The URL can be used to link to this page

CC 07-07-03¸OF CUPEP TINO AGENDA CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL ~ REGULAR MEETING CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ~ REGULAR MEETING 10300 Torre Avenue, City Hall Council Chamber Monday July 7 2003 6:45 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS 1. Report from the Public Safety Commission on its 2003-2004 goals. 2. Proclamation for Cupertino National Little League Minor Dodgers. POSTPONEMENTS WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the council on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. In most cases, State law will prohibit the council from making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda. CONSENT CALENDAR Unless there are separate discussions and/or actions requested by council, staff or a member of the public, it is requested that items under the Consent Calendar be acted on simultaneously. 3. Approve the minutes from the June 16 City Council meeting. 4. Adopt resolutions accepting Accounts Payable for June 13, June 20, and June 27, Resolution Nos. 03-126 through 03-128. July 7, 5. 2003 Cupertino City Council Page 2 Adopt resolutions accepting Payroll for June 20 and July 3, Resolution Nos. 03-129 and 03-130. 6. Accept the Treasurer's Budget Report - May 2003. 7. Approve applications for an Alcoholic Beverage License: a) Zazang Restaurant, 20010 Stevens Creek Blvd. b) Torys Restaurant, 21670 Stevens Creek Blvd. c) 20956 Homestead Rd., #A 8. Adopt a resolution setting a hearing date of August 4 to provide for lien assessments and collection resulting from abatement of a public nuisance (brash and weeds), resolution No. 03-131. 9. Adopt a resolution approving the destruction of records from the City Clerk files, which are in excess of two years old, Resolution No. 03-132. 10. Adopt a resolution urging the California Legislature to use a balanced approach in adopting the state budget, Resolution No. 03-133. 11. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign an agency shop agreement with Operating Engineers Local Union Number 3, Resolution 03-134. 12. Adopt a resolution accepting a quitclaim deed for Chiping Yang and Bee Choo Yang, 10660 Santa Lucia Road, APN 342-16-034, Resolution No. 03-135. 13. Adopt a resolution authorizing execution of an improvement agreement for Chiping Yang and Bee Choo Yang, 10660 Santa Lucia Road, APN 342-16-034, Resolution No. 03-136. 14. Accept city projects performed under contract. (No documentation in packet): a) San Tomas Aquino-Saratoga Creek Trail-Reach 5 Improvement Project, Project No. 2002-9116 (GradeTech, Inc.) b) Wolfe Road/I-280 Interchange Improvements, Project No. 9528 (Republic Electric) c) Civic Center and Library Project, Phase I, demolition, salvage, recycling and site preparation, Project 2002-9222 (Ferma Corporation) 15. Accept municipal improvements (grading, curb and gutter) for YR Development, 10675 Santa Lucia Road, APN 347-17-055. (No documentation in packet). July 7, 2003 Cupertino City Council Page 3 16. Adopt a resolution declaring the intention to order the vacation of a 10 fi. public service easement, 11477 Lindy Place, APN 356-24-004, Resolution No. 03-137. 17. Adopt a resolution approving a grant of easement (10 ft. public service easement) for 1 t477 Lindy Place, APN 356-24-004, Resolution No. 03-138. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (above) PUBLIC HEARINGS 18. Consider application(s): Z-2003-01; TM-2003-01; U-2003-02; and EA-2003-03 for Saron Gardens, LLC located at 7310 Rainbow Drive, A-E, APN(s): 366-19-075; 366-19-076; and 366-19-048. (This item was continued from 6/16/03): a) Grant a negative declaration b) Approve a tentative map to subdivide a 4.03-acre parcel into 55 residential parcels and one common parcel c) Approve the rezoning of a 4.03 acre parcel from P(R3) to P(Res) d) Approve a use permit to construct 55 single-family residences and site improvements on a 4.03-acre parcel e) Conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 1920: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino rezoning three parcels totaling 3.92 gross acres parcel from P(R3) or Planned Development with multi-family residential uses and R1 or Single Family Residential to R(Res) or Planned Development with residential uses 19. Consider a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation for the Forum at Rancho San Antonio from Residential Very Low 5-20 acre slope density to Residential Very Low 5-20 acre slope density/Quasi-Public Institutional. This project is located at 23500 Cristo Rey Drive, APN(s): 342-53-001 through 342-53-259; 342-54-001 through 342-54-016; 342-55-001 through 342-55-045: a) Grant a negative declaration b) Adopt Resolution No. 03-139 approving the General Plan amendment 20. Consider the appeal of a Design Review Committee approval of a new two-story 4,463 square foot residence, Application No. R-2003-03, Dick Fang, 10110 Mann Drive, APN 326-19-055. This item is Categorically Exempt and the Planning Commission recommends approval of the appeal. PLANNING APPLICATIONS - None July 7, 2003 Cupertino City Council Page 4 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 21. Adopt policy and procedures regarding the naming of City facilities and recognition of financial donors. 22. Review the City Council appointments to the General Plan Task Force. NEW BUSINESS 23. Adopt a Public Access contract with KMVT for programming on Cable Channel 15. ORDINANCES - None STAFF REPORTS 24. Receive a report on the inquiry regarding Asian demographics in the CDBG Consolidated Plan presented to the City Council at the 6/16/03 meeting. 25. Receive a report regarding an update on Vallco. 26. Receive an update on the Watershed Protection Collaborative. 27. Accept a report on Cupertino Courier-sponsored, "A Time to Talk: A Cupertino Forum." COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Michael Chang: Audit Committee Leadership Cupertino Legislative Review Committee Library Steering Committee 5 C's Liaison Santa Clara County Housing and Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) Alternate Santa Clara County Libra~ District JPA Board of Directors Alternate Sister City Committee - Toyokawa West Valley Mayors and Managers Vice-Mayor Sandra James: Economic Development Committee Environmental Review Committee Alternate Leadership Cupertino Library Steering Committee Santa Clara County Emergency Preparedness Commission Santa Clara County Transportation Agency Policy Advisory Committee Alternate Skatepark Committee West Valley Mayors and Managers Alternate July 7, 2003 Cupenlno City Council Page 5 Councilmember Patrick Kwok: Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Library Steering Committee Alternate Guadalupe/West Valley Flood Control and Watershed Advisory Committee Lower Peninsula Flood Control and Watershed Advisory Committee Santa Clara County Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission Santa Clara Valley Water Commission Sister City Committee - Toyokawa Altemate Councilmember Dolly Sandoval: Audit Committee Environmental Review Committee Legislative Review Committee 5 C's Liaison Santa Clara County Cities Association Alternate Santa Clara County Cities Association Legislative Task Force Santa Clara County Emergency Preparedness Commission Alternate Santa Clara County Housing and Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) Santa Clara County Transportation Agency Policy Advisory Committee Councilmember Richard Lowenthal: Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Altemate Economic Development Committee Guadalupe/West Valley Flood Control and Watershed Advisory Committee Alternate Lower Peninsula Flood Control and Watershed Advisory Committee Alternate Santa Clara County Cities Association Santa Clara County Cities Association Legislative Task Force Alternate Santa Clara County Library District JPA Board of Directors Santa Clara Valley Water Commission Alternate Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority (SVACA) Board Skatepark Committee Alternate CLOSED SESSION - None ADJOURNMENT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Canceled for lack of business. In compliance with the .4mericans with Disabilities Act (.4D~4), the City of Cupertino will make I reasonable efforts to accommodate persons with qualified disabilities. If you require special ] assistance, please contact the city clerk's office at 408-777-3223 at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting. CIrf CUPEPxTINO DRAFT MINUTES CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL Regular Adjourned Meeting Monday, June 16, 2003 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At 6:45 p.m. Mayor Chang called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL City Council members present: Mayor Michael Chang, Vice-Mayor Sandra James, and Council members Dolly Sandoval, Richard Lowenthal, and Patrick Kwok (Council member Kwok was in attendance 7:12 p.m. - 9:20 p.m. His absence at other times was due to health reasons). Council members absent: none. Staff present: City Manager David Knapp, Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood, City Attorney Charles Kilian, Public Works Director Ralph Quails, Community Development Director Steve Piasecki, Parks and Recreation Director Therese Smith, Public Information Officer Rick Kitson, and City Clerk Kimberly Smith. CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS 1. Presentation from the Teen Commission on its activities through May 2003. Teen Commissioner Kenny Lin presented the report, highlighted their mission statement, and listed their accomplishments for the year. These included a canned food drive for CCS; promotion of Blackberry Farm vision kits; skate park forum; planning of a teen job fair (cancelled later because of problems in the economy); high school dance through the Parks and Recreation Department; Adopt-A-Family; and attended a team building ropes course, a workshop for teen commissioners. POSTPONEMENTS Mr. John Moss, representing the applicant for Saron Gardens at Rainbow Drive, asked that the City Council postpone Item No. 16 to July 7. Mayor Chang reordered the agenda to open the public hearing on item No. 16 next. June 16, 2003 Cupertino City Council Page 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS 16. Consider application(s): Z-2003-01; TM-2003-01; U-2003-02; and EA-2003-03 for Saron Gardens, LLC located at 7310 Rainbow Drive, A-E, APN(s): 366-19-075; 366-19-076; and 366-19-048. a) Approve the rezoning of a 4.03 acre parcel from (PR3) to P(Res) b) Approve a tentative map to subdivide a 4.03-acre parcel into 55 residential parcels and one common parcel c) Approve a use permit to construct 55 single-family residences and site improvements on a 4.03-acre parcel d) Grant a negative declaration e) Conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 1920: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino rezoning three parcels totaling 3.92 gross acres parcel from P(R3) or Planned Development with multi~family residential uses and R1 or Single Family Residential to R(Res) or Planned Development with residential uses Staff distributed a staff report for this item that included a model resolution with a new condition and a draft ordinance. Tom Dragosavac, 7308A Rainbow Dr., said he was a member of the Saron Gardens Residents Association Committee, but was speaking on his own behalf. His concern was about the process and the jeopardy for rental housing in favor of owner-occupied housing. Dennis Whittaker, 20622 Cheryl Dr., expressed concern about the possibility of asbestos used in construction of Saron Gardens and the Cupertino Town Center, and asked that the issue be investigated. Rae Stevenson-Norris, 7314 Rainbow Dr., said she was also a member of the Residents' Association Committee. She distributed a Cupertino Courier article dated June 11, 2003 with the headline "Tenants get the boot for project," and said she objected to the dismantling of the community. Robert Levy, 10802 Wilkinson Ave., said he had written to the Council expressing his concern about the uprooting of the community, and he urged that this area be kept as rental housing. James/Sandoval moved and seconded to continue the public heating to July 7 as requested by the applicant. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Sandoval. Noes: None. Absent: Lowenthal and Kwok. June 16, 2003 Cupertino City Council Page 3 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None At 7:12 p.m., Council member Patrick Kwok was present. City Manager David Knapp explained guidelines for oral communications that were printed on the back of the speaker request cards. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Emily Liu, Teen Commissioner, said that her two years on the commission were hard work, fun, and fulfilling, and she thanked the Council for their support. Kenny Lin, Teen Commissioner, thanked the Council for the opportunity to serve two years. He said it was an amazing experience in which he learned leadership skills and made great connections with both teens and adults. Robert Levy, 10802 Wilkinson Ave., distributed a bus route chart for Bus #53. He said that Vallco, the Library and other parts of Cupertino are not well served by public transportation, and asked that the matter be addressed. Nolan Chen, Public Safety Commissioner, said that he appreciated the banner over Stevens Creek Boulevard thanking the U.S. troops. Shiloh Ballard, representing Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group and Irvin Dawid representing the Sierra Club distributed a brochure regarding affordable housing in the community and asked the City Council for its support. Paulina Werthen, 10972 Wilkinson Ave., read a prepared statement about Charles Lee, which stated that he is American citizen who was jailed in China on the basis of supporting Falun Gong. She provided an envelope to the Mayor that contained a magazine about Falun Dafa, as well as letters and records of Charles Lee's trial. Michael Gottwald, 6026 Peunington Lane, welcomed back Patrick Kwok after his illness, and thanked Council members Sandoval and James for their appearance at the Cupertino National Little League opening game and closing ceremonies, and for letting him throw the ceremonial first pitch at the opening game. CONSENT CALENDAR Sandoval/James moved and seconded to approve the items on the Consent Calendar as recommended, with the exception of No. 6, which was held over until after the closed session, and No. 9, which was pulled for discussion. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Lowenthal, Sandoval. Noes: None. Absent: None. Approve the minutes from the May 19 and 27, and the June 2, 3, and 9 City Council meetings. 3-3 June 16, 2003 Cupertino City Council Page 4 Adopt resolutions accepting Accounts Payable for May 30 and June 6, Resolution Nos. 03-108 and 03-109. 4. Adopt a resolution accepting Payroll for June 6, Resolution No. 03-110. 5. Accept the Treasurer's Budget Report - April 2003. Accept municipal improvements (grading, curb and gutter) for The O'Brien Group (Oak Valley), Subdivision (Off-site) Improvements, Tract 9054, Unit 1, Area 2; Tract 9076, Unit 3, Neighborhood 4. (No documentation in packet). Accept municipal improvements (grading, curb and gutter) for SQJ Development Co., Inc., 7953 Rainbow Drive, APN 362-31-029. (No documentation in packet). 10. Disposal of electronic products and computers: a) Adopt a resolution approving the agreement with Apple Computer for the disposal of electronic products and computers for fiscal year 2003-2004, Resolution No. 03-117 b) Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an amendment to the contract with Los Altos Garbage Company regarding the cost for resident to dispose of television sets, in an amount not to exceed $15,000 11. Oak Valley subdivision: a) b) Adopt a resolution accepting streets constructed by the Oak Valley Subdivision, Tracts 9054 and 9075 through 9078 into the City street system, Resolution No. 03-118 Adopt a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Certificate of Acceptance of Easement Deeds from the County of Santa Clara for various easements within the subdivision, and authorize the release of the construction securities for the Oak Valley Subdivision, Resolution No. 03-119 12. Authorize a transfer of funds in the amount of $41,000.00 from Account No. 270-8403, Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter, to Accotmt No. 270-9430, Stevens Canyon Road Widening, to provide additional construction contingency for the contract for the Stevens Canyon Road Widening, Project No. 98-120. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (above) Authorize the City Manager to execute a Renewal Agreement to the Interim Agreement with Ricochet Networks, Inc. (RNI), for the payment of power costs for the pole top radio repeater equipment in City right-of-way that was abandoned by Metricom upon Metricom's bankruptcy, Resolution No. 03-116. June 16, 2003 Cupertino City Council Page 5 Robert Levy, 10802 Wilkinson Ave., asked if Ricochet would be able to provide wireless connectivity. Public Works Director Ralph Qualls said that this agreement would extend their contract until they decide what to do with the antennae that are on the street lights, and it is not yet known what services will be offered. James/Kwok moved and seconded to adopt Resolution No. 03-116. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Sandoval. Noes: None. Absent: Lowenthal. Mayor Chang reordered the agenda to consider items 17-20 next. PUBLIC HEARINGS 17. Receive public comments, discuss, and adopt the 2003-04 budget: a) Adopt a resolution establishing an operating and capital budget for fiscal year 2003-04, Resolution No. 03-123 b) Adopt a resolution establishing an appropriation limit for fiscal year 2003-04, Resolution No. 03-124 c) Grant a negative declaration Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood repeated her presentation from the Council meetings of May 27 and June 2. Robert Levy, 10802 Wilkinson Ave., said the budget was easy to read, and he complimented city staff on their work. Kwok noted that although he had missed several Council meetings, he had been reading the minutes and watched the meetings on television. Public Information Officer Rick Kitson updated Council on some options for funding the PEG channel. James/Sandoval moved and seconded to adopt Resolution No. 03-123 adopting the budget, and agreed to defer the discussion on the DeAnza College PEG channel until the contracts are available for review. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Sandoval. Noes: None. Absent: Lowenthal. James/Kwok moved to adopt Resolution No. 03-124 establishing an appropriation limit. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Sandoval. Noes: None. Absent: Lowenthal. James/Kwok moved to grant a Negative Declaration. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Sandoval. Noes: None. Absent: Lowenthal June 16, 2002, Cupertino City Council Page 6 PLANNING APPLICATIONS - None UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS 18. Receive a report and recommendation on storm drainage in Elm Court. Public Works Director Ralph Quails highlighted the report and said that staff recommends installing an additional drain inlet for water, plus conducting annual inspection of the storm drains. Lee Shodiss, 21412 Elm Court, discussed the flooding problems he had experienced several times since he moved into his home in April, and he distributed photographs of the flooded street. He said that problem appears to be water flow, with water coming out of the manhole in the street, and a wave of water coming from Bubb and McClellan Roads. He said that neighbors have sustained property damage, but at this point had not filed any claims. Robert Levy, 10802 Wilkinson Ave., mentioned his book "The West Side and How We Grew" which included photos illustrating water over four feet deep on Elm Court. He said the photograph had been taken prior to work done here, and later there had been sand traps for years at the mouth of Elm Court. He suggested a bulge in the road to help channel water away. Shing-Shwang Yao, 21441 Elm Court, distributed photographs of flooding taken two months ago after the drainage pipes had been cleared out, and said he respectfully disagreed with the recommendation of the City Engineer. James Mac Hale, 21442 Elm Court, said the problem is not actually caused by drainage at Elm Court, but by storm drains clogged in other parts of the system, probably all the way to McClellan Road. Director Qualls said the cost of additional lines is prohibitive, and may cost as much as $1 million for McClellan Road. He said that staffbelieves that the drain inlet is carrying only'half of the capacity of the line underneath, and so the recommendation was to install the inlet and monitor the line. Kwok/Sandoval moved and seconded to accept the report and request that staff implement a project for the installation of an additional drain inlet at the end of Elm Court prior to the winter storm season, and to continue monitoring the storm drain and report back to the City Council in the rainy season. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Sandoval. Noes: None. Absent: Lowenthal. 19. Review bids, waive minor irregularities in the bid documents and award the contract for the Sports Center Remodel to XL Construction, the lowest responsive and responsible June 16, 2003 Cupertino City Council Page 7 bidder, in the amount of $1,721,187.00, by accepting the Base Bid of $1,687,868.00 and Add Alternates 4 and 5 in the amount of $3,979 and $29,340 respectively; approve a construction contingency for unforeseen conditions in the amount of $138,000.00; and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City. Public Works Director Ralph Quails reviewed the staff report. Sandoval/Kwok moved and seconded to review bids, waive minor irregularities in the bid documents and award the contract for the Sports Center Remodel to XL Construction in the amount of $1,721,187.00, which includes Add Alternates 4 and 5; to approve a construction contingency of $138,000.00; and to authorize the City Manager to execute the contract. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Sandoval. Noes: None. Absent: Lowenthal. 20. Cupertino Civic Center and Library Project: Items A and B were discussed first: Review and award the contract for the Civic Center and Library Project, Phase 2 construction, to Swinerton Builders, the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, in the base bid amount of $14,695,000.00 plus $347,000.00 for add alternates 1 through 7, for a total contract amount of $15,042,000.00; authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City; and approve a construction contingency for unforeseen conditions in the amount of $1,000,000.00. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute Amendment No. 2, for an additional amount not to exceed $615,000.00, for professional services with SMWM, to provide for Contract Administration during Phase 2 construction of the Civic Center and Library Project for a total contract amount of $3,119,000.00, Resolution No. 03-125 Adopt a resolution author/zing the City Manager to accept a gift of $45,000.00 from the Rotary Club of Cupertino for the purchase of 16 trees and 8 benches, and an acknowledgement plaque in the California Heritage Grove of the new Civic Plaza, Resolution No. 03-126 Public Works Director Ralph Qualls reviewed the staff report, said that the apparent low bid was $12.5% below the engineer's estimate, and explained the additional Add Alternates, which included: Elevator cab $55,000 Trees around the community hall 15,000 Motorized window shades 95,000 Sandblast finish concrete walls 65,000 Integral Color in concrete walls 50,000 June 16, 2003 Cupertino City Council Page 8 Trees in southeast parking lot 7,000 Artisan wall plaster in library 60,000 $347,000 Sandoval/James moved and seconded to award the Civic Center and Library Project, Phase 2 Construction contract to Swinerton Builders in the Base Bid amount of $14,695,000.00 plus $347,000 for Add Alternates 1 through 7, for a total contract among of $15,042,000.00; authorize the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the City; and approve a Construction Contingency for unforeseen conditions in the amount of $1,000,000; and to adopt a Resolution No. 03-125 authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute Amendment No. 2, for an additional amount not to exceed $615,000.00, for professional services with SMWM, to provide for Contract Administration during Phase 2 construction of the Civic Center and Library Project for a total contract amount of $3,119,000.00; and to direct staff that they would accept the girl of $45,000 but that the plaque language is to be approved by the City Council before it is cast, and that staff will work with the Rotary Club and the fundraising foundation for the library regarding the disposition of the $45,000, and that the City Manager will report back on July 7 if that information has been agreed to by those three parties. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Sandoval. Noes: None. Absent: Lowenthal Discussion began on item C: Qualls made the presentation and said that the Rotary Club wished to donate $45,000 toward the purchase of items in the plaza to commemorate 100 years of Rotary Intemational and 50 years of Rotary Cupertino. He said that Rotary representatives Phil Johnson and Eleanor Watanabe were both unable to attend this evening, and the check had not yet been presented to the city. Barbara Rogers, 19764 Auburn Dr., said that it was her understanding that the Rotary Club wanted the money given to the city, and the club had approached the city with this offer before the naming list was created. Rogers said that the naming opportunities list included items in the plaza such as benches and trees, and she suggested that the Council accept the funds from the Rotary Club and then remit them to the Cupertino Library Foundation. Discussion followed whether to apply the Rotary gift toward the fundraising effort of the Library Foundation. Sandoval/James moved and seconded to adopt Resolution No. 03-126 authorizing the City Manager to accept a girl of $45,000.00 from the Rotary Club of Cupertino for the purchase of 16 trees and 8 benches, and for the installation of an acknowledgement plaque in the California Heritage Grove of the new Civic Plaza, and that the plaque language will be approved by the City Council before the plaque is cast. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Kwok, Sandoval. Noes: None. Absent: Lowenthal. The City Manager said that staff will work with the Rotary Club and the library fundraising organization to determine whether the funds will be counted toward the fundraising effort, and report back on July 7th if that decision has been made. At 9:20 p.m. Patrick Kwok was absent for the remainder of the evening. June 16, 2003 Cupertino C{ty Counc{l Page 9 PUBLIC HEARINGS 13. Conduct a second public hearing to consider and adopt the City of Cupertino Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Citizen Participation and Consolidated Plans, Resolution No. 03-120. Senior Planner Vera Gil repeated her presentation from the meeting of June 2. She said there had been one change since that time, which was an opportunity for the City to select an uncapped income limit, shown on page 17 of the consolidated plan, which will allow the City to serve families with slightly higher income limits. Mayor Chang asked staff to verify the breakdown for the categories of Asian and Hawaiian/Pacific Islander on page 10 of the Consolidated Plan, because it appeared the numbers may have been transposed. The public hearing was opened at 9:30 p.m. There were no speakers, and the hearing was closed. James/Sandoval moved and seconded to adopt Resolution No. 03-120. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Sandoval. Noes: None. Absent: Kwok and Lowenthal. 14. Consider adopting a resolution for the annual renewal of fees for the Storm Drainage Nonpoint Source Program for 2003-04, Resolution No. 03-121. The public heating was opened at 9:35 p.m. There were no speakers, and the hearing was closed. James/Sandoval moved and seconded to adopt Resolution No. 03-121, approving the renewal and collection of the existing storm drain fees at no increase in rates for fiscal year 2003-2004. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Sandoval. Noes: None. Absent: Kwok and Lowenthal. 15. Consider ordering the vacation of a roadway easement, Dennis Lee and Katherine K. Lee, Trustee, 10588/10590 Santa Lucia Road, APN 342-16-084, Resolution No.03-122. The public heating was opened at 9:30 p.m. There were no speakers, and the hearing was closed. James/Sandoval moved and seconded to adopt Resolution No. 03-122, ordering the vacation of the roadway utility easement. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Sandoval. Noes: None. Absent: Kwok and Lowenthal. 21. Consider canceling the meeting of July 21. The City Clerk said that the only item scheduled for that meeting was a hearing to consider protests to the weed abatement program, and staff recommends that the weed abatement hearing be conducted on August 4 in order to meet the County deadline of August 10. June 16, 2003 Cupertino City Council Page 10 Council members concurred (with Kwok and Lowenthal absent) to cancel the meeting of July 21, conduct the weed abatement heating on August 4, and not to cancel the second meeting in August as is sometimes done for vacation schedules. ORDINANCES - None STAFF REPORTS - None COUNCIL REPORTS Council members highlighted the activities of their committees and various community events, which included: A proposal by Fred Chan for an aquarium endowment for the library; a ribbon- cutting event for an expanding Cupertino financial firm; a joint Chamber/Sheriff workshop on business security; Charles Corr's retirement from the San Jose School District; the relocation of the Sheriff's substation to the Quinlan Community Center; further exploration of a joint arrangement for an animal shelter; the completion of the Stevens Canyon Road project; Council member(s) attendance at the Cupertino National Little League closing ceremonies, a solar barbecue, and a bocce ball tournament. The Council asked for an updated on the Vallco Shopping Center at the next meeting. CLOSED SESSION 22. Labor negotiations Government Code Section 54957.6. The purpose of the closed session is to consult with City management representatives David Knapp, Carol Atwood, Ralph Qualls, Carol Ferrell, and Sandy Abe concerning labor negotiations with Operating Engineer's Local No. 3, Cupertino City Employee's Association and the unrepresented employees Compensation program. At 9:50 p.m. Council recessed to a closed session to discuss labor negotiations. At 10:23 p.m. Council reconvened, and the City Manager announced that the City Council had discussed labor negotiations and were prepared to take action on item number 6a and 6c. Approve the terms and conditions of employment for fiscal year 2003/04 (backup items to be handed out at the meeting): Amend the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the Cupertino City Employee's Association, Resolution No. 03-111 Amend the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Operating Engineers Local No. 3, Resolution No. 03-112 Amend the compensation program for unrepresented employees, Resolution No. 03-113 3-/6 June 16, 2003 Cupertino City Council Page 11 Amend the Administrative Rules and Regulations of the Personnel Code, Resolution No. 03-114 e) Fix the employer's contribution for medical insurance, Resolution No. 03-115 The Council members received the staff report regarding this item at the meeting. Sandoval/James moved and seconded to adopt Resolution No. 03-111 amending the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the Cupertino City Employee's Association. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Sandoval. Noes: none. Absent: Kwok and Lowenthal. Sandoval/James moved and seconded to adopt Resolution No. 03-113, amending the compensation program for unrepresented employees. Vote: Ayes: Chang, James, Sandoval. Noes: none. Absent: Kwok and Lowenthal. No action was taken on items B, D, or E. ADJOURNMENT At 10:25 p.m. the meeting was adjourned in honor of Santa Clara County Communications employee Keith Garvey who died on June 1, 2003. Kimberly Smith, City Clerk For more information: Staff reports, backup materials, and items distributed at the meeting are available for review at the City Clerk's Office, 777-3223. Televised Council meetings may be viewed live on Cable Channel 26, and may also be viewed live or on demand at www.cupertino.org. Videotapes of the televised meetings are available at the Cupertino Library, or may be purchased from the Cupertino City Channel, 777-2364. DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 03-126 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING JUNE 13, 2003 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated representative has certified to accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds as hereinafter set forth in Exhibit "A". CERTIFIED: Director of Administrative Services PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of July ,2003, by the following vote: Vote. Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino o6/12/o3 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO C~ECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.=rans_date between "06/09/2003" and "06/13/2003" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND 1020 601597 06/13/03 9 1020 601597 06/13/03 9 1020 601597 06/13/03 9 1020 601597 06/13/03 9 1020 601597 06/13/03 9 1020 601597 06/13/03 9 1020 601597 06/13/03 9 1020 601597 06/13/03 9 1020 601597 06/13/03 9 1020 601597 06/13/03 8 TOTAL CHECK ABAG POWER PURCHASING PO 1108501 ABAG POWER PQRCHASING PO 5708510 ABAG POWER PURCHASING PO 1108505 ABAG POWER PURCHASING PO 1108508 ABAG POWER PURCHASING PO 1108507 ABAG POWER PURCHASING PO 1108503 ABAG POWER PURCH~ING PO 1108506 ABAG POWER PURCEASING PO 1108504 ABAG POWER PURCH~ING PO 1108508 ABAG POWER PURCHASING PO 5606620 1020 601598 06/13/03 1680 ADVA~AGE GRAFIX 2204011 1020 601598 06/13/03 1680 ADVANTAGE GHAFIX 1107501 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601599 06/13/03 28 AIRGA~ NCI~ 1108303 1020 601600 06/13/03 29 LYNNE DI~NE AITKEN 5806449 1020 601601 06/13/03 2276 AL~[A~HA 1104510 1020 601601 06/13/03 2276 AL~L~HA 1104510 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601602 06/13/03 M2003 ALI, MOJGON J. 1100000 1020 601603 08/13/03 2319 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERV 1108201 1020 601604 06/13/03 1532 ALOTTA'S DELICATESSEN 1104530 1020 601505 06/13/03 2330 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SUPP 1108303 1020 601606 06/13/03 2836 APWA '1108601 1020 601607 06/13/03 2298 A~qCH WIRELESS 1108602 1020 601607 06/13/03 2298 ARCH WIRELESS 1106265 1020 601607 06/13/03 2298 ~%RCH WIRELESS 1108501 1020 601607 06/13/03 2298 ARC. WIRELESS 1104400 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601608 06/13/03 968 BAP AI3TO PARTS 6308840 1020 601608 06/13/03 968 BAP AUTO PARTS 6308840 1020 601608 06/13/03 968 BAP AUTO PARTS 6308840 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601609 06/13/03 M BARTHELL, YOSHIKO 580 601610 06/13/03 2013 BAY AREA DISTRIBUTING CO 6308840 601611 06/13/03 2889 BAY CONSTRUCTION INC 4209119 1020 i020 ..... DESCAIPTION ...... SALES TAX PAGE 1 AMOUNT JI/NE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 1078.49 J~3NE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 532.78 JI/NE 2003 STATEMEICT 0.00 201.72 JIINE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 47.62 J~ 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 315.38 JUNE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 620.57 JI~NE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 105.19 JUNE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 1750.80 JUI~E 2003 STATE~4ENT 0.00 50.90 JUNE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 632.80 0.00 5336.25 SUPPLIES A25200 0.00 116.15 COUNTER SUPPLIES 0.00 491.70 0.00 807.85 0.00 40.12 0.00 234.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR BOTTLED WATER SERV BOTTLED WATER SERV 0.00 146,40 0.00 165.00 0.00 311.40 REFUND B.LICENSE FEE 0.00 100.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 7487.40 CATERING 0.00 323.40 SUPPLIES 0.00 1885.68 CHECKLIST/Sg3TCD 0.00 19.89 6/02-7/01 0.00 19.78 6/02-7/01 0.00 12.13 6/02-7/01 0.00 69.67 6/02-7/01 0.00 19,72 0.00 121.24 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC FY 2002 2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 22.60 0.00 161.72 Refund: Check - SU~ER 0.00 162.00 SUPPLIES 8918 0.00 300.06 PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT 0.00 81114.98 RUN DATE 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:33 - FIN~CIAL ACCOUNTING 06/12/03 CITY OF C73PERTINO ACCOLrNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK EEGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/09/2003" and "06/13/2003" CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 1020 601612 08/13/03 2933 BAY GLJ%SS COMPA~ 110B504 1020 601613 06/13/03 M BEAUPBE, CATBY 580 1020 601614 06/13/03 2179 BIGGS CARDOSA ASSOCIATES 1108101 1020 601615 06/13/03 100 BMI IMAGING SYSTEMS 1104300 1020 601616 06/13/03 867 BRIAN f~ANGAS FOULK 2709430 1020 601617 06/13/03 M Beavers, Nancy 550 1020 601618 06/13/03 M Berr~nnan, Dorothy 550 1020 601619 06/13/03 1367 C A P I O 1101200 1020 601619 06/13/03 1367 C A P I O 1103300 TOTAL CBECK 1020 601620 06/13/03 124 1020 601621 06/13/03 809 1020 601622 06/13/03 132 1020 601622 06/13/03 132 1020 601622 06/13/03 132 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601623 06/13/03 2976 1020 601624 08/13/03 1476 1020 601625 06/13/03 146 1020 601625 06/13/03 146 1020 601625 06/13/03 146 1020 601625 08/13/03 146 TOTAL CKECK 1020 601626 06/13/03 149 1020 601626 06/13/03 149 1020 601626 06/13/03 149 1020 601626 06/13/03 149 1020 601626 06/13/03 149 1020 601626 06/13/03 149 1020 601626 06/13/03 149 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601627 06/13/03 152 1020 601628 06/13/03 155 1020 601629 06/13/03 1820 CALIFORNIA SAFETY & CLEA 1108406 CALIFORNIA SPORT DESIGN 1106343 C~IFOPdqIA WATER SERVICE 1108407 CALIFORigIA WATER SERVICE 1108508 CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE 1108314 CALPERS FISCAL SERVICES 1104510 C~ON DESIGN GROUP 110 CASH 5806349 C~H 5806449 CASH 5806249 C~R 1106342 C-ASR 2204011 CA. SE 1101200 CASH 1104400 CASH 1107501 CASB 1104510 CASH 1108601 C~H 2204010 CEB:CONTINUING EDUCATION 1101500 CENTR3%L WHOLESALE NURSER 1108303 CERIDIA-N BENEFITS SERVIC 110 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SUPPLIES/GLASS Refund: Check - Return CONSTRUCTION SERV MICORFILM PROCESSING P.o.#00030281 CARRYOVE Refund: Check - Sirens Refund: Check - Asian DUES L.LAGERGREN R.KITSON DUES DISPOSAL GLOVES 9000 SWEATSHIRTS 4/19-5/20 4/19-5/20 4/19-5/20 1959 SLrRVIVOR BENEFIT ARCHITEC7~ REVW PETTY CASH 5/14-6/06 PETTY CASH 5/14-6/05 PETTY CASB 5/14-6/06 PETTY CASH 5/14-6/06 PETTY C~H 8/05-6/11 PETTY CASB 6/05-6/11 PETTY CASB 6/05-6/11 PETTY CASB 6/05-6/11 PETTY CASH 6/05-6/11 PETTY CASH 6/05-6/11 PETTY CASH 6/05-6/11 HNDL EXPRT WITNESSES LANDSCAPE SPLY 15159 MAY2003 ADM FEES SALES TAX 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.O0 0.00 0.00 PAGE 2 AMOUNT 3318.00 400.00 360.70 5641.10 24 . 