Director's ReportCUPERTINO CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE
CUPERTINO, CA 95014
TELEPHONE (408) 777-3308
~ ~ ~ ~ R„F ~ ~ ~ FAX (408) 777-3333
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Subject: Report of the Community Development Directo
Planning Commission Agenda Date: Tuesday, January 26, 2010
The City Council met on January 19, 2010 and discussed the following item(s) of interest to the
Planning Commission:
1. Mary Avenue Senior Housing Proposal review- Council reviewed the project as presented
by the Cupertino Rotary Housing Corporation (CRHC), took no action, and will discuss
this item on February 2, 2010 as a regular public hearing item.
2. Green Building Ordinance process framework and budget -Council directed staff to
proceed with the alternative process not to exceed $25,000 (reallocated from the unused
portion of the green building certification fund).
Miscellaneous Items:
1. New Counter Hours for the Development Services Center - We have extended our counter
hours for Planning, Building and Public Works as of January 4. We are now open all day
from 7:30a.m.-5:30p.m., Monday through Thursday and from 7:30a.m.-4:30p.m. on Friday.
Customer service is our top priority and we are pleased to provide this service to our
residents and businesses.
2. BAA MD Thresholds for Development along Transportation Corridors - At the urging of
Santa Clara County and its cities, BAAQMD has delayed a decision on proposed
amendments to CEQA thresholds of significance on air quality along transportation
corridors.
Attached is a copy of Saturday's Mercury News article on BAAQMDs proposed regulation
that would trigger stiffer environmental review of .development within 1,000 feet of
transportation corridors. Also attached is BAAQMD's staff report.
The concern with these proposed regulations is that the land use planning requirements may
run counter to the mixed use, cluster development, higher density and proximity to
transportation-oriented development that has been emerging as standard practice for
affordable housing development in urban settings.
3. Cupertino High School Improvements -Cupertino High School has provided us with
preliminary drawings on their athletic field improvements. While the project will create
new fields and bleachers, the improvements do not change the locations of the existing
features of the athletic fields or significantly increase capacity. Changes proposed are minor
and mostly positive. They include:
-1- DR
Report of the Community Development Director
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Page 2
a. Reducing the capacity of the bleachers to the east of the site near single-family residences
and moving most of the seats to the west of the field -This will reduce noise and visual
impacts to adjacent single-family homes.
b. Making improvements along Tilson Avenue to add a sidewalk, trees, striped parking
area and a loading space for buses -The area had been used previously for parking but
did not have striping or a sidewalk. The improvements will increase safety for
pedestrians and auto traffic in the area.
c. 170 new trees along the perimeter of the field.
d. Replace existing restroom with a larger one along the eastern border of the field -staff
has some concerns about buffers between the new building and the fence adjacent to
single-family residences
Staff has made the following recommendations to enhance the project even more and
complement the City's existing infrastructure and development practices/standards:
a. Look for an alternative location for the replaced restroom on the east side of the field or
increase the setback and planted buffer area between the building and the fence.
b. Provide two curbed planter strips within the new parking area at the southwest
perimeter of the project area. Planter strips should be at least 3-feet wide and the length
of a parking space. Recommend using two of the new trees for the planter strips, and
shortening the bus parking area to maintain the same number of vehicle parking space.
c. Any new or upgraded light fixtures should be oriented and designed to preclude any
light and direct glare to adjacent residential properties.
d. Soften the sidewalk connection at the southeast corner of the project area, where the new
sidewalk meets the existing City sidewalk. The existing connection has a blunt turn that
should be smoothed out to allow for cleaner transition.
e. Provide additional outreach to adjacent property owners (especially the residences).
f. Provide improvements that will retain the difference in storm water so that no additional
flows are directed down Tilson Ave.
A complete list of improvements is provided below:
a. New infrastructure for the drainage, sewer, water, electrical, and communication system.
b. Code compliance upgrades to comply with Title 24, ADA regulations, and Title 9.
c. Stadium Improvements (Southeast of project area, bordering residential to the east, and
Tilson Avenue to the south).
• Existing Home bleachers will be replaced with new bleachers with 2,185 seats.
• Existing Guest bleachers, located next to single family, are being shortened, and have
500 seats.
• New Home and Guest restrooms
• Scoreboard and public address system will be replaced.
