECI Two Results, LLC) M-2009-02 ~ June 9, 2009
Page 2
office buildings containing 155,500 square ff~et, a twa-level 204-space parking structure,
surface parking areas and landscape improvements that include 323. new trees. In
addition, on November 4, 2008, the Director of Community Development approved a
facade remodel of Building #5 (DIR-2008-32) to bring that existing building info closer
design consistency with the newly approvec! office buildings (Attachment 3).
Due to difficult economic conditions, the applicant is seeking an extension of the
development appravals, construction phasing flexibility, clarification of certain
conditions of approval and specific modification of the traffic/street improvement
condition of approval. The applicant's objectives are to provide assurances to its
existing tenants and potential new tenants that they will be able to remodel Building #5
and/or construct new building spaces •c~rlten the economy improves and they can
accommodate the existing companies space :deeds.
DISCUSSION:
Modi~tcation Request
The permit modification request letter {Attar=hment 4) requests fhe following changes to
the previously approved permit conditions:
1. Extend expiration period of ASA-20~~8-05, M-2008-03 & TR-20(18-Ob for six (6)
years from the date of the approval oi~ this amendment.
Staff Comments: Each of the previous approvals was for a period of two years from the
date of City action. Such approvals are deemed "vested" when: 1) actual substantial
and continuous activity has taken place on the land or Z} sufficient building activity has
occurred and continues to occur in a diligent manner. Routinely, the City grants one
year extensions to planning permits, but in the past the City has granted longer permit
approvals for larger or complex projects that provide a substantial public benefit.
Examples of recent approvals are listed bela,.v:
Project Name Length of Permit Approval
Main Street Cupertino 5 years (benefit -park w/public access)
Civic Park 7 yE~ars (benefit -park w/public access)
Oaks Hotel/Mixed Use Bldg. 4 yF~ars (benefit -hotel taxes)
As a benefit to the City, the applicant is offering $200,000 in funds that may be used to
develop off-site traffic improvements to alleviate additional traffic congestion or
improve safety. This is further discussed later in the staff report.
All of the above permit time periods were fr~~m the date of approval. Staff feels a 5-year
extension from the date of approval of t]:us amendrnenf is sufficient time to start
construction of the first new building. Applicant is agreeable to the change to 5 years.
12-31
Tim Kelly(ECI Two Results, LLC) M-2009-02 June 9, 2009
Page 3
2. Allow construction phasing flexibility for the three new buildings at the
applicant's discretion.
Staff Comments: The applicant is requesting the ability to decide whether to develop alI
three new office buildings together or individually and in any order. Staff supports
this request given the following conditions proposed by the applicant:
a. Building construction is subject to the requirement that the existing and new
buildings will have sufficient parking, roadways, utilities and other accessory
facilities to function properly with the subsequent phases. In phase one, the
applicant shall satisfy all offsite improvements, phase one public art
requirement and installation of landscaping and improvements on both sides
of the site's front entry, or pay specified in-lieu fees, as a condition of
occupancy of the first new office building.
b. Use Sheet L-1.2 titled "Parking, Refuse & Circulation Plan" dated August 14,
2008 (Attachment 5} to identify the parking improvements required to
suppoxt each building and to define the Limit of work for each building's
improvements. The Community Development Director will have the
authority to approve reasonable, minor adjustments of the plans.
c. The applicant shall have the right to implement an interim parking plan
before all three, new office buildings are completed, in-lieu of the final
parking layout shown on Sheet L-1.2., so long as the `Community
DDevelopment Director determines that the proposed interim parking plan
satisfies parking and circulation requirements at that stage of project
development.
3. Amend Traffic/Signal Improvement Condition to allow an in-lieu
payment for offsite work instead of McClellan Road improvements.
Staff Cornmenfs: The Traffic/Signal Improvement condition (Condition No. 31.
in the permits) has three main components:
a. Bubb Road/Results Way Intersection - street and signal
improvements.
b. McClellan Road Frontage -land dedication for street widening,
travel lane restriping, creation of a potential student drop-off area
on south side of McClellan.
c. City Council review and approval of traffic, signal and roadway
improvements.
12-32
Tim Kelly(ECI Two Results, LLC) M-2009-0'2 June 4, 2009
Page 4
Planning and Public Works staff observed the traffic circulation on McClellan
Road next to both schools (Kennedy and Monta Vista) during the morning and
afternoon peak periods when the schools opened and closed, and concluded
that there may be traffic, signal and roadway improvements near the schools
that would be preferable to widening McClellan Road along the project's
frontage. Staff is looking at various improvement alternatives, but has not
reached any conclusions. Consequently the applicant will dedicate the
frontage along McClellan Road as requi;Aed by Condition #31 and will
additionally donate an amount of $200,000 j Attachment 6). The funds can go
toward engineering and improvement costs west of Highway 85 and within a
~/z mile radius of the site once the City decides on the final 'improvements.
The applicant wishes to meter the payment: of the $200,000 as City expenses
for the street improvements are incurred, v~ritlZ any remaining balance of the
$200,000 payable shortly after the applicant receives occupancy of .the new
building. Public Works disagrees with thi;~ approach and requests that the
total funds or a letter of credit for an equivalent amount be paid to the City
prior to building permit issuance.
4. Extension of Expiration Date of DIR-2008-32 for six (6~years from date
of approval of extension.
Staff Comments: DIR-2008-32 was a Director's Minor Modification of ASA-
2008-05 that approved a facade remodel of Building #5. It had a 2-year
expiration period ending November 4, 2010. This remodel was granted a
separate approval to enable the applicant to act quickly to tenant this vacant,
existing building without tying it to the con;~truction of the new buildings. In
line with staff's other recommendations, staff is recommending a 5-year
extensiori from the date of approval, with tr:e stipulation that implementation
of the remodel would not vest either M-20(18-03 or ASA-200$-05 for the new
buildings.
CEQA FINDINGS:
As lead agency, the City of Cupertino prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration for
the Qne Results Way Office Campus Project +~"Project"), incompliance with the
California Environmental Qualify Act (CEQ~~.) {Public Resources Code, section 21000 et
seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Califor~:ua Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et
seq., as amended). The City Council adopted a Negative Declaration for the Project at a
public hearing on September 17, 2008.
12-33
Tim Kelly(ECI Two Results, LLC) M-2009-02 June 9, 2009
Page 5
The Planning Commission needs to finds that the actions contemplated hereunder are
within the scope of the Negative Declaration and that (1} there are no substantial
changes proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous
negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or
a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) there
are no substantial changes occurring with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous negative
declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and (3)
there is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could
not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous
Negative Declaration was adopted, that shows any of the followh~g:
(A} The project will have one or more significant effects not
discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially
more sevexe than shown in the previous EIR;
{C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to
be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially
reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the
project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure
or alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably
different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would
substantially reduce ane or more significant effects on the
environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the
mitigation measure or alternative."