00 175.00 175.00 350.00 316.78 433.80 2980.33 275.59 3274.97 41502.00 550.00 106.10 13.77 60.83 7.00 187.70 3.90 27.06 1.07 50.00 56.00 175.62 102.29 140.73 63.00 RUR DATE 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:33 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/12/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBLrRSEMEiqT FUNqD SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/09/2003" and "06/13/2003" 1020 601630 06/13/03 M 1020 601631 06/13/03 2626 1020 601632 06/13/03 M 1020 601633 06/13/03 175 1020 601633 06/13/03 175 1020 601633 06/13/03 175 1020 601633 06/13/03 175 1020 601633 06/13/03 175 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601634 06/13/03 163 1020 601634 06/13/03 189 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601635 06/13/03 1194 1020 601636 06/13/03 184 1020 601637 06/13/03 191 1020 601638 06/13/03 192 1020 601638 06/13/03 192 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601639 06/13/03 198 1020 601639 06/i3/03 198 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601640 05/13/03 1637 1020 601641 06/13/03 210 1020 601642 06/13/03 676 1020 601643 06/13/03 214 1020 601644 06/13/03 220 1020 601645 06/13/03 1104 1020 601646 06/13/03 223 1020 601647 06/13/03 2664 1020 601648 06/13/03 2578 1020 501649 06/13/03 249 CPJ%MES, LOUIS 580 CHANG, CHEN-YA 1103300 CHEN, PING 580 COCA-COI~ USA 5606620 COCA-COL~ USA 5606620 COCA-COL~USA 5606620 COCA-COLA USA 5606620 COCA-COLA USA 5606620 CO~rON SHIRES & A~SO INC 110 COTTON SHIRES & ~S0 INC 110 COURTESY TOW 6308840 J~kMES COURTNEY 5606620 CUPERTINO CF~ER OF COM 1101042 CUPERTINO M~DICAL CENTER 5806440 CUPERTINO 5LEDICAL CENTER 5806449 C~3PERTINO LuNION SCHL DIS 2308004 CUPERTINO UNION SCHL DIS 2308004 DAVID J POWERS & ASSOCIA 110 DEEP CLIFF ~SOCIATES L 5606449 DEPARTMENT OF J~SSTICE 11045i0 DEPARTMENT OF TPJINSPORTA 1108602 DISCOLrBrC SCHOOL SI/PPLY 5806349 DIVERSIFIED RISK 1104540 DON & MIk~,S SWEEPING IN 2308004 KATHLEEN DUTRA 5806449 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX Refund: Check - Return CLIPPING SERV 5/1-31 REPDS 214241/214242 GEOLOGIC RVW H21499 GEOLOGIC R%~4 R20440 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR INFO BOOTH ART FESTAL TUBERCULOSIS/FRAZIER TUBERCLrLOSIS/SLIVINSK CREEK TRIP 5/15,5/16 CREEK TRIP 5/23-8/29 CONSULTANT SERVICES SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR FINGERPRINTS MAY2003 FY 2002-2003 OPEN pLrRC SUPPLIES 17254 BLK PAJ~TY INSLrRANCE FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR DESIGN AUqq40RITY 1YR FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAGE 3 AMOUNT 300.00 200.00 120.00 43.30 43.30 43.30 43.30 43.30 216.50 1835.00 200.00 2035,08 220.00 200.00 250.00 15.00 30.00 235.10 254.61 62.50 5988.00 832.00 89.60 473.18 326.06 260.00 57.00 424.82 RUN DATE 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:33 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/12/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 4 ACCODNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REOISTER - DISBURSEMENT FU~ SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/09/2003" and "06/13/2003" CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 1020 601649 06/13/03 249 ESBRO CHEMICAL 5606620 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601650 06/13/03 251 EV~2~S WEST VALLEY SPRAY 1108315 1020 601650 06/13/03 251 EVANS WEST VALLEY SPRAY 1108315 1020 601650 06/13/03 251 EVANS WEST VALLEY SPRAY 1108315 1020 601650 06/13/03 251 EVANS WEST V~LEY SPRAY 1108315 TOTAL URECK 1020 601651 06/13/03 1949 EVENT SERVICES 1108503 1020 601652 06/13/03 253 EXCHANGE LINEN SERVICE 5606620 1020 601653 06/13/03 M Elfving, Nonnie 550 1020 601654 06/13/03 M Elliott, Aubrey 550 1020 601655 06/13/03 1020 601655 06/13/03 1020 601655 06/13/03 1020 601655 06/13/03 1020 601655 06/13/03 1020 601655 06/13/03 TOTAL CHECK 260 FEDERAL EXPRESS COKP 110 260 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 2709449 260 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORE 1103500 260 FEDER~ EXPRESS CORP 1108601 260 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORE 4239222 260 FEDEP3%L EXPRESS CORP 110 1020 601656 06/13/03 2558 FEET FIRST ENTERTAINMENT 5806349 1020 601657 06/13/03 261 FERR & PEERS ASSOC INC 110 1020 601658 06/13/03 2304 FIELD PAOLI ARCHITECTURE 4269212 1020 601659 06/13/03 2361 FIRST BA~KC~D 5506549 1020 601659 06/13/03 2361 FIRST BANKC~D 1106500 1020 601659 06/13/03 2361 FIRST BANKC~%RD 5506549 1020 601659 06/13/03 2361 FIRST BANKCARD 5506549 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601660 06/13/03 2361 FIRST BA~KCARD 1106647 1020 601660 06/13/03 2361 FIRST BA~KCARD 1106200 1020 601660 06/13/03 2361 FIRST BANKCARD 1106500 1020 601660 06/13/03 2361 FIRST BANKCAR~ 1106343 1020 601660 06/13/03 2361 FIRST EANKCARD 5806349 1020 601660 06/13/03 2361 FIRST BANKCAP~D 5806349 1020 601660 06/13/03 2361 FIRST BANKCARD 5806349 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601661 06/13/03 266 RYAN FO~ES 5806449 1020 601662 06/13/03 268 1020 601662 06/13/03 268 1020 601662 06/13/03 268 FOSTER EROS SECURITY $YS 5708510 FOSTER BHOS SEC~JRITY SYS 1108507 FOSTER BROS SECURITY SYS 1108504 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC TL~RF SPRAY JOLLYMAN TURF SPRAY CREEKSIDE TREE SP~AY CREEKSIDE TURF SPRAY THREE OAKS RENTAL 5/01-5/31 FY 2002-2003 OPEN pURC AMOUNT 0.00 638.08 0.00 1062.90 0.00 3500.00 0.00 3500.00 0.00 2500.00 0.00 2000.00 0.00 11500.00 0.00 162.38 0.00 111.56 RFDS 39146 & 39148 O.00 107.00 RFDS 39144 & 39154 0.00 650.00 COURIER SERV R19923 0.00 19.23 COURIER SERVICE 0.00 17.70 COURIER SERVICE 0.00 11.28 COLrRIER SERVICE 0.00 32.67 COURIER SERVICE 0.00 29.85 COURIER SERVICE 0.00 14.47 0.00 125.20 DJ/DANCE 6/06 0.00 450.00 FORUM TRIP GENERATION 0.00 130.18 ~L%Y2003 STATEMENT MAY2003 STATEMENT MAY2003 STATEMENT MAY2003 STATEMENT ~L%Y 2003 STATEMENT ~L~Y 2003 STATEMF/qT MAY 2003 STATEMENT MAY 2003 STATEMENT MAY 2003 STATEMENT MAY 2003 STATEMENT MAY 2003 STATEMENT SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 831.79 0.00 47.80 0.00 605.67 0.00 22.97 0.00 14.86 0.00 691.30 0.00 16.60 O.00 669.02 0.00 1375.34 0.00 242.29 0.00 -60.00 0.00 495.01 0.00 65.50 0.00 2803.76 0.00 2753.40 0.00 5OO.OO 0.00 300.00 0.00 150.70 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES R~ DATE 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:33 06/12/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 5 ACCOLrNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER ~ DISBI/RSEMEN~ FI/ND SELE~ION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between ,'06/o9/2003" and "06/13/2003" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VE~OR ............. FLR~D/DEPT 1020 601663 06/13/03 2479 DONNA FP~F~L 5506549 1020 601664 06/13/03 1808 KIM FREY 1106343 1020 601664 06/13/03 1808 KIM F~Y 1106343 TOTAL CHECK 1020 501565 06/13/03 274 FRY'S ELECTRONICS 1106500 1020 601665 05/13/03 274 FRY'S ELECTRONICS 1106500 1020 601665 06/13/03 274 FRY'S ELEC~ONICS 6104800 1020 601665 06/13/03 274 FRY'S ELECq~ONICS 2708405 1020 601665 06/13/03 274 FRY'S ELECTRONICS 1108303 1020 601665 06/13/03 274 FRY'S ELECTRONICS 1106265 1020 601665 06/13/03 274 FRY'S ELECTRONICS 1106265 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601666 06/13/03 275 SUSAN FLvKUBA 5806449 1020 601667 06/13/03 M Foerster, Helen 550 1020 601668 06/13/03 281 G~JtDENLJ~ 1108314 1020 601669 06/13/03 1667 GLOB~kL EQUIPME~ COMP~R~Y 8109856 1020 601670 06/13/03 298 GtLAINGER INC 1108830 1020 801670 06/13/03 298 GRAINGER INC 1108830 1020 601670 06/13/03 298 GP~INGER INC 1108830 1020 601670 06/13/03 298 GR3%INGER INC 1108501 1020 501670 06/13/03 298 GP~INGER INC 5708510 1020 601670 06/13/03 298 GR~INGER INC 1108315 1020 501670 06/13/03 298 GP~AINGER INC 6308840 1020 601670 06/13/03 298 GRAINGER INC 1108303 1020 601670 06/13/03 298 GR~INGER INC 1108321 1020 601670 06/13/03 298 GR~INGER INC 1108315 1020 601670 06/13/03 298 GRAINGER INC 1108315 1020 601670 08/13/03 298 GP~INGER INC 1108303 1020 601670 06/13/03 298 GP~INGER INC 1108303 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601671 06/13/03 301 GR~YBAR ELECTRIC CO INC 1108504 1020 601672 06/13/03 2630 GREGORY B. BRAGG & ASSOC 6204550 1020 601673 06/13/03 899 GUZZARDO & ASSOCIATES IN 4259313 1020 601674 06/13/03 314 H.V. C~dlTER CO INC 6308840 1020 601674 06/13/03 314 H.V. C~-RTER CO INC 6308840 1020 601674 06/13/03 314 H.V. C~{TER CO INC 6308840 1020 601674 06/13/03 314 H.V. CARTER CO INC 6308840 TOTAL CHECK ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES T~ 0.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 AMOUNT 950.70 140.00 TEEN CO~ DINNER 0.00 105.07 TEEN CO~ DINNER 6/10 0.00 117.00 O.O0 222.07 SUPPLIES 16086 0.00 164.01 SUPPLIES 16085 0.00 108.24 SUPPLIES A25201 0.00 57.35 SUPPLIES 17499 0.00 86.59 SUPPLIES 15163 0.00 74.67 MONITOR 31363 0.00 611.23 RETUP~Y RE: 8291692 0.00 -611.23 0.00 510.86 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 3816.00 Refund: Check - Asian 0.00 24.00 SUPPLIES 8981 0.00 529.14 WORK SIIRFACE 0.00 61.05 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PUNC 0.00 28.25 FY 2002-2003 OPEN EUNC 0.00 1107.26 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PUNC 0.00 201.71 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PlYRC O.0O 363.50 FY 2002-2003 OPEN pLIRC 0.00 457.63 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 121.20 REI%3~/q P.O.52995 0.00 -64.80 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 1527.72 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 703.86 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 321.08 P~RTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 166.74 PARTS/SUPPLIES O.0O 1722.77 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 706.34 0.00 7363.25 pARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 150.92 W.COMP ~M ~E2003 0.00 1575.00 0.00 PUBLIC WORKS CON/~%CT 10481.83 P~RTS/SUPPLIES 24481 0.00 40.37 PARTS/SUPPLIES 15155 0.00 236.08 RETI~LN REF 237549 0.00 -203.32 PARTS/SUPPLIES 8738 0.00 78.36 0.00 151.49 RUN DATE 05/12/03 TI~ 14:46:34 - FINARCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/12/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CU4ECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: ~ransact.trans_date between "06/09/2003" and "06/13/2003" FUI~D - 110 ~ GENER3%L FL~ CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 1020 601675 06/13/03 315 JILL HAFF 5806449 1020 601676 08/13/03 2565 WESCO RECEIVABLES CORP 1108303 1020 601676 06/13/03 2565 WESCO RECEIVABLES CORP 1108830 1020 601676 06/13/03 2565 WESCO RECEIVABLES CORP 1108830 TOT~L CHECK 1020 601677 06/13/03 2064 HOW~kRD G HOFF JR. 1104400 1020 601678 06/13/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108314 1020 601678 06/13/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108312 1020 601678 06/13/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108312 1020 601678 06/13/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108407 1020 601678 06/13/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108303 1020 601678 06/13/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1106265 1020 601678 06/13/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108312 1020 601678 06/13/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 5606660 1020 601678 06/13/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 5606640 1020 801678 06/13/03 334 ROME DEPOT/GECP 1108312 1020 601678 06/13/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108407 1020 601678 06/13/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108303 1020 601678 06/13/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108407 1020 601678 06/13/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108312 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601679 06/13/03 M RONG, SON~EE 580 1020 601680 06/13/03 1898 AUTOM3%TIC RAIN CO. 1108314 1020 601681 06/13/03 347 INDUSTRIAL WIPER 1108406 1020 601682 06/13/03 353 IRON MOLrNTAIN 1104300 1020 601683 06/13/03 354 J CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES 5806449 1020 601684 06/13/03 2818 JAECO 1108501 1020 601685 06/13/03 1708 FP~ANK JELINCH 1101060 1020 601686 06/13/03 M JIANG, XINGYU 580 1020 601687 06/13/03 2374 JII PROMOTIONS, INC. 1101000 1020 601688 06/13/03 M JUNG, MIP~A 580 1020 601689 06/13/03 M Jerdes, Alla 550 1020 601690 06/13/03 M KAII~SH, KObL~LA 580 1020 601691 06/13/03 M KEENER, BRENDA 580 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 9.00 PAGE 6 AMOUNT 325.00 SUPPLIES 0.00 2572.02 SUPPLIES 0.00 3111.11 SUPPLIES 0.00 5949.42 0.00 11632.55 FIRST AID TRAINING 0.00 100.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PARTS SUPPLIES 8948 pARTS SUPPLIES 24109 PARTS SUPPLIES 24111 PARTS 'SUPPLIES 22485 PARTS 'SUPPLIES 8983 PkRTS 'SUPPLIES 22548 PARTS 'SUPPLIES 8936 PARTS 'SUPPLIES 15956 PARTS 'SUPPLIES 15954 PARTS 'SUPPLIES 8995 PARTS 'SUPPLIES 8978 PARTS 'SUPPLIES 8939 PARTS 'SUPPLIES 24166 PARTS'SUPPLIES 8922 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC SUPPLIES 15142 SOFTBALL PLAQUES SUPPLIES CONF JUNE 07, 2003 Refund: Check - SUeR MAPLE BOXES Refund: Check - SUeR REFD 39130 & 39132 Refund: Check - SLUR 0.00 O.O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 443.64 6.37 19.67 42.10 371.75 52.59 61.33 127.93 142.77 109.46 199.02 302.95 26.56 241.71 2147.85 160.00 128.96 130.01 265.92 280.88 11.56 I60.00 54.00 424.32 357.00 83.00 260.00 200.00 RUN DATE 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:34 06/12/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/09/2003" and "06/13/2003" 1020 601692 06/13/03 369 1020 601692 06/13/03 369 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601693 06/13/03 2882 1020 601694 06/13/03 M 1020 601695 06/13/03 371 1020 601695 06/13/03 871 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601696 06/13/03 372 1020 601697 06/13/03 376 1020 601698 06/13/03 382 1020 601699 06/13/03 385 1020 601699 06/13/03 385 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601700 06/13/03 2300 1020 601701 06/13/03 393 KELLY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 1108501 KELLY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 1108314 ROBERT A. KIM 1103500 KIM, YOLrNG HWAN 580 LISA KING 110 LISA KING 5806449 KINKO~S INC 1106248 KI~ORR SYSTEMS INC 5606620 DAYTON PRINTING INC. 5208003 ~ SAFE/5{ SUPPLY 5806349 L~ SAFETY SUPPLY 1108005 BA/~BARA LAUX 5506549 JOHN LEE 5806449 LI, LI~tNG 580 LIGHTHOUSE 6308840 LIGHTHOUSE 6308840 LIGb~THOUSE 6308840 LIN, PATRICK 580 LONG, DAWN 580 LOS ALTOS RECREATION DEP 5806449 LOS GATOS MEAT & SMOKEHO 5606620 LOS GATOS MEAT & SMOKE~O 5606620 LUCKY I & I PORTABLE SER 5208003 LUU, MONG}{ANG 580 RAACO AUTO PAINTING & BO 6308840 M3%NNING, COLLEEN 5806349 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TA2K PAGE AMOUNT SUPPLIES 8969 0.00 146.44 PAINTING SUPPLIES 0.00 47.10 0.00 195.54 VIDEO TAPE/pLAnNING 0.00 300.00 Refund: Check - SL~ER 0.00 116.00 28% FRA/~C~4ISE TAX BRD 0.00 -228.25 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 913.00 0.00 684.75 POSTER/SUeR CONCERT 0.O0 66.68 POOL SUPPLIES 0.00 546.25 DOOR }LA~GERS 17353 0.00 108.25 SUPPLIES 17253 0.00 213.42 SUPPLIES 24141 0.00 33.60 0.00 247.02 SERVICE AGP~E~iENT FOR 0.00 560.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT POR 0.00 238.80 Refund: Check - SUN~ER 0.00 119.50 EXTENTION C~LE 8910 0.00 67.55 REF: 1163545 0.00 -67.58 EDGE LIGHT BAR W/TRAFF 0.00 1146.40 O.O0 1146.40 Refund: Check - SGF~4ER 0.00 60.00 Refund: Check - Return 0.00 300.00 BLACH GYM RENT;~L 0.00 2160.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN pURC 0.00 93.07 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PL~C 0.00 73.98 0.00 167.05 RENT/~L 0.00 92.01 Refund: Check - SPRING 0.00 60.00 TIME/MATERIALS 0.00 986.50 PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 0.00 24.90 RUN DATE 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:34 - FINAMCIAL ACCOU~ING 06/12/03 CITY OF CUPEHTINO PAGS 8 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/09/2003" and "06/13/2003" FLTND - 110 - GENER~ FUN]D CASH ACCT CNECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DSPT 1020 601711 06/13/03 ME2003 MANNING, COLLEEN 1106342 1020 601711 06/13/03 ME2003 ~ING, COLLEEN 5806249 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601712 06/13/03 2713 REBECCA MCCORMICK 5806449 1020 601713 06/13/03 447 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 1108201 1020 601713 06/13/03 447 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 1108201 1020 601713 06/13/03 447 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 1108201 1020 601713 06/13/03 447 MISSION UNIFOP, MSERVICE 1108201 1020 601713 06/13/03 447 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 1108201 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601714 06/13/03 456 MON~J~C~ TRUCK CENTER 6308840 1020 601715 06/13/03 2405 CHRIS MORTON 5806449 1020 601716 06/13/03 465 MOLrNTAIN VIEW GARDEN CEN 1108312 1020 601717 06/13/03 M NlkKAI, FOkORI 580 1020 601718 06/13/03 473 NASER DISTRIBUTORS INC 5606620 1020 601719 06/13/03 M NASIR, QUAID 580 1020 601720 06/13/03 M NATAPOkJAN, DEEPIKA 580 1020 601721 06/13/03 475 1020 601721 06/13/03 475 1020 601721 06/13/03 475 TOTAL CHECK NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RE 4239222 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RE 4239222 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RE 4239222 1020 601722 06/13/03 2488 POWERPI~ 6308840 1020 601722 06/13/03 2488 POWERPIJkN 6308840 TOTAL CNECK 1020 601723 06/13/03 2975 JOVAN C. OBEN~U3BER 1104510 1020 601724 06/13/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1104510 1020 601724 06/13/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1104400 1020 601724 06/13/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 5806249 1020 601724 06/13/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 5806349 1020 601724 06/13/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1104000 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601725 06/13/03 494 OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN 1101500 1020 601726 06/13/03 M OGOSEI, A~IE 580 1020 601727 06/i3/03 M2003 OLYMPIAN DAY CAMP 560 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT LL.BE/LN/SUPPLIES 0.00 270.00 LL.BE~N/SUPPLIES 0.00 108.00 0.00 402.90 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PUEC 0.00 0.00 ENGINE DIAGNOSTIC AND 0.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 234.00 106.00 9.37 106.00 106.00 106.00 433.37 970.84 875,50 SUPPLIES 0.00 74.64 Refund: Check - SU~ER 0.00 274.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 310.20 Refund: Check - Return 0.00 300.00 Refund: Check - SU~ER 0.00 88.00 RENTAL 3/05-4/01 0.00 41.65 RENTAL 2/25 0.00 160.00 RENTAL 3/13 0.00 462.06 0.00 653.71 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 7097.87 PARTS/SUPPLIES 24146 0.00 7.47 0.00 7105.34 COMPENSATION SLIRVEY 0.00 5475.50 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 62.27 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 68.49 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 378.12 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 385.84 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 206.78 0.00 1101.50 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 71.22 Refund: Check - SU594ER 0.00 12.00 REFUI~D OF DEPOSIT 0.00 100.00 RUN DATE 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:34 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/12/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 9 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION C~ITERiA: transact.trans_date between "06/09/2003" and "06/13/2003" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND 1020 601728 06/13/03 503 ORCH3%RD SUPPLY 5606620 1020 601726 06/13/03 503 ORCHARD SUPPLY 5606620 1020 601728 06/13/03 503 ORCHARD SUPPLY 5606620 1020 501728 06/13/03 503 ORC~L~ SUPPLY 5606640 1020 601728 06/13/03 503 ORCI~ SUPPLY 5606640 1020 601728 06/13/03 503 ORCI43%RDSUPPLY 5606620 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601729 06/13/03 1220 ORCHARD SUPPLY ~qDWARE 1108502 1020 601729 06/13/03 1220 ORC~ SUPPLY ~L%RDWARE 1108502 TOTAL C~ECK ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX RE/73R_N P.O.52861 0.00 ON-TIME DISC 5/26 S~7~ 0.00 PY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 0.00 AMOUNT 68.31 39.87 22.56 54.05 186.70 ON-TIME DISCOUNT 5/26 0.00 PA/~TS/SUPPLIES 0.00 43.32 0.00 39.81 1020 601730 06/13/03 2692 SEC 1108504 4/27-5/26 PPHONE SHRF 1020 601730 06/13/03 2692 SEC 1108501 5/02-6/01 0.00 1020 601730 06/13/03 2692 SEC 6104800 4/21-5/20 0.00 1020 601730 06/13/03 2692 SBC 5608620 4/29-5/28 0.00 1020 601730 06/13/03 2692 SBC 5606640 4/29-5/28 0.00 1020 601730 06/13/03 2692 SEC 1108201 4/29-5/28 1020 601730 06/13/03 2692 SEC 1108501 4/29-5/28 0.00 1020 601730 06/13/03 2692 SBC 1108503 4/29-5/28 0.00 1020 601730 06/13/03 2692 SBC 1108507 4/29-5/28 0.00 1020 601730 06/13/03 2692 SBC 1108508 4/29-5/28 0.00 1020 601730 06/13/03 2692 SEC 1108509 4/29-5/28 0.O0 1020 601730 06/13/03 2692 SEC 1108501 4/29-5/28 0.00 1020 601730 06/13/03 2692 SEC 6104800 5/02-6/01 0.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 178.34 571.49 91.36 161.40 165,57 251.29 115.51 54.42 54.42 60.21 54.42 64,28 592.04 2414.74 WORLDCOM 1101000 WORLDCOM 1102100 WORLDCOM 1101500 WORLDCOM 1104300 WORLDCOM 1103300 WORLDCOM 1103500 WORLDCOM 1104000 WORLDCOM 1104100 WORLDCOM 1104200 WORLDCOM 1104510 /WORLDCOM 1106647 /WORLDCOM 1104530 /WORLDCOM 1104400 /WORLDCOM 1106100 /WORLDCOM 1106265 /WORLDCOM 1106529 /WORLDCOM 1106500 /WORLDCOM 1107200 /WOALDCOM 1107301 IWORLDCOM 1107302 FWORLDCOM 1107501 IWORLDCOM 1101200 tWORLDCOM 1107502 'WORLDCOM 1108504 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELI 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELI 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELI 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELl 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELl 1020 601733 06/I3/03 511 PACIFIC BELI 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELl 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELl 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELi 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELl 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 182.12 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 151.77 %~ELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 383.90 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 271.31 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 60.71 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.05 91.06 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 o.00 91.06 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 182.12 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 91.06 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 182.12 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 30.35 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 212.48 TELEPHONE SERV APRO3 0.00 91.06 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 91.06 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 485.67 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 30.35 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 364.25 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 91.06 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 273.19 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 60.71 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 394.60 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 91.06 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 30.35 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 121.42 RUN DATE 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:34 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING -lo 06/12/03 CItY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 10 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CI4ECK REGISTER - DISBLrRSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between -06/09/2003" amd "06/13/2003" 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELI 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELI 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 513 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 601733 06/13/03 511 PACIFIC BELL TOTAL CMECK WORLDCOM 1107503 WORLDCOM 1108001 WORLDCOM 1108101 WORLDCOM 1108102 WORLDCOM 1106265 WORLDCOM 1108501 WORLDCOM 1108503 WORLDCOM 1108507 WORLDCOM 5606620 WORLDCOM 5706450 WORLDCOM 1108601 WORLDCOM 1108602 WORLDCOM 5208003 WORLDCOM 2308004 WORLDCOM 1106265 WORLDCOM 1108201 WORLDCOM 6104800 WORLDCOM 5606620 WORLDCOM 5606640 WORLDCOM 5708510 WORLDCOM 1106265 WORLDCOM 1107301 WORLDCOM 1106647 WORLDCOM 1108511 WORLDCOM 1108504 WORL4DCOM 1108407 1020 601734 06/13/03 2444 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1106101 1020 601734 06/13/03 2444 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1108830 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601735 06/13/03 513 1020 601735 06/13/03 513 1020 601735 06/13/03 513 1020 601735 06/13/03 513 1020 601735 06/13/03 513 1020 601735 06/13/03 513 1020 601735 06/13/03 513 TOTAL CHECK PACIFIC G;%S & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 121.42 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 151.77 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 287.43 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 30.35 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 93.35 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 681.39 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 820.71 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 60.71 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 303.54 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 364.25 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 91.86 TELEPMONE SERV APR03 0.00 121.42 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 30.35 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 30.35 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 91.06 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 210.92 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 576.73 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 151.77 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 30.35 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 242.83 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 212.48 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 60.71 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 273.19 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 60.71 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 31.14 TELEPHONE SERV APR03 0.00 14.53 0.00 9149.36 3/25-5/13 RICOCHET 0.00 337.19 3/25-5/13 0.00 31934.31 0.00 32271.50 1108506 4/29 5/29 0.00 1108506 4/29-5/29 0,00 5606620 4/29-5/29 0.00 5606620 4/29-5/29 0.00 1108602 5/02-6/02 0.00 1108407 5/02-6/02 O.00 1108506 4/30-5/29 0.00 1020 601736 06/13/03 526 PENINSUI~ DIGITAL IMAGIN 4239222 1020 601736 06/13/03 526 PENINSLU~A DIGITAJ~ IMAGIN 4239222 1020 601736 06/13/03 526 PENINSULA DIGITAL IMAGIN 4239222 1020 601736 06/13/03 526 PENINSULA DIGITAL IMAGIN 4269212 1020 601736 06/13/03 526 PENINSULA DIGITAL IMAGIN 1108101 1020 601736 06/13/03 526 PENINSULA DIGITAL IMAGIN 4239222 TOTAL CHECK 5.54 373.56 30.77 160.42 43.53 7.67 15.72 637.21 CIVIC/LIBR3%RY PL3~S 0.00 2645.20 CIVIC/LIBP~Y PL3~NS 0.00 109.91 CIVIC/LIBRARy PROJECT 0.00 128.28 SPORTS CTR PROJECT 0.00 431.80 BMP S~EETS 0.00 69.62 CIVIC/LIBRARY PROJECT 0.00 1179.73 0.00 4564.74 1020 601737 06/13/03 2974 PERFOR~CE CONTR3%CTING 4269212 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR RUN DA~ 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:34 - FINANCIAL ACCOU~ING 06/12/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 11 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBI/RSEMENT FLrND SELECTION CRITERIA: ~ransac~.~rans date between "06/O9/~Q03" and "06/13/2003" FUND - 118 - GENERAL FUND 1020 601738 06/13/03 545 JEFF PISERCBIO 5686640 1020 601739 06/13/83 ME2003 PON YEE 1184510 1020 601740 06/13/03 2661 PROFESSIONAL TURF MGMNT, 5606640 1020 601741 06/13/03 509 PW SUPEP,~KETS INC 5806349 1020 601741 06/13/03 509 PW SUPERMARKETS INC 5806349 1020 801741 06/13/03 509 PW SUPERM2kRKETS INC 5806649 1020 601741 06/18/03 509 PW SUPE~L~RKETS INC 5806349 1020 601741 06/13/03 509 PW SUPEP34~KETS INC 5806649 TOTAL C~ECK 1020 601742 06/13/03 M Peavey, Angenette 550 1020 601743 06/13/03 M2003 QUIMBy O~J~S SCBOOL 5600000 1020 601744 06/13/03 1406 RAINES CHEVORLET 6308840 1020 601745 06/13/83 2482 ROBERT HALF TEC~OLOGY 6104800 1020 601745 06/13/03 2482 ROBERT FfALF TEC}~OLOGY 6104800 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601746 06/13/03 610 S & S WORLDWIDE 5806349 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 S;kN JOSE WATER COMPA~ 1108314 1020 601750 08/13/03 625 SA~ JOSE WATER COMP~2gY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 S~kNJOSE WATER COMP;kNY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMpA~ 1108407 1020 801750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMP;kNY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SA~ JOSE WATER COMP~NY 1108407 1020 801750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 S$%N JOSE WATER COMP~kNY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 S]%N JOSE WATER COMPA~ 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMP~kNY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108312 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 5708510 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108408 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SA~ JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108504 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPAArY 1108504 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108303 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 4209116 1020 601750 06/I3/03 825 SA~ JOSE WATER COMP~kNY 1108303 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 Sf%N JOSE WATER COMPA/~Y 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 S/kN JOSE WATER COMP~NY 5606640 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108504 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 5606620 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 5606620 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX BBF GOLF CONCESSIONAIR 0.00 EDUCATIONAL REIMBURSE 0.00 PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT 0.00 AMOUNT 1899.00 630.30 729.18 SUPPLIES 23223 0.00 17.56 SUPPLIES 23236 0.00 34.62 SUPPLIES 22516 0.00 14.01 SUPPLIES 25149 0.00 47.25 SUPPLIES 25198 0.00 22.89 0.00 136.33 Refund: Check - Sirens 0.00 OVERPAYMENT/ADMISSION 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 94,00 100.00 67.97 A.RICKS W/E 5/23 0.00 864.00 A.RICKS W/E 5/30 0.00 576.00 0.00 1440.00 SUPPLIES 17258 0.00 22.18 4/30-5/30/03 0,00 265.34 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 63.87 4/30 5/30/03 0.00 80.67 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 104.57 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 32.62 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 41.16 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 29.21 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 16.01 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 9.18 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 44.57 4/30-4/30/03 0.00 314.57 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 164.33 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 260.21 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 87,50 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 219.24 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 117.86 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 108.28 4/30-5/30/03 0,00 86.07 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 98.31 4/04-6/03/03 0.00 298.63 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 1211.18 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 29.21 4/30-9/30/03 0.00 2793.48 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 9.00 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 60,46 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 168.21 RUN DATE 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:35 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/12/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 12 ACCOLrNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between ,.06/09/2003,, and "06/13/2003. FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108312 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108312 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108312 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108505 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPIMNY 1108505 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMP/~P{ 1108321 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108314 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPI~NY 1108321 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108315 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMP~M~IY 1108315 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108314 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/83 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108315 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108315 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPA~IY 1108315 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPA/~IY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMP/tNY 1108506 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SA}IJOSE WATER COMEAi~Y 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 S;%NJOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108321 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMP;~ 5708510 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 5606620 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPAI~Y 1108506 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 5606620 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPA~ 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 5708510 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108303 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPAI~ 1108303 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPA/gY 1108303 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108503 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPAiCY 1108407 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMP~MNY 1108314 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108314 1020 601758 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108507 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108314 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108314 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108302 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108314 1020 601750 06/13/03 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108314 TOTAL CHECK ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 354.12 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 741.67 4/04-6/03/03 0.00 I164.79 4/03-6/02/03 0.00 22.07 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 243.14 5/01-5/30/03 0.00 9.00 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 36.50 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 591.05 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 166.26 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 2164.06 4/30-5/30/03 O.0O 119,51 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 972.99 4/30-5/30/03 O.O0 1078.59 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 943.56 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 36.50 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 I573.72 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 66.22 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 37.99 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 37.99 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 59.94 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 18.89 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 137.01 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 15.55 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 15.55 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 87.78 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 36.50 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 29.21 5/01-5/30/03 0.00 9.00 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 15.16 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 54.82 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 15.55 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 22.38 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 111.16 4/30-8/30/03 0.00 164.42 4/30-8/30/03 O,O0 37.99 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 258.51 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 1074.60 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 589.72 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 1544.10 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 127.04 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 96.31 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 128.75 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 120.22 4/30 5/30/03 0.00 82.68 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 844.11 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 842.40 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 480.08 4/30-5/30/03 0.00 602.73 5/01-5/30/03 0.00 9.00 0.00 24694.58 RUN DATE 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:35 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/12/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOONTING PERIOD: 12/03 C~{ECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FL~ SELECTION CRITERIA: ~ransact.trans_date between "06/09/2003" and "06/13/2003" FOND - 110 - GENER~ FUND C~H ACCT CHECK NO 1020 601751 ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 06/13/03 626 SAi~TA C~ CO DEPT OF R 1102100 1020 601752 06/13/03 633 1020 601752 06/13/03 633 1020 601752 06/13/03 633 1020 601752 06/13/03 633 1020 601752 06/13/03 633 1020 601752 06/13/03 633 1020 601752 06/13/03 633 1020 601752 06/13/03 633 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601753 06/13/03 1919 1820 601754 06/13/03 2875 1020 601755 06/13/03 644 1020 601756 06/13/03 647 1020 601757 06/13/03 M 1020 601758 06/13/03 M 1020 601759 06/13/03 M 1020 601760 06/13/03 2129 1820 601760 06/13/03 2128 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601761 06/13/03 652 1020 601762 06/13/03 2415 1020 601762 06/13/03 2415 1020 601762 06/13/03 2415 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601763 06/13/03 2810 1020 601763 06/13/03 2810 1020 601763 06/13/03 2810 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601764 06/13/03 2834 1020 601765 06/13/03 200 1020 601766 06/13/03 665 1020 601767 06/13/03 2549 1020 601768 06/13/03 2910 SA~A CL~ COUNTy SHERI 5606620 SA~A CI~ COUNTY S~ERI 5606620 SAi~TA CL~ COUNTY SHERI 5606620 SA~A CL~ COI/NTY SHERI 5606620 S;tNTA CLARA CODI~TY S~ERI 5606620 SAN~fA C~%It% COUNTY SMERI 5606620 S~TTA CI~ COL~ SHERI 5606620 SA-~!TA CI~ CO[7~ SHERI 5606620 SA/~TA CL~ VALLEY ~ANS 5500000 SAVIN C~EDIT CORP 1104310 SCREEN DESIGNS 5806448 ELIZABETH SFLANNON 5806449 SHEN, TING 580 SHIGEMI, lq/RIE 580 SHUEN, SIK YING 580 SIERI~A ORGANICS COMP;~NY 1108303 SIERP~A ORGI~NICS COMPA/~Y 1108303 SIERRA SPRINGS WATER CO. 1101500 SIMON MARTIN-VEG~3E WINKE 4239222 SIMON M~TIN-VEGUE WINKE 4239222 SIMON F~%RTIN-VEGUE WINKE 4239222 SMART & FINAL 5806349 S~%RT & FIN~.L 1106343 S~T & FINILL 1106343 SMART & FINAL 5806349 LESLIE SOKOL DBA DA-NCEKI 5806449 SOU~ BAY ~4ETROPOLITAN 5806449 STATE OF CALIFOP~NIA 110 STATE OF C~IFORNIA 2708403 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... CITATIONS APRIL2003 FY 2002-2003 OPEN P[3RC FY 2002~2003 OPEN PGRC FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC FY 2002"2003 OPEN PURC FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC FY 2002-2003 OPEN P[IRC TICKETS/PA~SES JI3NEO3 J0131303354 4-1709316 SPRING SOFTBA~LL S~LqTS SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR Refund: Check - SUeR Refund: Check - SL~ER Refund: Check - SUMMER 240 YDS SIERRA PI2%YGRO 240 YDS SIERRA P~YGR0 EMPLOYEE BOTTLE~ WTR PUBLIC WORKS CONTP~CT PGBLIC WORKS CONTRACT PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT SUPPLIES 17259 SUPPLIES 17535 SUPPLIES 25178 BBQ AUPPLIES SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR LISA KING/461046662 TALLY J~DGMENT SALES TAX 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 O.O0 0.00 0.00 O.O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 O,O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAGE 13 AMOUNT 3050,00 677.08 677.08 405.66 812.50 405.66 243.40 324.54 324.54 3870.46 231.00 114.66 1175.60 494.00 132.00 120.00 228.00 2478.93 2478.93 4957.86 14.52 19624.00 31005.00 14351.29 64980.29 171.15 104.37 10.76 286.28 1327.23 3995.20 2019.60 228.25 45727.15 RLTN DATE 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:35 - FINANCIAL ACCOU~ING 06/12/03 CITY OF C~3PERTINO ACCOL~ING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBL~SEMENT SELECTION CRITERIA: transac~.trans_date between "06/09/2003" and "06/13/2003" 1020 601769 06/13/03 M2003 STATE OF CALIFORNIA 110 1020 601770 06/I3/03 681 CONNIE B;~A STEVENS 5806449 1020 601771 06/13/03 684 CHERYL STODDAB/3 5806449 1020 601777 06/13/03 2045 SVCN 5208003 1020 601778 06/13/03 695 1020 601778 06/18/03 695 1020 601778 06/13/03 695 1020 601778 06/13/03 695 1020 601778 06/13/03 695 1020 601778 06/13/03 695 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601779 06/13/03 M 1020 601780 06/13/03 1065 1020 601780 06/13/03 1065 1020 601780 06/13/03 1065 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601781 06/13/03 700 1020 601781 06/13/03 700 1020 601781 06/13/03 700 1020 601781 06/13/03 700 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601782 06/13/03 708 1020 601783 06/13/03 709 1020 601784 06/13/03 M 1020 601785 06/13/03 724 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620 Skeels, Dean 550 T;~ND D CO~4~3NICATIONS I 1108504 T ;%ND D CO~K/NICATIONS I 1108504 T A~ D CO~4UNICATIONS I 1108504 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108315 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108303 TARGET SPECITLLTY PRODUCT 1108315 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUC~ 1108314 NANCY THOMPSON 5806449 LOUTg~J~ 5806449 TIAN, HU~N 580 /URF & INDUSTRIAL EQUIPM 6308840 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX ADV p194T 9/8-9/12/03 0.00 SERVICE AGREE~4ENT FOR 0.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 Refund: Check - SU~ER 0.00 2 X 10 LODGE POLE TREE 0.00 SUPPLIES 8998 0.00 Refund: Check - SU~94ER 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 PAGE 14 AMOUNT 450.00 540.00 292.50 48.00 1656.23 104.38 490.00 30.00 45.00 60.00 240.00 375.00 COMPOST WRKSHP 6/04 0.00 852.00 RE~JRN P.0.52863 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2008-2003 OPEN PURC O.00 FY 2002-8003 OPEN PL~C 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PCHC 0.00 0.00 Refund: Check - Rental 0.00 -35.10 578.97 362.55 490.30 4048.31 24.84 5469.87 300.00 REF CREDIT 16863 0.00 2906.00 HEF 16862 0.00 -2906.00 PER QUOTE CA~LING FOR 0.00 3000.83 0.00 3000.83 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 0.