• New pathways around the track and along Tilson Avenue.
d. Baseball Field Improvements (Southwest of project area, bordering Finch Avenue to the
west, and Tilson Avenue to the south).
• New five-row bleachers, dugout, bullpens, batting cage.
• New fencing along Tilson and Finch Avenue.
• New scoreboard and public address system.
-2- DR
Report of the Community Development Director
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Page 3
• Additional photovoltaic cells will be added to the existing lighting system to the
north of the field.
e. Softball Field Improvements (Northeast of project area, bordering residential to the east,
and the stadium to the south).
• New five-row bleachers, dugout, bullpens, batting cage.
• New scoreboard and public address system.
f. New landscaping enhancements.
• 170 new trees located around the field perimeters.
4. Sports Center Open House - We changed how we handle renewals and new memberships at
the Sports Center this year. These changes were made as a result of staff's thoughts about
last year's open house as well as feedback from other customers. Typically, we handle
renewals and new members at the annual open house. This year we had a special rate if
existing members renewed between December 8 and January 8. We had a slightly higher
rate if you renewed or became a new member at the open house. Both rates were lower than
a standard annual rate. We had good attendance, but avoided the mad house we
experienced last year. The results are very positive.
2009 2010
Total Revenue $165,477 $207,037
Total Memberships Sold 571 732
New Members 65 92
Upcoming Dates:
Jan. 27 State of the City Address, 11:30 a.m. (Quinlan Community Center)
Feb. 15 City offices closed for President's Day Holiday
Enclosures:
Attachments re: BAAQMD Thresholds for Development along Transportation Corridors
News Articles
G: \ Planning ~ AartiS ~ Director's Report ~ 2009 ~ pd1-26-10.doc
-3- DR
San Jose, home developers balk at proposed air pollution guidelines
- San Jose Mercury News
Suppose a builder proposes to develop a 100-condominium development in San Jose within
1,000 feet of Interstate 280.
Under proposed new air quality guidelines, the developer - for the f rst time in the country ----
could be told to study the health effects of freeway pollution on the people who would live in the
condos.
if the health risk is too great, the developer might need to modify or scrap his development plan
or spend extra time persuading the city or county to approve it.
The proposal to more closely scrutinize how people in new housing are affected by existing
pollution sources has thrust the Bay Area Air Quality Management District into another heated
debate over pollution reduction.
Air district officials say their proposed development guidelines break new ground in protecting
the public from cancer, asthma, lung disease and other ailments caused or aggravated by air
pollution.
"This plan is about protecting public health by providing better air," said Mark Ross, a regional
air board member on the Martinez City Council.
Builders and some city and county officials contend the proposal is overzealous regulation that
would kick the struggling building industry when it's down and stifle green development in San
Jose, Oakland and other cities that yearn for housing near transit centers and downtowns.
San Jose Planning Director Joe Horwedel said the proposed guidelines would "have some major
ramifications" for
the city's effort to cluster new development along transportation corridors to reduce suburban
sprawl and traffic gridlock.
"You start taking big areas of the city out of play, it makes it really difficult to achieve our goals
of smart growth," Horwedel said. "While we certainly have concerns about air pollution and its
impacts on residents, to go through and start redlining parts of the Bay Area as inappropriate for
housing is the wrong tack to take."
Horwedel said development along Highway 101 and Interstate 880 would_ be particularly
affected, and his department has urged air district officials to reconsider. "We think they should
be dealing with it at the source, with air quality standards for cars and trucks causing that
pollution, rather than saying you can't build near freeways."
Santa Clara County Supervisor Ken Yeager, one of the air district's 22 board members, said he
has urged postponing a vote on the proposal, currently set for Wednesday, out of concern that
many city officials have not had time to study it and that it may carry unintended consequences.
He said the idea was to stop sprawl, not to halt infill development along transportation corridors.
-4- DR
"I agree with the policy in theory," Yeager said. "But I don't know yet whether it's going to do
more good than harm, and I'm concerned about a rush to do this."
Paul Campos, an attorney for the Homebuilders Association of Northern California, said the
proposal "would mean additional costs, uncertain delays, onerous regulation and expensive
litigation for development."
Cities and counties would retain their authority to decide whether and how development would
occur. But the new proposal would steer them to scrutinize air quality more closely.