CONCLUSION:
In summary, staff is recommending approval of the request for permit
extension with the following revisions:
1) Extend ASA-2008-05, M-2008-03 and TR-2008-06 for a period of five (5} years
from the date of City Council approval;
2) Allow construction phasing flexibility for the three new buildings at the
applicant's discretion provided:
12-34
Tim Kelly(ECI Two Resulfis, LLC) M-2009-OZ ~ June 9, 2009
Page 6
• That the existing and ne~v buildings} will have sufficient parking,
roadways, utilities and other accessory facilities to function properly
with the subsequent phase;;
• For phase one, the applicant shall: satisfy all offsite improvements,
phase one public art requirement and iitistall the landscaping and
improvements on both sides of the site's front entry, or pay specified
in-lieu fees, as a condition of occupancy of the first new office building,
except when fees are requu•ed as a condition of the building permit.
• Use Sheet L-1.2 titled "P;~rking, Refuse & Circulation Plan' dated
August 14, 2008, to identify the parking improvements required to
support each building ar~d to define the limit of work for each
building's improvements. The Commw.~ity Development Director has
the authority to approve reasonable, minor adjustments of the plans
• The applicant shall have i:he right to implement an interim parking
plan before all three, new office buildings are completed, in-lieu of the
final parking layout shown on Sheet L-1.2., so long as the Community
Development Director determines that the proposed interim parking
plan satisfies parking and. circulation requirements at that stage of
project development
3} Amend Condition no. 31 to provide as an improvement alternative the
donation of $240,000 for traffic, signal and roadway improvements west of
Highway $5 and within x/z mile radius of the project site. Payment of the
funds or a letter of credit would bE~ due prior to building permit issuance.
4) Extend DIR-2008-32 for five (5} years from date of City Council
approval with the stipulation that implementation of the Director's
Minor Modification does not vest M-2008-03 or ASA-2008-05.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: Model Resolution
Attachment 2: City Council Action Letter dated Sepb_mber 19, 2008
Attachment 3: DIR-20118-32 Approval
Attachment 4: Letter from ECI Two Resu1#s LLC dated March 24, 2009
Attachment 5: Sheet L-1.2 titled "Parking, Refuse & Circulation Plan
Attachment 6: Letter from Neil Sekhri, of Gibson, Dui & Crutcher LLP dated June 4, 2009
Attachment 7: Adopted Negative Declaxation and Notice of Deternunation
Prepared by: Colin Jung, AICP Senior Planner
Reviewed by:
12-35
Tun Kelly(ECI Two Results, LLC) M-2009-02 June 9, 2009
Page 7
ao
City Planner
Approved by:
Aazti Shrivastava
Community DeveIoptnent DirectorG:planning/PDreporf/pcMreports/2009/M-2009-0Ldoc
12-36
Attachment G
CITY OF CLIPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
CITY OF CUPERTINO PLANNING COMMISSION
DRAFT MINI:JTES
6:45 P.M. JUNE 9, 2009 TUESDAY
CUPERTINO COMA~IUNITY HALL
\he Cupertino Corrnnunity Hall, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertuzo, CA., by Chair Lisa Giefer.
FLAG
Commissioners p ent: Chairperson: Lisa Giefer
Vice Chairperson.: Paul Brophy
Commissioner: David Kaneda
Commissioner: Wimiie Lee
ornmissioner: Marty Miller
Staff present: Community De opment Director: Aarti Shrivastava
ity Planner: Gary Chao
AICP Senio Ia.nner: Colin Jung
APPROVAL OF NIINUTES:
Miazutes of tl:e May I2, 2009 Planning Commi:csion
of the May 12, 2009 Planning Commission meeting a
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None
CONSENT CALENDAR: None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None
POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: None
PUBLIC HEARING:
Motion: Motion by Vice Chair Brophy, secc-nd by Com. ne
Motion: Motion by Vice Chair Brophy, sec~and by Com. Kaneda to move the agenda to
2. M-2009-02 Tim Kelly Major Amendment modifying the Architectural and Site Approval
(Embarcadero Capital (ASA-2008-OS), iJse Permit Modification (M-2008-03) Director's
Partners) Minor Modification (DiR-2008-32) & Tree Removal Permit
1 Results Way (TR-2008-06) for the purpose of extending expiration date of
these approvals for 6 years, phasing construction, clarifying
conditions of approval, & modifying the traffic & signal
da, to approve the Minutes
resented. (Vote: 5-0-0)
12-37
Cupertino Planning Commission 2 June 9, 2009
improvement condition. Tentative Council Date: June 16, 2009
Colin Jung, AICP Senior Planner, Presented the staff report:
• Reviewed the application as outlined i~ the attached staff report. City Council approved the
partial redevelopment of the 1 Results Way Office Park in September 2008. The applicant is
requesting extension of the expiration date of the approvals; phasing of construction; and
clarification of conditions of approval; and modify the traffic and signal improvement
conditions, No. 31 in Architectural and Site Approval and Use Permit Modification.
• He reviewed in detail the applicant's requests as outlined ii the staff report.
Staff supports the request fora 5 year extension period, noting that other applications have
been granted extension approvals. The applicant has agreed to make a $200,000
contl-ibution for traffic improvements within a half mile radius of their project site; and
that these conrtributions either in the form of cash or posting letter of credit will be paid at
the time of building permit issuance. There is also a letter of support from Judy Wilson,
Co-Chair of the Monta Vista Senior All Night Party thanking the applicant and the Results
Way Business Park for providing them accommodations for their senior party over the last
few years and asking that the Plamiing Commission support the application.
a Staff supports the request for flexible construction phasing with the following conditions:
when the phased project comes in, all existing and new buildings have sufficient parking,
roadways, utilities and accessory structures, to function on its own and work with any
other construction phases proposed. During the phase 1 construction of new building, that
the offsite traffic improvements, phase 1 public art requirements, front entry landscaping
improvements and any in-lieu development fees would be payable during the first phase.
There is an approved landscape plan that also includes the parking layout included in the
original approval; when that was initially approved it showed each of the builduigs with its
complement of parking that would be used to serve that particular building. It was
designed that each building would have enough parking surrounding the building to meet
its own needs. They would like to use that plan not only to identify their parking
improvements that they need to build, but also to define the limits of their improvements
to the site with minor adjustments that would be approved by the Director of Community
Development. Another condition is the interin parking plan that would be approved as
part of any phased project.
The third request is an amendment to the traffic signal improvement condition to give the
city more flexibility to allow in-lieu payment for offsite traffic work instead of the
McClellan Road improvements. Staff is not convinced that widening of McClellan Road
is the best option, but has not explored all the options yet, and asked the applicanrt to offer
the city an in-lieu payment option to mitigate that concern. In the event the other traffic
improvements and pedestrian improvements were not as good as the widening of
McClellan Road, staff is also asking the applicant to make an irrevocable offer of
dedication of a portion of McClellan Road so that it could be widened in future. City
Council asked in their approval of the project that they look at the street improvements as
part of the conditions of approval. The city and applicant have agreed on the $200,000
contributions; staff is recommending deletion of Condition 4b in the model resolution.
• Staff supports the extension of expiration date of approval, with the stipulation that the
implementation of the minor modification request would not vest any of the approvals for the
new buildings.