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 SERVICE AGREEMEArf FOR Refund: Check - SL~ER 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 94.27 1887.57 365.34 365.33 2712.51 260.00 1161.44 54.00 806.82 RUN DATE 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:35 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/12/03 CITY OF C~JPERTINO ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.~rans_date between "06/09/2003" and "06/13/2003" FUND - 118 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CNECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 1020 601786 1020 601787 1020 601788 1020 601788 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601789 1020 601790 1020 601791 1020 601792 1020 601793 1020 601794 1020 601795 1020 601795 1020 601795 1020 601795 1020 601795 1020 601795 TOT;~L CHECK 1020 601796 1020 601797 1020 601798 1020 601799 TOT~J~ CASH ACCOUNT TOTAL F~/ND 06/13/03 725 06/13/03 1578 06/13/03 2584 06/13/03 2584 06/13/03 310 06/13/03 310 06/13/03 746 06/13/03 745 06/13/03 M 06/13/03 2969 06/i3/03 2925 06/13/03 2925 06/13/03 2925 06/13/03 2925 06/13/03 2925 06/13/03 2925 TWISTERS G~ASTICS INC 5806449 UNITED RENTALS 6308840 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108501 VERIZ0N WIRELESS 1102403 VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS 1106500 VMI INC 4209223 Von Schoeler, Frances 550 WIC DISTRIBUTION 5606620 WULFSEERG REESE COLVIG & 4269212 WULFSBERG REESE COLVIG & 4239222 W[ILFSBERG REESE COLVIG & 4259313 WULFSBERG REESE COLVIG & 4259313 WULFSBERG REESE COLVIG & 4269212 WI~LFSBERG REESE COLVIG & 4239222 06/13/03 M YOO, YOUNG 580 06/13/03 M YO~N, UK HYI/N 560 06/13/03 M YUN, JONGYUN 580 06/13/03 602 ZEP ~U~JFACTURING COMPAN 6308840 TOTAL REPORT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR ARROWBOARD BI/LBS 8999 TRANSLATE RECYCLE NOT TR3~NSLATE 4/12-5/11 #309369653 MAY2003 ~608881609 MAY2003 SUPPLIES 16091 SONY PVM 14LC ~4ULTI FO REFD 39134 & 39136 ICE CREAM SUPPLIES SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR Refund: Check - SG~EH Refund: Check - SPRING REFDS 213594/213606 PARTS/SUPPLIES 8986 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 O,O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAGE 15 AMOUNT 16954.75 138.02 80.00 1789.02 1869.02 77.20 72.12 360.01 29169.05 107.00 381.90 714.98 1532.10 768.92 306.42 1840.80 3944.58 9127.80 72.00 72.00 177.00 247.98 568108.28 568108.28 568108.28 RDI~ DATE 06/12/03 TIME 14:46:35 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 03-127 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM TIlE FUNDS AS HEREINAFFER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING SUNE20,2003 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated representative has certified to accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds as hereinafter set forth in Exhibit "A". CERTIFIED: l~e-ctor ol(Administrative Services PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of July ,2003, by the following vote: Vote AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Members of the City Council ATTEST: APPROVED: City clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino 06/19/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.tran$_date between "06/I6/2003" and "06/20/2003" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 1020 601800 06/20/03 4 A T & T 1108501 1020 601800 06/20/03 4 A T & T 1108501 1020 601800 06/20/03 4 A T & T 1108501 1020 601800 06/20/03 4 A T & T 1108501 1020 601800 06/20/03 4 A T & T 1108501 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601801 1020 601803 1020 601804 1020 601804 TOTAL CHECK 06/20/03 7 06/20/03 7 06/20/03 2539 06/20/03 2319 06/20/03 2319 1020 601805 06/20/03 40 1020 601806 06/20/03 2013 1020 601807 06/20/03 2460 1020 601808 06/20/03 M2003 1020 601809 06/20/03 1165 1020 601810 06/20/03 M2003 1020 601811 06/20/03 1476 1020 601812 06/20/03 2232 1020 601812 06/20/03 2232 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601813 06/20/03 148 1020 601813 06/20/03 148 1020 601813 06/20/03 148 1020 601813 06/20/03 148 1020 601813 06/20/03 148 1020 601813 06/20/03 148 1020 601813 06~20/03 148 1020 601813 06/20/03 148 TOTAL CHECK 1020 801814 06/20/03 149 1020 601814 06/20/03 149 1020 601814 06/20/03 149 i020 601814 06/20/03 149 1020 601814 06/20/03 149 TOTAL CHECK ABAG PLAN CORPORATION 1104510 ABAG PLAN CORPORATION 1104540 ACS STATE & LOCAL SOLUTI 1102101 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERV 1108201 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERV 1108201 ALTEC INDUSTRIES INC 1108303 BAY AREA DISTRIBUTING CO 2708404 BERNARD, KAREN 1104510 BETHEL LUTHERAN CHURCH 110 BRUCE BARTON PUMP SERVIC 1108303 CALIFORNIA SPECIALIZED 1107502 CANNON DESIGN GROUP 110 CARIAGA, LOURDES 110 CARIAGA, LOURDES 110 CASH 1108501 CASH 1108408 CASH 6308840 CASH 1108407 CASH 1108830 CASH 1108315 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX PAGE 1 AMOUNT J~3NE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 20.10 JUNE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 48.25 JUNE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 20.10 JUNE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 20.10 JUNE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 20.10 0.00 128.65 PAR~A CONF / S.ABE 0.00 700.00 #GLP54734 LI PROPRTY 0.00 75.00 RLC CITATIONS APRIL03 0.00 5069.00 JTrLy - AUGUST 2002 0.00 10113.40 JULY-AUGUST 2001 0.00 14974.80 0.00 25088.20 IMPACT DRILL AND BITS 0.00 709.79 SUPPLIES 15143 0.00 218.40 BOOKS,TUTION SPRG03 0.00 572.98 REFD LGL NOTICE DPST 0.00 70.49 SUPPLIES 0.00 628.10 TRAINING G.CASTEEL 0.00 150.00 ARCH RVW 21446/22173 0.00 1810.60 CSGA~NSMNT 0.00 306.50 SSGARNSMNT 0.00 103.84 0.00 410.34 PETTY CASH 5/28-6/16 PETTY CASH 5/28-6/16 PETTY CASH 5/28-6/i6 PETTY CASH 5/28-6/I6 PETTY CASH 5/28-6/16 PETTY CASH 5/28-6/16 PETTy CASH 5/28-6/18 PETTY CASH 5/28-6/16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 O.OO 0.00 PETTy CASE 6/10-6/18 PETTY CASH 6/10-6/18 PETTY CASH 6/1046/18 PETTY CASH 6/10-6/18 PETTY CASH 6/10-6/18 3.18 12.90 15.00 26.94 28.00 37.74 166.35 87.55 30.09 92.19 262.02 RUN DATE 06/19/03 TIME 13:18:12 - FINI%NCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/19/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/16/2003" and "06/20/2003" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FDND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 1020 1020 TOTAL CEECK 601815 06/20/03 152 601816 06/20/03 1057 601816 06/20/03 1057 CEB;CONTINUING EDUCATION 1101500 CERIDIAN BENEFITS SERVIC 110 CERIDIA~ BENEFITS SERVIC 110 1020 601817 06/20/03 1156 CFA 110 1020 601818 06/20/03 174 COCA-COL~ 5706450 1020 601818 06/20/03 174 COCA-COLA 5706450 1020 601818 06/20/03 174 COCA-COL~ 5706450 1020 601818 06/20/03 174 COCA-COLA 5706450 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601819 06/20/03 178 1020 601820 06/20/03 M2003 1020 601821 06/20/03 183 1020 601822 06/20/03 192 1020 601822 06/20/03 192 1020 601822 06/20/03 192 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601823 06/20/03 844 1020 601823 06/20/03 844 1020 601823 06/20/03 844 1020 601823 06/20/03 844 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601824 06/20/03 198 1020 601825 06/20/03 M 1020 601826 06/20/03 2893 1020 601827 06/20/03 2085 1020 601828 06/20/03 2943 1020 801828 06/20/03 2943 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601829 06/20/03 M2003 1020 601830 06/20/03 1242 1020 601830 06/20/03 1242 1020 601830 06/20/03 1242 1020 601830 06/20/03 1242 TOTAL CHECK COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT 110 CONSTRUCTION ~t~NAGEMENT 110 COTTON SHIRES & ASSO INC 110 CUPERTINO MEDICAL CENTER 5806449 CUPERTINO MEDICAL CENTER 5806449 CUPERTINO MEDIC~L CENTER 5806449 CUPERTINO ROTARY CLUB 1103300 CUPERTINO ROTARY CLUB 1101500 CUPERTINO ROTARY CLUB 1101200 CUPERTINO ROTARY CLUB 1101000 CUPERTINO UNION SCHL DIS 5806349 DANG, Th~ 580 DAVID R FOX AJ~D COMPANY 5609112 DB PROMOTIONS 1103300 DECISION ONE CORPORATION 1108101 DECISION ONE CORPORATION 1108101 DEPT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES 1108005 DIGITAL PRINT IMPRESSION 1101075 DIGITAL PRINT IMPRESSION 1108601 DIGITAL PRINT IMPRESSION 1107301 DIGITAL PRINT IMPRESSION 1104510 CA CIVIL DISC 3UPDATE *FLEX DEP/240125 *FLEX HLTH/240125 0.00 141.26 0,00 349.94 0.00 522.42 0.00 872.36 CRA 0,00 128.85 FY 2002~2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 372.90 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 254.25 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 204.15 FY 2002'2003 OPEN PURC 0.0O 170.40 0.00 1001.70 #E7013899-0000 0.00 569.49 RFD ARCHITECT DPST 0.00 432.75 GEOLOGIC REVIEW 0.00 1528.00 TUBERCULOSIS/WIGET~ 0.00 15.00 TCULOSIS/ WROBLEWSKI 0.00 15.00 TUBERCULOSIS A.YOURG 0.00 15.00 0.00 45.00 03/04 DUES KITSEN 0.00 252.00 03/04 DUES KILIAN 0.00 252.00 03/04 DUBS KNAPP 0.00 252.00 03/04 DUBS JA~S/KWOK 0.00 504.00 0.00 1260.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 3368.69 Refund: Check - SPRING 0.00 55.00 SERV 2/15 TO 6/15/03 0.00 5130.00 FREIGHT CHRGS INV2077 0.00 7.77 SUPPLIES 17316 0.00 396.08 SERVICE CONTRACT FOR 6 0.00 1980.00 0.00 2378.08 CAD98241170 7/1-6/30 0.00 245.00 B.CARDS/M.NIH~I 0.00 61,54 B.CARDS/V.GUAPO 0.00 50.72 B.C~DS/G.C"~IAO 0.00 50.72 B.CARDS/JOB INFO 0.00 63.52 0.00 226.50 RUN DATE 06/19/03 TIME 13:18:12 FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/19/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FI/ND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/16/2003" and "06/20/2003" FUND - 110 - GENEP~AL FU~ CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VEHDOR ............. FUND/DEPT PAGE 3 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 601831 06/20/03 222 DKS ~SOCIATES 4209528 1020 601831 06/20/03 222 DKS ~SOCIATES 2709531 1020 601831 06/20/03 222 DKS ASSOCIATES 2709531 1020 601831 06/20/03 222 DKS ~SOCIATES 4209535 TOTAJ~ CHECK 1020 601832 06/20/03 28S] 1020 601833 06/20/03 2980 1020 601834 06/20/03 I376 1020 601835 06/20/03 1434 1020 601836 08/20/03 239 1020 601836 06/20/03 239 1020 601836 06/20/03 239 1020 601836 06/20/03 239 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601837 06/20/03 242 1020 601838 06/20/03 243 1020 601839 06/20/03 234 1020 601840 06/20/03 818 1020 601840 06/20/03 818 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601841 06/20/03 281 1020. 601841 06/20/03 281 1020 601841 06/20/03 281 1020 · 601841 06/20/03 281 1020 601841 06/20/03 281 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601842 06/20/03 291 1020 601843 06/20/03 1741 1020 601843 06/20/03 1741 1020 601843 06/20/03 1741 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601844 06/20/03 2046 1020 601845 06/20/03 298 1020 601845 06/20/03 298 1020 601845 06/20/03 298 1020 601845 06/20/03 298 SUSANA DOP~ S806249 DOWLING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1108601 DUDLEY ACOUSTICS INC 1108501 EDWARD $. W;tLSH CO. 1108303 ELECTRIC;iL DISTRIBUTORS 1108830 ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS 1108830 ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS 1108830 ELEC~ICAL DISTRIBUTORS 1108830 EMPLO~ENT DEVEL DEPT 110 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT 110 ENGINEERING DATA SERVICE 110 FLOYD D BROWN 1108505 FLOYD D BROWN 1108504 G~qDENL~ 1108315 G~RDENI~ 1108315 GA,qDEI~ 1108315 GARDENLA~D 1108315 GARDENLJ~ 1108314 GOLDEN TOUCH LA/fDSCAPING 1108314 GOVCONNECTION, INC. 5606640 GOVCONNECTION, INC. 6104800 GOVCONNECTION, INC. 1106100 GOVEP~ENT FINANCE OFFIC 1104100 GRAINGER INC 1108321 GRAINGER INC 1108303 GP~INGER INC 1108303 GRAINGER INC 6308840 PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT 0.00 1161.29 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 51817.74 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 4337.20 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.O0 24113.97 0.00 81430.20 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 2682.50 /~{AFFIX 7.6 UPDATE 0.00 675.00 SUPPLIES 15169 0.00 30.31 SUPPLIES 0~00 22.37 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PL~C 0.00 280.90 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PORC 0.00 2386.24 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 421.34 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PL~C 0.00 1398.23 0.00 4486.71 SIT/932-0014-5 0.00 16886.94 SDI/776-5260-0 0.00 869.16 ~AILING SERV R#22173 0.00 276.95 TIME/MATERIALS 0.00 132.60 TIME/MATERIAJ~S 0.00 132.60 0.00 265.20 pARTS/SUPPLIES 15140 0.00 613.i9 PA~qTS/SUPPLIES 15156 0.00 554.67 PARTS/SUPPLIES 15157 0.00 554.67 PJ%RTS/SUPPLIES 8984 0.00 504.48 P~RTS/SUPPLIES 15164 0.00 440.78 0.00 2667.79 ORC~ARD MAINT APR/JUN 0.00 2571.00 MEMORY STICK ADAPTER 0.00 75.78 MEMORY STICK J%DAPTER 0.00 1859.75 MEMORY STICK ADAPTER 0.00 283.61 0.00 2219.14 8 FU~ BAL/NET ASSETS 0.00 76.00 P/~RTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 250.96 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 -192.04 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 1979.79 P/LRTS/SUPPLIES 15177 0.00 149.03 RI/N DATE 06/19/03 TIME 13:18:12 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/19/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 4 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 C~ECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/16/2003,, and "06/20/2003" CASE ACCT CRECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 1020 601845 06/20/03 296 GRAINGER INC 1108303 1020 601845 06/20/03 298 GRAINGER INC 1108303 1020 601845 06/20/03 298 GRAINGER INC 1108315 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601846 1020 601847 1020 801847 TOTAL CHECK 06/20/03 1535 06/20/03 2565 06/20/03 2565 FLAINES & COMPANY INC 1104530 WESCO RECEIV~LES CORP 1108830 WESCO RECEIVABLES CORP 1108830 1020 601848 06/20/03 2510 HI-LINE 6308840 1020 601849 06/20/03 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108407 1020 601850 06/20/03 1898 ANTOMATIC PAIN CO. 1108830 1020 601850 06/20/03 1898 ALrTOMATIC PAIN CO. 1108303 1020 601850 06/20/03 1898 AUTOCRATIC PAIN CO. 1108315 1020 601850 06/28/03 1898 ALSO.TIC PAIN CO. 1108303 1020 601850 06/20/03 1898 AUTOMATIC PAIN CO. 1108315 1020 601850 06/20/03 1898 AUTOMATIC PAIN CO. 1108312 TOTAL CRECK 1020 601851 06/20/03 2360 1020 601852 06/20/03 337 1020 601853 06/20/03 343 1020 801854 06/20/03 2090 1020 601855 06/20/~3 2697 1020 601856 06/20/03 M2003 1020 601857 06/20/03 M2003 1020 801858 06/20/03 2818 1020 601859 06/20/03 2782 1020 601860 06/20/03 2954 1020 601861 06/20/03 710 1020 601862 06/20/03 2355 1020 601862 06/20/03 2355 TOTAL CHECK PETE HOWES- 1108201 ~UJSB~/%rDS & ASSOCIATES 1108303 IC~4A RETIREMENT TRUST-45 110 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS 1108101 INTELLAPRINT SYSTEMS 1108101 IRWIN SAVODNIK, M.D. 1104510 JAECO 1108501 JAY SIEC~ PRODUCTIONS 1106248 KAREN TOOMBS 5806249 KIMLEY-HOP~N ~ ASSOCIAT 4209534 KIMLEY-HORN ;LND ASSOCIAT 4209534 1020 601863 06/20/03 372 KINKO'S INC 5806449 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... PARTS/SUPPLIES PARTS/SUPPLIES PARTS/SUPPLIES RENEW/LL CROSS DIRECT SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 8711 PARTS/SUPPLIES 22484 PARTS/SUPPLIES 20528 FY 2002-2003 OPEN P~/RC FY 2002-2003 OPEN PLTRC FY 2002-2003 OPEN P~3RC FY 2002-2003 OPEN pLrRC FY 2002-2003 OPEN PDRC SAFETY TRAINING SUPPLIES RECEPTACLES FAX SERVICE 17356 ENGINEER COPIER R/~WL FITNESS DUTY REPORT GRADE BOND FEE RELSE SUPPLIES SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT iJ%MINATE SIGNS 22569 AMOUNT 201.46 60.56 165.01 2614.77 456.92 103.86 2841.56 2945.22 246.90 48.98 38.28 602.27 162.01 3302.51 3273.85 1387.96 8766.88 370.00 7354.04 6004.48 167.06 990.00 1100.00 20164.54 97.97 57.00 2000,00 3587.00 972.83 774.43 1747.26 38.97 RUN DATE 06/19/03 TI~4E 13:18:13 FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/19/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOOI~TING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FU~D SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/16/2003" and "06/20/2003" FUND - 110 - GENER/LL FUI~D PAGE 5 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT SUPPLIES 15153 0.00 223.12 SUPPLIES 15153 0.00 282.35 0.80 505.47 SUPPLIES 16465 0.00 13.85 CONF 9/7-10 QUALLS 0.00 420.00 UNUSED ARCHITECT DPST 0.80 985.56 REFD UNUSED MAIL DPST 0.00 70.55 BUS TOKENS FOR SU~94ER O.O0 816.75 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 361.76 PARTS 15165 0.00 278.02 PARTS/SUPPLIES 24148 0.00 37.36 J TRYBUS 385960533 0.08 223.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 26.90 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 375.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 377.53 0.00 779.43 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 579.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 3504.60 MYDRALIC FORK LIFT 0.00 797.32 "NAT'L DEF 0.00 18021.90 PARTS 24147 0.00 27.60 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 4485.60 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 124.16 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 83.57 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 6.16 COFFEE 0.00 43.29 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 388.90 0.00 646.08 UNION DUES 0.00 586.71 REFD UNUSED MAIL DPST 0.00 125.44 PERS 1959 0.00 119.04 RUN DATE 06/19/03 TIME 13:16:13 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/19/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 6 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 UNECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND EELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/16/2003" and "06/20/2003" ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX 1020 601884 06/20/03 833 P E R S 110 *FEES BYBK 0.00 1020 601864 06/20/03 833 P E R S 110 PERS SPEC 0.00 1020 601884 06/20/03 833 P E R S 110 PERS EMPLY 0.00 1020 601884 06/20/03 833 P E R S 110 FERS BUYBK 0.00 1020 601884 06/20/03 833 P E R S 110 *PERS BYBK 0.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1108503 5/08-6/07 0.00 5606620 5/08-6/07 0.00 1108503 5/08-6/07 0.00 1108504 5/08-6/07 0.00 5708510 5/08-6/07 0.00 1101500 5/08-6/07 0.00 1108505 5/08-6/07 0.00 1101500 5/08-6/07 0.00 1108501 5/08-6/07 0.00 1108505 5/08-6/07 0.00 1108501 5/08-6/07 0.00 1108504 5/08-6/07 0.00 5708510 5/08-6/07 0.00 1108501 5/08-6/07 0.00 0.00 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC 1020 601885 06/20/03 2692 SBC TOTAL CHECK 511 PACIFIC BELL/WOALDCOM 1108507 511 PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM 1108501 511 PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM 1108501 1020 601886 06/20/03 1020 601886 06/20/03 1020 601886 06/20/03 TOTAL CHECK PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC G~ & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC AMOUNT 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601687 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601867 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 1020 601887 06/20/03 513 TOTkL CHECK 462.65 142.79 25219.91 37.52 180.14 26162.05 88.43 88.43 242.37 484.69 242.37 88.42 242.37 242.37 242.37 88.42 54.56 88.42 68.43 88.42 2370.07 #5170211 3/01-4/27 0.00 22.96 #2522405 5/01-6/15 0.00 16.33 #2719771 5/01-6/06 0.00 89.42 0.00 128.71 1108504 4/30-5/28 0.00 1108507 4/30 5/28 0.00 1108503 4/30-5/28 0.00 1108505 4/30-5/28 0.00 1108505 4/30-5/28 0.00 1108602 4/30-5/29 0.00 1108511 4/30-5/28 0.00 1108407 4/30-5/28 0.00 1108501 4/30-5/28 0.00 1108303 4/30-5/28 0.00 1108314 4/30-5/28 0.00 1108312 4/30-5/28 0.00 1108315 4/30-5/28 0.00 1108830 4/30-5/29 0.00 5208003 4/30-5/29 O.OO 5606820 4/30-5/28 0.00 5606640 4/30-5/28 0.00 5708510 4/30-5/29 0.00 0.00 7602.25 894.61 1842.29 3601.06 243.10 2434.60 309.73 3206.93 4992.44 4361.29 731.56 325.23 199.26 56.57 8.88 2816.54 248.03 5077.96 38911.83 CUPERTINO SPORTS CTR 1020 601888 06/20/03 1699 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC C 4269212 1020 601889 06/20/03 1952 PAPA 1108407 0.00 318.00 SEMINAR 7/23 POLITO 0.00 55.00 RI~N DATE 06/19/03 TIME 13:18:13 - FINANCIAL ACCObqTTING 06/19/03 CITY OF C~3PERTINO 1020 801890 06/20/03 526 1020 601890 06/20/03 826 1020 601890 06/26/03 526 1020 601890 06/20/03 526 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601891 06/20/03 533 1020 601892 06/20/03 536 1020 601893 06/20/03 1392 1020 601894 06/20/03 M2003 1020 601895 06/20/03 2981 1020 601896 06/20/03 M2003 1020 601897 06/20/03 2605 1020 601898 06/20/03 590 1020 601899 06/20/03 2482 1020 601900 06/20/03 621 1020 601900 06/20/03 621 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601901 06/20/03 258 1020 601902 06/20/03 1636 1020 601903 06/20/03 628 1020 601904 06/20/03 2397 1020 601905 06/20/03 644 1020 601905 06/20/03 644 1020 601905 06/20/03 644 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601906 06/20/03 2261 1020 601907 06/20/03 2439 1020 601908 06/20/03 2948 1020 601909 06/20/03 2051 1020 601910 06/20/03 2065 PENINSULA DIGITAL IMAGIN 110 PENINSULA DIGITAL IMAGIN 4239222 PENINSULA DIGITAL IMAGIN 4239222 PENINSU~ DIGITAL IMAGIN 4239222 PERS LONG TE~ CARE PROG 110 ANNE MARIE PETERSON 5806249 PINE PRESS 1106448 POTT, ROGER 5700000 POWER INDUSTRIES 1108830 PROGRESSIVE CONSTRUCTION 110 PROMOTE FOR LESS 1104400 RICH VOSS TRUCKING INC 5208003 ROBERT HALF TECH/~OLOGY 6104800 THE MERCI3RY NEWS 4239222 THE MERCI3RY NEWS 2607401 S~a/TIA CL~ COUNTY 110 S~NTA CLJ%RA CTY SHERIFF 1104510 SANTA CL~ COL~ SHERI 1102100 SAVIN CREDIT CORPORATION 1104310 SCREEN DESIGNS 1106342 SCREEN DESIGNS 5806449 SCREEN DESIGNS 1106343 SECRETARY OF STATE 1101500 SERVICE STATION SYSTEMS, 6308840 CLAUDE PENN 1106248 SIADAT ENTERPRISES, INC. 6308840 SKILLPATH SEMIN~%RS 6104800 PAGE 7 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT IMPROREMENT pLAi~S 0.00 237.50 INITIAL BID SETS 0.00 2512.94 INITIAL BID SETS 0.00 7335.47 INITIAL BID SETS 0.00 93.12 0.00 10179.03 PERS LTC/#2405 0.00 215.09 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 1089.00 PRINT 4TH PROGi~AMS 0.00 676.56 REED 8 SESSIONS 0.00 344.00 SUPPLIES 15152 0.00 225.76 EEFD DESIGN RVW DPST 0.00 111.47 ASSORTED 4" GLOW STICK 0.00 612.80 COMPOST JL*NE 2003 0.00 700.00 A.RICKS W/E 6/06 0.00 864.00 163067-051103 DPL EOP 0.00 1476.28 186200-052403 ADS 0.00 390.78 0.00 1887.06 V ORTEGA 563312780 0.00 542.77 FINGERPRINTS APR03 0.00 48.00 LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVIC 0.00 480787.17 H2400800225 JUL2003 0.00 137.83 STAFF SHIRTS 0.00 1623.75 LACROSSE SHIRTS 0.00 400.52 VOLUNTEER SHIRTS 0.00 297.69 0.00 2321.96 NOTARY EXAM D.JOH~SON 0.00 40.00 TIME/METERIALS 0.00 220.01 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 800.00 C3~ WASHES 5/01-31 0.00 117.00 SEMINAR 7/2 NOWACK 0.00 499.00 RLTN DATE 06/19/03 TIME 13:18:13 FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/19/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 C~ECK REGISTER - DISBDRSEMENT FI/ND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/16/2003" and "06/20/2003" FUND - 110 - GENER~ FUND C~E ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 1028 681911 86/20/03 2810 1020 601912 08/20/03 2810 1020 601913 06/20/03 2320 1020 601914 06/20/03 1523 1020 601915 06/20/03 2708 1020 601916 06/20/03 891 1020 601917 06/20/83 677 1020 601918 06/20/03 1065 1020 601919 06/20/03 700 1020 601920 06/20/03 701 1020 681920 06/20/03 701 TOTAL CHECK 1020 681921 06/20/03 1564 1020 601922 06/20/03 M2003 SMART & FINAL 5806449 SMART & FINAL 5506549 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIkL 6308840 JANA SOKALE 5609112 SOUTHCON~ TECHNOLOGIES I 1188830 JOA~ SPITSEN 5506549 STATE STREET BANK & TWUS 110 T ~ D C059~ONICATIONS I 6104800 TARGET SPECI~J~TY PRODUCT 1108312 TARGET STORES 5806349 TANGET STORES 5706490 TEACHERS' HELPER 1106342 TEE CLIFFS 1104400 TEE CLIFFS HOTEL 1107502 THE URBA/q L4~ INSTITUTE 1107200 THEATERFUN INC 5806249 T~EASURER OF ALJ~4EDA COU 110 AL TSUGAWA 1104400 AL TSUGAWA 1104400 TWINKLE STAR MUSIC 1106500 UNITED WAY OF SANTA CLAR 110 US GA~4ES 1106342 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108501 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX PAGE 8 AMOUNT SUPPLIES 17452 0.00 83.82 TP~VEL P~TY SUPPLIES 0.00 300.00 PANTS/TOOLS 15175 0.00 72.04 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 1094.60 SUPPLIES 0.00 4825.50 TOM GUIDE 6/24 0.00 250.00 *PERS DEF 0.00 3915.93 TROUBLESHOOT PORTS 0.00 110.00 PY 2002-2003 OPEN P~/RC 0.00 3097.03 CAMP SUPPLIES 25193 0.00 22.92 PATIO FL~I~TJRE 17281 0.00 745.21 0.00 768.13 SUPPLIES 25189 0.00 10.79 CONF ~144948 TSUGAWA 0.00 445.50 REGISTER G.C~TEEL 0.80 445.50 NEW S~[APE OF SUBURIA 0.00 63.31 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 896.00 A LOPEZ JR 566398126 0.00 253.84 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 500.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR O.00 500.00 0.00 lO00.OO RUN DATE 06/19/03 TIME 13:18:13 FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING~ 06/19/03 CITY OF CLrPERTINO PAGE 9 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date betweem "06/16/2003" and "06/20/2003- FUND - 110 - GENERkL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT I020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108201 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108501 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108503 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108504 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108505 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108602 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 5208003 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 5606620 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108102 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 6104800 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1101200 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1102403 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS i107501 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1107503 1020 601933 06/20/03 310 VERIZON WIRELESS 1108005 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601934 06/20/03 1329 VICENT WAnG 1106500 1020 601935 06/20/03 1939 WINZLER & KELLY CONSULTI 2709443 1020 601935 06/20/03 1939 WINZLER & KELLY CONSLTLTI 2709443 1020 601935 06/20/03 1939 WINZLER & KELLY CONSULTI 2709443 TOTAL CEECK 1020 601936 06/20/03 2845 JLrLIE WONG 8806249 1020 601937 06/20/03 793 N/kNCY WULFF 5806249 1020 601938 06/20/03 M2003 YEH'S DEVELOPMENT LLC 110 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZUF54ALT ENGINEERING GROU 2709531 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZLTMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209534 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZUMW~tLT ENGINEERING GROU 1108601 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZLTMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 1108601 1020 801940 06/20/03 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 1108601 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209534 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZL~4WALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209534 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209534 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZU~ALT ENGINEERING GROU 1108601 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209534 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZU~l%LT ENGINEERING GROU 1108601 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZL~WALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209535 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209116 i020 801940 08/20/03 805 ZOMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 1108601 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 1108601 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209116 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZL~ALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209116 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GRCU 1108601 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZUi~WALT ENGINEERING GROU 1108601 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209533 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209533 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT #4088456999 ~Y2003 0.00 446.04 #4088456999 NAY2003 0.00 600.82 #4088456999 MAY2003 0.00 98.74 #4088456999 MAY2003 0.00 490.37 ~4088456999 MAY2003 0.00 101.02 #4088456999 MAY2003 0.00 190.87 #4088458999 [4AY2003 0.00 46.73 ~4088456999 [4AY2003 0.00 93.46 #4088456999 MAY2003 0.0O 253.29 #4088458999 MAY2003 0.00 50.68 #4088456999 MAY2003 0.00 50.68 #4088456999 M3%Y2003 0.00 77.26 #4088456999 MAY2003 0.00 53.52 ~4088456999 ~4AY2003 0.00 317.70 #4088456999 MAY2003 0.00 65.12 0.00 2936.30 PIANO TUNING 0.00 70.00 PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 29936.47 7604.91 13660.96 51202.34 1241.00 1176.00 RFD UNUSED FEES 0.00 335.43 PUBLIC WORKS CO~IRACT 0.00 1186.79 PROJECT MGI4T SVC 0.00 26.17 PROJECT MGMT SVC 0.00 1452.21 PROJECT MGMT SVC 0.00 449.95 PROJECT MGMT SVC 0.00 1256.75 PROJECT MGNT SVC 0.00 22.65 RUN DATE 06/19/03 TItlE 13:18:13 FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/19/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transac~.trans_date between "06/16/2003" and "06/20/2003" FUND - 110 - GENER3%L FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 1020 601940 06/20/03 805 TOTAL CHECK ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 1108601 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 1108601 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209533 1020 601941 06/20/03 2361 FIRST BANKCARD 1101800 1020 601941 06/20/03 2361 FIRST BANKCARD 1104300 1020 601941 06/20/03 2361 FIRST BANKCARD 1104300 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601942 TOTAL REPORT 06/20/03 2990 SOUTHERI~ UT;~q SCENIC TOU 550 DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 PAGE 10 AMOUNT 115.34 403.72 9.56 11606.26 CO~INCIL MEALS 0.00 279.47 CONFERENCE/PARKING 0.00 465.32 LEGAL NOTICE 0.00 978.20 0.00 1722.99 SHAKESPEARE/DESERT TR 0.00 13199.00 0.00 933916.08 0.00 933916.08 0.00 933916.08 R~ DATE 06/19/03 TIME 13:18:13 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 03-128 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFI'ER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING JUNE27,2003 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated representative has certified to accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds as hereinafter set forth in Exhibit "A". CERTIFIED: D~rect~,~._o f Ac~ninistrative-S ervic es / PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of July ,2003, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino 06/26/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 1 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/08 CHECK REGISTSR - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between ,,06/23/2003,, and ,06/27/2003- CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 1020 599473 V 02/28/03 2584 1020 601620 V 06/20/03 M2003 1020 601833 V 06/20/03 2980 1020 601943 06/27/03 859 1020 601944 06/27/03 13 1020 601945 06/27/03 2994 1020 601946 06/27/03 29 1020 601947 06/27/03 1884 1020 601947 06/27/03 1884 TOTAL C~iECK 1020 601948 06/27/03 2276 1020 601948 06/27/03 2276 TOTAL C~ECK 1020 601949 06/27/03 44 1020 601949 06/27/03 44 TOTAL URECK 1020 601950 1020 601951 1020 601951 TOTAL CHECK 06/27/03 2767 06/27/03 67 06/27/03 57 1020 601952 06/27/03 61 1020 601952 06/27/03 61 1020 601952 06/27/03 61 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601953 06/27/03 M 1020 601954 06/27/03 M 1020 601955 06/27/03 2504 1020 601956 06/27/03 2601 1020 601957 06/27/03 968 i020 601957 06/27/03 968 TOTAL CHECK UNIVERSAL DIALOG, INC. 1103300 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 110 DOWLING ASSOCIATES, INC. 1106601 A CATERED AFFAIR 1103300 ACME & SONS SANITATION C 5606640 ADVE~I~JRES IN 1106500 Llq~NE DIANE AITKEN 5706450 ALBERTSONS-NORTHER/q DIVI 1106343 ~J~BERTSONS-NOR~"HERN DI¥I 1106343 AMERICAN P~D CROSS 1104400 ANERICA~ RED CROSS 1104400 1020 601958 APEX PRODUCTS, LLC 1108505 1104510 1104510 ARTISTIC PLANT CREATIONS 1108501 ASTISTIC PLANT CREATIONS 1108503 ARTISTIC pLANT CREATIONS 1108505 AZARYA, OFER 580 BASK, DAVID 580 A~NE-LOR~AINE BARI 5706450 BALL HITCH RAMPS 1106343 BAP AUTO PARTS 6308840 BAP AUTO PARTS 6308840 06/27/03 720 BATTERY SYSTEMS 6308840 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT T~SLATION 1/17-1/30/ 0.00 -770.85 RFD ARCHITECT DPST 0.00 -432.75 TEAFFIX 7.6 UPDATE 0.00 -675.00 50% DEPOSIT 7/20 0.00 3545.19 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 168.63 GIFTS/A~NNL VOL RECOGN 0.00 2000.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 150.00 SUPPLIES 25183 0.00 11.15 SUPPLIES 22515 0.00 17.30 0.00 28.45 WATER DELIVERY AND DIS 0.00 9.46 WATER DELIVERY ~ DIS 0.00 36.29 0.00 45.79 CERTIFICATION FEE 0.00 184.00 CERTIFICATION FEE 0.00 8.00 O.OO 192.00 SUPPLIES 0.00 92.01 EMPLOYEE COFFEE SERV 0.00 224.68 EMPLOYEE COFFEE SERV 0.00 418.44 0.00 643.12 RUI~ DATE 06/26/03 TIME 13:35:50 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/26/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOL~4TING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_da~e between "06/23/2003" and "06/27/2003" FHND - i10 - GENERAL FUNq) CASH ACCT CHECK NO 1020 601959 1020 601960 1020 601961 1020 601962 1020 601963 1020 601964 1020 601965 1020 601966 1020 601967 1020 601969 1020 601969 1020 601970 1029 601971 1020 601971 1020 601971 1020 601971 TOT;%L CHECK 1020 601972 1020 601973 1020 601974 1020 601974 1020 601974 TOTAL CRECK 1020 601975 1020 601976 1020 601977 1020 601978 1020 601979 1020 601980 ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 05/27/03 2995 06/27/03 M 06/27/03 M 06/27/03 91 06/27/03 2680 06/27/03 2934 06/27/03 M2003 06/27/03 100 06/27/03 1066 06/27/03 130 06/27/03 130 06/27/03 1145 06/27/03 1476 06/27/03 1476 06/27/03 1476 06/27/03 1476 BAY TOOL & SUPPLY, INC. 6308840 BEN DAVID, ESTHER 580 BEN-MOSRE, N~JRIT 580 DR JOEL BERGER 5806449 BERRYMAN & HENIGAR 1107502 BINDVIEW CORPOP~TION 6109856 BLACK~I3P~, SUS~ 5700000 BMI IMAGING SYSTEMS 1104300 BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRI 5208003 CALIFORxNIA PARK ~ EEUE 1106100 CALIFORNIA PkRK~gD RECR 1106500 C3{LIFORNIA SUEVEYING & D 1108101 CAIgNON DESIGN GROUP 110 CANNON DESIGN GROUP 110 C3LNNON DESIGN GROUP 110 CA/{NON DESIGN GROUP I10 06/27/03 M2003 CAPRCEM 06/27/03 1460 TONI CARREIRO 06/87/03 148 CASH 06/27/03 148 CASE 06/27/03 148 C~H 1101060 1101065 2708404 1108501 1108201 06/27/03 M C~, S~%NGI~ 06/27/03 M C~S, LOUIS 06/27/03 M CREN, CAROL 06/27/03 M CHEN, C"HIEH PING 06/27/03 M2003 CEEN, JIgDy 06/27/03 M CHEVROT, CATHERINE 580 580 580 58O 58O ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SHOP TOOLS 15141 Refund: Check - SUF~4ER Refund: Check - SU594ER SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR PLAN CHECKS 5/17-6/13 RMS CONSOLE USER SERVE PRO-P. ATED 39 DAYS MICROFII~ PROCESSING MAY2003 RECYCiJ~LES MBRSHP P~NWL M.PRESTON 107490 YEI=AVICH R~L 'C' PAPER/ARCH SCALES ARCHITECTL~ REVW PETT"f CILSH 6/10-6/19 PET~ CASH 6/10-6/19 PE/~fY CASH 6/10-6/19 Refund: Check - SLUR Refund: Check - REFL~ Refund: Check - REFUb~D Refund: Check - SUeR 45% BOND RELEASE Refund: Check - SU~ER SALES TAX 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.O0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.OO PAGE 2 AMOUNT 216.87 145.00 89.00 90.00 3694.95 18258.27 40.07 174 . 62 201.95 125.00 125.00 57.47 330.00 440.00 330.00 660.00 1760.00 165.00 382.20 77.62 31.50 15.00 124.22 120.00 100.00 100.00 61.00 54 .00 RUN DATE 06/26/03 TIME 13:35:51 FINANCIAL ACCOU~ING 08/26/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 3 ACCOLTNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMEI~T FU~ SELECTION CRITERIA: trans&c~.trans_date between "06/23/2003" and "06/27/2003" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 1020 601981 06/27/03 1432 CHILDREN'S DISCOVERY MUS 5806349 1020 601982 06/27/03 1453 CHRISTOPHERS CA~PET SERV 1108505 1020 601983 06/27/03 M CFU3A, NANCY 580 1020 601984 06/27/03 M CHLrNG, BRUCE 580 1020 601985 06/27/03 169 CLEARY CONSLrLTANTS INC 1108101 1020 601986 06/27/03 175 COCA-COLA USA 5606620 1020 601987 06/27/03 184 JAYMES COURTNEY 5606620 1020 601988 06/27/03 1579 1020 601988 06/27/03 1579 TOTAL CHECK CUPERTINO LOC-N-STOR LLC 1108503 CUPERTINO LOC-N-STOR LLC 1108501 1020 601989 06/27/03 192 1020 601989 06/27/03 192 1020 601989 06/27/03 192 1020 601989 06/27/03 192 1020 601989 06/27/03 192 1020 601989 06/27/03 192 1020 601989 06/27/03 192 1020 601989 06/27/03 192 TOTAL CMECK CHPERTINO ~[EDICAL CENTER 5806449 CUPERTINO MEDIC3~L CENTER 5806449 CUPERTINO MEDICAL CENTER 5806449 CUPERTINO MEDIC~kL CENTER 5806449 CUPERTINO MEDICAL CENTER 5806449 CUPERTINO MEDICAL CENTER 5806449 CUPERTINO MEDICAL CENTER 5806449 CUPERTINO MEDICAL CENTER 5806449 1020 601990 06/27/03 198 CUPERTINO UNION SCHL DIS 2308004 1020 601991 06/27/03 198 CUPERTINO UNION SCHL DIS 1106343 1020 601992 06/27/03 2996 CYBEX INTERNATIONAL. INC 5706450 1020 601993 06/27/03 2866 DI~A R. ELROD 1107405 1820 601994 06/27/03 1212 DAVID M WILLIAMS 1108314 1020 601994 06/27/03 1212 DAVID M WILLIAMS 5806649 TOTAL CHECK 1020 601995 06/27/03 1020 601995 06/27/03 1020 601995 06/27/03 1020 601995 06/27/03 1020 601995 06/27/03 1028 601995 06/27/03 1020 601995 06/27/03 1020 601995 06/27/03 1020 601995 06/27/03 1020 601995 06/27/03 1020 601995 06/27/03 209 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 1108303 209 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 1108302 209 DE RNZA SERVICES INC 1108315 209 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 1108314 209 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 1108407 209 DE /LNZA SERVICES INC 1108501 209 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 1108502 209 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 1108503 209 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 1108509 209 DE ~/~ZA SERVICES INC 1108506 209 DE ~/qZA SERVICES INC 1108504 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX FIELD TRP 4/24 17248 0.00 COkRPET REPAIRS 0.00 Refund: Check - SU~ER 0.00 Refund: Check - SL~ER 0.00 GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 0.00 FOUNTAIN MACHINE SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 ~G-33 JULY 2003 RENT ~G-34 JULY 2003 RENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 AMOUNT 85.00 250.00 22.00 200.00 9476.50 54.12 200,00 217.00 217.00 434.00 T~ERCULOSIS/M.LOWE 0.00 15.00 TL~ERCR3LOSIS/GLEAVES 0.00 15.00 TTIBERCLrLOSIS/J.LOW 0.00 15.00 TUBERCLrLOSIS/WALDROPH 0.00 15.00 T%3BERCLrLOSIS/T.KIM 0.00 15.00 T%3BERCULOSIS/MU~O 0.00 I5.00 TUBERCLrLOSIS/SPENHOFF 0.00 15.00 TUBERCULOSIS/GOLKAR 0.00 15.00 0.00 120.00 GRDN GATE SCR 4/15,17 0.00 271.20 PERMIT 12939 0.00 5.00 PLaCARD/GRIPS 17212 0.00 33.07 SERV 5/7-6/18/03 0.00 7203.42 BEE SWARM CAPTURE 0.00 132.00 BEE SWARM CAPq~JRE 0.00 100.00 JANITORIAL JUNE 2003 0.00 1479.42 JANITORIAL OVJNE 2003 0.00 739.71 JANITORIAL JUNE 2003 0,00 739.71 JANITORIAL J~ 2003 0.00 4438.26 JANITORIAL JUNE 2003 0.00 1004.89 RUN DATE 06/26/03 TIME 13;35:51 - FINANCI~J~ ACCOUNTING 06/26/03 CITY OF CDPERTINO ACCOUNTING PRRIOD: 12/03 CKECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA; transact.trans_date between -06/23/2003. and "06/27/2003,, FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 1020 601995 08/27/03 209 1020 601995 06/27/03 209 1020 601995 06/27/03 209 1020 601995 06/27/03 209 1020 601995 06/27/03 209 1020 601995 06/27/03 209 1020 601995 06/27/03 209 1020 601995 06/27/03 209 1020 601995 06/27/03 209 1020 601995 06/27/03 209 TOTkL CHECK DE ANZA SERVICES INC 5708510 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 1108507 DE A/qZA SERVICES INC 1108505 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 1108508 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 5606620 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 5606640 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 5708510 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 1108505 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 1108504 DE ANZA SERVICES INC 1108504 1020 601996 06/27/03 1295 BETH DEKKER 5806349 1020 601997 06/27/03 M DEL ROSARIO, VIRGINIA 580 1020 601998 06/27/03 M DERVIN, VICTOR 580 1020 601999 06/27/03 2795 DEVCON ASSOCIATES XVI 4239222 1020 602000 06/27/03 850 DIDDAMS A~ZING PARTY ST 5806349 1020 602001 06/27/03 1242 1020 602001 06/27/03 1242 1020 602001 06/27/03 1242 TOTAL ClgECK DIGITA3~ PRINT IMPRESSION 1101070 DIGITAL PRINT IMPP~ESSION 1101070 DIGITAL PRINT IMPRESSION 1107301 1020 602002 06/27/03 222 DKS ASSOCIATES 1108602 1020 602003 06/27/03 M DUCH3~E, T~iERESE 580 1020 602004 06/27/03 M2003 ERLU1TD, M~INE 110 1020 602005 06/27/03 251 EVANS WEST VALLEY SPRAY 1108303 1020 602006 06/27/03 253 EXCH~GE LINEN SERVICE 5606620 1020 602006 06/27/03 253 EXCHANGE LINEN SERVICE 5606620 1020 602006 06/27/03 253 EXCHANGE LINEN SERVICE 1106265 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602007 06/27/03 260 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 1103300 1020 602008 06/27/03 2304 FIELD PAOLI ARCHITECq~E 4269212 1020 602009 06/27/03 M FINE, ~REW 580 1020 602010 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BANKC~D 5708510 1020 602011 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BA/~KC3~D 1020 602011 06/27/03 2361 FIRST EANKCARD TOTAL CHECK 1104300 PAGE 4 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT JANITORIAL JUNE 2003 0.00 719.28 JANITORIAL JUNE 2003 0.00 2685.20 JANITORIAL JUNE 2003 0.00 3500.12 JlbNITORIAL JUNE 2003 0.00 140.13 JANITORI~J~ J//NE 2003 0.00 378.16 JANITORIAL JUNE 2003 0.00 514.21 JANITORIAL SPRTS TRLR 0.00 694.43 St~POO CARPETS 0.00 300.00 SPECIAL Q CTR 5/2003 0.00 260.00 SCRUB t{ALLWAY TILES 0.00 135.00 0.00 32130.84 TRAINING/SU~ER STAFF 0.00 400.00 Refund: Check - SU~ER 0.00 60.00 Refund: Check - SD~ER 0.00 345.00 JULY 2003 RENT 0.00 16180.00 CAMPER CUBS 22574 0.00 17.30 WINDOW ENV/LGL NOTICE 0.00 650.00 WINDOW ENV/LGL NOTICE 0.00 700.00 WINDOW EN~;/LGL NOTICE 0.00 1226.72 0.00 2576.72 ON CALL TRAFFIC SERV 0.00 230.00 Refund: Check - Refund 0.00 55.00 45% BOND RELEASE 0.00 31S0.00 TREE SPRAY MEMORIAL 0.00 1500.