Under the guidelines, cities and counties would require the studies when people living in the
proposed housing would be exposed to an extra risk of 10 in 1 million from a pollution source
within 1,000 feet.
Experts would arrive at the risk by studying the types, potency and amounts of pollution and the
distance to the nearest homes.
The air district already has a guideline calling for industrial developers to examine pollution
effects on existing residents. Now housing developers will have to do the same thing. In its new
proposal, the air district for the first time has added diesel soot and fine particles as a criteria for
triggering a pollution study.
Cities and counties can choose to ignore the guidelines, but they would risk being sued by
project opponents alleging a violation of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Air district managers said having to do a pollution study doesn't doom a housing or business
development plan, but it could spur developers to take extra measures to reduce people's
exposure to contaminants.
For example, a builder proposing homes near a freeway could look into ways to locate the
buildings at the far end of the property to provide space for soot or fumes to disperse, said
Gregory Tholen, an air district environmental planner. Ironically, even as builders attack the
proposal as onerous, an environmental coalition has attacked part of the plan as too weak.
The Bay Area Environmental Health Collaborative contends the district should set a stricter
cancer-risk guideline for reviewing proposed new pollution sources such as gas stations and auto
body shops if they are proposed in six heavily polluted sections of the Bay Area.
An air district analysis has defined parts of San Jose, Oakland, East Palo Alto, Concord,
Richmond and eastern San Francisco as areas with elevated concentrations of diesel soot and
other air pollution. ~ _
"There should be no new sources of toxic pollution in these areas," said Gordon Mar, the health
collaborative's interim director.
But air district managers and industry representatives object, saying that setting stricter
development guidelines in more polluted areas would discourage development and job creation
there.
"We should be helping these urban areas that need economic development, not discouraging it,"
-5- DR
said Dennis Bolt, a spokesman for the Western States Petroleum Association.
Bolt also said the environmental coalition's proposal would make it harder to win permission for
upgrades or modernizations of industrial plants, fuel pipelines or gas stations in the six areas. '
Mercury News staff writer John Woolfolk contributed to this report. Reach Denis Cuff at
925-943-8267.
Air board meeting
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District board meets 9:45 a.m. Wednesday to consider
guidelines for assessing toxic air pollution and greenhouse gas impacts from new developments.
The location is district headquarters, 939 Ellis St., San Francisco.
To view online reports on the air district"s proposed guidelines for assessing pollution from new
developments, go to www.baagmd. ov. Click on "work," then "be informed, stay involved," then
'click on "CEQA guidelines."
-6- DR
AGENDA: 7
BAY AREA AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
Memorandum
To: Chairperson Pamela Torliatt and Members
of the Board of Directors '
From: Jack P. Broadbent
Executive Officer/APCO
Date: December 30, 2009
Re: Consider adoption of the proposed amendments to the District's California
Environmental Qualit~ct (CEQA} Thresholds of Significance
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The Board of Directors will consider adopting the proposed amendments to the CEQA
Thresholds of Significance as outlined in Attachment 1.
BACKGROUND
The District's CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines} are developed to assist local jurisdictions
and other lead agencies in identifying proposed local land use plans and development
projects that may have a significant adverse effect on air quality and public health. Staff
began a comprehensive update to the District's recommended thresholds of significance in
October 2008. The proposed revisions to the existing thresholds of significance include
thresholds for construction, project operation, and plan-level emissions of criteria air
pollutants, ozone precursors, greenhouse gases, toxic air contaminants; and odors. The
Guidelines also provide technical information on impact assessment methodology and
mitigation strategies.
DISCUSSION
The first Board of Directors hearing on the proposed CEQA thresholds of significance was
held on November 18, 2009. At that hearing the Board highlighted about 15 issues and
concerns raised during deliberations and public testimony. Staff presented responses to
those concerns and addressed requests of Board members at the December 2, 2009 Board
meeting. The Board then closed the public hearing and continued Board deliberations to
January 6, 2010. The Board also directed staff to bring back for their consideration
additional options for local risks and hazards significance thresholds; including the tiered
threshold approach for sources in impacted communities. Attachment 2 includes three
risks and hazards thresholds options: 1) existing staff, proposal; 2} staff proposal with
tiered approach for new sources in impacted communities; and 3) staff proposal without
the community risk reduction plan. in response to this direction, staff also prepared the
December 7, 2009 Proposed Thresholds of Significance Report {see Attachment 3} to
reflect these options.