+ Staff recommends that you re-use the previously granted mitigated negative declaration for the
original project, and also recommends approval of the extension request per the model
resolution:
12-38
Cupertino Planning Commission =~ June 9, 2004
Staff answered Commissioners' questions about the application. Com. Miller expressed concern
that the $200K may set a precedent. Staff said the funds could be used on programs to mitigate the
traffic problem on McClellan Road.
Sandra James, Applicant, representing property owner:
• She explained that they were asking for extension on entitlements because of the economic
climate. The choices that people have, property owners, developers and clients that want to
lease buildings are on hold now because they don't know what is going to happen in the next
two to five years, and they need some flexibility. They are requesting approval of the five year
extension and to separate the traffic issues from the extension. Since the city has not yet
determined what to do about traffic mitigation, the applicant is willing to make a dedication of
property.
John Hamilton, Managing Partner of Embarcadero Capital:
• He said he appreciated the support of their efforts to have the dream of the park become a
reality; and with the input they received they ;lave a good blueprint to move forward with. The
economy and growth of companies in the area are crucial in making it happen.
• He agreed that the $200K is just a donation acid they want to be good neighbors. In addition to
the extension, they are asking that consideration be given to expenditure of the money
reasonably close to the project, which would hopefully give some long term benefit from a
traffic improvement, even if it is not directly contributing to any traffic mitigation around their
project. He said that the busing discussion should be part of a larger study, and that he would
rather have the $200K go to something more tangible, a gift that would keep on giving. He
said he was familiar with the school congestion as he had children in the schools.
• Said he was comfortable with staf#'s recommendation which was a fair compromise and is one
they could move forward with.
Chair Giefer opened the public hearing.
Jennifer Griffin, Rancho Rinconada resident:
• The• neighborhood and city was pleased to see a long term investment in a tech park; the Bubb
Road tech park is one of the oldest tech parks in Cupertino. The tech economy in the valley is
unpredictable, it cycles and is presently in a down cycle. If people are in as players in the long
term in the tech arena they understand how things go izt Silicon Valley. She commended the
owners for their long teen goal of having a presence on this site of the tech park, tech
buildings. Cupertino needs that to maintain their Iong history in the tech arena, and rather than
seeing a housing overlay put on this property which she didn't rule out depending on some of
the recent things that have gone down; she said she considered Bubb Road as a tech park and
hoped that it would remaui that way in flee future.
• She said they have ongoing issues with the schools, and she felt the city was being very
reasonable in looking down the road at trying; to figure out ways to accoznznodate growth in
that area. That area will always have traffic problems and she hoped that by having a careful
plan and careful consideration from both the torch neighbors and schools and children that they
would eventually have a way of having traffic move in that area. She said it was important
that they look at what has been happening in their tech properties and she felt it was a good
plan.
Chair Giefer closed the public hearing.
Vice Chair Brophy:
• Said 1•ze supported the application; recalled that: he voted against the project in September 2008;
12-39
Cupertino Planning Commission 4
June 9, 2009
his concern at the time was that the city was not dealing with the impact of several hundred
new workers. He said he felt t11e change of focus on McClellan Road to having a fixed fund to
deal with possible traffic problems as a result was a big step forward and he supported staff's
proposed recommendations.
Com. Kaneda:
Said he supported the application.
He questioned whether it made sense to limit the area where the funds could be spent, the
distance of Bubb Road and McClellan Road. The real issue of what is going to be affected are
the two roads and it would seem like that would be the place to make improvements if you are
going to make improvements.
Suggested that the language be tightened up to those specific streets as opposed to within a half
mile.
Vice Chair Brophy:
• Referred to a map showing the half-mile radius; theoretically the farthest away would be the
Bubb and Stevens Creek intersection, which would not be an unreasonable place to make
improvements to handle the traffic coming through the complex. He said he was not
comfortable with the half mile radius.
Chair Giefer:
• Recalled that in earlier discussions when it came up as a residential project and the other tune
as a commercial project, they discussed opening up Imperial or Orange or some of those
streets, and the neighbors were not supportive of that. She said the realistic opportunities are
of McClellan and the other intersections tend not to fail the way that one does.
Aarti Shrivastava:
She said they wanted to maintain maximum flexibility and the idea was not to make traffic
improvements to the side streets. If they circumscribe this tightly and there were little
improvements around the corners, some biking improvements; they didn't want to preclude
possibilities and the applicant suggested what was thought to be eloquent language, a half mile,
which covered a variety of options, and they wanted the city to have the most flexibility.
The intent is if serious traffic improvements are made, they are defnitely going to be focused
on Bubb and McClellan.
Com. Lee:
• Said it was an elegantly designed project, and she was hopeful that the money will be used to
help traffic in the area.
• Said she supported the extension and the project.
Com. Miller:
• Said lie supported the project; supports the phasing and the extension. He said he still had
some concerns about the additional monies that are being asked for and the manner in which
they are being asked. However, the applicant has indicated that he is satisfied with that result,
and he was supportive of tl~e project.
Chair Giefer:
• She said although she shared the same concerns that Com. Kaneda had that it seems simple
where the traffic currently fails in the neighborhood, the point is well made that there may be
other solutions that they haven't thought through within that half mile radius; it does serve the
12 - 40
Cupertino Planning Commission
June 9, 2009
property. She said she wished busing was an option, but the applicant is less satisfied with that
and makes a good point; it is not something that is in perpetuity. She said they might get a test
for a year and see if it helps mitigate the issue., but fording increasing funding for that would be
difficult.
She said she supported the extension.
Motion: Motion by Vice Chair Brophy, second by Com. Kaneda, to approve Application
M-2009-02 as written, except that: Para. 4b be deleted and that the Letter of
Agreement be adopted. {Vote: 5-0=0)
1. -2009-01 (EA-2009-O1) Review of the live-year Capital Improvements Program
Ci f Cupertino (FY-2009-10 to 2013-14) for conformity to the City of
Citywz a Location Cupertino's General Plan. Planning Conznsission decisio~z
final unless ap~~ealed.
Colin Jung, AIC enior Planner, presented the staff report:
Said that the revi of the Capital Improvement Plan for FY 2009/10 to 2013/I4 and objective
is to determine if th capital Improvement Program is consistent with the General Plan. Each
year, the City Councn adopts a five year spending plan for capital improvements; and its
mechanism for prioritizit significant city e:~penditures for capital projects important to the
city. Funding is not fxed or the second tJirough the fifth years as priorities and projects
change, schedules speed up an slow down; the only real certainty in the five year program is
the first year funded projects.
~ Both state law and Cupertino Muni al Code require the Planning Commission to review the
CIP for General Plan consistency; an lso to make a recommendation on the environmental
assessment. The Plamiing Commissio is not responsible for setting the CIP funding
priorities, which is under the purview of the ity Council. The most significant project from an
environmental standpoint is the Stevens Cree Corridor Park project which is a multi-year
funded project. Other CIP projects consist cf re airs, renovations and minor improvements,
small additions to existing City infrastructure, small amounts of money for feasibility studies
and data collection to support newer longer term prof ts. The review of the projects indicate
staff has determined that the projects were categorical) exempt from environmental review
based on the nature of the projects; however, part of the quirements of CEQA is that the
environmental Review Committee when they look at the pro cts, not only individually, but
they need to take a look at the cumulatively is to decide whether he cumulative impact of all
these all relatively minor projects has a significant impact or not. he ERC recommended a
negative Declaration for capital improvement program.