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 57.77 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 441.62 SPCL EVENT LINENS 0.00 96.06 0.00 595.47 CODRIER SERVICE 0.00 49.39 PUBLIC WORKS CONTP. ACT 0.00 1451.81 REFDS 216825 & 216826 0.00 250.00 J~ 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 129.66 JIINE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 337.31 JLTNE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 35.00 0.00 372.31 RUN DATE 06/26/03 TIME 13:35:51 FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/26/03 CITY OF CUP~RTIN© ACCOL~TING PERIOD: 12/03 CMECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FTIND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.tran$_date between "06/23/2003" and "08/27/2003" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND PAGE 5 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 602012 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BANKCARD 1108314 1020 602012 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BANKCARD 1108501 1020 602012 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BANKC~D 1108507 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602013 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BANKC~RD 6104800 1020 602013 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BANKC~D 1104000 1020 602013 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BANKC~D 5606640 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602014 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BANKCAR/D 1108501 1020 682814 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BANKCARD 5708510 1020 602014 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BI~NKCARD 1108504 1020 602014 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BA~NKC~D 1108505 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602015 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BANECARD 5806649 1020 602015 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BANKCARD 5606620 1020 602015 06/27/03 2361 FIRST B~/qKC--ARD 5606640 TOTAL C"HECK 1020 602016 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BAiqKC~D 1108201 1020 602017 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BA~KCAXD 1108314 1020 602017 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BANKC~ 1108506 1020 602017 06/27/03 2361 FIRST EANKCAP~ 5708510 1020 602017 06/27/03 2361 FIRST BANKC~ 1108504 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602018 06/27/03 816 FLOYD D BROWN 5606660 1020 602019 06/27/03 268 1020 602019 06/27/03 268 1020 602019 06/27/03 268 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602020 06/27/03 M2003 FOSTER BROS SECURITY SYS 1108314 FOSTER BROS SECURITY SYS 1108504 FOSTER BROS SECURITY SYS 1108501 FRIENDS OF LONG MARINE L 5806349 1020 602021 06/27/03 M GANGAPURKAR, SUNITA 580 1020 602022 06/27/03 2476 G~EN EQUIPMENT C~INIC 5606640 1020 602023 06/27/03 1942 GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE 6104800 1020 802024 06/27/03 298 GRAINGER INC 1108303 1020 602024 06/27/03 298 GRAINGER INC 1108314 1020 602024 06/27/03 298 GR3%INGER INC 5708510 1028 602024 06/27/03 298 GRAINGER INC 5606640 1020 602024 06/27/03 298 GRAINGER INC 5606640 1020 602024 06/27/03 298 GR3%INGER INC 1108312 JUNE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 234.88 J~INE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 770.77 J~ 2003 STATE,lENT 0.00 15.57 0.00 1021.22 J~3NE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 1151.53 JI/NE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 47.80 JTJNE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 45.95 0.00 1245.28 J~3NE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 311.67 JTINE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 115.56 JUNE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 367.36 ~373NE2003 STATEMENT 0.00 130.30 0.00 924.89 JI~NE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 897.04 JIINE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 21.57 JTINE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 200.53 0.00 1119.14 J~E 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 59.94 J~E 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 111.91 JI/NE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 95.56 JTJNE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 426.62 JUNE 2003 STATEMENT 0.00 50.09 0.00 684.18 KITCHEN SYSTEM SERV 0.00 228.40 SUPPLIES 0.00 172.09 SERV CALL/SUPPLIES 0.00 184.00 SUPPLIES 0.00 22.00 0.00 378.09 ADM/Sb~R SCIENCE 0.00 260.00 Refund: Check - SU~ER 0.00 119.00 PARTS/SUPPLIES 15962 0.00 41.57 6-PACK TEAM PASS EXPIR 0.00 9995.00 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 113.65 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 301.59 PY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 189.99 PA/~TS/SUPPLIES 0.00 15.71 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 142.95 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00 45.39 RUN DATE 06/26/03 TIME 13:35:51 - FINI%NCIAL ACCOUNTING q-Ss 06/26/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_da~e between ,'06/23/2003,, and "06/27/2003,, CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 1020 602024 06/27/03 298 GRAINGER IHC 1108312 1020 602024 06/27/03 298 G~AINGER INC 1108303 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602025 06/27/03 M HALL, MARY A/~TN 580 1020 602026 06/27/03 M }L~;~BUSA, JENNIE 580 1020 602027 06/27/03 327 HELLO DIRECT INC 1108501 1020 602027 06/27/03 327 HELLO DIRECT INC 6104800 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602028 06/27/03 2565 WESCO RECEIV~LES CORP 1108830 1020 602029 06/27/03 1410 HILLYARD 5606640 1020 602030 06/27/03 M HO, ELAINE 580 1020 602031 06/27/03 2612 RONA~LD HOGUE 5506549 1020 602032 06/27/03 2983 HONDA PENINSUI~ DUCATI 1108314 1020 602033 06/27/03 M2003 HONG FU 1106343 1020 602034 06/27/03 1898 AUTOMATIC P~IN CO. 1108315 1020 602034 06/27/03 1898 AUTOMATIC P~IN CO. 1108315 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602035 06/27/03 2972 JESSICA NDANG 5606620 1020 602036 06/27/03 M Horiuchi, Fred 550 1020 602037 06/27/03 2392 INTERIOR SYSTEMS AND SER 1108504 1020 602038 06/27/03 M2003 JEROSZKO, ED 5700000 1020 602039 06/27/03 2285 ~ATHRYN KELLY JOESTEN 1106500 1020 602039 06/27/03 2285 ~THRY/q KELLY JOESTEN 1106265 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602040 06/27/03 M JOHNSTON, DI~/~E 580 1020 602041 06/27/03 M JOINER, MJ~RAGARET 580 1020 602042 06/27/03 M2003 JOHG, DERRICK 5700000 1020 602043 06/27/03 2936 Y~PAL~IKO HAWAII~%N B;~ND 5806349 1020 602044 06/27/03 M2003 KHGRGIN, IGOR 1100000 1020 602045 06/27/03 M KIM, KYEONG 580 ..... DESCRIPTION PARTS/SUPPLIES PARTS/SUPPLIES Refund: Check - Return Refund: Check - SL~94ER SUPPLIES HEADSET 15528 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES Refund: Check - SUeR SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR HONDA GENERATOR EU2000 TEEN CO~ DINNER FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC FY 2002-2003 OPEN PL~C SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR Refund: Check - Cancel PER PROPOSAL INSTALL E PRO-R~TED REFD/TD SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR Refund: Check - SUeR REFD CUPERTINO RM 6/8 PRO-RATED 127 DAYS SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR DIRECT MINOR MOD FEE REFDS 215641 & 215642 PAGE 6 AMOUNT 688.43 8.01 1485.72 750.00 149.00 395.32 384.03 779.35 2572.02 704.11 144.00 260.00 664.92 85.00 528.22 952.00 1480.22 1680.00 80.00 14476.00 90.14 28.55 121.45 150.00 75.00 300.00 121.78 500.00 199.00 250.00 R~/N DATE 06/26/03 TIME 13:35:51 - FINARCIAL ACCOUNTING ~26/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ~OUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CRECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FL~ ~ECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/23/2003" and "06/27/2003" 3H ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 602046 06/27/03 M KIM, SHIMJA 580 602047 06/27/03 M KIM, YOLING 580 602048 06/27/03 385 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY 1108314 602048 06/27/03 385 L~ SAFETY SUPPLY 1108314 PAGE 7 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT Refund: Check - SLUR 0.00 182.00 Refund: Check - SLUR 0.00 100.00 SUPPLIES 15146 0.00 39.82 SUPPLIES 15146 0.00 199.51 0.00 239.33 TRAINING S.A~E 9/4-5 0.00 350.00 PRO-RATED 82 DAYS 0.00 78.63 NATURE CAMP TRAIN 0.00 95.00 25% FP~CHISE TAX ERD 0.00 -23.75 0.00 71.25 Refund: Check - Refund 0.00 55.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 210.00 Refund: Check - SLUR 0.00 91.00 PROFESSIONAL SERV 0.00 540.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 49860.97 PRO RATED 39 DAYS 0.00 32.05 PRO-RATED 144 DAYS 0.00 154.29 SUPPLIES 22573 0.00 36.28 SUPPLIES 22572 0.00 28.32 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 2777.25 FY 200242003 OPEN PURC O.00 880.54 0.00 3657.79 CIP DP=AWING UPDATES 0.00 550.00 Refund: Check - Refund O.O0 80.00 STAFF INCENTIVE GIFTS 0.00 227.95 TRAIRIRG/BREAKF~T 0.00 28.59 TRAINING/BREAKFAST 0.00 68.59 DAY CAMP SUPPLIES 0.00 102.96 0.00 428.09 PRO-RATED 59 DAYS 0.00 56.58 RUN DATE 06/26/03 TIME 13:35:51 06/26/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 8 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMEHT SELECTION CRITERIA: transac~.trans_date between "06/23/2003,, and "06/27/2003,, CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 1020 602066 06/27/03 M2003 1020 602067 06/27/03 1968 1020 602088 06/27/03 444 1020 602089 06/27/03 2726 1020 602070 06/27/03 465 1020 602071 06/27/03 2385 1020 602072 06/27/03 M 1020 602073 06/27/03 M 1020 602074 06/27/03 2716 1020 602075 06/27/03 473 1020 602075 06/27/03 473 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602076 06/27/03 475 1020 602076 06/27/03 475 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602077 1020 602078 1020 602078 TOTAJ~ CHECK 06/27/03 2862 06/27/03 479 06/27/03 479 1020 602079 06/27/03 484 1020 602079 06/27/03 484 1020 602079 06/27/03 484 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602080 06/27/03 965 1020 682080 06/27/03 965 TOT~tL CHECK 1020 602081 1020 602082 1020 602082 TOTAL CHECK MATSUMOT0, TOSHI0 5700000 MAZE AND ASSOCIATES 1104000 MINTON'S LL~ER 5806349 ** MOSS & BARNETT 1101031 MOU~AIN VIEW GARDEN CEN 5606640 Y~ATHLEEN MOUNTJOY 5606620 5gJKHERJEE, KOYELI 580 NA~AI, Y=AORI 580 TI~%NA NARRLFHN 5606620 N~ER DISTRIBL~TORS INC 5606620 NASER DISTRIBDTORS INC 5606620 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RE 1108314 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RE 4239222 NATURE WOE 5506549 NATL~ES WOOD 5606620 NATURES WOOD 5606620 NEW PIG CORP 1108303 NEW PIG CORP 1108303 NEW PIG CORP 1108303 NORTH COAST ~4EDICAL 1101200 NORTH COAST MEDICAL 1104380 NORTHERN TOOL & EQUIPMEN 6308840 POWERPI~N 6308840 POWERPLAN 6388840 06/27/03 1358 06/27/03 2488 06/27/03 2488 1020 602083 06/27/03 2639 1020 602083 06/27/03 2639 TOTAL CHECK NOVA PARTNERS INC 4269212 NOVA PARTNERS INC 4259313 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... PRO-P~ATED 127 DAYS J~ 2003 AUDIT PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES LEGAL FEES CEME~TT 15963 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR Refund: Check - SU~ER Refund: Check - SU~ER SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR FY 2002-2003 OPEN PDRC FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC RENTAL 6/5-7/2 RENTAL 6/03-7/04/03 HAWAIIA~ LUAU FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC SUPPLIES 15162 SUPPLIES 15162 SUPPLIES 15162 WORF~ITE BANANA BOAPJD WORKRITE BANANA BOARD TOOLS 8389 SUPPLIES CUTTING EDGES 15183 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SALES TAX 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 O.OO 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 AMOUNT 104.38 2660.34 25.93 675.00 112.58 1680.00 76.00 95.00 140.00 524.13 307.65 831.78 91.63 514.83 606.46 146.13 441.66 375.09 816.75 31.45 230.46 331.63 593.54 310.24 620.46 930.70 264.11 1135.09 192.92 1328.01 11885.31 4598.64 16453.95 RIJN DATE 06/26/03 TIME 13:35:52 - FINANCIAL ACCOL~TING 06/26/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 9 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.~rans_date between "06/23/2003" and "06/27/2003" 1020 602084 06/27/03 490 NSTC:NEW SPRAYER TECHNOL 1108407 1020 602085 86/27/03 496 O~GPOkDY PAVING INC 2709450 1020 602086 06/27/03 499 DEBBIE O'NEILL 5606620 1020 602087 06/27/03 2576 O.C.JONES AND SONS, INC 2709430 1020 602088 06/27/03 M OBATA, AKIHIRO 580 1020 602089 06/27/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1020 602089 06/27/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1020 602089 06/27/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1020 602089 06/27/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1020 602089 06/27/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1020 602089 06/27/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1020 602088 06/27/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1020 602089 06/27/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1020 602089 06/27/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1020 602089 06/27/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1020 602089 06/27/03 493 OFFICE DEPOT TOTAL CHECK 1104100 6104800 1104510 5806249 1106300 5806349 1107503 1107301 2204010 1104400 1108601 1020 602090 06/27/03 2710 P~tBLO ORTEGA 5606620 1020 802093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1028 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 802093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 51I PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 51I PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELl 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELl WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORL4DCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WORLDCOM WOHLDCOM WORLDCOM 1108201 1101000 1102100 1101500 1104300 1103300 1103500 1104000 1104100 1104200 1104510 1106647 1104530 1104400 1106100 1106265 1106529 1106500 1107200 1107301 1107302 1107501 1101200 1107502 1108504 1107503 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SUPPLIES 15182 0.00 343.12 PATCHING/VARIOUS STS 0.00 25638.89 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 380.00 PL~LIC WORKS CON~CRACT Refund: Check - SUMMER OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 240207.47 0.00 70.00 0.00 202.38 0.00 37.88 0.00 19.22 0.00 99.05 0.00 162.31 0.00 23.83 0.00 297.55 0.00 128.31 0.00 21.64 0.00 176.38 0.00 112.05 0.00 1280.60 0.00 1680.00 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 248.00 TELEPHONE SERU MAY03 0,00 219.23 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 182.69 TELEPHO~fE SERV MAY03 0.00 401.92 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.O0 320.77 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 73.08 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 109.62 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 109.62 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 219.23 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 109.62 TELEPHONE SERV MAy03 0.00 219.23 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 36.54 TELEPHONE SERV M3%Y03 0.00 255.77 TELEPHONE SERV MAYO3 0.00 109.62 TELEPHONE SERV ~3%Y03 0.00 109.62 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 584.62 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 36.54 TELEPHONE SERV M3~Y03 0.00 438.46 TELEPHONE SERV [4AY03 0.00 109.62 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 328.85 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 73.08 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 475.00 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 109.62 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 36.54 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 146.15 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 146.15 RUN DATE 06/26/03 TIME 13:35:52 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING q-37 06/26/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 10 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CRECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/23/2003" and "06/27/2003,' FUND - 110 - GENER3%L FLrND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 08/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 08/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 1020 602093 06/27/03 511 TOTAL CHECK PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM PACIFIC SELL/RORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM PACIFIC SELL/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELI/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELI/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELI/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELI~WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELI/WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL/EORLDCOM PACIFIC BELLIWORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL;WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL~WORLDCOM PACIFIC BELL~WORLDCOM PACIFIC SELL~WORLDCOM 1108001 1108101 1108102 1106265 1108501 1108503 1108507 5606620 5706450 1108601 1108602 1020 602094 06/27/03 511 PACIFIC BELL/WORLDCOM 1108507 1020 602095 06/27/03 1699 PACIFIC G/kS & ELECTRIC C 4259313 1020 602096 06/27/03 515 1020 602096 06/27/03 515 TOTAL CHECK PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 5708510 PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 5606620 1020 602097 06/27/03 M2003 P~aL~4ER, PATI 5700000 1020 602098 06/27/03 526 1020 602098 06/27/03 526 1020 602098 06/27/03 526 TOT/iL CNECK PENINSI/LA DIGITAL IMAGIN 4259313 PENINSL~ DIGITAL INAGIN 4259313 PENINSLVLA DIGITAL IMAGIN 4259313 1020 602099 06/27/03 M PHA. DKE, SHAILESR 580 1020 602100 06/27/03 541 ROBIN PICKEL 5706450 1020 602101 06/27/03 545 JEFF PISERC~IO 5606640 1020 602102 06/27/03 M2003 PREIKSA, VICTOR 5700000 1020 602103 06/27/03 2661 PROFESSION~Ja TURF MGMET, 5609105 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 182.69 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 343.08 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 36.54 TELEPHONE SER%q~AYR03 0.00 108.28 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 811.13 TELEPNONE SERV MAY03 0.00 875.32 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 73.08 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 365.38 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 438.46 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 109.62 TELEPRONE SERV MAY03 0.00 146.15 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 36.54 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 36.54 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 109.62 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 33.68 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 73.08 TELEPHONE SERV ~4AY03 0.00 14.52 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 328.85 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 73.08 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 255.77 TELEPNONE SERV MAY03 0.00 292.31 TELEPHON~ SERV ~4Ay03 0.00 36.54 TELEPHONE SERV MAY03 0.00 182.69 TELEPHONE SERV ~xAY03 0.00 694.23 0.00 10966.37 #5170211 5/1-6/27 0.00 15.23 DEPOSIT FOR CITY CENTE 0.00 1500.00 TIME/MATERIALS 0.00 875.00 RELOCATE KEY PAD 0.00 297.50 0.00 1162.50 PRO-RATED REFUND 0.00 149.59 CTY CENTER PARK SPECS 0.00 23.27 PLANS/SPECS CTY CTR 0.00 446.64 CE~ER PARK SPECS 0.00 44.49 0.00 514.40 Refund: Check - SUeR 0.00 SERVICE AGREEMEN~fFOR 0.00 BBF GOLF CONCESSIONAIR 0.00 PRO-RATED 144 DAYS 0.00 4.00 765.00 1999.00 139.89 CIP IRRIGATION/PUMp 0.00 4697.36 RUM DATE 06/26/03 TIME 13:35:52 - FINANCIAL ACCOURTING 06/26/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER ~ DISBURSEMENT FLrND SELEC~TION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/23/2003" and "06/27/2003. FUND - 110 - GENEPJ{L FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO 1020 602104 1020 602105 1020 602106 1020 602107 1020 602108 1020 602108 1020 602108 TOTAL CHECK 06/27/03 559 PROJECT SENTINEL 1107405 06/27/03 2894 RAJANI PURANIK 5506549 06/27/03 2649 QUILL 1101500 06/27/03 M P~SHIN~AR, LATH3% 580 06/27/03 581 RELI~LE 1107504 06/27/03 561 RELIABLE 1107301 06727/03 581 RELIABLE 1104300 1020 602109 06/27/03 1071 1020 602110 06/27/03 M2003 1020 602111 06/27/03 588 1020 602112 06/27/03 M2003 1020 602113 06/27/03 M 1020 602114 06/27/03 610 1020 602115 06/27/03 M2003 1020 602116 06/27/03 959 1020 602117 06/27/03 633 1020 602117 06/27/03 633 1020 602117 06/27/03 633 1020 602117 06/27/03 633 TOTAL C~ECK 1020 602118 06/27/03 639 1020 602118 06/27/03 639 1020 602118 06/27/03 639 1020 602118 06/27/03 639 1020 602118 06/27/03 639 1020 602118 06/27/03 639 TOTAL CNECK 1020 602119 06/27/03 1020 602120 06/27/03 1020 602121 06/27/03 1020 602122 66/27/03 1020 602122 06/27/03 REPUBLIC ELECTRIC 1108830 RESOURCE RECYCLING INC. 5208003 BART RIBOTTA 5606620 RUSCH, JACLYN 5700000 Rangwala, Zoaib 550 S & S WORLDWIDE 1106342 SAN FR~CISCO ZOO 5806349 THE MERCURY NEWS 1106265 SANTA CLARA COUNTY SHERI 5606620 SANTA CL~ COUNTY SNERI 5606620 SANTA CLARA COUNTY SHERI 5606620 SANTA CLARA COUNTY SEERI 5606620 SAVIN CORPORATION (COPIE 5806449 SAVIN CORPORATION (COPIE 5806349 SAVIN CORPORATION (COPIE 5506549 SAVIN CORPORATION (COPIE 5806249 SAVIN CORPORATION (COPIE 1104310 SAVIN CORPORATION (COPIE 5706450 M2003 S~ENA, ~4A/Dh~3R 5700000 M2003 SC~ID, JOHANNA 5700000 2706 THOS~%S SC~{ROTH JR. 5606620 644 SCREEN DESIGNS 5806349 644 SCREEN DESIGNS 5806349 PAGE 11 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 5625.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 120.00 SUPPLIES 0.00 1.99 Refund: Check - SL~ER 0.00 119.00 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 578.21 OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 54.11 SUPPLIES 17121 0.00 33.09 0.00 665.41 RELOCATE STREETLIGHT A 0.00 9004.00 DATE 06/26/03 TIME 13:35:52 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/26/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 12 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/03 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/23/2003" and "06/27/2003" 1020 602122 06/27/03 644 SCREEN DESIGNS 5806349 1020 602122 06/27/03 644 SCREEN DESIGNS 5806349 1020 602122 06/27/03 644 SCREEN DESIGNS 5806449 TOTAL CEECK 1020 602123 06/27/03 M2003 SEIGIHA~, TAK 5700000 1020 602124 06/27/03 M SHLTEN, SIK YING 580 1020 602125 06/27/03 651 1020 602125 06/27/03 651 1020 602126 06/27/03 651 1020 602125 06/27/03 651 1020 602125 06/27/03 651 TOTAL CHECK SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPP 1108315 SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPP 1108314 SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPP 1108312 SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPP 1108303 SIERRA PACIFIC TURF SUPP 1108312 1020 602126 06/27/03 M2003 SILICON VALLEY/SAM JOSE 1108101 1020 602127 06/27/03 2415 1020 602127 06/27/03 2415 1020 602127 06/27/03 2415 TOTAL CHECK SIMON M~TIN-VEGUE WINKE 4239222 SIMON M~TIN-VEGLTE WINKE 4239222 SIMON MARTIN-VEGUE WINKE 4239222 1020 602128 06/27/03 2973 }CATHLEEN SMITH 5606620 1020 602129 06/27/03 662 SNADER A~D ASSOCIATES IN 1103500 1020 602130 06/27/03 2733 SONY BROADCAST AND PEOF 1103500 1020 602130 06/27/03 2733 SONY BROADCAST AND PROF 1103500 1020 602130 06/27/03 2733 SONY BROADCADT ~ PROF 1103500 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602131 06/27/03 2990 SOU~ERN OTAH SCENIC T0U 550 1020 602132 06/27/03 1011 1020 602132 06/27/03 1011 TOTAL CHECK STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 110 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 1104100 1020 602133 06/27/03 2549 STATE OF CALIFOAMIA 110 1020 602134 06/27/03 2879 DEE STAUFFER 5706450 1020 602135 06/27/03 2513 MJ%RTHA MARIA STEINER 5506549 1020 602136 06/27/03 1012 STOREFRONT DOOR SERVICE 1108501 1020 602137 06/27/03 529 1020 602137 06/27/03 529 TOTAL CHECK SUNGARD PENTAMATION, INC 6104800 SUNGARD PENTAMATION, INC 6104800 1020 602138 06/27/03 2277 SUPREME AL~JI0 1106500 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT CRAZY FOR SPORTS 0.00 676.56 SU~ER SCIENCE FUN 0.00 1308.47 AQUATICS SHIRTS 0.00 895.23 0.00 4376.81 PRO-RATED 157 DAYS 0.00 161.30 Refund: Check - SUeR 0,00 120.00 SUPPLIES 15185 0.00 122.02 SUPPLIES 15185 0.00 122.02 SUPPLIES 15184 0.00 538.67 SUPPLIES 15186 0.00 122.02 SUPPLIES 15185 0.00 122.02 0.00 1026.95 BUSINESS ~TRNL RENEWAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT SERVICE AGREEMENT FOE FUJI VHS TAPES AND PDV 76.95 3015.82 357.97 8745.00 12118.79 1680.00 1833.32 ACCT 7004537000 0.00 -303.84 ACCT 7004537000 0.00 -774.46 DRUM ASSEMBLY 0.00 1183.49 0.00 105.19 0.00 FINAL TRIP 7/14-21 PREPAYMENT 5/1-6/15 PREPAY~NT 5/1-6/15 0.00 0.00 0.00 M.LA~/569-37-8357 0.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 TIME/MATERIALS 0.00 DATA LINE CHRGS MAY3 0.00 DATA LINE C~RGS MAR03 0.00 0.00 13199.00 916.00 55.00 971.00 23.75 150.00 320.00 2060.00 242.46 243.00 485.46 SUPPLIES 16095 0.00 309.00 RLrN DATE 06/26/03 TIME 13:35:52 06/26/03 CIlag OF CUPERTINO ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/0] C~ECE REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/23/2003- and "06/27/2003" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND 1020 602139 06/27/03 2045 SVCN 1104300 1020 602139 06/27/03 2045 SVCN 1104300 I020 602139 06/27/03 2045 SVCN 1104300 1020 602139 06/27/03 2045 SVCN 1104300 1020 602139 06/27/03 2045 SVCN 1104300 1020 602139 06/27/03 2045 SVC~ 1104300 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602140 06/27/03 695 1020 602140 06/27/03 695 TOTAL CHECK SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620 1020 602141 06/27/03 2997 TAM C05~UNICATIONS INC. 1106343 1020 602142 06/27/03 2958 TESCO CONTROLS INC 1108314 1020 602143 06/27/03 M TEWARI, SUDFLANSHU 580 1020 602144 06/27/03 2952 THERMA CORPOP~ATION 4269212 1020 602145 06/27/03 M2003 TRALTT~, JOSEPH 5780000 1020 602146 06/27/03 2396 TREADWELL &ROLLO 4239222 1020 602146 06/27/03 2396 TREADWELL & ROLLO 4239222 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602147 06/27/03 2781 AL TSUGAWA 1104400 1020 602148 06/27/03 2348 T~JRF STAR, INC. 6308840 1020 602149 06/27/03 727 U S POST~TER 5806249 1020 602149 86/27/03 727 U S POSTMASTER 5806349 1020 602149 06/27/03 727 U S POST~ka~STER 5806449 TOTAL CMECK 1020 1020 1020 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602150 06/27/03 2584 UNIVERSAL DIALOG, INC. 1103300 602151 06/27/03 745 VMI INC 4209546 602151 06/27/03 745 VMI INC 1103500 602152 06/27/03 M2003 W & F CONSTRUCTION 110 602153 06/27/03 761 WEDEMEYER BAKERY 5606620 602153 06/27/03 761 WEDEMEYER B~RY 5606620 1020 1020 TOTAL C/4ECK 1020 602154 06/27/03 765 1020 602155 06/27/03 768 DR CHI-HSUI D WENG 5706450 WEST GROUP PAYMENT CENTE 1101500 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC 0.00 FY 2002-2003 OPEN PDRC 0.00 Fy 2082-2003 OPEN P[/RC 0.00 0.00 TRAINING }U~TDBK 17451 0.88 P24 280-M ASERVICE PED 0.00 Refund: Check - SLUR SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR PRO-KATED 100 DAYS 0.08 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 0.00 0.00 SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 0.00 PARTS 15149 0.00 POSTAGE STAMPS 0.00 POSTAGE STAMPS 0.00 POSTAGE STAMPS 0.00 0,00 TP~SLATION 1/17-1/30 SONY pVM 14LC MULTI FO PIONEER DVD RECORDER A REFD L~SED DEPOSIT FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC FY 2002-2003 OPEN PURC SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR CA LGL FIL DIR/SPR 03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 PAGE 13 AMOUNT 760.00 45.00 90.00 75.00 47.50 35.00 1052.50 3307.43 1653.71 4961.14 176.60 3166.31 72.00 4852.00 102.74 2991.34 7625.46 10616.80 SO0.O0 198.92 74.00 74.00 74.00 222.00 770.85 15846.73 3554.93 19401.66 330.25 368.88 123.30 492.18 250.00 86.60 RUN DATE 06/26/03 TIME 13:35:52 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 06/26/03 CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCOL~NTING PERIOD: 12/03 C~ECK REGISTER DISBL~RSEMENT BDI~ SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.tran$_date between "06/23/2003,, and "06/27/2003- C~SH ACCT CNECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT 1020 602156 06/27/03 2969 1020 602156 06/27/03 2969 TOTAL CHECK WIC: WONDER ICE CREAM DI 5606620 WIC: WONDER ICE CREAM DI 5606620 1020 602157 06/27/03 1859 WILLIAMS SCOTS~G%N INC 4269212 1020 602157 06/27/03 1859 NILLI~4S SCOTS~N INC 4269212 TOTAL CHECK 1020 602158 06/27/03 M2003 WINCHESTER MYSTERY HOUSE 1103300 1020 602159 06/27/03 962 LIS~DA YEL~VICH 1106500 1020 602159 06/27/03 962 LINDA YELAVICH 5506549 1020 602159 06/27/03 962 LINDA YELAVICN 5506549 1020 602159 06/27/03 962 LINDA YEI~VICN 5506549 TOTAL C~ECK 1820 602160 06/27/03 M 1020 602161 06/27/03 2786 1020 602162 06/27/03 799 1020 602163 06/27/03 M2003 TOTAL C~H ACCOUNT TOTAL FUND TOTAL REPORT YOOSEFI, ENTERAM 580 ~VJAN CHIH DANCE OF AMERI 5506549 ~KER ROAD i~FILL 5208003 ZHOU. JIAN 5700000 PAGE 14 ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT SUPPLIES 0.00 513.08 SUPPLIES 0.00 326.80 0.00 839.60 RENT MOBILE OFFICE 0.00 388.95 RENT MOBILE OFFICE 0.00 598.96 0.00 997.9I TOUR TOYOKAWA 7/17 0.80 360.00 CAMER3% 0.00 149.95 SUPPLIES LUAU 6/23 0.00 46.90 LUNCH DECORATIONS 0.00 59.50 SUPPLIES 7/4 0.00 42.35 0.00 298.60 Refund: Check - SI3~ER 0.00 120.00 SERVICE AGREES~ENT FOR 0.00 260.00 YARDWASTE MAY2003 0.00 16768.77 PRO-P~ATED 127 DAYS 0.00 108.86 0.00 660591.85 0.00 660591.85 0.00 660591.85 RDlg DATE 06/26/03 TIldE 13:35:52 - FINANCI~J~ ACCOUNTING RESOLUTION NUMBER 03-129 DRAFT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWiNG CERTAiN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE iN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREiNAFTER DESCRIBED FOR SALARIES AND WAGES PAID ON June 20, 2003 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services, or their designated representative has certified to the accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law; NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds set forth: GROSS PAYROLL $ 424,802.69 Less Employee Deductions $(120,418.92) NET PAYROLL $ 304.383.77 Payroll check numbers issued 68277 through 68536 Void check number(s) CERTIFIED: Director of Adminis{rative Services PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of auly ,2003, by the following vote: Vote AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Members of the City Council ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino RESOLUTION NUMBER 03-130 DRAFT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR SALARIES AND WAGES PAID ON July 3, 2003 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services, or their designated representative has certified to the accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said cia/ms and demands have been audited as required by law; NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds set forth: GROSS PAYROLL Less Employee Deductions NET PAYROLL Payroll check numbers issued 68540 through 68840 Void check number(s) CERTIFIED:~'~Lt~£.AA~-~ (hr ~v'o l Att~ood) Director of Administ~tive'Services $ 461,001.37 $(117,814.92) $ 343.186.45 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of July ., 2003, by the following vote: Members of the City Council Vote AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: APPROVED: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino CUPEI TINO City Hall 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (408) 777-3220 FAX: (408) 777-3366 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Agenda Item No. ~O SUMMARY Meeting Date: July 7, 2003 SUBJECT Accept the Treasurer's Budget Report - May 2003 BACKGROUND Attached is the Treasurer's and Budget report for the period ended May 31, 2003. The report includes all funds in control of the City. Investments The market value of the City's current portfolio totaled $42.7 million at May 31, 2003, with a maturity value of $42.3 million. The City intends to hold investments until maturity to redeem full value of the securities plus interest earnings up through the maturity date. Investment earnings rates continued to decline through May, with funds in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) yielding 1.77% compared to April's 1.86%, and 2.74% a year ago. The City's portfolio as a whole yielded 2.97% in May. In the past year the City had invested in callable federal agency notes of short-term duration in order to extend the average length of maturity for a slightly higher yield than experienced by LAIF. These investments continue to be called, so that the average length to maturity of the City's portfolio is decreasing along with yields. Due to the low yields available, the City has not re-invested in similar instruments, and it is anticipated that the portfolio yields will converge towards the lower LAIF return before interest rates begin to rise. Overall, the City's current investment portfolio decreased approximately $400,000 in May, as planned expenditures exceeded incoming revenues. Note that investments have been laddered to maturity dates that will allow for the projected cash flows required for the library and other capital projects. The investments of the City of Cupertino are in full compliance with our City investment policy and/or State law. Investments are tiered to adequately provide the City with sufficient cash flows to pay its obligations over the next six months. Revenue/Expenditure Trends Revenues continue to fall short of prior year receipts in almost every revenue category. Excluding proceeds and revenues associated with the 2002 debt refinancing, year to date revenues are $3.4 million less than last year, a decrease of 12.2%. Sales taxes, reflective of the area economy, are down 5.2% from last year's receipts, which had declined 12% from the prior year. Hotel occupancy tax revenues are $57,000 higher in total due to the added hotel, but same-hotel receipts are down over 23% from last year. The City's yield on investments has declined steadily since the beginning of 2001, dropping 22%. Operating expenditures have increased slightly over one percent from last year. Departmental and capital savings were identified as part of the midyear analysis, and are reflected in the adjusted budget. RECOMMENDATION: Accept the Treasurer's and Budget report for May 2003. Submitted by: Approved for submission: Carol T. F~rrell Deputy Treasurer David W. Knapp City Manager City of Cupertino May 2003 I ACTIVITY DATE ADJUSTED MATURITY MARKET PURCHASE DESCRIPTION YIELD COST VALUE VALUE SECURITIES MATURED/CALLED 02/12/03 05/12/06 IFHLB© [6k 3.~5%Io 1,000,000 1,000.000 1,007,613 7,613 I SECURITIES PURCHASED - i ~ASH t 05/31/03 ~C £ -- ~ upertino National Bank i ~ 1,727,000 1,727,000 1,727,000 1 [ ~ ' b~/31/03~atcrBayTmstCompan~ / · 0 ~ ~- 0 ~ 0 ICA i ' t ! m7000 ,,7:7,000 ICoRP "[ ~ 7 i o o ~ xs~L[~~ ~ 05/31/03 ~lState Pool ~:6f 1.77%' 14,128;605[ i4,128,605~ 1~A28,605 [ MONEY M~KET F~DS ~ ~ ~ / [ 05/31/03 Cupe~inoNa0-Sweep account 6j 0.48%[ 98~ 989.56~ [ ~5/31/03 TGBTC Money Mmket '44~ 05 °/o~ '4~ '500~ [ M6~TGAGE'O~LIGATIONS ~[ I ~ 07/09/93 04/15/07 FHLMC(P) 6~ 6916~ ~ [ ~ ~ ~ I .% 340,677/ 3~ 352,275 ,1,597 I I ~ ~8~01/o~ ovouo~ lm[~(e) ~ s.38~i l,SOO,OOO~ ~,so~ i,s;~ 9,i651 / 06/28/02 02/15/04 FHLMC(P) 6k 2.73~ 1~322,862 ~ 1300,000' i,3~7,805 14,944I ~ ' 06/2~02 ~ 04~1~/04 FHLMC(P) 6k ~ 2.81% ,310,454 ~ ~30~ ~;330}f0~ 19,646 ~ 06/28/02 ' 03/15/04 ~MA 6~ ~ 84% 1,319,63i ,300,000 ' ,337}'2~2382 ~ 17,750' I 06/¢8/~96/15/04 i~MA ~6k 2.93~ D06,841 1,200~000 .222~801 i 21.961 06/28/02 /0 /~ /~ ~ 3.34% ~74 ~ -'-- ~ .... , [ . 38 650000 695566 18127 06/28/02 iI~IT/0~mMA ~ ~ [6k 2.56% 2,026;08~ 2~ [ 2,038~956 2}86~ ~7/~/02~ 07/15/04 [~MA~ ~ I ~.15% 2,400,000 [ 2400~ 2,404,992 4,992 01/30/03 I 01/30/06 ~MA(float~r)~ ~6k ~ 2.13%~ 1,000~00~ 1,000,000 1,000,6~8 ~ ~58 03/06/03 ~ ~9/05/0~ ~mMA(flogter)~ ~g~ ~ :.50%I 1,000,b00 1,000~000 1,000, i25 / o4/h/b3 04/11/o6 ~HLB~ ~6kI 2~00% 499~456~ 300,006 500,190' 73~ ! i ~us OOVERN~vIENT SECURITIES [ ~ 02/~ 06/30/03 [TreasuryNote 6a UV 07/01/02 12/31/03 , Treasury Note ~ : ;6~i Managed Porffollo~ 20,636~413~ 20,448,487I 2,497,739 ~ 2,500,000 20,82g}9i8~ i89,505 ~1508,593 ! i0,853 ~,018,553~ 5,000,000 I $,0~9,060I 20,507 42,500,1.t5 I 42,291,625 I 42,710,147 210,012 :Xwrage L~n~ih to Matur ~y ,in years) i i 0.99 ~ ~ :~: City of Cupertino May 2003 ; IRISI&AGENC¥'PORTFOLIO } ' ADJUSTED MAI'URITY MARKET IUNREALIZE£ PURCIIASE] MATURITY DESCRIPTION REF YIELD COST VALUE ' VALUE PROFIT/LOSS , CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT: [ 07/27/01 i 06/30/03 Cupcrtino Satl,Kestcr Trust) 6b i 2 0'~% 41,025 t 41,025~ 41,025 0 ~ 41,025 41,025 41,025 0 Total Trust & Agency Portfolio , / Traffic Impact Fr~k n Fidu¢iar~"rust I 0 98% 19 100 9 0 ) ' 11,13/02 i l.eo~se fayment Fund 1.69% 7678)4 i I 7678)4 7 I 767.804 I 0 ] 10/15/02 7 /LA1F Bond Account ~ I ot8[ BoncJ Re~e~e Po~ifolio i ~ ] 17,712 811 17,712,811 17,712,811 0 , / 12% Investments by Type Managed Portfolio Corporate Bonds 0% LAiF 33% Mortgage Obligatior 49% Money Market 3% 4,50% - Rate of Return Comparison 4.00% 3.50% 3.00% 2.50% 2.00% 0.50% 0.00% l,_.,"--~"-- LAI F ] CupertinoJ 4/02 5/02 6/02 7/02 8/02 9/02 10/02 11/02 12/02 1/03 2/03 3/03 4/03 5/03 COMPLIANCE WITH INVESTMENT POLICY City of Cupertino May 31, 2003 Category Standard Comment Treasury Issues No limit Complies US Agencies (eg FHLMC) No limit Complies Medium Term Corporate Bonds/Notes 30% with A rating Complies LAIF $40 million Complies Money Market Funds 20% Complies Maximum Maturittes 25% up to 15 years Complies (FHLMC at 5+ yrs) " Remainder up to 5 years Complies Per Issuer Max 10% (except govts) Complies Bankers Acceptances 180 days & 40% Complies Commercial Paper 270 days & 25% Complies Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 30% Complies Repurchase Agreements 365 days Complies Reverse Repurchase agreements Prohibited Complies 20,000,000 18.000,000 ~ 6,000,000 14,000,000 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 Revenue Comparison 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 BIYTD 05/31/02 []YTD05/31/03 1 Sales Tax 2 Property Tax 3 TOT 4 Utility Tax 5 Franchise Fees 6 Other 7 Licenses & Permits 8 Money & Property 9 Intergovernmental l0 Charges for Services l I Fines & Forfeitures 12 Other Revenue 9,000,000 Expenditure Comparison 8,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 Administrative 2 Law Enforcement 3 Community Service 4 Administrative Service 5 Recreation Service 6 Community Development 7 Public Works City of Cupertino I I I Summary of Budget Transfers 5/31/03 Description Acct# Budget ~ Revenue Expenditure Adjustment Budget Budget 2002/03 ADOPTED BUDGET 46,570,000~ 67,065,000 Debt Refinancing~ssuance 2001/02 CARRYOVER: Encumbrances Department carryovers Project carryovers 15,665,000i various 5,220,767~ 5,220,767 various 537,770~ 537,770 various 11,434,531 11,434,531 REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS: Transcription Services - City Clerk 2,6001 2,600! 190,000~ 93,944~ After school enrichment programs W/h funds in excess of settlement, BFI Traffic Study for Villa Serra Apts PG&E Safe Tree Grant !5804725 190,000/ 26,250 26,250 20,000: BJA Block Grant 1~100-4811 -4553 1104553 1104431 : 20'00~ -1,040,000 ~r2 l°us 47,079 ~ 110-2401 Midyear Revenue Adjustments CLEEPS/COPS Grant Funding Reduced Park Ded tax revenues EXPENDITURE ADJUSTMENTS.' · 1104910 47,~ - 1 ~040,000 -3,838i -3,838 1,475,oo0! -1,475,000i Transcription Services - City Clerk After school enrichment programs ~ Salary adj. - City Manager Salary adj. - City Attorn~ -- Salary adj. - RDA Traffic Study for Villa Serra Apts Additional costs for trial case PG&E Safe Tree Grant BJA Block Grant I110-2402-7014 Midyear Expenditure Adjustments ~ 11 O-various ...... ~270-various " 365-various " .... [ 420-varions CLEEPS/COPg Grant Projects : 1~0-2401-7014 CCS Project ~0sts 02203 (BMR. Res~rvej ' 110-740526326 110-4300-7014 380-6349-70Jd 1i0-1200-5501 2,600 ~ 2,600 190,000 i90,000 7,719- 7,71~ ~110:i500-5501 7,470~ C~ ~i 7,470 2~0-7304-5501 ~ 1,250 ' 1,250 110-8601-70~4 : -- 26,250 26,250 i ~10-1500~7075 20,0001 ~ 1110_8408:9100 ~ :V ~6fi00 20,000 . 