CC 02-02-10C O P E RT I N O APPOVED MINUTES
CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
ROLL CALL
At 6:15 p.m. Mayor Kris Wang called the meeting to order in the Council Chamber, 10350 Torre
Avenue, Cupertino, California.
Present: Mayor Kris Wang, Vice-Mayor Gilbert Wong, and Council members Barry Chang,
Orrin Mahoney, and Mark Santoro. Absent: none.
CLOSED SESSION
1. Significant exposure to liti a~ pursuant: to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9: one
case.
At 6:15 p.m. Council recessed to a closed session to discuss this item. At 6:45 p.m.,
Council reconvened in open session.
Mayor Kris Wang announced that the City ~~ouncil received a briefing from legal counsel
and no action was taken.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
At 6:45 p.m. Mayor Kris Wang called the regul<<r meeting to order in the Council Chamber,
10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, and lecl the Pledge of Allegiance.
Present: Mayor Kris Wang, Vice-Mayor Gilbert Wong, and Council members Barry Chang,
Orrin Mahoney, and Mark Santoro. Absent: none.
CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIO:YS
2. Proclamation for the 30th anniversary oi' Live Oak Adult Day Services program at
Cupertino. (No documentation in packet).
Mayor Wang presented the proclamation t o Colleen Hidgen, Executive Director of the
Live Oak Adult Day Services.
Colleen Hidgen stated that it was a passion. of hers to help make sure the seniors led full
and enriched lives and remained connected with the community. Live Oak Adult Day
February 2, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 2
Services worked in partnership with St. Jucie's Church and provided such services to the
seniors in Cupertino, and she was honored to be part of the program.
POSTPONEMENTS
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
The City Clerk distributed the following items:
Item Nos. 11 and 12, Acceptance of City proiects
Email from Susan Sievert saying that the map provided was insufficient.
Item No. 15, Marx Avenue Senior Housing
In support, emails from Donna Jones-Dulin of DeAnza College Finance and Educational
Resources, Christopher Schwab, Ann Cleaver, Lynn Ching, Jessica Rose Tracy. The City Clerk
also distributed copies of the project elevations and artist renderings of the cottages.
In opposition, emails from Barinder Saini, Datta Sawant, Padmaja Petla, Nirmala Pailla, Sudha
Andra, Ravi Sridharan, Yamesh Yerraguntla, Sudr~akar Reddy, Santosh Dhavalikar, Mary Anila,
Appala Patnala, Maneesh Pawar, Padmini Ongole, Subrahmanyam Ongole, Susan Sievert,
Anuradha, Duleep Pillai, Ranjan Desai, Senthil Par~durangan, Viji, Keith Murphy.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Cathy Helgerson expressed her concerns about thE: Apple complex in the city. She noted that in
2005 she had sued Apple and the city because ofcancer-related issues. She also stated that there
was a noise issue because Apple had a nitrogen t<<nk and a compressor and chemicals from the
facility were negatively affecting the city's water ;end sewer lines. She wanted Apple's building
moved and their permit rescinded. To date she had not received a response from the city on these
issues. Furthermore, she did not agree with having only three minutes to express her concerns.
Mayor Wang asked the City Manager to respond to Ms. Helgerson and he noted that he would
request the Bay Area Air Quality Management l;~istrict to provide data on Apple's air quality
levels.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Wong moved and Mahoney seconded to approve the items on the Consent Calendar as
recommended, with the exception of Item Nos. 8, 11, and 12 which were pulled for discussion.
Ayes: Chang, Mahoney, Santoro, Wang, and Wong;. Noes: None. Abstain: None.
3. Adopt resolutions accepting Accounts Payable for January 8, 15, and 22, Resolution Nos.
10-017 to 10-019.
4. Adopt a resolution accepting Payroll for January 22, Resolution No. 10-020.
February 2, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 3
5. Adopt a resolution accepting the Treasurer/Deputy Treasurer appointment, Resolution
No. 10-021.
6. Accept the Planning Commission's recommendation to select Paul Brophy as the
Environmental Review Committee represer.~tative.