Second part of the review is a review. of tike General Plan consisten for the CIP: He
reviewed the CIP Matrix; which indicated the nature of the General Plan po ' that pertains to
the seven categories of projects as outlined in the CIP Matrix.
Staff reconunends that the Plam~ing Commission recommend a Negative Decl tion for the
Capital Improvement Program and ford the five-year CIP consistent with the Geiser Plan per
tine model resolution.
Staff answered Commissioners' questions about funding of projects and potential projects for
futtue.
12-41
EXISTING COryORIONS PROPOSED OPTION 6COG SF. REgJIRED COUM PROPOSED COUNT
BUILDNG 1 37,7T1 BUfCDTJG 1 37,611 f32.D 110,0
BUADINGT 27,!71 dVILDAYGT 23,771 d2.0 A1.0
BUILDINGS 34,504 BUILDINGS 3x,594 721.4 123.0
BUILO1N04 x2,500 BUI[DrNG4 x2500 148.1 151.0
BU1LDMfG d(1ncL drrdpej 77,e7e BVILOfNG S(drfdpe ezcludetlJ 73,400' 2573 26 D.0
BWlDMeG dr7 37,770 New BuRWrtDA 51,270' 170.8 204,0
BURDMrGd 22,020
~ Naw Bu3dnDe 51,daS' 782.0 7e4.0
BUILDING 9
3B,d64 Now BwidlnD C 61, d8S • 182.0 164.0
BU1LD01G 10 a,a1a
T07AL APPROX,SP. OgS,IBe 707AL APPROX. F. 38a,4a6' 1.2f5 1,;N
PAAA/NG ON•GRADfi"' Bed PAR721N60N-CRADE" x81
PARXINO UNDER BLDGI id0 PARWNC UNDBR 80007 180
PARfaINO UNDER BGDG a ad PARXINC UNDER BLDG d 68
TOTAG fi%6TINB PARIONO 1234 PAOPOBED Q4RAGB PAAKMG 204
L K VWED 1
(Note: Numbr and bca6on of hanwmp padlnp IDacea
Teo, and wlll adeU Na b71 paAdnq cwnl.)
7o L u a r268
t3 e4ae.t/2esf
(Nak: Gly roquMn enl 011 slat psr2d5tl o} -mee Moor areal
TOTAL HANDICAP A CCES5IBLE
PAAlQNG REgV1RE11"' Sq.a1
(zo+(133Tnoa)
Halo:
Caku119ona aro eppmxsnsle sM aR Aii W On echanwOC dmvlnps, Tbaae areas arm svbjed Io oi,urpa.
CdoWadbna an red eeaetl on as-Dude Geld
'Mdkabss cnanpe In aovare lactape lmmaxiu'np condUarta
r PuLMO cwleWatmne an aDPo#meH end require rl-aM vrrmpflon
"'CBO Beoaon ! f28B, 7teb 1 fB•d: !! dle number dparnAp
spaeos M a fol orD+qpe an 1,001 and oven Ma numbro!
srz:eaefMO paraAp apaoa rogvirodla IwenfypNa one ror
each f 00 PrN1nD ePaera.
p.l. raw^w,eer
na.z na,wR,a
'~~..~.
RESULTS WAY
.,;......,.,..r...,.r,.....„...,.. CAMPUS
w,....na_,.-.aa.~.o. r.w.~ .+e'~',-.:~N=_rti,-. =' ttlw.vm. xa ~ r. na~,;.w,...mta.,~a~m,...e REBULTB WAY
~.~..nRnn,.-.',+Mn„n"~ ~~ e~tbnr~ni An:1„F.MMnMSUat M,a„nKeNa.n'„atll Id
rr .~:w. w... ,~....
ao-mnr ua +n
~, v b + .r•
~m.qs.
.~r....r ..ti
- - •r,,. Ernbarcadero
°:~.1. aDRUaARDBRarlrt
- __.1::,: n.+.awvrw. , un..+.e..reM tadlaMn yR e4
-- emmeN, GAromefa
ry.L CIIeGrMa nn,n.eelnam,n '
-- 1ul4eebdnrhenN-NYne
- - - - - aenlWluM2eepT,MR.9eyeelarr•fb,lee,gaales
Takl.4leMw lml.l~,ue'xyeilntlweLLUw ernNnr,N
w..... v.r.. ew..+ r.,l,,.
4.'m I,n
Fur .n r~M is-r'M l a~-f
"v'r`rV" I er,rr rr ,w:J n 1wM +,N-vMl
ew^,+e«e "^' 6TUDI0 FIVE~Daalpn, Ina
,n,n:q,n o-r..= ... wee.v.`*n l.nv ~rsAddY
_ - MHNtd.O.rl~m~EdlaNS `n.;,.%..v up_..v re-'wYl rsP.-nrM eee Nnminp
Nw#.w.anewo.^reNlun.s,rw+....ne..,n °^ p,l,,,~.nw `v'~~ r•"w,•a:: „~n• neemea,w area
xw `~"'":,w m..r%..~.,., aw,aRn, uwromwwees
MpeArahFe„6rsvagLaa a,ed ra*.un~ Ute.7R7'I10
+4usz+ne
-~~./
~_./~~ asEw.hooWnul q....... ..
w.,arp~:oT6wa.n
~:~ `l
-; ~~•~~•`~'~~_ ~,~ ~~ ~-~- Attachment H
_..., u '~~•~ ice!
• s ~ ~ ~ ) ZY f'T !
\` ~ T-' M.,w.,£;'~°}~~'~'~,.~, r =h-. ~- ~ ,<,..} 1~ II ~=I ~ ~-rl~.'`j - ~~ ~1~>~1;lli r'
Wnar,'!~ VO-- I ~.^ 11, ~ 4~, ~ 1-Th7sH iNeLOeVPa ~ L: F_- \~
1~ °"Rra.a. h. a1: 4~tA° 1 - ° P ~~~ '~ (,1'"tln°a ~^, _ -~ _. •' ' ~ i ! I ! i I
-..~ PaMneAAemWne,re laliee z ~~~ ~1 o J C
~' .-~`~~~~%i' A HSN nU.~N ,I 1 C-~ L lyw~ i!r~ 1 i - I~1~~i I
^RXD!°f0 hee:AmaDrlaMen .;'.("~ a -- ^. Itlamn,eallm4 ! : 'O/ '~ , r J 4 1 111j i
-------- r.aervw arcyeen ..;1;~ f•:.- GE ~/'x, m.ow rwvrom+naacs®aw s :i y~' ~~l r,, ~ I I ~ I
p. MlnrlXeloeUaM ~ ....;;,; .f%k'.. P t~Etf2aR0' ; ~ i}~' ~ ~ t~ / I ~ III i
../ ~E~ '~R~e~ ~ 2'- \yvpG~ ~~d`+ l'k- ~ ~ ~ Z evrLDmlct ~ t~" I j !