20,000 4Z0791 47,07q -30,000[ -50,000 -300,000 -300,000 -300,00~ -300,00C -395,000[ -395,00~ Midyear Exp. Adj. - Teen Center ~ t 110-6343-various -3,838~ -3,83~ 750,000 750,00~ -4~i070 -47,070 2002/03 ADJUSTED BUDGET I I I 60,096,03~5 84,234,528 Capital Projects May 31, 2003 Fund Pro~# Description C/O anc C/O bud,qetI Adopted chan,qe Total Bud,qet Encumbrance i Expenditure Current Bal. 11(3 _...~.~215 .D_~?a. rtm_.e~__t._r_emo~J_~ ............. 14,942.50 0.00 ............................... 14,942.50 0.00~ 14,942.50 0.00 210 9612 Minor Storm Drain Improv ....... -9-,30~.-(~j- - 1-§~i~90.0~. 71,507 -~§,-097.(~9 - -27,-~-{).--50i-----~9,95~-~(~ -'~,-~1.5.c 215 9620 Storm Drain Pro~ects 0.00 1,024,304.32 75,000 1,099,304.32' 40,971.50i 103,568.76 954,764.0( 270 9411 W.Stev Creek bike lane 0.00 20,965.00 20,965.0(; i 20,965.0C 270 9412 S.Stelling bike lane 0.00 24,712.00 24,712.0¢ i 24,712.0~ 270 9413 De Anza bike lane 0.00 40,523.00 40,523.0C 40,523.0~ 270 9430 Stev Canyon Rd widening 1,078,616.99 25,510.30 1,104,127.29 372,816.611 735,322.4~ (4,011.81 _2.~_0. 9_4.3_~_ Stev.~._rl~/. Bla~_e._y_~-/S _m..o~._i~i_cation_... 11,330.89 0.00 ......... 11,330 89 0 00j 4,632.58 6,698.31 270 9432 Hmstd belleville T/S modif. 0.00 75,000.00 ................................................ ~5,(~(~7~ ................. i .............................. 75,000.0~ 270 9435 Nalghborhoed t raf calming 8,230.00 6,120.00 100,000 114,350.00 1,292.05i 9,526.77 103,531.18 270 9436 Stev Cd( Trail Bike facilities 0.00 30,219.00 30,219.00 i 30,219.0(3 ~ 131,006.50 270 9438 Miller Ave bike facilities 0.00 131,006.50 131,006.50 270 9440 Wo!fe bike faciliti¥ improv 11,890.43 122,776.68 134,667.11 i 5,022.70 129,644.41 270 9441 Bike detection enhancement 0.00 19,659.00 19,659.00 i 19,659.0~ 270 9443 Bellinger Rd bike facility improv. 86,119.35 249,840.52 335,959.87 114,523.25j 31,493.33 189,94329 _ 2_7_0.. .._ 94~__6.. _D_eAr~_z.~.S~_ev_O_d~.(~£oes_w.~_l~ enh; ......... . q._0_0 __~0,000_:..00_ ..................... (2(~0_,~(~O) 0.00 i 0.00 27¢ 9447, Mary Avenue gateway 33,258.59 156,841.52 (50,000) ....... :~-40,1-(~;~':/- - 27C 944~ :oothill blvd bike lanes 86,450.00 99,341.95 185,791.95 0.00i 91,602.00 94,18.9.9~ 27C 944~c MaP/Avanue Footbridge 0.00 389,877.15 633,864 1,023,741.15 25,000.00i 128.67 998,612.4R 270 945(~ Pavement Management 67,300.00 29.45 750,000 (100,000), 717,329.45 426,444.15i 155,226.16 135,659.14 270 9531 Ramp meter signal 280/85 389,233.43 80,209.00 469,442.43 369,472.941 29,760.49 70,209.00 270 9532 SR85/Stev Cd( T/S mod~[ioation 0.00 49,378.49 49,378.49 i 49,378.49 ._270 ._..._9_701 .~!~_e_w~.~l.a. ps u_?.i.m_p_rv ar_e~,_.s_... 0.00 0.00 75,000.00 75 000.0~ ............. ~. ................ ~_5.,_000.00 270 970; Git/wide bike pad(lng facilities .............. 0.~(~ .... ~-'~'i:~89.0(~' ............................. ~',-~-89.00 j -- 51,789.00 280 9213 McClellan Ranch bld.g ~mprov. 0.00 211,652.00 211,652.00 i 211,652.00 420 9108 Pad( Renovations 0.00 72,545.84 72,545.84 0.00 I 72,545.00 0.84 420 9113 Stev Cd( trail masterplan 0.00 6,260.70 6,260.70 ~ j 6,260.70 420 9115 Skate Park 0.00 401,953.40 (220,000.00 181,953.40 i 181,953.40 420 9116 San Thomestrail improvements 21,807.60 427,101.90 184,000.00 (150,0OO.00 482,909.50 53,782.39 i 381,035.61 48,091.50 42_0- _. 91~7_ S~_ev C....rk._Tr~Lm_a_~_ter p_!_a~_~udy__. 74,734.84 20,976.00 95 710.84 16,036.49 [ 58 942 32 20 73~ 0~ ......................................................................................... ~. .... L......~. ............. ,~ .__'~.~_..~_ 420 9118 Union Pacific RR trail 0.00 4,313.87 4,313.87 i 4,313.87 420 9119 Portal/VVilson park improvement 0.00 564,060.05 9,000.00 573,060.05 383,943.58 [ 142,976.53 46,139.94 420 9121 Memorial park softball field impv. 0.00 0.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 J 25,000.00 420 9216 Service center expanisan 41,888.00 67,831.00 109,719.00 66,538.00 i 22,154.45 21,026.55 420 9219 Animal contral facility 0.00 500,000.00 (500,000.00) 0.00il 0.00 42¢ 9223 0'vic center rmprovements 0.00 199,953.03 1,800,000.00 500,000.00 2,499,953.03 51,740.38 i 46,390.11 2,401,822.54 _ .~_~_C. _9_2~.._ ~ ."; i~[c_._c.._ent_e_r ._pi_ _a~._a i m~p_r ~y_ _a~n en_t s_.._ 0.00 63,979.75 900,000.00 963,979.75 0.00~ 26,857.03 937,122.72 420 9524 :)eAnza/Stev Creek artedal mgmt ....... ~bO ........ 21 ,-~97i'~ ..................................... 21,~4~'~'~- ............... 420 9527 Homestesd/Tantau T/S upgrade 3,733.00 172.15 3,905.15 3,733.00 i 0.00 172.15 420 9528 280/Welfetrafficesfety~mprov. 302,574.31 82,434.64 385,008.95 53,132.69 i 251,456.14 80,420.12 420 95;~ Phase III Hmstd artedal m~lmt 0.00 43,540.90 43,540.90 i 0.00 43,540.90 CapitaJ Projects May 31, 2003 Fund Proj# Descdptien C/O eric C/O bud,qet Adopted , chan,qe Total Bud,q~ Encumbrance i Expenditure Current Bal. 420 9533 Gree~ LED T/S lights 10,459.86 261,036.00 ......................................................... 271 495.86 33209 i 1012777 261,036.00 420 953, Advanced ITS De Anza blvd 30,055.47 .............. 675,536.00 705,591.47 11,090.17 I 19,647.21 674,854.09 420 9535 Adaptive traf control system 635,356.48 300,561.00 935,917.48 369,865 22 i 265,491.26 300,561 .(~'~ 420 9536 Stalling corddor T/S upgrade 0.00 4,901.97 4,901.97 4,901.97 420 9537 Bubb corridor T/S upgrade 0.00 3,063.72 3,063.72 I 3,063.72 420 9538 Pruneddge cordder T/S upgrade 0.00 4,901.97 4,901.97 ~ 4,901.97 420 9539 Wolfe/Pruneddge T/S upgrade 0.00 ' 4,595.58 4,595.58 i 4,595.58 42~_ ._ 95~'~. _S~._h.._o~ tr~f~i_c~ calrr~[r~_rneasu_~_ _..!...6~,430.68 21,902.95 ..................... 185,333.63 25,783.60 ~ 137 647.08 21,902.95 420 9544 Safe routes CHS 500,000.00 ....................................... ~30~)~00 ................... i ........... ~'~)-,'~00.~." 420 9545 T/S upgrades various locations 0.00 0.00 300,000.00 (150,000.001 150,000.00 i 150,000.00 42(; 9546 Traf operation center facilities 0.00 0.00 200,000.00 200,000.00 i 200,000.00 42C 9547 Yellow peal LED T/S upgrades 0.00 0.00 140,000.00 140,000.00 i 140,000.00 42(~ 9548 Traf st walkability mods facility 0.00 0.00 100,000.00 (95,000.0C 5,000.00 0.00 i 5,000.00 42(~ 9703 Apple public art 100,000.00 (100,000.0~ 0.00 i 0.00 ,~_2..3__ _9._2~_~ _U~_r. ary_._c_o~._stru_c.~!.o~_ ........... 1,725,520.72 I 720866.03 i 17600000.00 21 046386.75 833 105.07 j 2549,558.44 17663,72324 424 921C Senior Center Expansion 10,952.00 34,483.47 45,435.47 0.00 [ 12,748.60 32,686.87 425 9313 :cur Season Comer 0.00 412,074.95 662,000.00 1,074,074.95 40,649.44 J 105,355.69 928,069.82 425 9314 Four Season Art Sculpture 0.00 143,788.00 143,788.00 122,220.00 i 21,588.00 (20.00) 426 9212 SportsCtr.fitneesexp~,~;on 0.00 1,629,918.91 711,000.00 2,340,918.91 94,107.28 i 334,766.09 1,912,045.54 560 9105 Blackberry Farm 0.00 451,882.65 75,000.00 ~ 526,882.65 ' 0.00 J 30,753.67 496,128.98 560 911; BBFmesterplanstudy 34,000.00 116,000.00 150,000.00 27,309.70 i 59,677.84 63,012.46 Total 4,851,185.14 12,004,530.53 24,402,371.00 1,056,000.06 4(~)~i~'~-7'~61~-~i~'~4.4~"§~,7'~'~10.6-~" CUPER TINO City Hall 10300 To~e Avenue Cupe~ino, Califomia 95014 Phone (408) 777-3312 Fax (4Og) 777-3~6fi OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER SUMMARY AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ! SUBJECT mD ISSUE AGENDA OATE:'J't~3 "~t 2_~0 3 Application for Alcoholic Beverage License. BACKGROUND Name of Business: Location: Type of Business: Type of License: Reason for Application: Zazang Restaurant 20010 Stevens Creek Boulevard Restaurant On-Sale Beer and Wine for Bona Fide Public Eating Place Person to Person Transfer ~COMMENDATION There are no use permit restrictions or zoning restrictions which would prohibit this use, and staff has no objection to the issuance of the license. Prepared by: Ciddy Wordell,*City Planner Submitted by: David W. Knapp, City Manager G:planning/m/sc/abczazang Printed on Recycled Paper Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE(S) ABC 211 (6/99) State of California TO: Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control 100 Paseo de San Antonio Room 119 San Jose, CA 95113 (408) 277-1200 DISTRICT SERVING LOCATION: First Owner: Name of Business: Location of Business: County: Is premise inside city limits? Mailing Address: (If different from premises address) Type of license(s): 41 Transferor's license/name: File Number: 401173 Receipt Number: 1423422 Geographical Code: 4303 Copies Mailed Date: June 5, 2003 Issued Date: ZAZANG ENTERPRISE INC ZAZANG RESTAURANT 20010 STEVENS CREEK BLVD CUPERTINO, CA 95014 SANTA CLARA 379418 /YOON KYONG HI Census Tract 5081.01 Dropping Partner: Yes No License Type Transaction Type Fee Type Master 41 ON-SALE BEER AND PERSON TO PERSON TRANSF NA y 41 ON-SALE BEER AND ANNUALFEE NA y 30 TEMPORARY PERMI DUPLICATE NA N Dup Date Fee 0 06/05/03 $150.00 0 06/05/03 $276.00 1 06/05/03 $100.00 Total $526.00 Have you ever been convicted of a felony? No Have you ever violated any provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, or regulations of the Department pertaining to the Act? No Explain any "Yes" answer to the above questions on an attachment which shall be deemed part of this application. Applicant agrees (a) that any manager employed in an on-sale licensed premise will have all the qualifications of a licensee, and (b) that he will not violate or cause or permit to be violated any of the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act. STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of SANTA CLARA Date: June 5, 2003 Under penalty of penury, each person whose signature appears below, ce~ifies and says: (I) He is an appllcanL or one of the applicants, or an executive officer of the applicant corporation, named in the foregoing application, duly aut6orized to make this application on its behalf; (2) that he has read the foregoing and knows the coments thereof and that each of the above statements therein made are true; (3) that no person other than the applicant or applicants has any direct or indirect interest in the applicant or applicant's business to be conducled under the license(s) for which this application is made; 14) that the transfer application or proposed transfer is not made to satisfy the payment of a loan or to fulfill an agreement entered imo more than ninety (90) days preceding the day on which the transfer application is filed with the Department or to gain or establish a preference to or lot any creditor or transferor or to defraud or injure any creditor of transferor; (5) that the transfer application may be withdrawn by either tb~e applicant or lhe licensee with no resulting liability to the Department. Applicant Name(s) ZAZANG ENTERPRISE INC Applicant Signature(s) CUPI: INO City Hall 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, California 95014- Phone (408) 777-3312 Fax (40R) 777.2qfifi OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER SUMMARY AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SUBJECT AND ISSUE AGENDA DATE~"~ 2015.3 Application for Alcoholic Beverage License. BACKGROUND Name of Business: Location: Type of Business: Type o f License: Reason for Application: Torys Restaurant 21670 Stevens Creek Blvd. Restaurant On-Sale General for Bona Fide Public Eating Place Premise to Premise Transfer RECOMMENDATION There are no use permit restrictions or zoning restrictions which would prohibit this use, and staff has no objection to the issuance of the license. Prepared by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner Submitted by: David W. Knapp, City Manager G:planning/misc/abctorys2 Printed on Recycled Paper Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE(S) ABC 211 (6199) State of California TO: Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control 100 Pasco de San Antonio Room 119 San Jose, CA 95113 (408) 277-1200 DISTRICT SERVING LOCATION: First Owner: Name of Business: Location of Business: County: Is premise inside city limits? Mailing Address: (If different from premises address) Type of license(s): 41 Transferor's license/name: File Number: 401192 Receipt Number: 1423466 Geographical Code: 4303 Copies Mailed Date: June 5, 2003 Issued Date: SAN JOSE HO FUK CHEUNG TORYS RESTAURANT 21670 STEVENS CREEK BLVD CUPERTINO, CA 95014 SANTA CLARA Yes 859 HYDE AVE CUPERTINO, CA 95014 Census Tract 5077.01 364782 /HO FUK CHEUN¢ Dropping Partner: Yes__ License Type Transaction Type Fee Tyne Master 41 ON-SALE BEER AND PREMISETO PREMISETRANS NA y Duo Date F¢~ 0 06/05/03 $100.00 Total $100.00 Have you ever been convicted of a felony? No Have you ever violated any provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, or regulations of the Department pertaining to the Act? No Explain any "Yes" answer In the above questions on an attachment which shall be deemed part of this application. Applicant agrees (a) that any manager employed in an on-sale licensed premise will have all the qualifications of a licensee, and (b) that he will not violate or cause or permit to be violated any of the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act. STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of SANTA CLARA Date: June 5, 2003 Under penalty of perjury, each person whose signature appears below, certifies and says: II) He is an applicant, or one of the applicants, or ~n executive officer of the applicant corporation, named in the foregoing application, duly authorized to make this application on its behalf: (2) that he has read the foregoing and knows the contents thereof and that each of the above statements therein made are true: (3) that no person other than the applicant or applicants has any direct or indirect interest in the applicant or applicant's business to be conducted under the license(s) for which this application is made: (4) that the transfer application or proposed transfer is not made to satisfy the payment of a loan or lo fulfill an agreement entered into more than ninety (90) days preceding the day on which the transfer application is filed with the Department or to gain or establish a preference to or for any creditor or transferor or to defraud or injure any creditor of transferor; (5) that the transfer application may be withdrawn by either the applicant or the licensee with no resulting liability to the Department. Applicant Name(s) Applicant__Signature(s) HO FUK CHEUNG s CUPEI TINO City Hall 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, Califomia 95014 Phone (408) 777-3312 Fax (AOR) 777-~2&& OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER SUMMARY AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SUBJECT AND ISSUE AGENDA DATE~_~ ..~0'~ ~ Application for Alcoholic Beverage License. BACKGROUND Name of Business: Location: Type of Business: Type of License: Reason for Application: 20956 Homestead Rd., #A Restaurant On-Sale Beer and Wine for Bona Fide Public Eating Place Person to Person Transfer RECOMMENDATION There are no use permit restrictions or zoning restrictions which would prohibit this use, and staff has no objection to the issuance of the license. Prepared by: Submitted by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner David W. Knapp, City Manager G:planning/misc/abctorys2 Printed on Recycled Paper Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE(S) ABC 211 (6/99) State of California TO: Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control 100 Pasco de San Antonio Room 119 San Jose, CA 95113 (408) 277-1200 DISTRICT SERVING LOCATION: First Owner: Name of Business: File Number: 401535 Receipt Number: 1424848 Geographical Code: 4303 Copies Mailed Date: June 16, 2003 Issued Date: NGUYEN CHRISTINE NGO Location of Business: County: Is premise inside city limits? Mailing Address: (If different from premises address) Type of license(s): 41 Transferor's license/name: 20956 HOMESTEAD RD A CUPERTINO, CA 95014 SANTA CLARA 295349 /LIU JACK T Census Tract 5078.06 Dropping Partner: Yes License Type Transaction Type Fee Type Master 41 ON-SALE BEER AND PERSON TO PERSONTRANSF NA Y 41 ON-SALE BEER AND ANNUALFEE NA Y 41 ON-SALE BEER AND STATE FINGERPRINTS NA N Dup Date Fee 0 06/16/03 $150.00 0 06! 16/03 $276.00 3 06/16/03 $117.00 Total $543.00 Have you ever been convicted of a felony? No Have you ever violated any provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, or regulations of the Department pertaining to the Act? No Explain any "Yes" answer to the above questions on an attachment which shalI be deemed part of this application. Applicant agrees (a) that any manager employed in an on-sale licensed premise will have all the qualifications of a licensee, and (b) that he will not violate or cause or permit to be violated any of the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act. STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of SANTA CLARA Date: June 16, 2003 Under penalty of perjury, each person whose signature appears below, certifies and says: (1) He is an applicant, or one of the applicants, or an executive officer of the applicant corporation, named in the foregoing application, duly authorized to make this application on its behalf; (2) that he has read the foregoing and knows the contents thereof and that each of the above statements therein made are tme; (3) that no person other than thc applicant or applicants has any direct or indirect interest in the applicant or applicant's business to be conducted under the license(s) for which this app[icatlon is made; (4) that the transfer application or proposed transfer is not made to satisfy the payment of a loan or to fulfill an agreement entered into more than ninety (90) days preceding the day on which the transfer application is filed with the Department or to gain or establish a preference to or for any creditor or transferor or to defraud or injure any creditor of transferor; (5) that the transfer application may be withdrawn by either the applicant or the Iicensee with no resulting liabiIity to the Department. Applicant Name(s) Applicant ,~gnature(s) RESOLUTION NO. 03-131 DI AFr A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO SETTING HEARING TO PROVIDE FOR LIEN ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTION RESULTING FROM ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE WHEREAS, on December 16, 2002, the City Council of the City of Cupertino declared weeds, brash, and debris growing on certain described property to be a public nuisance; and WHEREAS, on January 21, 2003, a public hearing was conducted and the City Council directed that the County Fire Marshal was designated and ordered as the person to cause notice to be given in the manner and form as provided in Section 9.8.040 of the Cupertino Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to schedule a public heating for consideration and confirmation of the weed abatement report; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino hereby sets August 4, 2003, 6:45 p.m., Council Chamber, City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, as time and place for said public heating and directs the County Fire Marshal to so notify affected parties. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of July 2003, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 03-132 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN RECORDS (CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) WHEREAS, the City Council did by adoption of Resolution Nos. 8894 and 02- 037 establish roles and regulations for records retention and destruction; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that certain records in excess of two years old no longer contain data of any historical or administrative significance; and WHEREAS, the departmental request for permission to destroy all said records in excess of two years old has been approved by the City Clerk and the City Attorney pursuant to Resolution Nos. 8894 and 02-037; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino authorizes destruction of the records specified in the schedule attached hereto. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7thday of July 2003, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTA1N: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino RECORDS INVENTORY FOR MICROFILMING OR DESTRUCTION Department: City Clerk Contact: Kimberly Smith or Grace Johnson Page: of - File Name: June 2003 Resolution which authorized destruction: 03-132 No. (to be used File Name, Project name File Number, Resolution, Subject, Application, Address or Location Date ranges Enter for microfiche or Developer Ordinance, Application Permit (if any) (or most M = to be microfilmed card #) Number recent date) D = to be destroyed REQUIRED Chronological file 2000 2000 D correspondence City Council 1999- D Actions 2000 Apple Computer 155 Staff report of 10253 Portal Ave.; 1998 D appeal of PC Apple Gateway approval of 18-U- Campus; 1 Infinite 85 (M); Staffreport Loop request to delay re- installation of public art; Action letter regarding 11- U-90(M) Page RECORDS INVENTORY FOR MICROFILMING OR DESTRUCTION Department: City Clerk Contact: Kimberly Smith or Grace Johnson Page: of - File Name: June 2003 Resolution which authorized deslmcfion: 03-132 No. (to be used File Name, Project name File Number, Resolution, Subject, Application, Address or Location[ Date ranges Enter for microfiche or Developer Ordinance, Application Permit (if any) [ (or most M = to be microfilmed card #) Number recent date) D = to be destroyed REQUIRED Claims D Page Mark W. Butler, Philippe and Anne Dor, Rich Long, Kim Simmons, Michele Rodriguez, Sharon Kohlmannslehner vs. David Winslow, Glenn & Linda Wegner, Jeno Racz, John Kerstulovich & Elaine Adkins, B & B-VI, Margaret Nicol, Brandon Howard, Ove Hallberg, Aniceta Hall, Erin Jurian, Bryan Phillips, Alan Brinker, State Farm Insurance, Ron Ramirez, Akana & De Loache, David O'Connor, Comes Now, Judi Somberger, Nolte & Associates, Mocherla, Teresa Barragan, CA State Auto Assoc. 1990- 1998 RECORDS INVENTORY FOR MICROFILMING OR DESTRUCTION Department: City Clerk Contact: Kimberly Smith or Grace Johnson Page: of - File Name: June 2003 Resolution which authorized destruction: 03-132 No. (to be used File Name, Project name File Number, Resolution, Subject, Application, Address or Location Date ranges Enter for microfiche or Developer Ordinance, Application Permit (if any) (or most M - to be microfilmed card #) Number recent date) D = to be destroyed REQUIRED Claim of Anna Sixth 163 Claim and lawsuit 1556 Halford Ave. 1995 to D action Santa Clara, CA 8/19/98 95051 User Fees 178 User Fee Schedule 1994 to D 2000 Bingo Permit 123.1 Bingo permit 1996 to D Renewals renewals 2000 Monthly Treasurer's 120.1 Monthly 2000 to D Report Treasurer's Report 2001 City Council 1998 - 261 Staff reports and 1997 to D copies of Audit 2000 Committee minutes Book Publishing Co. 192 Copies of 1998 to D 1998 - ordinances to be 2001 codified and cover letters sent to Book Publishing Company Xerox 189 Xerox 1989 to D correspondence and 1997 usage information Budget 207 Staff reports 1995 to D regarding budget 1998 adjustments Loyalty Oaths 450 Oaths of office 1987 to D 1996 Page RECORDS INVENTORY FOR MICROFILMING OR DESTRUCTION Department: City Clerk Contact: Kimberly Smith or Grace Johnson Page: of__ - File Name: June 2003 Resolution which authorized destruction: 03-132 i'/o. (to be used File Name, Project name File Number, Resolution, Subject, Application, Address or Location Date ranges Enter for microfiche or Developer Ordinance, Application Permit (if any) (or most M = to be microfilmed card #) Number recent date) D = to be destroyed Commissions and 378 Correspondence, 1979 to D Committees annual and 2000 unscheduled vacancy notices Postage Rates 420 Correspondence to 1985 to D Pitney Bowes and 1998 Post Office regarding postage rates Conflict of Interest 451 Staff reports and 1977 to D copies of 2000 resolutions regarding the conflict of interest code Work Requests No number Work requests to 1980 to D Public Works Dept 1995 City Clerk's Duties 565 Various 1979 to D correspondence to 1995 CM, other cities, membership organizations (e.g. CCAC) Page CUPER TINO City Hall 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 (408) 777-3354 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM Summary AGENDA DATE July 7~ 2003 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Adoption of Resolution 03- ~ 33 Urging the California Legislature to use a balanced approach in adopting the State Budget. BACKGROUND The State of California as is well known is in the midst of the worst budget crisis, according to many, since the Great depression. The fallout, as is also well known, is the major and looming threat to local govermnents from any spending reductions or "take- backs" of local govermnent revenues. As result, the essential services that cities, counties and special districts deliver directly to their communities they represent are in serious jeopardy and, worse, face serious uncertainties about the impact of the unresolved state budget issues. Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson recently announced plans for the State Democratic Caucus to visit cities and counties within their districts and to seek support by City Councils and Boards of Supervisors urging the State Legislature to use a balanced approach in adopting the State Budget urging the State Legislature to use a balanced approach in adopting the State Budget. It was further proposed that the caucus members provide cities and counties with a sample resolution to that effect for their consideration. The speaker's requested assistance from the League of Califomia Cities (LCC) and the County Supervisors Association of California (CSAC) in drafting the sample resolution concerning the importance of a balanced approach to the State Budget. This assistance was provided by following some previously adopted policies of the LCC and CSAC on this subject with specific suggestions including blending spending cuts, temporary taxes dedicated to deficit reduction, a new spending lid and constitutional protection of local revenues. Printed on Recycled Paper The resolution ultimately approved by the Speaker's Office has been provided to Council members by Assembly Member Sally Lieber on behalf of herself and Assembly member Rebecca Cohn. This sample resolution provides the basis for a position by the Council in support of a balanced approach in adopting the State budget and the Mayor and Council members have requested that staff adapt the Speaker's resolution to a City resolution for consideration by the Council at the July 7, 2003 meeting. In preparing the report and resolution for Council consideration, staff has noted that, in large part, the principles cited by the Speakers sample resolution are ones that the LCC and CSAC have supported and, in some cases, firmly advocated as important to local governments. However, the Speakers resolution, as provided by the Assembly Members, for whatever reason, does no.__!t include two key provisions that are and have been part of the joint LCC/CSAC policy statement approved the Boards of both bodies. The provisions not included are those concerning (1) a new spending lid; and, (2) constitutional protection of local revenues. These two provisions in addition to those in the Speakers Resolution are critical and key elements of local governments strategy in assuring a balanced and fair treatment of city and county revenues now and in the future. Staff has, therefore, prepared a Resolution based on the sample resolution from the Speakers office, but which includes the two additional provisions noted above, for the Council's consideration and recommends adoption of the resolution. Further, if approved by the Council, staff has drafted a letter for the Mayor's signature that communicates the city's position and transmits a copy of the resolution to state representatives. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adoption of Resolution 03- ~ 3~ urging the California Legislature to use a balanced approach in adopting the State Budget. Submitted by: Approved for submission: Director of Public Works David W. Knapp City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 03-133 DRAFT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO URGING THE CALIFORNIA LEGISTLATURE TO USE A BALANCED APPROACH IN ADOPTING THE STATE BUDGET WHEREAS, the state of California is facing the worst budget crisis since the 1930s Great Depression, threatening the ability of state and local government to deliver essential services and threatening the long-term fiscal health of state and local government; and WHERAS, counties and cities are in the midst of approving their own operating and capital budgets for the 2003-04 fiscal year and cannot adequately make decisions about the funding of local government services until the state budget is finalized; and WHEREAS, the state of California is facing a $38 billion deficit, and dramatic measures must be taken to reduce spending and protect state and local services; and WHEREAS, the city and county officials of Califomia understand the interdependence of the fiscal condition of state government and local government; and WHEREAS, the financial condition of the state of California is so serious that it is incumbent upon state leaders to both cut spending and enact temporary increases in revenues to avoid making future generations of Californians pay for the budget deficit; and WHEREAS, local officials have already taken measures to reduce local spending, but the failure to adopt a balanced budget could imperil local services; and WHEREAS, the boards of directors of the League of California Cities, California State Association of Counties and California Special Districts Association have endorsed a set of principles calling for a balanced approach to managing the state budget deficit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA, that the following balanced budget principles be supported in the upcoming budget process: · Spending Cuts. Reduce the current estimated deficit through state spending reductions, minimizing federal fund loss where possible. Short-term Borrowing. Finance part of the budget deficit over a period of up to 5 years through the issuance of short-term debt instruments, secured by temporary taxes that are dedicated solely to retiring the short-term debt. · Revenues for Deficit Reduction. Adopt a set of tax increases dedicated solely to retiring the short~term debt and the remaining structural deficit. CUPEI(TINO City Hall 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (408) 777-3213 FAX: (408~ 777-3109 HUMAN RESOURCES SUMMARY Agenda Item No. I I Meeting Date: July 7, 2003 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Authorize the City Manager to sign an agency shop agreement with Operating Engineers, Local Union #3. BACKGROUND Senate Bill 739 authorizes an agency shop arrangement with recognized employee organizations without negotiations as long as two conditions are met. First, the union is required to submit a signed petition by 30% of the bargaining unit's employees. The second condition is fulfilled if a majority of employees approve agency shop in a balloted election. Operating Engineers, Local Union No. 3 (OE3) has satisfied both agency shop requirements. On March 12, 2003, OE3 submitted a signed petition from 80% of the maintenance workers and equipment mechanics in the bargaining unit. On April 10, State Mediation Services facilitated a secret ballot election in which 90% of the employees casting votes supported agency shop. Now that all requirements are met, OE3 is seeking agency shop implementation by July 14, 2003. EMPLOYEE IMPACT With the transition to agency shop, all maintenance workers, equipment mechanics and the street lighting worker will be required to pay union dues or an agency fee for OE3 representation. If an employee is a member ora bona-fide religion, body or sect with historically held conscientious objections to joining or supporting public employee organizations, he/she may either pay an agency fee or an equivalent amount to charity. The agency fee differs from union dues by including only costs incurred for representing employees. For example, the agency fee excludes costs associated with political or ideological activities. Currently, of the 49 bargaining unit employees, 42 are union members and seven are not. OE3 will provide additional agency shop information, notification and payroll forms to employees subject to the transition. Printed on Recycled Paper RECOMMENDATION In compliance with Senate Bill 739, staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 03- [ ~ ~ authorizing the City Manager to sign an agency shop agreement with Operating Engineers, Local Union #3. Submitted by: Approved by: ,~andy ~be Human Resources Manager David W. Knapp City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 03-134 DRAFT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AN AGENCY SHOP AGREEMENT WITH OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL UNION #3 WHEREAS, Senate Bill No. 739 authorizes a municipal agency shop arrangement without negotiations upon a signed petition by 30% of the employees in the bargaining unit and majority employee approval in a secret balloted election; and WHEREAS, Operating Engineers, Local Union #3 submitted a petition signed by 80% of the bargaining unit employees and received approval from 90% of the employees casting votes; and WHEREAS, Operating Engineers, Local Union #3 thereby meets State requirements for an agency shop agreement with the City of Cupertino. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino does hereby authorize the City Manager to sign an agency shop agreement with Operating Engineers, Local Union #3. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of July 2003 by the following vote: VOTE AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTA1N: MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino RESOLUTION NO. 03-135 DRAFT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS FROM CHIPING YANG AND BEE CHOO YANG, 10660 SANTA LUCIA ROAD, APN 342-16-034 WHEREAS, Chiping Yang and Bee Choo Yang have executed a "Quitclaim Deed and Authorization", which is in good and sufficient form, quitclaiming all their rights in and authorizing the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, to extract water from the underground basin, underlying that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described as follows: All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, as shown and delineated on the attached Exhibits "A" and "B". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Cupertino accept said "Quitclaim Deed and Authorization" so tendered; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said "Quitclaim Deed and Authorization" and this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7~ day of July, 2003, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino "EXHIBIT A" WATER RIGHT QUIT CLAIM DEED All that certain real property situate in the County of Santa Clara, State of California, more particularly described as follow: Portion of Lot 87, as shown upon that certain Map entitled," MAP OF INSPIRATION I-IEIGHTS, MONTE VISTA, SHOWING SECTIONS 1 TO 222 INCLUSIVE" filed for record in the office of the Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, State of California, on April 1 lth, 1917 in Book "P" of Maps, at Page 13, and more particularly described as follow: Beginning at the point the most west side of the property comer, thence rurming along the northwesterly property line N 45%5' 30" E 72.33 feet; Thence marring S 89°40' 00" E 73.43 feet Thence running SOUTH 108.34 feet; Thence running WEST 67.14 feet; Thence rurming N 44o54' 30" W 81.48 feet, also the northerly boundary line of Santa Lucia Road, 40 feet wide, to the Point of Beginning. Containing: 10,290 square feet, more or less 0.24 acres, more or less A. P.N.: 342- 16 ~ 034 25538 ALCALDE A~ ?P,O?ERI-Y LIWE EXHIEHT WA1'EK PJ~-I-IT OUIT CLA IH DF:EP To TRIP_ ~lr¥ ~xt.' ,¥% ~/~ ~ tW .' ~ I ~'~ ~ P,o. t~ zo~o2 RE$OLUT,ON NO. 03-]36 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AUTHOR/ZING EXECUTION OF IMPROYEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND CHIPING YANG AND BEE CHOO YANG 10660 SANTA LUCIA ROAD, APN 342-16-034 WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council a proposed improvement agreement between the City of Cupertino and developers, Chiping Yang and Bee Choo Yang, for the installation of certain municipal improvements at 10660 Santa Lucia Road and said agreement having been approved by the City Attorney, and Developers having paid the fees as outlined in the attached Exhibit A; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Mayor and the City Clerk are hereby authorized to sign the aforementioned agreement on behalf of the City of Cupertino. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7~ day of July 2003, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino Resolution No. 03-136 Page 2 EXHIBIT "A" SCHEDULE OF BOND, FEES, AND DEPOSITS DEVELOPMENT: Chiping Yang and Bee Choo Yang LOCATION: 10660 Santa Lucia Road A. Faithful Performance Bond: $ 21,755.00 TWENTY ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY FIVE AND 00/100 DOLLARS B. Labor and Material Bond: $ 21,755.00 TWENTY ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY FIVE AND 00/100 DOLLARS C. Checking and Inspection Fees: $1,840 ONE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED FORTY AND 00/100 DOLLARS D. Indirect City Expenses: N/A E. Development Maintenance Deposit: $1,000 ONE THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS F. Storm Drainage Fee: Basin 2 $ 286.67 TWO HUNDRED EIGHTY SIX AND 67/100 DOLLARS G. One Year Power Cost: N/A 110-4537 H. Street Trees: N/A I. Map Checking Fee: N/A 110-4539 J. Park Fee: ZONE II N/A ACCT #: 280-4082 K. Water Main Reimbursement: N/A 110-4554 Maps and/or Improvement Plans: As Specified in Item #20 BY DEVELOPER RESOLUTION NO. 03-137 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER VACATION OF A PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO PURSUANT TO SECTION 50430 ET SEQ. OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FIXiNG TIME AND PLACE FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND PROVIDING FOR NOTICE THEREOF; LINDY PLACE WHEREAS, that certain Public Utility Easement more particularly described in description and map attached hereto and made part hereof as Exhibits "A" and "B", is deemed unnecessary for present and prospective use; and WHEREAS, the City Council elects to proceed pursuant to the provisions of Section 50430 et seq. of the Government Code of the State of California; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interests that the City Council initiates the vacation of said easement; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby declares its intention to vacate the aforesaid public utility easement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the 18th day of August, 2003, at 6:45 p.m., in the Council Chamber, City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, is the time and place fixed for hearing on the above proposed vacation; 2. That the aforesaid date is not less than 15 days from passage of this resolution pursuant to law; 3. That the City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of this resolution to be published in the manner prescribed by law, and shall cause certified copies to be posted along the line of said property proposed to be vacated at least 10 days before the date of hearing and no more than 300 feet apart with a minimum of 3 being posted. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7st day of July 2003, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino Job No. 2000567 Legal Description - 10' P.S.E. to be Abandoned A Public Service Easement (P.S.E.) easement situate in the CITY OF CUPERTINO, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, STATE OF CALII~ORNIA, lying entirely within Parcel 2 as shown on that certain parcel map recorded April 28, 1971 in Book 282 of Maps at Page 25, Santa Clam County Records, more particularly described as follows: A strip of land 10.00 feet in width contiguous to and lying northerly of the Southerly line of said pamel. PARCEL 4 PARCEL 1 PARCEL MAP 4664 423 P.M. 16 ~ - 423 P.M. 16 PARCEL 2 282 P.M. 25 0.70 ~N: 356-24-004 L ~2R. 99' UNDY PLACE LEA & SUNG ENGINEERING, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS · LAND SURVEYORS 2'1~5 INDUSIRIAL PARKWAY VEST (510) 887.-4088 FAX ~ 887-3010 Drawing LOCATION: N: ~projects ~~g_doBs\gg30g\dwg \99309ESYT. dwg EASEMENT ABANDONMENT 11477 IANDY PLACE CUPERT/N0, C.~r.r~0RNIA JOB NO 2000567 scale 1"= 30' RESOLUTION NO. 03-138 DRAFT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING A GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC SERVICES FROM YUVAL SCARLAT; LOCATED AT 11477 LINDY PLACE, APN 356'24-004 WHEREAS, Yuval Scarlat has executed a Grant of Easement which is in good and sufficient form, conveying to the City of Cupertino, Grantee, an easement for public service purposes over the property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B", attached hereto and made a part hereof. All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, located at 11477 Lindy Place, APN 356-24-004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said Grant of Easement. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7* day of July 2003, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYE S: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino Job No. 2000567 Legal Description - I0' P.S.E. A Public Service Easement (P.S.E.) easement 10.00 feet in width situate in the CITY OF CUPERTINO, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, STATE OF CAL~ORNIA, lying within Parcel 2 as shown on that eerm'm parcel map recorded April 28, 1971 in Book 282 of Maps at Page 25, Santa Clara County Records and a portion of Section 26, Township 7S, Range 2W, M.D.B. & M., more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast comer of said Parcel 2; thence along the Southerly line of Parcel 2 North 89° 23' 19" West, 94.84 feet; thence along the Westerly line of Parcel 4 as shown on PM 4664, which map was recorded in Book 423 of Maps at Pages 15 and 16, Santa Clara County Records, South 0° 36' 41" East, 22.68 feet to a comer of Lot 3 of the last said Parcel Map; thence along the Northerly line of said Lot 3, North 72° 00' 31" West, 10.48 feet; thence parallel with and distant 10.00 feet at right angles form the aforesaid Westerly line of Parcel 4, North 0° 36' 41" East, 29.55 feet; thence parallel with and distant 10.0 feet at fight angles form the aforesaid Southerly line of Parcel 2, South 89° 23' 19" East, 100.10 feet to a point on the Easterly line of Parcel 2; thence along said Easterly line South 24° 45' 22" East, 11.07 feet to the point of Beginning. Drawing LOCATION: N: \projects \ gg_JOBs\ gg$og \clwg \ gg$ogESMT, dwg CUPEP TINO City of Cupertino 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 Fax: (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department Summary Agenda Item No. Agenda Date: [uly 7, 2003 Application: U-2003-02, Z-2003-01,TM-2003-01, EA-2003-03, Applicant (s): Saron Gardens, LLC. Property Location: 7310 Rainbow Drive A-E, 7308 Rainbow Drive 9 -14 and A. Application Summary: Consider application(s): Z-2003-01; TM-2003-01; U-2003-02; and EA-2003-03 for Saron Gardens, LLC located at 7310 Rainbow Drive, A-E, APN(s): 366-19-075; 366-19-076; and 366-19-048. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends approval of: 1. Mitigated Negative Declaration, file number EA-2003-03 2. Tentative Map (TM-2003-01), in accordance with the Planning Commission Resolution No. 6187 3. Use Permit application (U-2003-02), in accordance with the Planning Commission resolutions No. 6188 4. Rezoning application (Z-2003-01), in accordance with the Planning Commission Resolution No. 6189 Project Data: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: Project Consistency with: General Plan: Zoning: Environmental Assessment: Mitigated Negative Declaration Residential Low / Residential Med/High. R1-6 / P(R3). Yes. Yes. ORDINANCE NO. 1920 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO REZONING THREE PARCELS TOTALING 3.92 GROSS ACRES PARCEL FROM P (R3) OR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES AND RI OR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO P(RES) OR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH RESIDENTIAL USES WHEREAS, an application was received by the City (Application no. Z-2003-01) for the rezoning of properties to P(Res); and WHEREAS, the rezoning is consistent with the City's general plan land use map, proposed uses and surrounding uses; and WHEREAS, upon due notice and after one public hearing the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that the rezoning be granted; and WHEREAS, a map of the subject property is attached hereto as Exhibit A and Exhibit B as a proposed amendment to the Master Zoning Map of the City of Cupertino. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the property described in attached Exhibit A and Exhibit B is hereby rezoned to P(Res) or Planned Development (Residential Use); and that Exhibit A attached hereto is made part of the Master Zoning Map of the City of Cupertino. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after its passage. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Cotmcil of the City of Cupertino the 7th day of July, 2003 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the ~ day of, 2003, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk G:\ PlanningN PDREPORT~ ORDN Z-2003-01 Ord.doc Mayor, City of Cupertino LINE TABLE LEGEND %.E i~a~l CENT/RUNE c~ I LOT LIN[ AREA TO BE REZONED TO "E-RES" ADJACENT LOT UNE~~ (5.92 AC.) ~ MONUMENT NOTE: FUTURE LOTS 1 AND 2 TO REMAIN ZONED AS R-1 RAINBOW DRIVE ~,o~.~.~w.,,.. 'oct No 5017 157 Mops ~6 APN: 566 19 42 I~ .' ~s66-19 ~1 ~ 1 ~x .-. ,d...~ ~1~ ~.~' Y 98?+ SaFt ' ',/ 566-19-76~ ;/ /}~-'~'~a ~', !~ Exstng Zonng R- .' ,' ¢',' .,' ,194 Acres _ ~. ,, ,~ ,/ . , / , . /, . , , ,, ,., - -- -- } BEAR]NOS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE ~ ~ONU~ENTED CENTERLIN[ OF POPPY WAY AS SHOWN ~ ON "TRACT NO. 2016, SPRINGARDEN UNIT NO. 4" ~j ~0. 2~2~- FILED FOR RECORO IN BOOK 124 OF MAPS AT PAGE ~1~ I ~6. CENTERLINE BEARING TAKEN AS SOUTH ~ ~1-~ L I 0~00'31" EAST. ~ ~~~x rp c f n' rr rn ZONING P~T MAP DRAWN: NJH SARON GARDENS DESIGN: DBV Engineers · Planners · Su~eyors CH'KD: - DATE: 6-11-03 1075 N. TENTH STREW, SUITE 100 SCALE: 1"= 100' SAN JOSE, CA 95112 (408)998-1234 CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA R~: U-2003-02 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6188 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT 55 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS ON A 4.03-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 7310 RAINBOW DRIVE A-E AND 7308 RAINBOW DRIVE 9-14 and A. SECTION I: PROIECT DESCRIPTION Application No(s).: U-2003-02 (EA-2003-03) Applicant: Prometheus Location: 7310 Rainbow Drive A-E and 7308 Rainbow Drive 9-14 and A. SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR USE PERMIT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use Permit, as described in Section II. of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the 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; 2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of this title. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for Use Permit and Exception are hereby recommended for approval, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based are contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No(s). U-2003-02 Resolution No. 6188 U-2003-02 May 27, 2003 Page 2 (EA-2003-O$), as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 2V, 2003, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. APPROVED EXHIBITS The recommendation of approval is based on the exhibits labeled Saron Gardens dated June 6, 2003 including sheets A0, LO.O, C1-C8, T1, LI.I-L4.1, Al, A.A1-A.A3, A.B1-A.B2, A.C1-A.C2, A.D1-A.D3, A.NI~A.N2, A.P1-A.P3, except as may be amended by the Conditions contained in this resolution. 2. 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(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. 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. 3. FENCING & LIGHTING PLAN: The applicant shall submit a fence and lighting plan (including fencing details of the transformer along Rainbow Drive) to the Design Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. In order to replace the perimeter fences, proof of consent or authorization from the adjoining neighbors must be submitted to the City prior to approval. 4. DECORATIVE PAVERS: The style and type of the decorative pavers are not approved as part of this project. A revised site plan indicating the specific type and style of pavers must be submitted to the Design Review Committee for review and approval prior to final approval of the project. Pavers shall be specified as interlocking pavers or other pavement materials that looks like interlocking pavers with some water permeability. CURB & PARKWAY ALIGNMENT ON POPPY WAY: A supplemental arborist report with specific tree preservation recommendations must be submitted to the City for review and approval in order to finalize the sidewalk/curb design along Poppy Way prior to the approval of the final map. The arborist report shall consider the existing tree canopy size, grade levels and sufficient setback from the proposed sidewalk in order to ensure complete preservations of these trees. The sidewalk/parkway will be required to meander or bulb around trees #60-62 along Poppy Way and then come back in to match the existing sidewalk/parkway patterns. In the event that the two R-1 lot sizes are affected by the approved curb/parkway Resolution No. 6188 U-2003-02 May 27, 2003 Page 5 STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION 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 adioining properties, and shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site is located. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125. 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 Engineers and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Pre and Post- development calculations must be provided to identify whether new storm drain facilities will be required, existing systems may need to be upgraded, or storm drainage can be maintained the same. 9. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 10. UNDERGROUND 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 coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility 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. 11. IMPROVEMENT 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 Resolution No. 6188 U-2003-02 May 27, 2003 Page 6 inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits. a. Checking & Inspection Fees: b. Grading Permit: c. Development Maintenance Deposit: d. Storm Drainage Fee: e. Power Cost: f. Map Checking Fees: g. Park Fees: $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $2,268.00 minimum $ 6% of Site Improvement Cost $ 3,000.00 $ 5,198.70 $1,097.75 $ 97,200.00 Bonds: a. b. C. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements Labor & Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. -The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. ** Developer is required for one-year power cost for streetlights 12. 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. 13. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water for water service to the subject development. 14. WORK SCHEDULE A work schedule shall be provided to the City to show the timetable necessary for completion of on and off site improvements. 15. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in your grading and street improvement plans. Erosion and or sediment control plan shall be provided. Resolution No. 6188 U-2003-02 May 27, 2003 Page 7 16. NOIfNPDES PERMIT The developer shall determine if a NOI/NPDES permit will be required for their site. Please see attached. CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF ENGINEERING/SURVEYING CONDITIONS (Section 66474.18 California Government Code) I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV of this Resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices. /s/Ralph Qualls Ralph Qualls, Director of Public Works City Engineer CA License 22046 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of May, 2003, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Miller, Wong and Chairperson Chen COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: Saadati ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of CommunityDevelopment /s/Angela Chen Angela Chen, Chairperson Cupertino Planning Commission G:\plannmg\PDREPORT\ RES\ U-2003~32res.doc (t Z-2003-01 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6189 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING THE REZONING OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (R3) ZONING DISTRICT TO P(RES) (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL) FOR A 55 SINGLE-FAMILY HOME DEVELOPMENT AT 7310 RAINBOW DRIVE A-E and 7308 RAINBOW DRIVE 9-14 and A. SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No(s).: Z-2003-01 (EA-2003-03) Applicant: Prometheus Location: 7310 Rainbow Drive SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR ZONING PERMIT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for the rezoning of property, as described on this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the subject rezoning meets the following requirements: 1) That the rezoning is in conformance with the General Plan of the City of Cupertino. 2) That the property involved is adequate in size and shape to conform to the new zoning designation. 3) That the new zoning encourages the most appropriate use of land as compared to the majority of other parcels in this same district. 4) That the proposed rezoning is otherwise not detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of subject parcels. 5) That the rezoning promotes the orderly development of the city. "-I3 Resolution No. 6189 Z-2003-01 May 27, 2003 Pmze 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for change of zone is hereby recommended for approval; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based are contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. Z-2003-01 (EA-2003-03), as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 27, 2003, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. I APPROVED EXHIBITS The recommendation of approval is based on the exhibits labeled Zoning Plat map, dated 4/9/03. 2. LOT LINE ADIUSTMENT A lot line adjustment shall be submitted to and approved by Cupertino staff. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of May, 2003, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Miller, Wong and Chairperson Chen COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: Saadati ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development /s/Angela Chen Angela Chen, Chairperson Cupertino Planning Commission G: I Plan ning \ PD REPO R T \ RES \ z-2003-01 res.doc TM-2003-01 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6187 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE MAP TO SUBDIVIDE A 4.03- ACRE PARCEL INTO 55 PARCELS AND ONE COMMON PARCEL AT 7310 RAINBOW DRIVE A-E and 7308 RAINBOW DRIVE 9-14 and A. SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: TM-2003-01 Applicant: Prometheus Location: 7310 Rainbow Drive SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Tentative Subdivision Map as described in Section I of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given as required by the Subdivision and Procedural Ordinances of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held at least one public hearing in regard to the application; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has satisfied the following requirements: a) That the proposed subdivision map is consistent with the City of Cupertino General Plan. b) That the design and improvements of the proposed subdivision are consistent with the General Plan.. c) That the site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of development contemplated under the approved subdivision. d) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidable injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. e) That the designs of the subdivision or the type of improvements associated therewith are not likely to cause serious public health problems. f) That the design of the subdivision and its associated improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. Resolution No. 6187 TM-2003-01 May 27, 2003 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application 02-TM-01 for a Tentative Map is hereby approved subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on page 2 thereof, and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application 02-TM-01, as set forth in the Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting of May 27, 2003, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Approved is based on the approved plans, entitled "Tentative Map", prepared by David B. Voorhies, dated 3/30/03. 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(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. 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. ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: A reciprocal maintenance agreement shall be required for all parcels which share a common private drive or private roadway with one or more other parcels. Said agreement shall be recorded in conjunction with recordation of the final map, and shall be subject to prior approval as to form and content by the City Attorney. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STREET WIDENING Street widening, improvements and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. The Public Works Department must approve all on and off-site improvements prior Resolution No. 6187 TM-2003-0 l May 27, 2003 Page 3 to gaining approval, which includes storm drain improvements, sidewalk design, curb and gutter design and dedications along Poppy Way. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer. The Public Works Department must approve all on and off-site improvements prior to gaining approval, which includes storm drain improvements, sidewalk design, curb and gutter design and dedications along Poppy Way. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION 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. 7. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City. 8. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125. 10. 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 Engineers and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. 11. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Pre and Post- development calculations must be provided to identify whether new storm drain facilities will be required, existing systems may need to be upgraded, or storm drainage can be maintained the same. 12. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 13. UNDERGROUND 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 coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of Resolution No. 6187 TM-2003-01 May 27, 2003 Page 4 underground utility 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. 14. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits. a. Checking & Inspection Fees: b. Grading Permit: c. Development Maintenance Deposit: d. Storm Drainage Fee: e. Power Cost: f. Map Checking Fees: g. Park Fees: $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $2,268.00 minimum $ 6% of Site Improvement Cost $ 3,000.00 $ 5,198.70 $1,097.75 $ 97,200.00 Bonds: Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements Labor & Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. -The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. ** Developer is required for one-year power cost for streetlights 15. 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. 16. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water for water service to the subject development. 17. WORK SCHEDULE A work schedule shall be provided to the City to show the timetable necessary for completion of on and off site improvements. TM-2003-01 May 27, 2003 Resolution No. 6187 Page 5 18. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in your grading and street improvement plans. Erosion and or sediment control plan shall be provided. 19. NOI/NPDES PERMIT The developer shall determine if a NOI/ NPDES permit will be required for their site. Please see attached. CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF ENGINEERING/SURVEYING CONDITIONS (Section 66474.18 California Government Code) I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV of this Resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices. /s/Ralph Quails Ralph Quails, Director of Public Works City Engineer CA License 22046 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of May, 2003, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Miller, Wong and Chairperson Chen COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: Saadati ATTEST: APPROVED: / s/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development G:\Planning\ PDREPORT\RES\TM-2003-01res.doc /S/ Angela Chen Angela Chen, Chairperson Cupertino Planning Commission CITY OF CUPERTINO MITIGATED NEGATIVE 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 17 1977, 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 July 7, 2003. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION EA-2003-03 Application No.: Applicant: Location: Z-2003-01, TM-2003-01, U-2003-02 Jeff White (Prometheus) 7310 Rainbow Drive, A-E DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST Zoning (Z-2003-01) to rezone a 4.03 acre parcel from PR3) to P(Res). Tentative Map (TM-2003-01) to subdivide a 4.03-acre parcel into 55 residential parcels and one common parcel. Use Permit (U-2003-02) to construct 55 single-family residences and site improvements on a 4.03-acre parcel. FINDINGS OF DECISIONMAKING BODY The City Council granted a Mitigated Negative Declaration with the following mitigations: 1. Trees: The applicant is required to plant 6 - 48" box Coast Live Oaks to replace the removed specimen oak and cedar trees. The arborist report has identified specific tree projection measures that will be included in the project conditions as well. 2. Storm water drainage: A storm water drainage study is required and shall be completed as part of this project prior to the Planning Commission Public Hearing. Specific mitigation measures identified in the drainage study shall be included as conditions of the project to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works Department. 3. Relocation program: The project is required to provide a relocation program with provisions to relocated existing apartment residents to other comparable apartment units within the Cupertino Union School District. 4. Below Market Rate units: The project is required to provide 20% BMR units. The applicant is demolishing all 40 units and proposing 15 additional new units for a new total of 55 units. 20% will be taken from these 15 additional new units resulting in 3 BMR units. 5. Traffic Impacts: The applicant is required to install one new stop sign at the driveway exit along Rainbow Drive and sidewalk access from the project site to Rainbow Drive. The applicant is required to submit a traffic analysis discussing potential traffic impacts. These finding identified in the analysis shall be implemented as conditions of the project to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works Department. 6. Parking: The applicant is required to submit a parking analysis that shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to the Planning Commission Public Hearing. Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development CERTIFICATE OF THE CITY CLERK This is to certify that the above Negative Declaration was filed in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Cupertino on City Clerk g/erc/negEA200303 CUPERTINO City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 Fax: (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department Summary Agenda Item No. I~ Agenda Date: June 16, 2003 Application: U-2003-02, Z-2003-01,TM-2003-01, EA-2003-03, Applicant (s): Saron Gardens, LLC. Property Location: 7310 Rainbow Drive A-E, 7308 Rainbow Drive 9 -14 and A. Application Summary: Use permit to demolish 39 existing apartment units (9 buildings) and 1 single-family residence and construct a residential development consisting of 55 single-family homes. Tentative map to subdivide 3 parcels (totaling 4.03 acres) into 55 single-family private lots and one lot held in common. A rezoning of a P(R3) - multifamily zoning district to P(Res) - Planned Residential. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends approval of: 1. Mitigated Negative Declaration, file number EA-2003-03 2. Tentative Map, file number TM-2003-01 3. Rezoning application, file number Z-2003-01 4. The Use Permit application, file number U-2003-02, in accordance with the Planning Commission resolutions No. 6187, 6188, 6189 Project Data: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: Project Consistency with: General Plan: Zoning: Residential Low / Residential Med/High. R1-6 / P(R3). Yes. Yes. Environmental Assessment: Mitigated Negative Declaration Applications: U-2003-02, Z-2003-01, TM-2003- 01, EA-2003-01 Page 2 Saron Gardens June 19, 2003 BACKGROUND Prometheus is proposing to demolish nine buildings on the current Saron Garden Apartment Site on Rainbow Drive and one single-family house on an adjacent lot. The nine buildings consist of 39 residential apartment units along with 6 carports and a swimming pool. In place of the buildings, 55 new single-family detached homes are being proposed on the site along with a public pedestrian pathway/emergency access drive and a village green area near the center of the project. The applicant is also proposing to subdivide the project site into 56 lots (one lot being the shared common/access area) to facilitate the newly proposed homes. The project takes on a town home style development in terms of functionality and parking utilization; however a conscious effort was made to design the homes so that they are detached individual single-family homes instead of attached town houses. Prior to the Planning Commission hearing, Prometheus held five neighborhood meetings. The first two meeting were held at the conceptual stage, while the next four meetings were held after the formal application submittal. The Planning Commission heard this item on May 12, 2003 and directed the applicant to address concerns raised by the Saron Gardens residents relating to the proposed relocation program, school impacts and building setbacks. The Commission recommended approved the project 4-0 (one member was absent) on May 27, 2003. Overall, the Commission was pleased with the project in terms of architectural/site design and the community outreach efforts by the applicant. DISCUSSION Site Analysis The project site is located in a residential neighborhood surrounded by 4-plex apartments along the northerly property line and single-family residential homes along the westerly and majority of the southerly property lines. The project parcel shares a portion of its southerly boundary with a commercial nursery (Yamagami's) located along the southeasterly corner of the site. The subject site has frontages both on Rainbow Drive and Poppy Way. The only vehicular access to the development is off of Rainbow Drive. The project provides a 12-foot wide emergency vehicle and pedestrian access drive off of Poppy Way. This emergency access corridor will be partially paved with turf blocks. The turf block path will appear to be a lawn area while satisfying Fire Department standards in terms of supporting emergency vehicle loads. Applications: U-2003-02, Z-2003-01, TM-2003- 01, EA-2005-01 Page 3 SaronGardens June 19, 2003 The access corridor also serves as a public pedestrian path providing access from the existing Poppy Way neighborhood to the center of the project (village green park) and eventually out to Rainbow Drive. The pedestrian path will be available to the public at all times and is considered a desirable element that enhances neighborhood connectivity while eliminating cut through traffic. Only the two larger single-family homes will gain vehicular access off of Poppy Way consistent with the development patterns on Poppy Way. A main feature of the development will be the Village Green Park (consisting of approximately .16 acres) located near the center of the project, with 14 residential units facing directly onto the park. The village green will be a public common open space for the 55 proposed homes with a built in sand play area, two picnic benches/tables, two' sitting benches and a large lawn area. 8 of the units will face Rainbow Drive. The remaining 31 units will face onto the interior street system with the two larger R-1 single-family lots fronting onto Poppy Way. The private streets separate the units by approximately 20 to 22 feet. With the exception of 5 units (type B), most of the units will have front entrances from several interior courtyard areas (or village green) with the garages open onto the interior streets. Only 5 units (type B) will have both the front entrance and the garage open onto the interior streets. Decorative pavers are used on the front entry drives and the southerly interior street to add more interest and further delineate the proposed pedestrian path across the project. Architectural Design According to the project architect, the major focus in the design of this development is to employ a "bay area cottage" vernacular style. There has been a consistent effort to reduce the scale and apparent height of the houses by means of detailing and through the use of dormers, porches, trellis, stone bases and horizontally banded windows. A conscious attempt has been made to avoid the "mini-mansion" approach, which tends to combine too many materials and emphasizes vertical, rather than horizontal proportions. The applicant has worked extensively with staff and the City's architectural consultant in designing the project. Therefore, staff is in support of the project architecture. Please refer to the attached plan set and color renderings for further details on the design of the units. Traffic & Parking Traffic Impacts - The project was reviewed for traffic impacts based on a report prepared by Fehr & Peers on March 24, 2003. The report considered the net-trip generation of the project, site access and the potential impacts on adjacent intersections. The report Applications: U-2003-02, Z-2003-01, TM-2003- 01, EA-9003-01 Page 4 Saron Gardens June 19, 2003 determined that there will be no significant traffic impacts. The traffic report was reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. Parking - The City's Parking Ordinance does not have a classification for the proposed detached small lot single-family development that functions similar to a town home development. In the past, staff had required projects to provide a parking survey of similar projects from neighboring cities when an exception is warranted. The applicant submitted a parking survey from Fehr & Peers (dated May 1, 2003), indicating that the proposed parking ratio of 2.8 stalls per unit is on par with parking requirements of similar density products in other jurisdictions. In addition, the parking analysis surveyed the actual guest parking demands at six selected residential projects. On average, the actual guest parking demand for the six sites is 0.47 spaces per unit that further provides evidence that the proposed 0.8 guest space per unit is adequate. The parking arrangement for the two regular single family homes (Type P) complies with the regular parking requirements for single family homes, which are 2 covered stalls and 2 uncover off-street parking stalls. Below Market Units According to the General Plan Policy 3-8, the City's existing multi-family rental units provide housing opportunities for household of various income levels. Therefore in general, the existing multi-family units should be preserved to the maximum extent possible. In the event that a proposed development or redevelopment of a site causes a loss of multi-family units, the City must require mitigation measures to offset the impacts. Although the project will be increasing the total amount of housing units by 15 units on the project site, 39 existing apartment units and one single-family home will be demolished. As a mitigation measure, 20% (3 units) of the 15 additional units must be below market rate units which is 5% more than what the City normally requires (15%) in order to offset the low income housing that are being displaced as part of this project. Relocation Assistance Program In addition to the BMR requirement, the project is required to provide a relocation program with provisions to assist the relocation of existing apartment residents to other comparable units within the Cupertino Union School District boundary or Santa Clara County at the tenants option. Applications: U-2003-02, Z-2003-01, TM-2003- 01, EA-2003-01 Page 5 Saron Gardens June 19, 2003 The final version (dated May 22, 2003) of the proposed relocation program is summarized as follows: Resident Relations Manager: Prometheus will have a resident relations manager on-site prior to the start of construction to work with and assist the residents during the relocation period. The manager will assist residents to relocation to another project by providing information such as apartment listings, moving company listings, and information on how to qualify for BMR units. Early Notification: Prometheus will meet with residents prior to completing the entitlement process to provide an overview of the project plans and timeline. This early notification will allow residents to prepare and be organized for their relocation. In order to provide residents adequate time to find alternative housing, Prometheus will notify each resident with at least 60 days notice in advance of the required move out date. Refund Deposits: Prometheus will refund the security deposits at the time of the move-out at the leasing office and waive all cleaning charges so long as the following criteria are met: rent must be current, apartment must be vacated on or before their scheduled move-out date, all personal belongings removed form the site, apartment is free from debris, and fixtures of the apartment are not removed. In addition, dumpsters will be provided to facilitate the disposal of resident's debris from the property. Relocation Allowance: At move-out, each resident will be provided with a lump sum relocation allowance equal to three times the monthly rent being paid by that resident at the time of relocation. Dispute Resolution: In the event that a dispute arises regarding the implementation of this program, the dispute shall be resolved through mediation. Environmental Review The Planning Commission recommended a Mitigated Negative Declaration with mitigations related to traffic, parking, landscaping, drainage, BMR units and relocation plan. The mitigations are included in the project or incorporated into the conditions of approval. Saron Gardens June 19, 2003 Applications: U-2003-02, Z-2003-01, TM-2003- 01, EA-2003-01 Page 6 PLANNING COMMISSION ISSUES As mentioned earlier, on May 27, 2003, the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the project. Overall, they were pleased with the development plan. Concerns raised and addressed at the meeting are listed below: · Relocation Assistance Program - The Saron Gardens residents originally had concerns regarding the relocation assistance package proposed by the applicant. However, the applicant worked extensively with the residents to revise the relocation program and have resolved the concerns. Staff received a petition from the Saron Gardens Resident Association in favor of the latest version of the relocation assistance program date May 22, 2003 (see attachment). School Impacts- Concerns were raised at the Planning Commission meetings regarding the project impacting children residing at the Saron Gardens Apartments attending Cupertino Schools (Regnart Elementary, Kennedy Jr. High, Monta Vista High School). Staff and the applicant met with the representatives of the Cupertino School Districts (Cupertino Union and Fremont Union) on May 19, 2003. The purpose of this meeting was to find out if the school districts could allow the existing student residents of Saron Gardens to be grandfathered into their current schools (Regnart, Kennedy and Monta Vista) in the event that they move to a new residence outside of the school district boundary. Overall, the School Districts are in favor of this project since it will help generate additional funding from the State and from the developer's fees. The District did confirm again that the project would not have a significant impact on the school system. On the notion of the Districts allowing students to finish out their remaining academic career (from elementary through high school) in their current district even after they move outside of the district, the Districts did point out that they cannot offer special treatments to Saron Garden residents that otherwise wouldn't be available or offered to any other residents in the same school districts. However as a common practice, the Districts could accommodate students if the proposed project allows the residents to reside at Saron Gardens past December of 2003; then the existing elementary students attending Regnart Elementary School will be allowed to finish out the 2004 school year at Regnart. This concept would also apply to all of the existing high school seniors at Saron Gardens currently attending Monta Vista High School. Unfortunately Kennedy Middle School is already over capacity (with a long waiting list) and will not be able accommodate the students if they move out of the district. The School District wanted to emphasize that all of the schools in the Cupertino Union and Fremont Union Districts are outstanding schools that may only differ in the degrees of excellence. A condition has been added that requires Prometheus to do everything within reason to accommodate residents with children attending schools so that they can continue to live in the same school assignment area. Applications: U-2003-02, Z-2003-01, TM-2003- 01, EA-2003-01 Page 7 Saron Gardens June 19, 2003 Building Setbacks - Several single-family homeowners suggested at the Commission meeting that the side yard setback for some of the Type N units located along the southwest corner of the project site be increased from 10 feet to 20 feet to further alleviate privacy and visual impacts. The applicant restudied the site plan and came up with an alternative design that allows two of the Type N units to have 20 feet side yard setbacks. By doing so, the project gained two additional parking stalls, and one of the interior drives along the northerly property line was deleted. The Fire Department has reviewed and approved the revised site layout. Staff is in support of this revision. SUBMIITED~,~Y: Steve P~aseck~, Director of Community Development APPROVED BY: David W. Knapp, City Manager ENCLOSURES Planning Commission Resolution No. 6187, May 27, 2003 Planning Commission Resolution No. 6188, May 27, 2003 Planning Commission Resolution No. 6789, May 27, 2003 Ordinance No. 1920 Staff report for the Plaxming Commission public hearing, May 27, 2002 Staff report for the Planning Commission public hearing, May 12, 2003 Planning Commission minutes, May 12, 2003 Planning Commission minutes, May 27, 2003 Letter Received by the Saron Gardens Resident Association with revised Relocation Progxam, May 22, 2003 Letter from the Residents of Saron Gardens Association, May 27, 2003 Revised Zoning Plat Map Plan set Color Renderings G:\Planning\PDREPORT~CC\U-2002-03cc.doc ORDINANCE NO. 1920 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO REZONING THREE PARCELS TOTALING 3.92 GROSS ACRES PARCEL FROM P (R3) OR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES AND R1 OR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO P(RES) OR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH RESIDENTIAL USES WHEREAS, an application was received by the City (Application no. Z-2003-01) for the rezoning of properties to P(Res); and WHEREAS, the rezoning is consistent with the City's general plan land use map, proposed uses and surrounding uses; and WHEREAS, upon due notice and alter one public hearing the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that the rezoning be granted; and WHEREAS, a map of the subject property is attached hereto as Exhibit A and Exhibit B as a proposed amendment to the Master Zoning Map of the City of Cupertino. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the property described in attached Exhibit A and Exhibit B is hereby rezoned to P(Res) or Planned Development (Residential Use); and that Exhibit A attached hereto is made part of the Master Zoning Map of the City of Cupertino. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in rome thirty (30) days after its passage. iNTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the 16th day of June 2003 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the __ day of__ 2003, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTA1N: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino TM-2003-01 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6187 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE MAP TO SUBDIVIDE A 4.03- ACRE PARCEL INTO 55 PARCELS AND ONE COMMON PARCEL AT 7310 RAINBOW DRIVE A-E and 7308 RAINBOW DRIVE 9-14 and A. SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Location: TM-2003-01 Prometheus 7310 Rainbow Drive SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Tentative Subdivision Map as described in Section I of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given as required by the Subdivision and Procedural Ordinances of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held at least one public hearing in regard to the application; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has satisfied the following requirements: a) That the proposed subdivision map is consistent with the City of Cupertino General Plan. b) That the design and improvements of the proposed subdivision are consistent with the General Plan. c) That the site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of development contemplated under the approved subdivision. d) That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidable injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. e) That the designs of the subdivision or the type of improvements associated therewith are not likely to cause serious public health problems. f) That the design of the subdivision and its associated improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. Resolution No. 6187 TM-2003-01 May 27, 2003 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application 02-TM-01 for a Tentative Map is hereby approved subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on page 2 thereof, and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application 02-TM-01, as set forth in the Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting of May 27, 2003, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Approved is based on the approved plans, entitled "Tentative Map", prepared by David B. Voorhies, dated 3/30/03. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONSt 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 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 such exactions. ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: A reciprocal maintenance agreement shall be required for all parcels which share a common private drive or private roadway with one or more other parcels. Said agreement shall be recorded in conjunction with recordation of the final map, and shall be subject to prior approval as to form and content by the City Attorney. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STREET WIDENING Street widening, improvements and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. The Public Works Department must approve all on and off-site improvements prior Resolution No. 6187 TM-2003-01 May 27, 2003 Page 3 to gaining approval, which includes storm drain improvements, sidewalk design, curb and gutter design and dedications along Poppy Way. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer. The Public Works Department must approve all on and off-site improvements prior to gaining approval, which includes storm drain improvements, sidewalk design, curb and gutter design and dedications along Poppy Way. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION 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. 7. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City. 8. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125. 10. 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 Engineers and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. 11. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Pre and Post- development calculations must be provided to identify whether new storm drain facilities will be required, existing systems may need to be upgraded, or storm drainage can be maintained the same. 12. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 13. UNDERGROUND 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 coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of Resolution No. 6187 TM-2003-01 May 27, 2003 Page 4 underground utility 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. 14. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits. a. Checking & Inspection Fees: b. Grading Permit: c. Development Maintenance Deposit: d. Storm Drainage Fee: e. Power Cost: f. Map Checking Fees: g. Park Fees: $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement minimum $ 6% of Site Improvement Cost $ 3,000.00 $ 5,198.70 $1,097.75 $ 97,200.00 Cost or $2,268.00 Bonds: Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements Labor & Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. -The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. ** Developer is required for one-year power cost for streetlights 15. 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. 16. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water for water service to the subject development. 17. WORK SCHEDULE A work schedule shall be provided to the City to show the timetable necessary for completion of on and off site improvements. Resolution No. 6187 TM~2003-01 May 27, 2003 Page 5 18. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in your grading and street improvement plans. Erosion and or sediment control plan shall be provided. 19. NOI/NPDES PERMIT The developer shall determine if a NOI/ NPDES permit will be required for their site. Please see attached. CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF ENGINEERING/SURVEYING CONDITIONS (Section 66474.18 California Government Code) I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV of this Resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices. /s/Ralph q)ualls Ralph Qualls, Director of Public Works City Engineer CA License 22046 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of May, 2003, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Miller, Wong and Chairperson Chen COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: Saadati ATTEST: APPROVED: / s/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development G:~ Planning\ PDREPORT\ RES\TM-2003-01res.doc /s/ Angela Chen Angela Chen, Chairperson Cupertino Planning Commission U-2003-02 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6188 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT 55 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS ON A 4.03-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 7310 RAINBOW DRIVE A-E AND 7308 RAINBOW DRIVE 9-14 and A. SECTION I: PROIECT DESCRIPTION Application No(s).: U-2003-02 (EA-2003-03) Applicant: Prometheus Location: 7310 Rainbow Drive SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR USE PERMIT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use Permit, as described in Section II. of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Plarming 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; 2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of this title. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for Use Permit and Exception are hereby recommended for approval, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based are contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No(s). U-2003-02 Resolution No. 6188 U-2003-02 May 27, 2003 Page 2 (EA-2003-03), as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 27, 2003, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. APPROVED EXHIBITS The recommendation of approval is based on the exhibits labeled Saron Gardens dated June 6, 2003 including sheets A0, LO.O, C1-C8, T1, LI.I-L4.1, Al, A.A1-A.A3, A.B1-A.B2, A,C1-A.C2, A.D1-A.D3, A.N1-A.N2, A.P1-A.P3, except as may be amended by the Conditions contained in this resolution. 2. 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(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. 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. 3. FENCING & LIGHTING PLAN: The applicant shall submit a fence and lighting plan (including fencing details of the transformer along Rainbow Drive) to the Design Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. In order to replace the perimeter fences, proof of consent or authorization from the adjoining neighbors must be submitted to the City prior to approval. 4. DECORATIVE PAVERS: The style and type of the decorative pavers are not approved as part of this project. A revised site plan indicating the specific type and style of pavers must be submitted to the Design Review Committee for review and approval prior to final approval of the project. Pavers shall be specified as interlocking pavers or other pavement materials that looks like interlocking pavers with some water permeability. CURB & PARKWAY ALIGNMENT ON POPPY WAY: A supplemental arborist report with specific tree preservation recommendations must be submitted to the City for review and approval in order to finalize the sidewalk/curb design along Poppy Way prior to the approval of the final map. The arborist report shall consider the existing tree canopy size, grade levels and sufficient setback from the proposed sidewalk in order to ensure complete preservations of these trees. The sidewalk/parkway will be required to meander or bulb around trees #60-62 along Poppy Way and then come back in to match the existing sidewalk/parkway patterns. In the event that the two R-1 lot sizes are affected by the approved curb/parkway Resolution No. 6188 Page 3 U-2003-02 May 27, 2003 alignment, the proposed homes must be reduced in size according to the R-1 development standards. Revised plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. 10. 11. 12. LANDSCAPING PLAN: A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Design Review Committee for review and approval indicating the preservation of tree #58 on the site plan. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS (CC&R's): A copy of the CC& R's for the project shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to approval of the final map. A legal description of the side/rear yard easements proposed between homes must also be submitted to the City Attorney's Office for review and approval prior to the final map approval. PARKING RATIO: Parking ratio for the property shall be 2.83 spaces per unit (156 stalls). Two spaces per unit shall be covered. In addition, the parking ratio for the two R-1 single-family homes shall be 4 spaces per unit (8 stalls). Two spaces per unit shall be covered. SITE PLAN: A revised site plan reflecting the proposed fence recess between each homes as shown on the landscaping plan sheet L2.1 shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. INTERIOR GARAGE DIMENSION: The interior garage clearance shall be 20 feet by 20 feet (measured from inside walls). STOOP HEIGHTS OF UNIT TYPE D (D1 & D2): As proposed, the entry landing leading to the front door of D units (D1 & D2) is approximately elevated 6 feet above grade that does not present a very desirable pedestrian experience. The applicant shall explore options to reduce the height of the entry stoops by breaking up the main entry stairs by adding a couple of steps at the entrance of the front yard or re-evaluate the grading plan for the project so that the ground floor/garage could be set lower in elevation in order to reduce the scale of the front stoops. Revised plans for all of the D units shall be submitted to the Design Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of the Final Map. TRANSFORMER: The transformer proposed along Rainbow Drive shall be screened completely out of the public view by a combination of fencing and landscaping. The fence design shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. Alternatively, the transformer may be underground if screening from fencing and landscaping are determined inadequate. Resolution No. 6188 U-2003-02 May 27, 2003 Page 4 13. BELOW MARKET RATE UNITS: The project will be increasing the total number of housing units by 15 units on the project site. However, 39 apartment units will be demolished. As a mitigation measure, 20% (3 units) of the 15 additional units must be below market rate units consistent with the City's Housing Mitigation Policy. 14. RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: The project will be subjected to the approved relocation assistance program dated May 22, 2003 except as may be amended by the Conditions contained in this resolution. Prometheus shall do everything within reason to accommodate residents with children attending schools so that they can continue to live in the same school district. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STREET WIDENING Street widening, improvements and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. The Public Works Department must approve all on and off-site improvements prior to gaining approval, which includes storm drain improvements, sidewalk design, curb and gutter design and dedications along Poppy Way. CURB AND GU'I"I'ER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer. The Public Works Department must approve all on and off-site improvements prior to gaining approval, which includes storm drain improvements, sidewalk design, curb and gutter design and dedications along Poppy Way. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION 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. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125. Resolution No. 6188 U-2003-02 May 27, 2003 Page 5 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 Engineers and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Pre and Post- development calculations must be provided to identify whether new storm drain facilities will be required, existing systems may need to be upgraded, or storm drainage can be maintained the same. 9. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 10. UNDERGROUND 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 coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility 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. 11. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits. a. Checking & Inspection Fees: b. Grading Permit: c. Development Maintenance Deposit: d. Storm Drainage Fee: e. Power Cost: f. Map Checking Fees: g. Park Fees: $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $2,268.00 minimum $ 6% of Site Improvement Cost $ 3,000.00 $ 5,198.70 $1,097.75 $ 97,200.00 Bonds: a. b. C. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements Labor & Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. Resolution No. 618g U-2003-02 May 27, 2003 Page 6 -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 changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. ** Developer is required for one-year power cost for streetlights 12. 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. 13. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water for water service to the subject development. 14. WORK SCHEDULE A work schedule shall be provided to the City to show the timetable necessary for completion of on and off site improvements. 15. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in your grading and street improvement plans. Erosion and or sediment control plan shall be provided. 16. NOI/NPDES PERMIT The developer shall determine if a NOI/NPDES permit will be required for their site. Please see attached. CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF ENGINEERING/SURVEYING CONDITIONS (Section 66474.18 California Government Code) I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV of this Resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices. /s/Ralph Qualls Ralph Quails, Director of Public Works City Engineer CA License 22046 Resolution No. 6188 U-2003-02 May 27, 2003 Page 7 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of May, 2003, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Miller, Wong and Chairperson Chen COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: Saadati ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development /s/Angela Chen Angela Chen, Chairperson Cupertino Planning Commission G:\ planning\ PDREPORT\ RES\ U-2003-02res.doc CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 Z-2003-01 RESOLUTION NO. 6189 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING THE REZONING OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (R3) ZONING DISTRICT TO P(RES) (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL) FOR A 55 SINGLE-FAMILY HOME DEVELOPMENT AT 7310 RAINBOW DRIVE A-E and 7308 RAINBOW DRIVE 9-14 and A. SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No(s).: Z-2003-01 (EA-2003-03) Applicant: Prometheus Location: 7310 Rainbow Drive SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR ZONING PERMIT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cuperfino received an application for the rezoning of property, as described on this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the subject rezoning meets the following requirements: 1) That the rezoning is in conformance with the General Plan of the City of Cupertino. 2) That the property involved is adequate in size and shape to conform to the new zoning designation. 3) That the new zoning encourages the most appropriate use of land as compared to the majority of other parcels in this same district. 4) That the proposed rezoning is otherwise not detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of subject parcels. 5) That the rezoning promotes the orderly development of the city. Resolution No. 6189 Z-2003-01 May 27, 2003 Pa~e 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for change of zone is hereby recommended for approval; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based are contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. Z-2003-01 (EA-2003-03), as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 27, 2003, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1 APPROVED EXHIBITS The recommendation of approval is based on the exhibits labeled Zoning Plat map, dated 4/9/03. LOT LINE ADIUSTMENT A lot line adjustment shall be submitted to and approved by Cupertino staff. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of May, 2003, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Miller, Wong and Chairperson Chen COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: Saadati ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development /s/Angela Chen Angela Chen, Chairperson Cupertino Planning Commission G: \ Planning I PDREPORT \ RES \ z-2003-01 res.doc CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: U-2003-02, Z-2003-01, TM-2003-01, Agenda Date: May 27, 2003 EA-2003-03 Applicant: Saron Gardens, LLC. Owner: Joelson 1983 Living Trust Location: 7310 Rainbow Drive A-E, 7308 Rainbow Drive 9 -14 and A. Application Summary: Use permit to demolish 39 existing apartment units (9 buildings) and I single-family residence and construct a residential development consisting of 55 single-family homes. Tentative map to subdivide 3 parcels (totaling 4.03 acres) into 55 single-family private lots and one lot held in common. A rezoning of a P(R3) - multifamily zoning district to P(Res) - Planned Residential. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of: 1. The negative declaration, file number EA-2003-03; 2. The use permit application, file number U-2003-02, in accordance with the model resolution; 3. The tentative map application, file number TM-2003-01, in accordance with the model resolution; 4. The rezoning application, file number Z-2003-01, in accordance with the model resolution. Project Data: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: Acreage (Gross): Density: Height: Stories (Allowed): Parking: m (SFR) Planned Residential Proposed: R1 (SFR) Planned Residential Total: Residential Low / Residential Med/High R1-6 / P(R3) 4.03 acres 13.64 du/gr, ac. 34'-8" 2-3 story residential (7 - 2 story units, 48 - 3 story units) Units/sq ft. 2 un/ts 53 units Ratio Required 4/unit (2 covered 8 stalls + 2 uncovered) Not specified by the code. 4 4 110 46 164 Covered spaces (garage) Driveway spaces (open) Covered spaces (garage) Guest spaces (open) Total Spaces Applications: U-2003-02, Z-2005 , Sar0n Gardens May 27, 2003 TM-2003-01, EA-2003-O3 Project Consistency with: General Plan: Yes Zoning: Rezoning required Environmental Assessment: Mitigated Negative Declaration BACKGROUND: On May 12, 2003, the Planning Commission considered this item and directed the applicant to meet again with the Saron Gardens Apartment residents to further discuss the issue regarding the proposed relocation assistance program. The applicant has scheduled a meeting with the residents on April 22, 2003. Since this meeting will occur after the staff report is prepared, the outcome of the meeting will be available to the Commission on its May 27, 2003 public hearing. In addition, some concerns were bought up in the May 12, 2003 Commission meeting regarding the proposed building setbacks along the southwest comer of the project adjacent to existing single-family homes, school impacts and proposed pedestrian path. These issues will be addressed in the Discussion section of this report. DISCUSSION: Revised Site Plan Several single-family homeowners suggested at the Commission meeting that the side yard setback for some of the Type N units located along the southwest corner of the project site be increased from 10 feet to 20 feet to further alleviate privacy and visual impacts. The applicant did restudy the site plan and came up with an alternative design that allows two of the Type N units to have 20 feet side yard setbacks. By doing so, the project gained 2 additional parking stalls and one of the interior drives along the northerly property line was deleted. The Fire Department has reviewed and approved the revised site layout. Staff is in support of this revision. The revised site plan will be available at the May 27, 2003 Planning Commission hearing. School Impacts Staff and the applicant met with the representatives of the Cupertino School Districts (Cupertino Union and Fremont Union) on May 19, 2003. The purpose of this meeting was to find out ff the school districts could allow the existing student residents of Saron Gardens to be grandfathered into their current schools (Regnart, Kennedy and Monta Vista) in the event that they move to a new residence outside of the school district boundary. 2 Applications: U-2003-02, Z-200~ Saron Gardens May 27, 2003 TM-2003-O I, EA-20v~-03 Overall, the School Districts are in favor of this project since it will help generate additional funding from the State and from the developer's fees. The District did confirm again that the project would not have a significant impact on the school system. On the notion of the Districts allowing s~udents to finish out their remaining academic career (from elementary through high school) in their current district even after they move outside of the district, the Districts did point out that they cannot offer special ~reatments to Saron Garden residents that otherwise wouldn't be available or offered to any other residents in the same school districts. However as a common practice, the Districts could accommodate students if the proposed project allows the residents to reside at Saron Gardens pass December of 2003, then the existing elementary students attending Regnart Elementary School will be allowed to finish out the 2004 school year at Regnart. This concept would also apply to all of the existing high school seniors at Saron Gardens currently attending Monta Vista High School. Unfortunately Kennedy Middle School is already over capacity (with a long waiting list) and will not be able accommodate the students if they move out of the district. The School District did want to emphasize that all of the schools in the Cupertino Union and Fremont Union Districts are outstanding schools that may only differ in the degrees of excellence. Staff recommends that Prometheus, as part of the relocation assistance program, do everything within reason to accommodate residents with children attending schools so that they can continue to live in the same school assignment area. This should be added to the proposed relocation assistance program. Pedestrian Path At the previous Planning Commission meeting, the applicant requested that the proposed pedestrian path be deleted from the project. In addition, some Planning Commission members had concerns regarding the proposed path going through some of the interior private streets of the project. Promoting neighborhood connectivity is one of the goals specifically emphasized by the City Council. The project is proposing a pedestrian path that essentially connects the project with the adjacent neighborhood on Poppy Way. By keeping the interior street system private, the developer is able to yield more units. However, this does not negate the fact that new neighborhoods would still have to be open or be connected to existing neighborhoods to prevent the creation of neighborhood enclaves. Alternatively, the Planning Commission could require that the applicant revise the site plan so that all the interior streets are public streets (consisting with public street standards) that open onto adjacent streets. As mentioned in the previous staff report, the applicant is proposing a Planned Development project. Which means that some deviations from the Ordinance are being Applications: U-2003-02, Z-200. Saron Gardens May 27, 2003 TM-2003-01, EA-2003-03 requested as result of this project. In this case, the deviations being requested are the City's ,maximurn~lot coverage, maximum floor area ratiofisecond floor to ground floor ratio, ~etbacks, building articulation rules and ~substandard private streets. These deviations may not be necessarily negative as long as they can help to create a more desirable final product. In order for the City to approve a Planned Development project, the project as a package would have to offers some form of community benefits or outstanding elements that as a whole would offset the deviations being requested and produced a better product. As a package, the proposed project offers several key features or community benefits. One of these key features is the4pedestrian path that promotes neighborhood connectivity and pedestrian access. Other features or benefits of the project include 'koutstandi,ng architectural/site design, yroposed open space?relocation assistance program,~hree below market rate units and lowering of building heights along existing single-family homes. Staff is supportive of this project because of the combination of these features. Staff would recommend denial of the project if any of these features were deleted. Enclosures: Model Resolution for U-2003-02 Model Resolution for Z-2003-01 Model Resolution for TM-2003-01 Exhibit A: Selected Comparable Rental Properties, May 12, 2003 Exhibit B: Fire Department Comments, May 20, 2003 Exhibit C: Resident Relocation Assistance Program submitted by the residents of the Saron Gardens Apartment at the May 12, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting Letter from Vera C. Scott, 1320 Flower Court, May 16, 2003 Staff report for the May 12, 2003 Planning Commission Meeting Submitted by: Gary Chao, Assistant Planner Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developmen~7~r~_ G:\Plannmg\PDREPORT\pcUserepor ts\U-20034Y2b.doc 4 EXFIIBIT A SELECTED COMPARABLE RENTAL PROPERTIES Cupertino Union School District Fremont Union High School District Saron Gardens Cupertino, CA Property 1 BIUI BA 2 BR/1 BA Elementary Vliddle High School Saron Gardens $1,000 $1,400 Regnart Kennedy Mont~,Vista 7308 Rainbow Drive (approx.) (approx.) Cupertino, CA The Gideon Apts. $980 $1,180 Regnart Kennedy MonteVista 7411 Rainbow Drive Cupertino, CA Total Units 14 26 Las Hadas $1,200 $1,350-$1,450 Lincoln Kennedy Monte Vista 7375 Rollingdell Drive Cupertino, CA Total Units 32 96 Sahara Sands $995 $1,100 - 1,295 Lincoln Kennedy Monte Vista 7373 Fallenleaf Cupertino, CA Total Units 10 15 ~lcClellan Terrace $1,275 NA Lincoln Kennedy Monte Vista 7924 McClellan Rd. Cupertino, CA Total Units 12 NA Foothill Village $1,150 - 1,210 $1,355 - 1,500 Stevens Kennedy Monte Vista 10330 North Foothill Creek Cupertino, CA Total Units 23 70 GlenbrookApts. $1,095 - $1,145 $1,420-$1,500 Garden Gate Kennedy Monte Vista 10100 Mary Avenue Cupertino, CA Total Units 92 117 Property 1 BR/1 BA 2 BR/1 BA Elementary Middle High School Rainbow Fourplexes NA $1,600 Regnart Kennedy Monte Vista 7344 - 7440 Rainbow :Drive Cupertino, CA Total Units NA 32 Villa Victoria $900-$950 $1,250-$1,350 Meyeholtz Miller Lynbrook 7200 Bollinger San Jose, CA Total Units 49 30 Fountain Park $925 $1,225 Meyerholtz Miller Lynbrook 1026 S. De Anza Blvd San Jose, CA Total Units 34 32 Grove $1,125 $1,275 Garden Gate Cupertino Homestead 20900 Homestead Rd. Cupertino, CA Total Units 20 32 Village Green $1,145 - 1,195 $1,520- 1,545 Garden Gate Cupertino Homestead ~.1230 Homestead Rd. Cupertino, CA Total Units 60 34 Valley Green $1,180- 1,200 $1,250-$1,400 GardenGate Cupertino Homestead 20875 Valley Green Cupertino, CA Total Units 100 209 Villa Serra $1,150- $1,195 $1,475 - $1,520 Garden Gate Cupertino Homestead 20800 Homestead Rd. Cupertino, CA Total Units 121 88 Property ! BIU1 BA 2 BIU1 BA Elementary Middle High School Shadow Oaks $1,025 - $1,075 $1,195 - $1225 Sedgwick Hyde Cupertino 202 Calver~ Drive Cupertino, CA Total Units 100 1 O0 Fountains $1,025 $1,200 Sedgwick Hyde Cupertino 175 Calvert Drive Cupertino, CA Total Units 95 75 Podium $l,100 - $1,350 NA Eaton Hyde Cupertino 10100 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA Total Units 53 NA TOTAL UNITS Monte Vista 183 356 Lynbrook 83 62 Homestead 301 363 Cupertino 248 175 TOTAL 815 956 1,771 FIRt: DEPARTMENT SANTA CLARA COUNTY 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos. CA 95032-1818 (408) 378 4010 · (408) 378-9342 (fax) · www.s¢cfd.org BLDG PERMIT NUMBER oo.~oL....,. EXHIBIT B FILE NUMBER DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS CaD'SEC. SHEET NO. REQUIREMENT Review of a revised site plan reflecting a shift in two building clusters with a minimal roadway relocation. ~ The relocation of the buildings and roadway are noted. No fire department conditions of this submittal. All previous conditions are still in effect. City PLANS SPECS NEW RMDL AS OCCUPANCY CONST. TYPE AppllCantName DATE PATE CUP [] [] [] [] [] PROMETHEUS 5/20/2003 OF~I SECJFLOOR AREA LOAD DESCRIP~ON BY Commercial Development Hokanson, Wayne NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION SARAN GARDENS Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District Serving Santa Clara County and the communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los A!t,~ Hill~ I c~ Gatos Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill. and Saratoga To; Planning Commission and City Council City of Cupertino Cupertino CA 95014 EXHIBIT C From: Residents of Saron Gardens Apts. 7308-7318 Rainbow Dr. Cupertino, CA 95014 Re: Resident relocation assistance Date: May 11, 2003 Two weeks ago we received notice from Prometheus Real Estate Group of their intention to acquire our homes, evict us, and build 55 three-story densely packed single family houses. Many of us met with Jon Moss and Jeff White a few days ago on the evening of Wednesday, May 7. At this meeting they handed out the attached "Resident Relocation Program" and we all discussed it. The plan was fairly self- explanatory except for a provision conveyed verbally that "rental assistance" would only be available to those who rented a new place at higher rent than they're presently paying. At~er discussion many of us feel that the features of the plan offered are designed to induce smooth compliance with all Prometheus requirements. We further feel that the many conditions on receiving any assistance at all will predictably eliminate many of our forty families f~om the program, thus saving money for Prometheus. It is proposed that forty Cupertino families be evicted from their homes so that a great deal of money can be made offthe property, under pemaits and approvals from city government. We believe it is the city government's responsibility to see that a relocation program designed for the good of the displaced families is included as a required part of the permitting process. We all live here because, for a great variety of reasons, Saron Gardens has been the best place for us. To be forced to fred somewhere else to live brings up all manner of issues in our lives. It is a great stress for us. For all of us it involves costs, hard choices, and compromises in our lives that are not compensated or addressed by the proposed relocation program. The resulting disruption may lead people to choices that do not involve immediate leasing of another more expensive rental in Santa Clara County, thus rendering them ineligible for the biggest part of the assistance. Also the opportune moment to make the move may not be in the final sixty days which will begin when Prometheus decides. The prudent residents will begin seeking a new situation as soon as permits are approved and the property changes hands, or even before. Another issue for residents is the spreading out of relocation compensation payments over the following year. The Prometheus method requires that we submit copies of our neW rental agreements and wait patiently and hopefully for our promised checks. We would have no clear legal recourse should they not come. It puts us in a position comparable to that of welfare recipients. At a later time we will be living separately and each have all the power of a single person faced with a multi-million dollar corporation and its own house lawyers. At that point all we would be able to do is come to the door with hat in hand and say "please". For these reasons we ask that you write into the permitting process a new relocation program, mandatory to Prometheus, with the following provisions: 1. Relocation assistance will be provided in a per unit lump-sum payment, the amount of which is based solely on present rent paid. Payment is to be due upon presentation of keys in accordance with the tenant's present rental agreement with Saron Gardens. All tenants presently renting at Saron Gardens are eligible and can move out at any time beginning now without sacrificing eligibility. Along with this payment will come payment of all outstanding tenant deposits made to Saron Gardens. Tenants with existing leases can end their lease early if they so desire. There are to be no conditions on how the relocation assistance money is used. Completion of these payments will then end the relationship between the resident and Prometheus, with no further worries or mediations required. 2. Residents may not be rendered ineligible for assistance based on a small technical violation of any ora multitude of conditions. In particular conditions of removal of personal belongings, having unit free from debris, and all fixtures intact provisions are susceptible to abuse and must be eliminated. Tardiness in move-out due to hardship may reduce the allocated assistance as mediated by a third party without automatically ending all eligibility. 3. The issue of removing personal belongings and debris fi.om premises about to be bull-dozed should be handled by Prometheus through the provision of all the free debris box service residents need to facilitate their move. Hitherto with one family moving out at a time this problem has been handled by existing dumpster service. This will not be adequate in the last sixty days. Requiring 40 families to get all discards to the dump themselves imposes an unreasonable burden. 4. One major concern for many of us is the continuity of our children's education at Regnart, Kennedy and Monta Vista. We ask the city, in cooperation with the Fremont Union High School District and the Cupertino Union School District, to guarantee the right of our children currently in these schools or scheduled to begin this fall m continue in their present schools and system until high school graduation. The obvious item missing thus far is the amount of assistance to be offered.. The plan offered by Prometheus, for those they consider completely eligible, would be $500 for moving, and up to $2,700 in rental assistance, for a total of $3,200. This amount must be viewed as a ceiling rather than a straight-on offer because many residents would end up not qualifying in whole or in part due to the smtctnre of conditions in which the offer is framed. Predictably, this will greatly reduce the total payout Prometheus will make. We propose for the lump-sum relocation assistance payment described in point number one above a sum in the amount of three times the existing Saron Gardens rent for the unit. Based on the average of $1,500 rent per unit this would mean an average of $4,500 per unit for a total of about $180,000. This may seem like a lot of money. However this is a large project in which a lot of money will be made. We are the people to be put out and distressed so that this can happen. A decent and respectful compensation plan for us is a normal and proper expense. At the May 7 meeting, Mr. Moss told us that the new units across Rainbow Drive fi.om us have successfully sold for $650,000 each. He characterized the project they have in mind here would be higher quality and of a nicer, less dense layout. Also these units would not be practically hanging over the freeway as those are. So for round purposes we guess a price tag of $800,000 per unit. This would produce a gross income for the project of 44 million dollars. The compensation plan we propose constitutes about four tenths of a percent (.41%) of this figure. We ask the City of Cupertino to act on our behalf to ensure that this plan be made a condition required for Prometheus to receive permission to pursue this project. We ask that it be done in a way that enforcement will not be a problem for us. We will be happy to meet to discuss this further. We thank you for representing us as our law-makers. Resident Relocation Program For Saron Gardens Redevelopment April 29, 2003 Prometheus is seeking approval to redevelop the existing Saron Gardens Aparlments into 55 detached single-family homes. Saron Gardens Apartments includes nine apartment buildings, one house, on-grade parking, a swimming pool and a small open space. There are 39 apartments and l single-family house on the property. Prometheus values its residents and wants to keep them informed about the proposed project. In order to make the transition as smooth as possible for the residents, Prometheus has prepared this Resident Relocation Program. The Program includes the elements explained below. Resident Relations Manager Prometheus will have a Resident Relations Manager on-site prior to the start of construction to work with and assist the residents during the relocation period. The Resident Relations Manager will be able to proactively work closely with residents to provide information and quickly respond to resident issues. Informational resources such as apartment listings, moving company listings, and information on how to qualify for BMR units will be made available to residents. Prometheus greatly values it customers and wants to make sure their needs are met and their issues are resolved. Early Notification Prometheus will meet with residents prior to completing the entitlement process to provide an overview of the project plans and timeline. Prometheus also plans on communicating with residents regularly regarding the specific details of the proposed project after the entitlement process. During this early notification process, the Resident Relations Manager will work closely with residents to provide specific information about other apartments in the area, moving supplies, truck rental, moving companies, and storage facilities. This early notification wilt allow residents to prepare and be organized for their relocation. In order to provide residents adequate time to find alternative housing, Prometheus will notify each resident with at least 60 days notice in advance of the required move out date. Residents who move from the project during this 60-day period to another rental property within Santa Clara County, will receive a refund of their deposit, a moving allowance and rental assistance as outlined below. Refund Deposit Prometheus wants to refund security deposits to residents as quickly as possible. A check for the security deposit will be available at the leasing office on the scheduled move-out date. Prometheus will refund security deposits at the time of move-out, so long as the following criteria are met: rent must be current, apartment must be vacated on or before their scheduled move-out date, all personal belongings removed from the site, apartment is free from debris, and fixtures of the apartment are not removed. Provided the previous criteria are met, the deposit check will be given to the resident when they return their keys to the leasing office, as opposed to being mailed within 21 days. In addition, if the previous criteria are met, Prometheus will waive cleaning charges. Moving Allowance We recognize our residents will be incurring moving expenses. In an effort to assist our residents, Prometheus will provide a $500 moving allowance per apartment. Any residents who have special needs that affect their ability to move will receive a moving allowance not to exceed $1,000. The moving allowance check will be given to the resident along with their deposit when they return keys to the leasing office provided they have met the criteria addressed in the above Refund Deposit section. Rental Assistance In order to ensure that residents do not incur significantly higher rental expenses for the first year after they relocate, Prometheus will provide rental assistance. In order to qualify for rental assistance, the resident would need to relocate to another rental property within Santa Clara County within the 60-day notice period described in the Early Notification section of this program and provide a copy of their lease. The rental assistance to be provided to the residents would be as follows: ,, For months one through six after relocation from the property, Prometheus will pay for up lo 20% of the prior rent at Saron Gardens. ,, For months seven through twelve after relocation from the property, Prometheus will pay for up to 10%o of the prior rent at Saron Gardens. The rental assistance shall be paid on the schedule required by the resident's lease at the relocated property. Dispute Resolution In the event that a dispute arises regarding the implementation of this program, the dispute shall be resolved through mediation. The City of Cupertino and Prometheus will mutually agree upon the selection of the mediator. We, the undersigned residents of Satori Gardens Apts. endorse the attached letter of May 11, 2003 to the Planning Commission and City Council of our City of Cupertino. This letter speaks for us. Print Signature Address .