-7- DR
At the December 2, 2009 Board of Directors meeting, the Board directed staff to meet
specifically with local planning directors and public health officers to discuss the proposed
CEQA Guidelines and respond to their concerns. Staff invited and met with local
planning directors and health officers on December ] 5 for a CEQA workshop. The
workshop was attended by 23 local agency staff representing 16 Bay Area cities and
counties. At the workshop, staff discussed the thresholds of significance, the issues
regarding infill development, the availability and development of analytical tools, future
workshops the District will hold on implementation of the thresholds, and also responded
to specific concerns expressed by the attendees.
Staff has also provided additional responses to public comments received subsequent to
November 1, 2009 (Attachment 4) and not included in previous Board packages.
BUDGET CONSIDERATION/FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
The update to the District's CEQA Guidelines was included in the FYE 2010 budget.
Assisting local agencies in implementing the CEQA Guidelines will require an on-going
commitment of staff resources.
Respectfully submitted,
Jack P. Broadbent
Executive Officer/APCO
Prepared by: Greg Tholen
Reviewed by: Jean Rom eg nkamp
2
-8- DR
Cupertino's Lehigh cement permit renewal on hold for new EPA standards -San Jose Mer... Page 1 of 2
~I~C,~~Ct~~,t~ ~~~V~
MercuryNews.com
Cupertino's Lehigh
cement permit renewal on
hold for new EPA
standards
ay Matthew Wilson
Cupertino Courier
Posted: 01!14/2010 03:10:34 PM PST
Updated: 01/14/2010 03:10:35 PM PST
A permit renewal that outlines all federal
regulations for the Lehigh Cement Plant's operation
is on hold as regulatory officials wait to add tough
new federal emission standards to the voluminous
operating permit.
Lehigh will continue to operate but will have to wait
until the summer renewal of its Title V permit, which
details the approximately 1,500 source-specific air
pollution limits and standards, according to Brian
Bateman, director of engineering with Bay Area Air
Quality Management District.
The permit lists all such requirements and the
monitoring, record keeping and reporting steps the
facility must take and it must be renewed every five
years. New emission standards from the
Environmental Protection Agency will set the
nation's first limits on mercury emissions from
existing kilns and new kilns. Emission limits for
hydrocarbons, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide
will also be set.
"We are putting on hold our Title V efforts in
regards with this facility. We are doing this because o
f the development of EPA's applicable standards.
We think it makes a lot of sense to have that process
move forward. When those standards are finalized,
we will incorporate them" into the new permit, Jack
Broadbent, CEO of the BAAQMD, said at a special
Cupertino City Council session Tuesday regarding
the Lehigh plant.
"We are going through a renewal process. It would
not make sense to go through yet another renewal
process."
The new mercury emission rules will be announced
in June. The facility will then plan to deal with the
new rules and incorporate those efforts into the
renewed permit. The strict new standards will take
effect in 2013 and are expected to reduce mercury
emissions by 81 percent to 93 percent and
hydrochloric acid by 94 percent, said to Shaheerah
Kelly, an environmental engineer with the EPA.
'The technology has got to the point where we feel
these regulation standards are feasible," said
Bateman. "Mercury is difficult to filter. More so than
other metals because of its relative volatility."
The air district is also evaluating and responding
to a deluge of public comments regarding the
permit. The district believes that many of the new
emission standards will address some of the
comments, according to Broadbent.
The Title V Program requires local and state air
quality agencies to issue comprehensive operating
permits to facilities that emit significant amounts of
air pollutants. The EPA has authority to terminate,
modify or revoke and re-issue a permit. There are
about 100 Title V facilities in the Bay Area that
BAAQMD oversees. Bateman said that in the past five
years of the permit Lehigh has had 18 notices of
violation, many of which were administrative and the
result of faulty equipment.