../. - ',~ ~f I,N \ ~ Fa.re~ ^ Eg Yi, ~~~ ~- ~ j ~ ~k ~. Y1 a,ea PIN~V ®-0N6RAef ~ i a, ~ ~ r, ( 1
L/"• .-~:~ y+ b ~s t'~ i- / i twwy mavromaeoslawl`li '
RZ '~ b,ay J'r ~ 1 r t' t 1 t
i ._%~.. ~~ ,. ~3 I.muml e ~\'R .- r;_`=1 yf ' ~Tt~ - _ _ 4 _ ~ ' I . I 1 I
,rr.'.'.''~" h 1 d"` a _aJ: _, 4 l
,.~" -~a.•i' ~a~y. i ~ ~;.i'o r ~i ~° ~ ''-t IT' 1 I(I Its! I;~i 1,'_ ~ \ '.• 'w^ ~J I l ~ ~
•:%~'~•~' F~a~ ~ `' `, r. Y ae~. L>~fA ~ I ~ r ~teNaa rROV'~ro61aNa ' - ~ I I I~
X'• R ntr' '. ~-ecvaalaom,sa 00 O' ~ ~^ ~Fi~ ct+,~ T r ~ G l - 1
,,,~{ :~;Sy~y,_ fi'f a 1N ~. ~L'A"" ~ 9 ~'lL~ ,r+i.•''~ I ~ ` I I ' f ~ I 7 ~ rr~"' el u.a rllavloao.uwu >- '„~.. 1 I 1
..-Y,cnnon ~ ~1 L ~n .1"~ ~'~ a °U~ ^. ~~ 1 y L ~ i % ar 1`-' : _ _ :-~, I . ~l'_' 7- C. ,~_~ y~'1 ~~,~^ ~~ • ,I ~F , Bux.DINC 2 1 I .r ; f ; I I
, ' l~ - Jr ~r`,:a T1s'.'N ~ N.:• _'0 Y ~ ~o- t ... \ ~ ~ I I~i - i ~ f f 1 ~~~'~ F I *>i'.~' I 1 i I _.~ I' ~ _ 1 :.:4 s', m~,eaanuau -~- ~ I ~ • (
~•;,~::.•-' ~ n ha 1 I 1 I-i " : 1 I I!!UE FNSTORY
'^T I• t , `:` N w t b? ~ ~-~a~iei`nei cv~ioao.an o,uee y! ~ - Y rskl' ~,/ ~1'+ ~..- l ( t ~ r _I I _ r ' ;'-` rYl~
`. Y t r 1 ~ 1v,1,-~, rl
~~ ~ \ rae \~a~1~~~1 r~n r2~. t, ~. ~°-d~ /~~. +,;;.{_~ It ~a'L:~u)"i!.'Fr~~~ ~C.~'"Ill.:.,~C~~r.,1L~.ad I ~....~~i _t J ~'~ ) 1(,d.
I . \ \11'' L 1 . 1 k~ \\ ~` li ~. l ~'Z ;~y"?( QP~ 1°~ .~::: 3~,y ~. a '.., . ~ tc a P ~( \jr~ ~. +c -`` `- - ~ i ~ w; „il>s>~fo C al ~ri li i
^`•_, ~~ ~ \•, -~ ~ x~ ' 1 ~._ --mot,: k . , t ,
' 1 _ ~ `-```~~\ \\\ ,.Y~~ rOr. ~ ~~ ~ I O `r :.sr. Ir ~~~- f~ ~~11, I~I
l ~ ~ "'
ry-, 1=~~i ~~`\L~ ` `5~~~~',1~•Y~ Y _.it ~ ~ ~.~ ~C-y. ~i I r°ruji,~j' °FL - - .Ir fir. I
ICC, ~ ~.j,.1 1\l„'`,*1~'i"-l 1~T I1 i r r.. ~[Y 1-_('•"'~ °- ~ I ( r -1 9 1 ~.~ BL'nDMOa BUIIDRJG3 -~_ 3 -~ ~~'
y '~'~,~ 'Y 1 „„ I ! I.'. f I I I ~ i T L ~k .~I ie.uw ~'n~aN a,unc..: '-~~ ,` ~ BL'p-01N05 e ~ a/u~nnwndl ltnt:l nnnM.al ~--. -~ I C ~ ,; I '
''7P ( e 1. raJ aws rnovloeo-oN yroue
1'~ ~,
' 'Ij li.^' !- '~~j~I'I`'` IL's, I~ IThIk - ~ ,~ Ilse - f 1 Nmv eunDt~te e ~ . ~~t~~ l~ tin 1! aye. m;. nr,u.al .. i. +s+ cwe rnw,osa m antoe s - I I ~ I ` i li ~ m
r J r t (~lT ~`I I I I I~~ l ~ I I I~ '~i - kiwi ~(ar+Me .... ~ IRl~ii }4 I` N~reo nlooen®~o n - ~ ~'r~ T~ I ~-~ ~I
I Y '-T-r \ r,I '-aaxc,auwweu - r r,-r: I_' I~ I I
~' ~. - 1 I .III ~.a;- x:, ! -L; ~- . )., ; t r...ae ~ ~' ~• ~ 1, mwaw r - _ '- rk ~ ~1:~~~~1,. •~ ,j t
_ woa+n.Na+dr+c««- --- i1 ~I " 7 ~.~1 - e,nr...q, r i
~~4•}- ( an.r.Ir,F11~ '1 t I ~IIiKP -;?' ^. j r.,~y _~1.~ t, *' ">, >,I JI- (':f~.;/;!,=i%~/''.~ ///ii.~;.l%n„h/;//,l•:.~ ,~., I r -
~~ {p.~~- '(~~j'~~ •~-.~(/~ :1,°JJ 'I I :.. - _, _'-y'- _ 7 k * ~ aL ~}I~ ~ .I ~ '! ~~• ~,1.~TTT -) i r(ar .~Il ~
vrJi ~~?I= 1d~ i 1 =1 . I ; I'•'1 ` ~ , ~~9~;mel,~d~une~~t I h ~' I 'I-~I~ ~ I ~~~ ~_ I ~I ~I 1 j ~~3r«xzol,eT , I ~~i ddf,~~_~ ~ V, I 'r I + ! .~ 1 I I I 1 i I' ~c '' ~,;; I; ti I L'
ti~l '-,. °„r°"+C4 - .~'y_`=-.~1' ~ y,erwwl - ~-- rwsNduosuns-~-~' `1 I~I~. ,s Lei j
-~ 1 l_ :I ~ I Ir -' I I 3` I I n I I I i, III 1 11 I i I I 1 s L t I rwawe I I I i I'
~'~''~I~ ~ }~.~_. ~::. ',~-. I I• . 11. ~'~1 {fir ~ ',I i '!1.+.t L.i71 ~- l~.l -`~1 I I I I I yI•'I^ I 1 L' I t~ '!-~'L~:~ 'I ~ I~ _
-4.~.- /' 'AY'c~:? x~~' ~sl~.l..',o1x57+ii.:"yI~L~~.:~}:+r~lY..1-r%~.~~, ~~~I i I i ~LL: ~T '!~ ~: ~~.i~ i ~' ~~ I;
l/'l, IV"' ; ./•-+ y~~ J•'~ .. ~l I I r' 777 -a i 1 1 a , a .F...~'t !I .. ~,', va
_:?, -1 f S__ Z- 1-'• ~ ~ •_, q-_.. 1 ('!' ! ( F1 `' x E- r (~f 1 l \ / . • / / , it I ~ •~ j -. r• a•
mot' -J'-1;- ~~ ~r.>{ ~=:r~ t ~ ~-~`-,"~`~ ._.z•_ .-. .~ ..,~.a~-~.-,~'. -~i`=;~r'~=' --~~W~~%,11~~ ~-''_'_:.;!_...~~-'~~~ ;~ J%_:~L.. /~c-'=`~=1I(( ~ I ~ ~~RI~NO, REFUSE
A '' - I _...~ • ._. L.. i 161 --- & CIRCULATEON
~;.,`
aae,n.._ ~I.~...~.,,s...,.,l~..n_.~,......n~.,........,l~..aa,ae..,n,.,..,~.a.,..,~r
Attachment 1
Traci Caton
From: Judy Wilson [judykwils@earthlinl<.netj
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 4:29 Pti1
To: Kris Wang; Orrin Mahoney; Doll} Sandoval; Mark Santoro; Gilbert Wong; Lisa Giefer;
dkaneda@ideasi.com; pauldbroi~hy@yahoo.com; Winnie Lee; Marty Miller, City of Cupertino
Planning Dept.