7. Adopt a resolution supporting the League ~~f California Cities initiative Local Taxpayer,
Public Safety, and Transportation Protection Act of 2010, and direct staff to forward the
resolution to the League of California Citie:>, Resolution No. 10-022.
9. Adopt a resolution approving a Stormv~~ater Management Facilities Operation And
Maintenance Agreement, Apple Inc., 19333 Vallco Parkway, APN(s) 316-20-075 and
316-20-076, Resolution No. 10-024.
Through an agreement with the City, the property owner of this commercial development
will be required to operate and maintain st~~rmwater management facilities in accordance
with the approved Stormwater Management Plan, to minimize adverse impacts due to
changes in storm and surface water flow co-~ditions.
10. Adopt a resolution accepting a uitclaim Deed and Authorization for Underground Water
Rights, Sanjay Sawhney and Vishakha Sawhney, 21071 Grenola Drive, APN 326-28-
006, Resolution No. 10-025.
The property owners of this residential development agree to grant to the City the right to
extract water from the basin under the over] ying property.
The City's contractor Petersen-Dean Commercial, Inc., completed work on the Monta
Vista Roof Project. The project involve~~ installation of gutter, remove and replace
structural beam and improvements to roof i ntegrity.
13. Adopt a resolution accepting a Quitclaim Deed and Authorization for Underground Water
Rights, Thomas Surrette & Hemal Surrette, 22001 Lindy Lane, APN 356-27-002,
Resolution No. 10-026.
The property owners of this residential development agree to grant to the City the right to
extract water from the basin under the overlying property.
14. Adopt a resolution accepting a Quitclaim Deed and Authorization for Underground Water
Rights, Roy Hong and Andrea Hong, 10928 Sycamore Drive, APN 342-56-037,
Resolution No. 10-027.
The property owners of this residential development agree to grant to the City the right to
extract water from the basin under the overlying property.
February 2, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 4
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (above)
8. Adopt a resolution approving a Stormwatf;r Management Facility Easement Agreement,
Apple Inc., 19333 Vallco Parkway, APN(s) 316-20-075 and 316-20-076, Resolution No.
10-023.
Through an agreement with the City, the property owner of this commercial development
will be required to grant ingress and egress rights to the City for the purpose of inspecting
stormwater management facilities installed. in accordance with the approved Stormwater
Management Plan.
Councilmember Santoro referred to the map and wanted to make sure that the city had
access to the storm water management facilities.
Public Works Director Ralph Qualls re:;ponded that such access was noted in the
agreement.
Santoro moved and Wong seconded to adopt Resolution No. 10-023. The motion carried
unanimously.
For item Nos. 11 and 12, Council acknowledged receipt of email from Susan Sievert saying that
the map in the backup materials was insufficient as a staff report.
11. Accept a City Project performed under contract: Memorial Park Softball Field & Library
Field Irrigation Renovation, Project No. 201)9-03.
The City's contractor B&B Landscape Contractors, Inc., completed work on the Memorial
Park Softball Field & Library Field Irrigation Renovation Project. The project involved
grading, storm drain, wood repair, irrigation and temporary fencing.
12. Accept a City Project performed under contract: Monta Vista Roof Project, Project No.
2009-01.
Mahoney moved and Wong seconded to a~~prove item Nos. 11 and 12 as presented. The
motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARINGS -None
Mayor Wang re-ordered the agenda to hear item No. 16 next.
NEW BUSINESS
16. Delegate authority to the City Manager to sign the Memorandum of Understanding for
Cooperative Purchasing of Power with the County of Santa Clara if adopted by the
County Board of Supervisors in substantially the same form as the document attached to
this report.
February 2, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 5
Mahoney moved and Chang seconded to ;authorize the City Manager to sign the MOU
with the County of Santa Clara as set forth in the staff report. The motion carried
unanimously.