Cupertino's Lehigh cement permit renewal on hold for new EPA standards -San Jose Mer... Page 2 of 2
t~~je,~~e~cur,~ ~"~tU~
MercuryNews.com
facility became a popular issue during the recent
"In nearly ever case they were associated with some city council election.
equipment that was not working properly and that
was corrected quickly, usually in a day or less than Because of ongoing resident concern, the city is
a day from when the notice of violation was issued," staying up to date on Lehigh operations.
said Bateman. Councilman Barry Chang even offered to join air
district officials during surprise inspections.
Lehigh can continue to operate as normal as long
as the permit renewal is under review, according to
Bateman. The announcement came on Jan. 5 and was
reiterated at the council session Tuesday. The
meeting brought together representatives from
BAAOMD, Regional Water Quality Control Board, the
EPA and Santa Clara County to educate the city
council and residents on how the facility is
monitored regulated.
"It was very educational for me just to learn about
the process. It's a learning curve for me and the
public," Councilman Gilbert Wong said.
"Even though we do not have jurisdiction, I am a
believer in transparency in government. One thing
we wanted to learn was what as going on and hear
from [the public] and also from the regulatory
agencies who see if there is problem. I'm very happy
to see tighter regulations coming in," Councilman
Mark Santoro said.
It was also announced at the meeting that air
testing by the EPA near Stevens Creek Elementary
School conducted in mid-2009 found levels of
hexavalent chromium that were well below levels of
concern. The EPA is analyzing results, wind data,
and source operations. A report will be issued later
this year on the findings.
A few dozen residents spoke out at Tuesday's
meeting, raising concerns about emissions and
potential health risks of the facility. Many
congratulated the council for holding the meeting
and were pleased to see tougher emission standards
coming. -
"Throughout the course of the industrial
revolution, a lot of industries have started out with
the best of intentions and its been discovered that
they are very bad for society. Asbestos comes to
mind as one and its heavily regulated now and we
used to everywhere when I was a kid," said John
Bartas "It seems the cement industry belongs with
those other industries."
The city is devoting a section of its website to
Lehigh Cement Plant information and frequently
asked questions.
For more information, go to www.cupertino.org .
The Lehigh Hanson Cement Plant is off Stevens
Creek Boulevard in the hills of Santa Clara County. It
lies just beyond the Cupertino borders and the city
has no jurisdiction over the facility. The cement
-'1~0= ~ .pR -
Cupertino residents now need city permit for landscaping projects -San Jose Mercury Ne.
~1~Q~1'CttC,t~ ~~W~
MercuryNews.com
Page 1 of 1
Cupertino residents now
need city permit for
landscaping projects
sy Matt wlson
Cupertino Courier
Posted: 01'15/2010 07.17:49 PM PST
Updated: 01/15/2010 07:17:50 PM PST
Cupertino residents planning landscaping projects
may need to get city approval as part of new state
water conservation regulations.
In upcoming weeks, the city plans to draft its own
local ordinance that will require some landscaping
projects to go through a design review process at
city hall. The local law is intended to streamline
what city officials have called a complicated state
process for calculating water usage that went into
effect on Jan. 1.
Under the new regulations, new construction
triggers a landscape review. In Cupertino, this
means any residential construction project with
5,000 square feet of yard space that requires a
building permit will also need a landscaping permit.
Those requiring a permit will have to calculate the
total water use of their landscape project as part of
the permit application process.
Applicants could also have to bring soil
management reports, landscape, irrigation and
grading design plans to city hall when applying for
a permit.
Only about 25 percent of Cupertino's residential
properties have landscaping spaces that large, said
City Manager David Knapp. The city does not expect
to charge additional fees for the permit process.
The Water Conservation in Landscaping Act
requires all cities to use the state's regulations or
create their own water-efficient landscape
ordinance. The new mandate is intended to help the
state conserve water. Water is commonly wasted by
poorly designed and maintained landscapes, and
half of California's urban water is used for
landscape irrigation, according to officials at the
state Department of Water Resources.
"Our goal is to see if there are ways to get people to
[efficient] levels without doing the detailed water
calculations and helping out small business owners
that don't typically have those resources," Knapp
said. 'The goal of all this is to make it easy while
also promoting doing the right thing." Cupertino is
consulting with other cities, the Bay Area Water
Supply and Conservation Agency and Santa Clara
Valley Water District on a regional ordinance,
according to Aarti Shrivastava, director of
community development.
An ordinance will likely not be up for council
review until March or April, according to Knapp.
.. _ ...
-1 1= DR