Cc: ~ Sandy James; Randy Shuayto
Subject: Measurex conditional use permit
Attachments: Cupertino City Councii 09.doc; ATT00001.txt
Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council ME=tubers, T can not attend the Planning
Commission's meeting tonight, June 9th, but would like to respectfully submit this letter for
your consideration.
It has come to my attention that their will be a request concerning the old Measurex site
near Monta Vista High School. As they have been wonderfully generous to us in letting us use
their facility year after year and have been such supportive neighbors, T was hoping that
someone could submit my letter and or read it -tonight on their behalf.
thank you so much
Judy Wilson
Monts Vista Senior All Night Party Co-Chair 20~'~8 and 2010
12-43
1
Cupertino Planning Commission
Cupertino City Council
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3202
Re: Results Way -Conditional Use Permit Amendments June 9, 2009
Dear Council members and Planning Commissioners,
] am writing as the co-chair of the Monte Vista High School Senior All-Nigh# Party Corporation (MV SANP) for 2008 and
also for 2010. As you maybe aware, Monte Vista High Scthool parents, school administrators, and other volunteers
have a tradition of working for an entire year to create a unique thematic night long party for the members of the
graduating class. While this started as an effort to keep our children safe on this important and yet often deadly date, it
has morphed 'into what many consider one of the most memorable experiences for the students. It is literally the fast
time that the students are together as a class for those remarkable four years.
We rely heavily on our community for support.
Some companies will provide donations of cash, gift certificates, products and services. Cupertino is blessed v~ith
merchants and service providers who also go the extra yard to make Cupertino a special place. We depend on their
generosity and community spirit to make the whole greater than the sum of the parts.
One set of community members that has provided a critical resource above and beyond most others are the owners
and property managers of the former Measurex facility on Results Way. Embarcadero Capital Partners, and the
management company CB Richardson Ellis were key partners in that they provided MV SANP a location to design,
build and store our voluminous materials for the event. Speafically, they donated the use of their Building 6, electricity,
water, parking, grounds maintenance, and security for free months. Without this donation, the party would have been
significantly more difficult to prepare and execute and, in our opinion, of much lesser quality.
These owners have given a significant gift to over 1500 of our students in the last few years. They did this without
pause, exemplifying their commitment to our community. We trust their continued commitment to creating an ever
improving City of Cupertino.
So, on behalf of Monte Vista's SANP, I write to express our continued support for the refurbishment of the old
Measurex campus, and wish to express our support for the request submitted by ECI Two Results LLC ("property
owner") to extend the expiration of entitlements to redevelop the former Measurex campus.
We heartily encourage the City of Cupertino to work with such commifted partners by approving their request. The MV
SANP thanks and recognizes Embarcadero Capital Partners. Our graduates thank you. Our parents thank you.
We apologize that we cannot be at the meeting on tonight as we are busy building the SANP for the lass of 2009. We
would be happy however to have our memo of support made public and would be proud to have it read to our Council.
Sincerely,
r Judy Wilson
Monte Vista High School Senior All-Night Party Corporation, co-chair
11129 Clarkston Ave
Cupertino, CA. 95014
408-725-0434
D. Michael Foulkes
President
Cupertino Chamber of Commerce
20455 Silverado Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
June 8, 2009
To: Cupertino Planning Commission
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Re: Results Way -Conditional Use Permit Amendments
Dear Planning Commissioners:
On behalf of the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce, I write to express our continued
support for the refurbishment of the old Meastirex campus, and wish to express our
support for the request submitted by ECI Two Results LLC ("property owner") to extend
the expiration of entitlements to redevelop the former Measurex campus.
In these challenging economic times, we believe it is important to work with businesses
to provide as much support and flexibility as ~bssible to ensure they have the ability to be
successful in their missions. In the case of this o~ce/R&D complex, the property owner
should be able to develop the property when the economy rebounds and should not be
penalized for circumstances beyond their control.
Additionally, we are in support of the property owner's request for a phased development
approach. This will allow the property owner to introduce new facilities to companies in
Cupertino along with the pace of economic recovery.
Cupertino has very little available office space, and we want to ensure that when the
economy returns to strength, projects such as this one are ready to move forward to
accommodate job growth in Cupertino that would otherwise go elsewhere. Approval of
the request to extend the property owner's entitlements will help make this happen.
Sincerely,
D. Michael Foulkes
President, Cupertino Chamber of Commerce.
12-45
Attachment J
CUPIERTIidO
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 950143255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3223 • FAX: (408) 777-3366
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
EA-2008-05
Applications ASA-2008-OS, M-2008-03, TR-2008-06
Tim Belly (Erxtbarcadero Capital Partners)
At its meeting of September 16, 2008, the City Council, of the City of Cupertino held a public
hearing to consider an applications for:
Modification of a Use Permit and Architectural and Site Approval of five ~ buildings containing
about 139,432 square feet and the development of-three new, two-story office buildings containing
155,500 square feet, atwo-Ievel, 204 space parking garage; surface parking Iot and landscaping
improvements at. an existing 19.8 office park
Tree Removal request to remove 303 trees on an approved landscape plan and replace theme with
321 trees at the existing office park.
The decision of the City Council was to approve said project. The City Council ley feting a
Mitigated Negative Declaration on this project on September 16, 2008, has determined that the
project is consistent with the General Plan and there are no significant environmental impacts. The
Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of State and City
guidelines. A copy of said Mitigated Negative Declaration is available in the Off ce of the City
Clerk, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California.
Grace Schmidt
Deputy City Clerk
City of Cupertino
1 - d6
Please return t~o City Clerk's Off ce: ~' ~ . . ~ ~ ~ -.