Councilmember Santoro stated he did not agree with moving items out of order for
discussion. He was concerned about not giving people the right to speak on an item if
they arrived at the anticipated time for the item but it had already been discussed. While
he voted favorably on Item 16 at this meeting, he did not intend to do so at future
meetings for items that had been moved forward on the agenda.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
15. Consider the following actions related to a potential 18-20 unit senior, affordable housing
rp oject from the Cupertino Rotary Housing Corporation (CRHC):
A. Approve a Memorandum of UndE-rstanding (MOU) between the City and the
CRHC (see Attachment A)
B. Give priority to CRHC for uncommitted Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Housing
funds, Community Development Bl~~ck Grant (CDBG) funds and Below Market
Rate (BMR) funds
C. Authorize $11,000 to prepare a Re~~ord of Survey for the Mary Avenue right-of-
way
D. Authorize staff to initiate the rezoning and General Plan amendment for the
project area and related funding
City Manager David Knapp introduced the project and noted that the memorandum of
understanding, if adopted, would express tree intent of both the Cupertino Rotary Housing
Corporation and the city to work together on this affordable senior housing project, but
the MOU was not a binding agreement. The Council was also being asked to commit the
city's affordable housing monies to this project in order to rezone the property as multiple
family residential, and to authorize a record of survey.
Richard Lowenthal, President of the Cupertino Rotary Housing Corporation (CRHC),
said that the proposed 18-20 unit afford<ble senior housing project had an excellent
location close to amenities such as the Senior Center, Memorial Park and DeAnza
College. The benefits to the community in~;,luded improvements to Mary Avenue traffic,
additional trees and greenscape, parallel parking and bike lanes, and no impact on
schools. The CRHC would design, build and maintain the project. Mr. Lowenthal noted
that some concerns had been raised such as parking, traffic, air quality, property values,
senior housing needs and quality of maintenance, and those issues would be fully
addressed in the formal application. Mr. Lowenthal stated that this property had virtually
no value to developers as for-profit housing and retail would not work. The cost of the
February 2, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 6
project was $5-6 million with no General Fund monies being used. There were two
options, one with tax allocation credits and one not. The CRHC planned to raise $1
million, use a bank loan and have access to the city's specifically allocated monies for
affordable housing. He noted that this pro~iect met the goals and objectives listed in the
city's General Plan. Mr. Lowenthal said that the MOU would not be binding for the city,
but it would allow the CRHC to move forward with the design aspects of the project and
to start the process of obtaining bank funding.
Jim Jackson, working with the CRHC board, said that originally the main funding source
was going to be tax allocation credits, but that's far less likely now because of the
downturn in the economy. He noted that to pursue the tax allocation credit option the
syndication/consulting fees were about $700,000. For-profit groups bought the tax credits
to offset other taxes, but to package and sf;ll the tax credits it was necessary to do some
marketing and advertising. The consulting; fees included for the non-profit developer,
Charities Housing, was needed because i:hey had the expertise to do these kinds of
projects.
Council members questioned the high cost of consulting fees, the width of the road after
the project was completed, which agencies would receive the property tax monies,
whether Council could allocate funds such as CDBG monies to another project in the
future, what action could Council take if t:he property was rezoned now but the project
was not approved, whether there was a time limit on the MOU, if there would there be
any encumbrances on the real property, and whether CRHC would match city funds.
Richard Lowenthal stated that the consulting fees were the estimates received from
Charities Housing. The Council could certainly add a time limit to the MOU and add any
encumbrances they deemed necessary. Lo~Nenthal stated that they would not be able to
match city funds, but they were willing to r~~ise $1 million for this worthwhile project.
Staff responded that they did not have a sf~ecific width for Mary Avenue but it appeared
to be about 47'. Additionally if Council re2toned the property now but the project was not
approved they could either reverse their action or leave it in place until another proposal
was received. Staff also noted that the MIJU was not binding and if Council gave this
project priority for such funds as CDBG thE~y could change their minds at a later date.
Kathy Robinson, Charities Housing, said the consulting fee for the chosen nonprofit was
$586,000 in both the tax credit scenario an~J the non-tax-credit scenario. In the tax credit
scenario, when Mr. Lowenthal referred to additional fees for attorneys, accountants, etc.
attached to the tax credit syndication, those additional monies were under permanent loan
fees, construction loan fees and bond costs. , In the non-tax credit scenario, those items
were much lower.
The following speakers were opposed to the project. Their objections included:
• It would eliminate parking spaces needed by the public when attending Memorial Park
and the DeAnza College flea market. There were already many parking problems during
February 2, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 7
events at Memorial Park, and people would be forced to park in front of Casa DeAnza on
or that private property.
• Students want to save every penny and don't want to pay for parking on campus, so this
parking on Mary provided a service to studf;nts.
• Casa DeAnza residents will bear the burden of this project. It was already difficult to
merge into traffic during college hours, es~~ecially when making a left turn leaving Casa
DeAnza.
• The location was inappropriate for seniors because of its proximity to Highway 85 and
the accompanying noise and air pollution.
• There were better locations elsewhere in thf; community for senior housing.
• More cars and a narrower road would worsen the traffic congestion, increase commute
times, and create more inconvenience for current residents, walkers and cyclists.
• Traffic congestion would increase accident:; on Mary Avenue.
• The whole community had not had time or ;sufficient information to study this project.
• It would take away the current beauty of thE- location for only 18 houses.
• It would be more efficient to build multiple apartments in a better location such as next to
the library for seniors rather than building jest a few cottages.
• Concerns about the financing of this project - no city funds should be used -cost to the
city of giving up the land.
• Conversion to a residential street would create more traffic problems.
• Negative impact on neighboring properties.
• How would this project fit into the Oaks Center project that was already approved.
Nirmala Pailla
Ramesh Yerraguntla
Appala Patnala
Sid Shettay
Raghupathi Subliah
Barinder Saini
Cathy Helgerson.
Joan Lee
Gangadhar Andru
Duleep Pillai
Jennifer Griffin
Tom Hugunin
Darryl Lum
Bob McKibbin
Keith Murphy
Ranj an Desai
Park Chamberlain
Senthil Pandurangan
John Cruz
February 2, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 8
The following speakers were in favor of the projec~:. Their comments included:
• Aging Cupertino residents needed smaller places where they could "downsize" their
homes and yard work.
• The location was good near the Senior Center, the Oaks, DeAnza College, Mary Avenue
Bridge and Memorial Park.
• An MOU would allow the CRHC to pr~~ceed with an application and design phase
without the City Council committing the city to participation. It was aloes-risk option
and Council could choose to reject the project when more details were made available as
part of the formal application.
• Cupertino had inadequate senior housing.
• The project could help to create financial stability for seniors on fixed incomes.
• The four-lane road was originally intended to lead to the freeway overpass, but that was
no longer necessary since the original overpass idea was replaced with the new Mary
Avenue pedestrian footbridge.
• City general funds would not be used for this project.
• The Rotary Club would design, build and rriaintain the project.
• A standard residential street would be safer for the neighborhood.
• It solved many needs, such as making life simpler for seniors, bringing families closer,
and allowing residents to engage in daily ~ictivities with their peers while being close to
amenities.
• It would create apedestrian-friendly neighborhood street which would add value to the
community.
• This project could help to create a lifelong intergenerational community.
• Rotarians particularly want to participate in hands-on community service and would be
strong partners for this project.
• It would create a unique opportunity to work the Rotary Club on a worthwhile community
project.
Michael Gottwald
Cookie Hoover
Eleanor Holt
Jim Jackson, former Cupertino Mayor
Roberta Hollimon, League of Womc;n Voters -Cupertino/Sunnyvale
Morris Hosoda
John Gatto, former Cupertino Mayo r
Saron Savoy,West Valley Community Services-Program Mgr., Housing Services
Kathy Nellis, former Cupertino Councilmember
Liz Gallegos, President -Cupertino Rotary Club
Don Staub, West Valley Communit;~ Services Board
Kathy Robinson, affordable housing developer for 25 years
Steve Andrews
Christina Espinosa
Jim Black
February 2, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 9
Donna Jones Dulin, Associate Vice-President of Finance and Educational Resources for DeAnza
College, said she did not want the Council to base their decision on whether or not some students
choose to avoid the campus parking fee. She s~~id that the college had sufficient parking on
campus for classes as well as the weekend flea market. There were a few exceptions that
triggered overflow parking during the fall term, lout these were not consistent and did not last
throughout the quarter. She explained that there v~ere 5,500 to 5,800 parking spaces on campus
that were expected to turn over four to five times a day. Ms. Dulin said that the current parking
rate was $2 per day for students, and even less than that if purchased by the quarter or by the
year. Flea market parking was $5. She noted that the education code required the college to
charge for parking unless it was for anon-profit us~~.