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino; C~ :.95014
_. , - ~
CITY OF CUPERTINO
MITIGATED NEGArfiI~E DECLARATION
As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure adopted by~the City Council of the
City of Cupertino on May 27, 1973, and amended on March 4,1974, January 171977, May 1,
1978, and July 7, 1980, the following described project was granted a Mitigated Negative
Declaration by the City Council of the City of Cupertino on September 17, 2008 •
PROTECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
Application No.: ASA-2008-05, M-2008-03, TR-2408-06 (EA-2008-06)
Applicant: Tim Kelly (Embarcadero ~~apital Partners)
Location: 1 Results Way
DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST
Modification of a Use Permit and Architectura:~ and Site Approval of five buildings containing
about 139,632 square feet and the developrrient of three new,, two-story office buildings
containing 155,500 square feet, atwo-level, 201. space parking garage, surface parking lot and
landscaping uprovements at ari existing 19.8 a~-re office park and a .
Tree Removal request to remove 303 trees om an approved landscape plan and replace them
with 321 trees at the existing office park
FINDINGS OF DECISIONMAKING BODY
The City Council granted a Mitigated Negative Declaration since the project is consistent with
the General'PIan and there are no significant environmental impacts.
The applicant shall adhere to all of the conditions required by the City Council on September 17,
2008 including but not limited to: .-
1) Tree replacements shall be made in accor=dance with the protected Tree Ordinance;
2) Ln lieu•of transplanting trees #131 & 174, #s 88 & 89'will be transplanted instead
3) Evaluate improvements in the parking area to provide protection/preservation of tree
#179
4) Traffic improvements will be made to Bubb Road and Results Way including the removal
of ~he " ork hop" island, do related Ian=_ re-striping and modify traffic signalization
5) Ix~ a traf c signal warning sign
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
CERTIFICATE OF THE CITY CLERK
This is to certify that the above Mitigated Negative Declaration was filed in the Office of the
City Clerk of the City of Cupertino on ~ ~a~ ODOR
•
City Clerk
g/er%~cegEA200806
12-47
EXHIBITS
BEGIN
HERE
C~~ I~I~~
~ lz
Oln September 17, 2008 -City Cowncil approved the
redevelopment of the One Results Way Office Park (ASA-2008-
O5, M-2008-03 and TR-2008-06); Director approved DIR-2008-32
The applicant is requesting the following:
1. Extendu1g the expiration date of these approvals by 5 years
• Other large projects have had similar approval time frames
• Execution of minor mod. (facade remodel) does not vest [he major
approvals
2. Flexible phasing of construction
• Each building has sufficient facilities to function
• Significant improvements required in Phase 1: a) offsite
improvements b) public art c) front entry landscaping d) any in lieu
fees
3. Amend Traffic/Signal Improvement Condition (#31) to
allow an nn-lieu payment for offsite work instead of the
McClellan Road improvements
• The applicant offers a voluntary $200,000 payment in-lieu of the
McClellan Road improvements, for traffic/street improvements within
'k mile of project property westerly of Highway 85
• Bubb Road/Results Way intersection improvements remain part of the
condition
• Recommend reuse of previously granted mitigated negative
declaration
• Recommend approval of file no. M-2009-02 per the mode]
resolution (PC vote 5-0)
"With the added condition that Planting Commission
Resolution condition #4b be deleted. This condition pertanis
to a roadway easement requirement that ~~as satisfied by the
former propertyowner nr 1971.
2
CC 7I21I0~
~«
C O P E RT I N G VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and shall be effective as of July , 2009, by
and between the City of Cupertino (the "City";- and ECI Two Results, LLC, a California
limited liability company (the "Developer") for a voluntary contribution of monies for
transportation system improvements.
RECITALS
This Agreement is made with regard to the following facts, intentions and
understandings:
A. Developer is the sponsor of a project located on Results Way and consisting of
three new, two-story office buildings containing 155,500 square feet and atwo-level
parking structure (the "Project"}, as shown on the Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
B. The City Council approved construction of the Project on September 16, 2008,
pursuant to a Use Permit Modification (M-2008-03), Architecture! & Site Approval
(ASA-2008-050), and Tree Removal Permit (7'R-2008-06) (the "Project Approvals")
C. The City Council approved an amendment to the Project Approvals on July 21,
2009, in which they removed Developer's obli;;ation to make certain improvements to
McClellan Road.
E. In the interest of facilitating improvem+~nts that might benefit the Project, the City
and Development wish to enter into this Agreement by which Developer agrees to make a
voluntary contribution to the City for its subse+~uent construction of other traffic
improvements in the Project area.
AGREED~IENT
The City and Developer agree to the following:
1. Developer shall make a voluntary contribution of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars
($200,000:00) in the form of cash or by posting; a letter of credit ("Developer's Payment")
at the time that the City issues the final building permit for the construction of the first
new office building of the Project (not including Building No. 5). Issuance of final
building permit means that no other permits of any kind will be required by the City for
the Developer to complete construction of the i~uilding core and shell and related site
work.
2. In consideration and subject to completion of any required environmental review,
City shall use Developer's Payment only for soft and hard costs reasonably incurred by
the City for improvements and incentives to re+~uce traffic congestion and enhance
pedestrian safety in the area west of Highway f.5 and located no more than one-half (1/2}
mile from the Project site (the "Improvement Area"). City shall keep accurate books and
records tracking all use of Developer's Payment.
3. The parties acknowledge that payments pursuant to this Agreement from
Developer to City are exempt as a "source of income" within the meaning of California
Political Reform Act (pursuant to California Government Code Section 87103.6).
4. Upon request from Developer, City shall provide Developer with a detailed
accounting of City's expenditure of Developer's Payment.
5. The City and Developer shall use reasonable efforts to execute documents and to
perform such acts as are reasonably necessary in connection with the performance of its
respective obligations under this Agreement.
6. The City acknowledges and agrees that under this Agreement, the City is not
committing itself or agreeing to approve any land use entitlements or undertake any other
acts or activities relating to the subsequent independent exercise of discretion by the City,
the City Council, the Mayor, or any other agency, commission or department of the City
and that the actions described herein are subject to the prior approval of City, City
Council, and the Mayor or any other agency, commission or department of the City each
in their sole and absolute discretion.
7. To the fullest extent permitted by law, and related to facts and circumstances
arising from and after the date hereof, City agrees to indemnify and hold Developer and
their respective agents {collectively, the "Indemnified Parties"} harmless from and
against any loss, expense, cost, compensation, damages (including foreseeable and
unforeseeable consequential damages), attorneys' fees, claims, liens, obligations, injuries,
interest, penalties, fines, lawsuits and other proceedings, judgments, awards, or liabilities
of any kind, known or unknown, contingent or otherwise, equitable relief, mandamus
relief, specific performance, or any other relief (collectively, "Losses") that the
Indemnified Parties may incur as a result of City's use or expenditure of Developer's
Payment. City fully, unconditionally and irrevocably releases, discharges, and forever
waives (collectively, "releases") any and all claims, demands, rights, and causes of action
(collectively, "claims") against, and covenants not to sue or to pay the attorneys' fees and
other litigation costs of any party to sue, Developer or any of its agents for Losses arising
from, accruing from, or due to, directly or indirectly, Developer's Payment or the use
thereof by City.