Councilmember Mahoney believed that in good faith the Council should approve the MOU for a
three-year time frame and move this project forw~~rd. He noted there were several issues but he
was looking forward to the detail of an application.
Vice-Mayor Wong thanked Rotary for bringing thi;~ project forward but while he was an advocate
of senior housing he was not comfortable with thf; location of this project. He also believed the
cost was high, funding would be a challenge and sc-me General Fund money would be needed.
Councilmember Chang stated that while he liked ;affordable senior housing he was not sure this
project was best for the city in these current uncert;~in economic times. In his opinion the location
was bad, noise and air pollution were issues, the parking accommodated those at Memorial Park
not just DeAnza students and he was not willing to give the land under discussion to anyone.
Councilmember Santoro also said that he was in favor of senior housing and believed Rotary
would certainly follow through on this project. However, he had several concerns including
public input and noticing for this project, future access needs if street was narrowed, traffic
patterns if neighborhoods became more dense in th.e future, noise, air pollution, safety and giving
up the road.
Mayor Wang wondered if a compromise could be reached to see this project move forward and
asked Mr. Lowenthal if the project would work if it were smaller and the street was not
narrowed.
Richard Lowenthal stated that the project was not feasible if made smaller and/or the street was
kept at the current width. He further stated his viev~~ that wide streets were more dangerous due to
speeding than narrower residential streets and he ~~ommented on his years as a Councilmember
and member of the Bicycle/Pedestrian Committee as a basis for this opinion. However it
appeared that narrowing Mary Avenue was a k~~y issue for Council. The Cupertino Rotary
Housing Corporation was willing to do a $5 million affordable senior housing project for the city
but the Council was basically saying no to this project in favor of parking on Mary Avenue.
Vice-Mayor Wong stated for the record that the Council did support senior housing.
Councilmember Santoro did not think it was fair ~:o say that Council was not in favor of senior
housing. Councilmember Chang stated that he was in favor of senior housing.
February 2, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 10
Mahoney moved and Wang seconded to authorize $11,000 to prepare a Record of Survey for the
Mary Avenue right-of--way. The motion failed 2:3 with Chang, Santoro and Wong voting no.
Mahoney moved to approve a memorandum of understanding between the City and the CRHC.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
Santoro moved and Chang seconded to vote no on all actions related to a potential 18-20 unit
senior, affordable housing project from the Cupertino Rotary Housing Corporation. The motion
carried 3:2 with Mahoney and Wang voting no.
NEW BUSINESS
17. Set the date of Tuesday, February 23 at 3:00 p.m. for a City Council Work Program study
session. (No documentation in packet).
The Council concurred to hold a Work Program study session on Tuesday, February 23,
at 3:00 p.m. in Community Hall.
ORDINANCES -None
STAFF REPORTS -None
COUNCIL REPORTS
Council concurred to start the February 16 meeting at 6:00 p.m. and hear the Scenic Circle item
before the Heart of the City item. If the topics on 1:hat agenda cannot be finished at that meeting,
it will be continued to the next day.
ADJOURNMENT
At 11:15 p.m., the meeting was adjourned to Tuesday, February 16, 6:00 p.m., in the City
Council Chamber.
Kimberly Smit ity Clerk
Staff reports, backup materials, and items distributed at the City Council meeting are available
for review at the City Clerk's Office, 777-3223, and also on the Internet at www.cupertino.org.
Click on Agendas & Minutes, then click on the apf~ropriate Packet.
Most Council meetings are shown live on Comca:;t Channel 26 and AT&T U-verse Channel 99
and are available at your convenience at www.cupertino.or~. Click on Agendas & Minutes, then
click Archived Webcast. Videotapes are available at the Cupertino Library, or may be purchased
from the Cupertino City Channel, 777-2364.