8. Unless otherwise indicated elsewhere in this Agreement, all written
communications sent by the parties may be by U.S. mail ore-mail, and shall be addressed
as follows:
To City: .
Ms. Aarti Shrivastava
Director of Community Development
City of Cupertino
103000 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
To Developer:
ECI Two Results, LLC
c% Embarcadero Capital Partners
1301 Shoreway Road, Suite 250
Belmont, CA 94002
Attn: Blake Reinhardt
with a copy to:
Neil H. Sekhri
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher
555 Mission Street, Suite 3000
San Francisco, CA 94105
Any notice of default must be sent by registered mail.
10. Attorneys Fees. In the event of any litigation or arbitration between the parties
arising out of the breach by a party to comply writh its obligations under this Agreement,
the prevailing party sha116e entitled to obtain, Fps part of the judgment or award, all
reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and expenses i~icurred in connection with such litigation
or arbitration, except as may be limited by applicable law.
11. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and each
counterpart shall be deemed to be an original document. All executed counterparts
together shall constitute one and the same document, and any counterpart signature pages
may be detached and assembled to form a single original document.
ECI Two Results LLC,
a California limited liability company
By: Embarcadero Capital Investors Two LP, a Delaware limited partnership,
its sole member
By: Embarcadero Capital Partners LLC, a Delaware Limited liability company,
its sole general partner
By: Hamilton Partners LP, a California limited partnership, manager
By: Hamilton Ventures Inc., a California corporation,
its sole general partner
By:
THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
8y:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
4
a a ~
~ ;~ 3~ tt a
~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ i ~
~ ~ ~~ W~ ~~~ ~~, rt~~, ~i
,~,f11fTI11rfUl~-"S ` "'?f"1~ ~~v `, ~},~F~~ iy[ 11
~;, ~ r~: iii E 1 h,~ ~ ;c ~. r r 1 ,•. !i~! ~,fl ~ ,;
~ ~~ ~ • ~ c~' , .~~ !; ,- ,fit
r ,~
I ~~ ' ~ ~ ~a ~~~~
,. .fib ~,,
~\ 4~
'~,dh l .
~~. ~~ ~~-:_ ; ` ~'~} ` i ~7 L d3ri'?d t,r.'13") ~ -a"~~ : J ~ ..
7 it - • ~ ~~ !.. .'~t' . el~ .°'^- =:. `~~ i`
~ ~~ ~.:_ ~ ' Vii.' k~; ,~ _ ; ~ ~-
`~ ' ~~ '
'y __n ~,- ~ ~
.,- ., ~
~ti ~ y ~:, t ~~ ~~
~ _ I' ; {
:~t ..'~~. ~xtK. d IM1' 1 ~ S
Y
'~ ~~ =. Y:~ }1~11I'isf~ 1 Iii"_ ~ ~
S
~,,- ,
tit ,,~k~~xi~~n~ ty ~L~ ~t~'~'(~k>~ ~°' ~'
\\ -fly !ny - ~ fil' ti - ~t--L
is
1r r~-- - .',~ ~.. k
'~~1 '`ir Et ~ r I
`+ ~:
.J `,,fit' ~ ,a{• 4;!;i.t 't'.; ~ti'[ YS:r-
a: '.
W Via. k~ '~s!'(. ,St ; C\'•.~~~=`"-~ I I ' i'~$~~~ ~~7 i l ,t`w~ ='~' :. ~ ~__,
=-~'--
~y
X ~ ~ `~ ~-- '~ ;-- - - ~-
.tir to "Id'-+ ..i'~ % • '?~; I_1 ~ -i
i
1
t
r
Cc- 7~a1-Dq #l~
Linda Lagergren
From: Judy Wilson [judykwils@earthlink.riet]
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 4:04 PM
To: Kimberly Smith; David Knapp
Cc: Orrin Mahoney; Dolly Sandoval2; Gilbert Wong; Kris Wang; Mark Santoro
Subject: in support of the 5 year extension t~~ the Results Way project (old Measurex site)
Attachments: Cupertino City Council 09.doc
################################################~rt###########################
Panda ClientShield warning:
The file Cupertino City Council 09.doc was potentially dangerous and was moved to quarantine.
Hi all,
I am unable to attend tonight's city council meeting however I would like to present this
letter in support of the 5 year extension to the Results Way Project as I know they are on
the agenda for tonight.
They have been an invaluable resource and a wonderful neighbor to us at Monta Vista High
School and I would like this letter to be read ~~r heard in support of their request.
thank you very much
Judy Wilson
Monta Vista High School
Senior All Night Party Chair 2008 and 2010
Cupertino Planning Commission
Cupertino City Council
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3202
Re: Results Way -Conditional Use Permit Amendments June 9, 2009
Dear Council members and Planning Commissioners,
I am writing as the co-chair of the Monta Vista High School Senior All-Night Party Corporation (MV SANP) for 2008 and
also for 2010. As you may be aware, Monta Vista High Schocl parents, school administrators, and other volunteers
have a tradition of working for an entire year to create a unique thematic night long party for the members of the
graduating class. While this started as an effort to keep our children safe on this important and yet often deadly date, it
has morphed into what many consider one of the most memorable experiences for the students. It is literally the last
time that the students are together as a class for those remarkable four years.
We rely heavily on our community for support.
Some companies will provide donations of cash, gift certificates, products and services. Cupertino is blessed with
merchants and service providers who also go the extra yard to make Cupertino a special place. We depend on their
generosity and community spirit to make the whole greater then the sum of the parts.
One set of community members that has provided a critical re:~ource above and beyond most others are the owners
and property managers of the former Measurex facility on Results Way. Embarcadero Capital Partners, and the
management company CB Richardson Ellis were key partners in that they provided MV SANP a location to design,
build and store our voluminous materials for the event. Specifically, they donated the use of their Building 6, electricity,
water, parking, grounds maintenance, and security for five moths. Without this donation, the party would have been
significantly more difficult to prepare and execute and, in our cpinion, of much lesser quality.
These owners have given a significant gift to over 1500 of our students in the last few years. They did this without
pause, exemplifying their commitment to our community. We 'trust their continued commitment to creating an ever
improving City of Cupertino.
So, on behalf of Monta Vista's SANP, I write to express our continued support for the refurbishment of the old
Measurex campus, and wish to express our support for the recauest submitted by ECI Two Results LLC ("property
owner") to extend the expiration of entitlements to redevelop tfie former Measurex campus.
We heartily encourage the City of Cupertino to work with such committed partners by approving their request. The MV
SANP thanks and recognizes Embarcadero Capital Partners. Our graduates thank you. Our parents thank you.
We apologize that we cannot be at the meeting on tonight as we are busy building the SANP for the class of 2009. We
would be happy however to have our memo of support made E~ublic and would be proud to have it read to our Council.
Sincerely,
Judy Wilson
Monta Vista High School Senior All-Night Party Corporation, c~~-chair
11129 Clarkston Ave
Cupertino, CA. 95014
408-725-0434
^a
~~
r._, ~- ~ ~
t..;
~~ ~
~~~~.:_.
~~~•~~
`t ~:~
_ -G,.~
~~...--