-7 .-~ 4,,~, Phone Signature We, the undersigned residents of Saron Gardens Apts. endorse the attached letter of May 11, 2003 to the Planning Commission and City Council of our City of Cupertino. This letter speaks for us. Phone ff-t t 0 ~q Signature Print Address Signature Print -- Address '~.~ IP ~ JIr'~, Phone ~"¢~'~ ' ~ ~7~ ~ Silage ~f Print Address Phone Print Address ?'~.~ ~1~! Name Address Phone We, the undersigned residents of Saron Gardens Apts. endorse the attached letter of May 11, 2003 to the Planning Commission and City Council of our City of Cupertino. This letter speaks for us. Print Name Address Phone Silage Print N ne Address Phone Signature Print ~ ~Addressff'gna~ ra~~--~~ Name Address Phone Print N me Address Phone Silage Name P-~one ~Address Signature~ We, the undersigned residents of Saron Gardens Apts. endorse the attached letter of May 11, 2003 to the Planning Commission and City Council of our City of Cupertino. This letter speaks for us. Address q Phone Signature Print Address Print Name Address Pho~ Signature Print Name Address Print , ,' : Name ,~ ] y, Address 7~*g k~';~,~' ~/ '~'~' Phone /(~.) 2~r ~. ~g._~ Signature ' We, the undersigned residents of Satori Gardens Apts. endorse the attached letter of May 11, 2003 to the Planning Commission and City Council of our City of Cupertino. This letter speaks for us, Print Address phone /.1.0} - Ehone Signature_ Print Name Signature -- / Name P~one Signature Print Name _Address Phone Signature Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Cupertino, CA May 16, 2003 Mr. Piasecki: This is to let you know that I will be unable to attend the next meeting of the Planning Commission because I plan to visit my family in Germany. I have planned this trip for many months and I don't see how I can change my plans. So I ask for your help to let the Planning Commission know why I am not attending the meeting on May 27, 2003. I am vitally interested in the outcome of their decisions and I am sure you can understand my concerns. Sincerely, Vera C. Scott 1320 Flower Court Cupertino, CA 95014 Vera C. Scott 1320 Flower Ct. Cupertino, CA 95014 May 12, 2003 This is in regard to the proposed development of the property located at 7310 Rainbow Drive, Cupertino. I have talked repeatedly to the representatives of Prometheus and have always maintained that the density of the project is too overwhelming. I am especially upset that the setback behind my property will be only 10 feet. The representatives of Prometheus told me that they were planning to plant trees like Fern Pines which come in 24' boxes and should be fast growing. But with a 10 foot setback it seems questionable that future owners would be able to maintain large trees in their minimum backyards. So I hope the setback can be changed to 20 feet. We also discussed the windows in the 2 story houses and I was told that the master bedroom windows would overlook my property. Now I am asking the Planning Commission to require the developer to do 3 things as condition of approval of the Use Permit: 1) Maintain a 20 foot building setback along my property line. 2) Require 24' box specimen Fern Pines along my property line and 3) Require all 2nd story windows facing my property to be high clerestory windows only. CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: U-2003-02, Z-2003-01, TM-2003-01, Agenda Date: May 12, 2003 EA-2003-03 Applicant: Prometheus Owner: Joelson 1983 Living Trust Location: 7310 Rainbow Drive A-E, 7308 Rainbow Drive 9 -14 and A. Application Summary: Use permit to demolish 39 existing apartment units (9 buildings) and 1 single-family residence and construct a residential development consisting of 55 single-family homes. Tentative map to subdivide 3 parcels (totaling 4.03 acres) into 55 single-family private lots and one lot held in common. A rezoning of a P(R3) - multifamily zoning district to P(Res) - Planned Residential. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of: 1. The negative declaration, file number EA-2003-03; 2. The use permit application, file number U-2003-02, in accordance with the model resolution; 3. The tentative map application, file number TM-2003-01, in accordance with the model resolution; 4. The rezoning application, file number Z-2003-01, in accordance with the model resolution. Project Data: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: Acreage (Gross): Density: Height: Stories (Allowed): Parking: R1 (SFR) Planned Residential Proposed: R1 (SFR) Planned Residential Total: Residential Low / Residential Med/High m-6 / P(R3) 4.03 acres 13.64 du/gr, ac. 34' -8" 2-3 story residential (6 - 2 story units, 49 - 3 story units) Units/sq ft. 2 units 53 units Ratio Required 4/unit (2 covered 8 stalls + 2 uncovered) Not specified by the code. 4 4 106 44 158 Covered spaces (garage) Driveway spaces (open) Covered spaces (garage) Guest spaces (open) Total Spaces Applications: U-2003-02, Z-20v3-V,, Saron Gardens May 19, 9003 TM-2003-01, EA-2003-03 Project Consistency with: General Plan: Yes Zoning: Rezoning required Environmental Assessment: Mitigated Negative Declaration BACKGROUND: Prometheus is proposing to demolish nine buildings on the current Saron Garden Apartment Site on Rainbow Drive and one single-family house on an adjacent lot. The nine buildings consist of 39 residential apartment units along with 6 carports and a swimming pool. In place of the buildings, 55 new single-family detached homes are being proposed on the site along with a public pedestrian pathway/emergency access drive and a village green area near the center of the project. The applicant is also proposing to subdivide the project site into 56 lots (one lot being the shared common/access area) to facilitate the newly proposed homes. The project takes on a town home style development in terms of functionality and parking utilization, however a conscious effort was made to design the homes so that they are detached individual single-family homes instead of attached town houses. In preparation for this application, Prometheus held five neighborhood meetings. The first two meeting was held at the conceptual stage, while the next four meetings were held after the formal application submittal. Details of the neighborhood meeting will be addressed in the neighborhood meeting section of this report. DISCUSSION: This report will summarize this project's conformance with the General Plan followed by an overview of the neighborhood meeting, site analysis, architecture, tree removal, traffic, parking, school impacts, below market units and relocation assistance program. GENERAL PLAN: The project conforms to the General Plan use, height and density regulations. The General Plan designations for the subject site are Residential Low and Residential Med/High. Currently a small portion of the project site along Poppy Way is in the Residential Low designation. The project proposes two larger single-family homes conforming to the R-1 Ordinance in this area. However there will also be some overlapping of higher density detached single-family homes (11 homes) proposed in the Residential Low area. This is consistent with the General Plan Policy 2-79 where it recognizes that the actual gross dwelling unit density may be slightly different if the properties reflect the general development character of neighboring properties. The proposed project is consistent with the general development character of neighboring properties. The rest of the higher density detached homes are located in the Residential Med/High area. 2 Applications: U-2003-02, Z-20vS-o l, 8aron Gardens May 12, 2003 TM-2003-01 ~ EA-2003-03 ZONING: Portion of the property is currently zone P(R3) - multifamily residential and will be rezoned to P(RES) - planned development residential. The remaining area will remain R-1 which facilitates the two larger (lower density) single-family homes along Poppy Way. Exhibit G contains the plat map and legal description required for the rezoning. The rezoning is consistent with the General Plan discussed earlier. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING: Below is a summary of the concerns raised in several of the neighborhood meetings (please note actions by the applicant or by staff are explained below each concern): · Height of homes immediately adjacent to existing single-family homes. Response: Five units (plan N) that are immediately adjacent to neighboring single-family homes have been lowered to 2 stories in response to the neighbors concerns. Privacy impacts. Response: All the homes adjacent to existing single family homes will be required to comply with R-1 privacy protection planting requirements as a condition of the project. In one specific instance, a site line analysis was prepared in order to demonstrate to one residential neighbor that there will be no immediate views from her back yard to the proposed three story homes. Preserving perimeter trees. Response: Almost all of the perimeter trees are saved with the exception of those that are either in bad condition or hindering the site plan. Vehicular or pedestrian access from Poppy Way. Response: Only the two single-family homes fronting on Poppy Way will have vehicular access from Poppy Way. The remaining 53 small lot single family units take access from Rainbow Drive. Emergency vehicles and pedestrians will be able access the site from an emergency access/pedestrian easement off of Poppy Way. Providing neighborhood connectivity between existing neighborhoods with new projects is a desirable element. Impact of the construction activities on the adjacent nursery. 3 Applications: U-2003-02, Z-2b.~-0., §aron Gardens May 12, 2003 TM-2003-01, EA-2003-03 Response: The project will be required to adhere to the City's limitation on construction hours according the Municipal Code. In addition, the project must utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's) as required by the State Water Resources Control Board in regards to specific dust control measures and construction site management practices minimize impacts both on the environment and the adjacent neighbors. Since the project site is not located in a hillside area, the construction activities are not limited to certain period of the year. SITE ANALYSIS: The project site is located in a residential neighborhood surrounded by 4-plex apartments along the northerly property line and single-family residential homes along the westerly and majority of the southerly property lines. The project parcel does share a portion of its southerly boundary with a commercial nursery (Yamagami's) located along the southeasterly corner of the site. ~ WJ~L-~(}&- SARON GAROEN$ The subject site has frontages both on Rainbow Drive and Poppy Way (see above site plan). The only vehicular access to the development is off of Rainbow Drive. The project provides a 12-foot wide emergency vehicle and pedestrian access drive off of Poppy Way. This emergency access corridor will be partially paved with turf blocks. The turf block path will appear to be a lawn area while satisfying Fire Department standards in terms of supporting emergency vehicle loads (see exhibit C). The access 4 Applications: U-2003-02, Z-2b,~.~-. , Saron Gardens May 12, 2003 TM-2003-01, EA-2003-03 corridor also serves as a public pedestrian path providing access from the existing Poppy Way neighborhood to the center of the project (village green park) and eventually out to Rainbow Drive. The pedestrian path will be available to the public at all time and is considered a desirable element that enhances neighborhood connectivity while eliminating cut through traffic. Only the two larger single-family homes will gain vehicular access off of Poppy Way consistent with the development patterns on Poppy Way. A main feature of the development will be the Village Green Park (consisting of approximately .16 acres) located near the center of the project with 14 residential units facing directly onto the park. The village green will be a public common open space for the 55 proposed homes with a built in sand play area, two picnic benches/tables, two sitting benches and a large lawn area. 8 of the units will face Rainbow Drive. The remaining 31 units will face onto the interior street system with the two larger R-1 single-family lots fronting onto Poppy Way. The private streets separate the units by approximately 20 to 22 feet. The site plan has been reviewed and recommended for approval by the Fire Department. With the exception of 5 units (type B), most of the units will have front entrances from several interior courtyard area (or village green) with the garages open onto the interior streets. Only 5 units (type B) will have both the front entrance and the garage open onto the interior streets. Decorative pavers are used on the front entry drives and the southerly interior street to add more interest and further delineate the proposed pedestrian path across the project. The applicant did not provide staff with the specific type or style of decorative pavers used in the project. A revised site plan indicating the type of pavers must be submitted to the Design Review Committee for review and approval at a later date. Staff recommends the pavers be specified as interlocking pavers with water permeability. Likewise, the applicant did not provide information on any of the proposed new perimeter fencing design and site lighting details therefore they are not part of this approval. The applicant is required to submit a fence and lighting plan (including fencing details of the transformer) to the Design Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. The applicant is aware of the fact that in order to replace the perimeter fences, proof of consent or authorization from the adjoining neighbors must be submitted to the City. ARCHITECTURE: According to the project architect, the major focus in the design of this development is to employ a "bay area cottage" vernacular style. There has been a consistent effort to reduce the scale and apparent height of the houses by means of detailing and through 5 Applications: U-2003-02, Z-2b,,~-~., Saron Gardens May 12, 2003 TM-2003-01, EA-2003-03 the use of dormers, porches, trellis, stone bases and horizontally banded windows. A conscious attempt has been made to avoid the "mini-mansion" approach, which tends to combine too many materials and emphasizes verticality, rather than horizontal proportions. The cottage style in the Bay Area evolved with influences imported from Cape Cod and East Coast Victorians, as well as the Craftsman and Mission Revival styles. The harmonious interaction of these various types can be seen in the older neighborhoods of Berkeley, Oakland and Palo Alto, where closely spaced dwelling achieve diversity while maintaining an over unity. A limited palette of materials is employed, consisting primarily of cement plaster and lap siding, with dormers and "loggias" at the top story defined by board and batten siding; cultured stone base; and either composition shingle or cement shake roofs. A matrix of colors and materials has been developed which, when applied to each house, will subtly alter the perception of style. Specifically, the A2 and C2 houses fall into a Craftsman vernacular, the D2 houses evoke the Mission Revival style, while the Al, C1, D1, N and B are defined with elements of the Cape Cod and Victorian, combined with touches of the Craftsman style, depending on the finish materials and colors applied to the individual house. Please refer to the following color renderings of each of the unit styles (in the order of appearance in the staff report) for detailed illustrations: REAR SIDE FRONT SARON GARDENS A2 ELEVATIONS 6 Applications: U-2003-02, Z-2b~,o-b.. garon Gardens May 12, 2003 TM-2003 -01, EA-2003 -03 REAR FRONT SARON GARDENS C2 ELEVATIONS REAR SIDE FRONT SARON GARDENS D2 ELEVATIONS 7 Applications: U-2003-02. Z-2b,~J-. , §aron Gardens May 12, 2003 TM-2003-01, EA-2003-03 REAR SIDE FRONT SARON GARDENS A1 ELEVATIONS Q4.28~3 REAR FRONT SARON GARDENS D1 ELEVATIONS ~,~,,-,.-~' Applications: U-2003-02, Z-2O~-, Saron Gardens May 12, 2003 TM-2003-O1, EA-2003-03 REAR 8ARON GARDENS FRONT Gl ELEVATIONS N FRONT B FRONT SARON GARDENS B N ELEVATIONS 9 Applications: U-2003~02, Z-20o~-L , Satori Gardens May 12, 2003 TM-2003-01, EA-2003-03 The P houses, in the R1 zone along Poppy Way, are stylistically similar to the rest of the community but have been adapted to respond and to be compatible with the existing residences in the neighborhood. The P units are consistent with the City's Single Family Design Guidelines and the R1 ordinance. FRONT SARON GARDENS ELEVATIONS FRONT .............-'-~'-°~..,.,,,.,~ -'~' SARON GARDENS P2 ELEVATIONS 10 SaronGardens May 12, 2003 Applications: U-2003-02, Z-2Ou~-, TM-2003-01, EA-2003-03 All of the houses that front onto the village green park and Rainbow Drive have an entry arbor element at the front yard to further delineate each individual unit entrances and reduce the apparent scale and height of the units (please Diagram 1). z :'.- Diagram I In addition, double arched trellises are placed at several key entrances of the courtyards leading to the interior units (please see Diagram 2). Diagram 2 11 Applications: U-2003-02, Z-26~,~. Saron Gardens May 12, 2003 TM-2003-01, EA-2003'-03 Staff recommends that two additional double arched trellises be placed at the entrance of the courtyard between tract 21 & 22 and tract 25 & 26. This is added as a condition of the project. Originally staff and the City's Architectural Consultant shared concerns regarding the original entry scales, apparent heights of the homes and the street side elevations of the corner units. However, the project architect has worked extensively with staff to address these issues. Efforts have been made to most of the unit types reduce the entry heights and additional detailing (i.e., trellis, porch, arbor, stone base and variations of wall sidings) has been enhanced to address the apparent building heights. Additional architectural detailing has also been added to the side elevations of each of the end units (unity type A1 & D2) to the satisfaction of the City's Architectural Consultant. However, staff included a condition requiring the applicant to restudy the porch (stoop) heights of the D units (D1 & D2) to lower their heights. Revised plans for all of the D units shall be submitted to the Design Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of the Final Map. TREE REMOVAL: An arborist report addresses the health of all the existing trees on the property. Of the 50 trees proposed for removal, five trees are specimen trees (3 Coast Live Oak and 2 Red Oak). These trees are either in poor condition or are located within the footprint of buildings. Five new 48" box specimen Coast Live Oaks will be planted in replacement of the removed specimen trees as a condition of the project. The remaining trees to be removed are not considered specimen or heritage trees and require no additional replacement. There are three trees (tree #60-62) that the applicant is required to save that are located immediately adjacent to Poppy Way. The applicant is currently working with the Public Works Department to design a public sidewalk/parkway that will preserve these trees. The sidewalk/parkway will be required meander around these trees and then come back in to match the existing sidewalk/parkway patterns. The applicant is aware of the fact that the two R-1 single-family homes may have to be reduced in size depending on the final approved curb and parkway alignment. A supplemental arborist report with specific tree preservation recommendations must be submitted to the City for review and approval in order to finalize the sidewalk/curb design along Poppy Way prior to the approval of the final map. The arborist report shall consider the existing tree canopy size, grade levels and sufficient setback from the proposed sidewalk in order to ensure complete preservations of these trees. As part of the project, 44 trees are proposed to be preserved. 11 of these 44 trees will be transplanted. Staff recommends that Tree #58 (a large Digger Pine - 25.4 inches in diameter) along Poppy Way located in the middle of the proposed emergency vehicle & 12 Applications: U-2003-02, Z-20t, J ~ t, garon Gardens May 12, 2003 TM-2003-01, EA-2003-03 pedestrian access easement be preserved as well. A condition will require that the proposed emergency/pedestrian access easement be revised to go around this tree. TRAFFIC: The project was reviewed for traffic impacts based on a report prepared by Fehr & Peers on March 24, 2003. The report considered the net-trip generation of the project, site access and the potential impacts on adjacent intersections. The report determined that there will be no significant traffic impacts. The traffic report was reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. PARKING: The City's Parking Ordinance does not have a classification for the proposed detached small lot single-family development that functions similar to a town home development. In the past, staff had required projects to provide a parking survey of similar projects from neighboring cities when an exception is warranted. The applicant submitted a parking survey from Fehr & Peers (dated May 1, 2003), indicating that the proposed parking ratio of 2.8 stalls per unit is on par with parking requirements of similar density products in other jurisdictions. In addition, the parking analysis surveyed the actual guest parking demands at six selected residential projects. These projects were selected for their similarity to the proposed project as well as their location and guest parking arrangements. The survey indicated that the actual guest parking usage rates at these facilities ranged from 0.11 spaces per unit to a high of 0.83 spaces per unit. On average, the actual guest parking demand for the six sites is 0.47 spaces per unit that further provides evidence that the proposed 0.8 guest space per unit is adequate. The parking arrangement for the two regular single family homes (Type P) complies with the regular parking requirements for single family homes which are 2 covered stalls and 2 uncover off-street parking stalls. SCHOOL IMPACTS: The Cupertino School District has reviewed the project against its enrollment records. According to the School District, currently there are a total of 20 students (15 elementary and 5 middle school students) in the existing Saron Gardens apartment complex. Using the worst-case projection method, the district is expecting a total of 24 students (20 elementary and 4 middle school students) resulting from the new 55 homes. Based on this assessment, the project will pose no significant impact on the schools and the district can accommodate the 5 added elementary students. BELOW MARKET RATE UNITS: According to the General Plan Policy 3-8, the City's existing multi-family rental units provide housing opportunities for household of various income levels. Therefore in 13 Applications: U-2003-02, Z-20~_ ,, §aron Gardens May 12, 2003 TM-2003-01, EA-2OO3-03 general, the existing multi-family units should be preserved to the maximum extent possible. In the event when a proposed development or redevelopment of a site would cause a loss of multi-family units, the City must require mitigation measures to offset the impacts. Although the project will be increasing the total amount of housing units by 15 units on the project site, 39 existing apartment units and I single-family home will be demolished. As a mitigation measure, 20% (3 units) of the 15 additional units must be below market rate units which is 5% more than what the City normally requires (15%) in order to offset the Iow income housing that are being displaced as part of this project. RESIDENT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: In addition to the BMR require~ment, the project is required to provide a relocation program with provisions to relocated existing apartment residents to other comparable units within the Cupertino Union School District boundary or Santa Clara County at the tenants option. The proposed relocation plan is summarized as follows: Resident Relations Manager: Prometheus will have' a resident relations manager on-site prior to the start of construction to work with and assist the residents during the relocation period. The manager will assist residents to relocation to another projbct by providing information such as apartment listings, moving company listings, and information on how to qualify for BMR units. Early Notification: Prometheus will meet with residents prior to completing the entitlement process to provide an overview of the project plans and timeline. This early notification will allow residents to prepare and be organized for their relocation. In order to provide residents adequate time to find alternative housing, Prometheus will notify each resident with at least 60 days in advance of the required move out date. Refund Deposits: Prometheus will refund the security deposits at the time of the move-out at the leasing office so long as the following criteria are met: rent must be current, apartment must be vacated on or before their scheduled move-out date, all personal belongings removed form the site, apartment is free from debris, and fixtures of the apartment are not removed. In addition, Prometheus will waive all cleaning charges. 14 Applications: U-2003-02, Z-20b- 1, §aron Gardens May 12, 2003 TM-2003-01, EA-2003-03 Moving Allowance: Prometheus will provide a $500 moving allowance per apartment. Any residents who have special needs that affect their ability to move will receive a moving allowance not to exceed $1,000. Rental Assistance: Prometheus will provide rental assistance to ensure that residents do not incur significantly higher rental expenses for the first year after they relocate. In order to qualify for the rental assistance, the resident would need to relocate to another rental property within the Cupertino Union School District or Santa Clara County at the tenant's option within 60-day notice period. For months one through six after relocation from the property, Prometheus will pay for up to 20% for the prior rent at Saron Gardens. For months seven through twelve after relocation, Prometheus will pay for up to 10% of the prior rent at Saron Gardens. Dispute Resolution: In the event that a dispute arises regarding the implementation of this program, the dispute shall be resolved through mediation. The Housing Committee has reviewed and recommends approval of the proposed relocation program. Enclosures: Model Resolution for U-2003-02 Model Resolution for Z-2003-01 Model Resolution for TM-2003-01 Exhibit A: Applicant's Project Summary Exhibit B: Arborist Report Exhibit C: Pictures of sample turf block Exhibit D: Relocation Program Exhibit E: Parking Analysis Exhibit F: Traffic Analysis Exhibit G: Zoning Plat Map Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration Project Aerial Color and Material Board 3-D Colored Elevations/Renderings Plan Set Submitted by: Gary Chao, Assistant Planner Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developme~rr,~ G:N Planning\ PDREPORT\ pcUserepor ts\ U-2003432.doc 15 SARON GARDENS APN 366-19-075 APN 366-19-076 APN 366-19-048 R3: Multi-Family Residential R3: Multi-Family Residential R1: Single-Family Residential EXHIBIT A PROJECT DESCRIPTION The existing Saron Gardens Apartments will be redeveloped into 55 detached single- family homes. Saron Gardens includes nine apartment buildings, one house, on-grade parking, a swimming pool and a small open space. There are 39 apartments and 1 single- family house on the property. The proposed project will create 53 single-family homes with access to Rainbow Drive and 2 single-family homes on Poppy Drive. 18:15 FROM-PROMETHEUS REAL ESTATE ~ROUP EXHII3IT 13 Mayne Tree Expert Company, Inc. ES rABLISHED 1931 GRADUATE FORE $'1'£R PdCHAR.~ L II~TtNfiTON KEVIN R ~IEUfY Mr. Jeff White Prometheus 350 Bridge Par~ay Redwood Ci~, CA 9~65-1517 Re: Saron Gardens, 7308 Rainbow Drive, Cupertino, CA $"1~.1 E CONTR~.CTOR"S LICENSE NO 276795 CERTIFIED AR.BOR~$TS PEST CONTROL ADVISORS AND OPERATORS February 24, 2003 s3s BR-~,GATO KO.~,D. STE ~, S,~N CARLOS. CA 9¢070-622~ TELEPHONE (650) 593.4400 FACSIMILE (aS0) 593.a4n3 Dear Mr. Whi~e: On Pebmary 12, 2003, we met at the above site for the purpose of inspecting trees 6 inches in diameter and larger at 4 ~ feet above grade. This information was to be included in an arborist report. Tree numbers in the report correspond to the tags on each tree. Any tree that was not tagged bat had a diameter o~ greater than 6 inches, was noted and assigned a number. (There was only one tree.) Part of my assignment was to determine how transplantable the trees were. The larger a tree is, the harder it is to transplant, as wall as more costly. There are several smaller trees on the site that would make excellent transplants- Those are the small palms in the pool area garden and some of the live oaks in front, TI, to Each txee was given a condition rating which includes general tree health and structure- The table used is the following- 0-29 ... Very poor 30-49 ... Poor 50-69 ... Fait 70-$9 ---Good 90-100 .. Excellent Each tree was assigned a life expectancy taring; S for short, M for medium, L for long. Finally there is a "CommentS" section which explains the condition rating and gives any other wee informatiOn. MAR'ZS'O3 18:15 FROtvI-PRO~IETHEUS REAL ESTATE GROUP ~ CondiUon L.E.R.· (~ches) ~ercent) T.~e No. Species ')-.E.R. ~ Lite Expe~laney Re.m~ tL~Lon& M---Medium, S-~ Short) l Coast live oak 10.3 60 L 2 Coast live oak 9,8 55 L 3 Coast live oak 15_9, 13.5, 9.35 70 L 4 Coast live oak 13.5 70 L 5 Coast live oak 6.25, 4.4 60 k 6 Coast live oak 9.98 80 L 7 Coast live oak 9.5 65 L 8 Coast live oak 8.2, 5.8 60 L T1-T4 Coast live oaks NA 75 L 9 Giant sequoia 16.9 lO S 10 Digger pine 9,2.3 70 M 11 Black pine 10.4 30 5 12 Digger pine 36.8 70 M 13 Douglas-fir 20.2 70 L T-5gB P 03/09 P-FUJ S S R R R S R R R R Poor form and included bark. ^Il growth one side. Has bleeding Forks at 3 feet with included bark. Leans. In proposed footprixu. One-sided due to shading. Forks at 2' with included bark. In proposed footprint_ In proposed £oorprinr. Forl~ at 4 iA feet with included bark. In proposed ~ootprint, Forks at ground level with included bark. Relocate on sim. Severe needle and twig blight. In proposed foo~rinr. Topped, weak upper srracture. Sequoia pitch moth larvae activity. In proposed footprin£. Dying. In proposed footprint. Slight lean, :opped. Weak upper structure. In proposed footprint, R Topped. In proposed (ootprint. "Fate: S~Save. R=Remeve MAR-25-D3 t8:15 FROM-PROMETHEUS REAL ESTATE GROUP 650-5g~-53(4 ~-~o r.u~,v= sARaN GARDENS TREE SURVEY Tr.ee No. Species DBH Condition L.E.R.' {Inches) (Percent) {Years) *L,E.R. = £i~e F. xp~ta~cy Remaining iL~L~ng, Mc. Medium, ~.~ Short) 14 Giant sequoia 26.0 75 L 15 Fruitless mulberry 13.2, 8,2, 6.2 70 S 16 Coast live oak 3.6.5 70 L 17 Privet 4.4, 4.0, 60 3.2, 3.7, 4.4 18 Ginkgo 13.7 @ 4' 50 M Hollywood juniper 11.9 55 S 20 Privet 12.2, 10.8 55 21 Canary Island pine 28_2 75 M 22 Date palm 24.0 {Est.) $0 M 23 Coast live oak 20.0 ?0 L 24 Coast live oak 23.6 65 L 25 Ash 14.1 60 M 26 Hollywoud juniper 8.6 65 Fate*~ Re__marks S R $ $ S R Topped. Minor needle and twig blight. Topped for line clearance. Has included bark- Topped for line clearance. Roots uplifting paving. Old bark damage with oozing_ Not really a tree. Forks at 2 feet into five trunks. Provides Forks at 4 ~/: feet with included bark. Roots uplifting paving. All grow-th opposite house side. In footprint. Just a very large shrub. Forks at 2 feet with included bark. Topped and side pruned_ Provides sc~en. Roots uplifting paving. In foo~rint. Has fronds at 4'. Hazard to pedestrians. Relocare on site. Topped for line clearance. Topped for line clearance. Has included b~k- Sutrounded by paving which it is uplifting_ Included bark, ha footprint. R Leans a_ad is one-sided. In footprint. Pate: S=Save, R--Remo~e ~AR-Z~-O~ 1B:16 pROM-PROMETHEUS REAL ESTATE GROUP 850-596-53?4 I-:~ r u~/v~ r-~u~ ~a~.u , '~ ,<I~N5 'FREE SI.rRVEY TtaeN_o. 5_pecics ~ Cob. diti0n I.,:IL~* Cinches) (Percent) (Years) Life Expectancy ge~lning f~Long. M~Medium, S= Short) 27 Liquidarnbar 10.9 60 M R ~Jplifting patio. Weak upper s ~T~I Cttl~'e. 28 Hollywood juniper 9.5 60 S 29 Carob 14.7 65 M R Roots cracking patio. Weak stnicrure. In footprint. R Roots uplifting concrete. Topped, with very dense canopy. In footprint. 30 Caroh 12.9 60 M R Roots uplifting concreu~. Topped, with very dense fohage. Leans. In footprint. 31 Carob 10.95 65 M R See No. 32 Cacob 10_9 60 M R Thin czow~. In footprint_ 32a,b,c,d,e Palms NA SO M S Relocate on site. 33 Fan palm 16.9, 15.1 75 M R Two-trunked. In footprint 33A Hollywood 12.6 65 Juniper S R Leans, in footprint. 34 Chinese pistache 1 2.6 60 M R Poorly pruned. In footprint 35 Hollywood 11.1 65 Juniper S R Poorly pruned_ In footprint. 36 ~.ocust 11_65 65 37 Red oak 13.3 t~,! 65 M L R Slight lean. In footprint. R Topped at 10'. Slightly weak upper strucu, tre. Not recommended to ~ansplant. 38 Red oak 13.5 65 L S See No. 37. it'e: S--Save, R~-Remove MAR-ZS-D8 18:16 FRO~-PROMETHEUS SARON GARDENS TREE SURVEY T:~eeNo. ~ D~B,I"I .Condition ~ Pate** R;rpar~cs {Znches) (PercenO (Yeats) ~[.E~R. ~ Life L,~pectanmy Remaining (1.-Long, M=Medi~m, S= Shot0 39 Red oak 13.1 65 L 40 F~n palm 18.1 75 M 41 Red oak 8.3 65 L 42 Red oak 9.8 65 L 43 Prod oak 8.55 65 L 44 Siberian elm 17.1, 11.7 4,0 M R 83, 7.1, 5.6 S In Ioot~rint. $ Relocate on site. S Topped for line clearance. Not recommended to transplam S 5e~ No. 41. $ See No. 41. Topped for line clearance. Included bark and has very weak structure. 45 Siberian elmll.1, i0.7, 9.3 40 M R 46 Red oak 13.5 60 L 47 Red oak 13.7 60 L 48 Podocarpus 12.1 55 S 49 Red oak 15.1 60 L 50 Date palm No tr~k at 4 ~A' 65 M 51 Holly oak 9.4 75 M 52 Holly oak 13_0 60 M 53 Red oak !3,75 75 L Topped for line clearance. ~cluded bark ~nd has very weak smac',oa re. R Topped at 10'. C~nopy is all sprout. In footprint, R Topped at 10t Canopy is all sprouts. Too near building. R R Growing under ~e eaves. Very weak structure. In footprint. Topped at 10'. One-sided. In footprint. S Relocat~ on site. S Relocate on site. 5 Leans. Relocate on site. S Leans, poor form. unbalar~ced. *' ]~a~: $-Save, R--Remove ~T, Lee No. Species FRO~4-PRO~4ETHELJS REAL ESTATE GROUP 6so-sg~-s~F4 SARO~ G^~DENr$ TREE S~VE~ (Inches) {Percent) ~ears) 'LE,R. ~- Lite Erpecta~cy Remaining iL=Long, M=Mediu.m, $- Short) 54 Red Oak 13.7 75 L ,~5 PaIm 12.0 (Est.) 90 M 56 Eucalyptus 10.8 55 M 57 Cl~inese elm 17.2 60 M S 58 Digger pine 25.4 70 M 59 ~ig 10.5, 8.2 50 M ') Canary Island pine 18.8 75 M 61 Blue cedar ~7.4 80 M 62 Redwood 19.8, 9.0 65 L 63 Canary Isla2~d pine 25.5 60 M 64 Chinese pistache 12.2 60 S 65 Plum 8_0, 7.5 45 S 66 Loc-~st 9.1 50 M 67 Fir 11.6 45 L 67a Small palm NA 80 M In footprint. Relocate on site. Tr~xk wound. Upper we~k st~uctu~. In footprint, Weak upper structure. Heavy limbs_ Side pruning may be needed for clearance. Slight lean. Upper storm damage. In footprint. Past sunburn on west side. Not a native tree. Recommend removal. Keep sidewalk 5' away. Keep sidewalk 5' away. Forks at ground level Topped. Keep sidewalk 5' away. Slight lean. One-Mded. Broke~ limbs. In footprint. Topped_ In footprint. Over-maY. Ire- Included bark. leans, ail growth on one side. lu foo~rint. Id~tting house, leans. Relocate on site, ~ ~ate: 5~Save, R=Remove MAR-Z5-03 18:17 FRO~-PROMETHEUS REAL ESTATE GROUP 5ARON GARDENS TREE SURVEY Tre_e No. Specie~ D~H gnches) ~ercent) (Years) *L.£.IL = Lite lixpectancy Remah, dng ([-=Long, M=Meelittm, .5= Short} 68 Magnolia 12.0 [Est.) 85 M 69 ChJ. nese pistache 22.0 {Est.) 65 5 ?0 Coast live oak 12.0 (Est.) 0 L 71 Flowering magzxolla 6.4, 6.0, 4.7 70 M 72 LJq~aida mbar 15.2 55 M S50-585-5374 Fa~te" _Reraarks 73 Ginkgo 7, 6, 6, 5, 4 (Est.) 55 M 74 Fig 5, 4 {Est.) 40 M 75 Canary Island pine 21.3 60 M 76 l--Iawthorrt 10.8, 8.0, 60 S 76a Palm NA 80 M 77 Stone pine 9.8 55 M 78 Red oak 10.0, 9.8, 7.3 50 L 79 I'~wtho rn 6,8, 5.0 55 M 4.3, 4.8, 5.0 80 Coast hve oak 13.1 60 l- 81 Coast live oak 19_4 45 L g2 Coast live oak 14.2 55 L '~ Farm: S-"Save, R~llemove S S £ R R R R R S R R R S S Ivy covered, one-sided. Ivy covered, side-pruned. Dead, ivy covered. Forks at 1'. Relocate on site. Tr~rtk wound. Side pruned for line clearance. In loot-print. Forks at 3-4 feet. Weak connection. Most growth on same side. In footprint. Ivy coveted..in footprint. Twisting trunk. Roots uplifting sidewalk. Original support pipe still in tree. In footprint. Decay_ Weak structure_ Relocate on site. Severe lean. In footprint. Upper decay, poor form. In footprint. Cattopy all sprouts. In footprint. Topped for llne c[earmace, wittx some included bark. Topped for line d~arance. Trunk oozing. Leans, topped ~or line clearance. MAR ~, 5 2003 Mayne Tree Expert Company, Inc. CERTt'FIr:D ARBOP3S'! ~ STATE CONTRACTOR"S LICaNSF NO. 276793 PEST CONTROL ADV]SOI~ ,~ND OP~R.~TOR,~ April l, 2003 Mr. Jeff White prometheus 350 Bridge Parkway Redwood City, CA 94065-1517 Re: Satori Gardens, 7308 Rainbow Drive, Cupertino, CA Dear Mc. Wb. ite: This letter is for the purpose of outlining and providing tr=~ protection. Also included in this letter are opinions on the survivability of the various transplantable trees. PJ, ease note that these are only generalizations and do not include all situations. T~ee Protecfiam 1) Fro b~ctive fencing (chaJnlink or orange plastic) ~hould be installed at the trees' drip- tides/root zones. The ~enci.ng should be adjusted only eno,~agh to allow demolition/ construction to proceed. 2) The areas within these fences or tree protection zones are to be inaccessible to constructlon activity and materials. If encroachment is necessary, place a layer of 4 inches of wood ch~ps or plywood to protect the root zone. Wood should be placed arou nd the trunks to promct the bark ff encroachment (s near the rrunk~. (See Mitigating Measures for Existing Trees on Construction. Sites", enclosed.) Trenching and/or grade changes within the tree protection zones should be avoided. This includes pre-construction, construction and pos K/construction periods. If any soil dL~mrbance is required within any (~ree protec~on zone, the project azboris~ shall be consulted prior ro this action. APR-O?-O9 14:31 FROM-PROUETHEU$ REAL ESTATE GROUP 650-§g6-~3?4 T-685 P.OS/O5 P~98I Saron Gardens/Prom~b~,eus 4--1-03 4) The project arborist shall oversee all tree relocations, but a tree moving company will know better how it should be done. In my o!pimon, the palm~ m be relocated have a high rate of survival and the oaks have a medium to medium-kigh rate of survival. There are several formulas for the root ball size needeck for relocation. I usc 10 inches in total root ball diameter for each inch of tree rliameter at 48 inches above g~ade. 5) These relocated trees shall be irrigab~-d regularly duzmg the first season, then normally as needrd for the species. Have the relocated trees iatsp~cted after construction, so that other mitigating treatments can be recor~'~ended. Thes~ may included fertilizing, sp~aying and/or pruning_ In conclusiOll, these recommendations are generalizations for initial n'ee care dul'~g con- truction. After constnaction, landscaping a)so needs to address tree impacts from irrigation trenching placement. I believe these recommendations are correct and follow proper arboricultural principles and practices. $incerety, Richard L. Huntington 'Certified Arborist WC ~0119 R.l_H:dcr APR-OF-a3 14:31 FROM-PROMETHEUS REAL ESTATE GROUP 650-5g6-5374 T-683 P.04/65 P-gB1 MITIOATINO iv~EASUR.ES FOR CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS ON P_XISTI~O TR~P~ ;r~ ~o some degr~;. The degre~ ~f impac~ ~s largely predic~e~ on ~he "[re~ pr~[~[~on program" b~s~d on the species, size, con~ion ~nd cxp~c[;o ~mp~c[. A Certified Arboris~ (International Society of ArDo~icol[ure) I$ suggested for this work TI~o l~ca~ University o{ C~hforni~ Extension or Coumy F~ Ad~l$o[s Ofilc~ has ~he names of ~o:~l certified arboris~s. ~Fl-q'10N li S1TE ~ All existing tr~cs snail be fenced within, at. or outside ;ne dnplme (foliar spreac~) of [nc (r~ ~sing ~l~c following formul2: Five roches in ~stance from average groun¢ level Example: a~ tach diameter tree *oula have a fence erected 10 feet from t~e base oF the ~ree (~ x 5 = 120/12 = 10}. The ~enc{ng should not ,ntcrf~r; wi~h acme) construction, but unnecessary trench;rig, grading or compaction shall be 31lowea within the aripline of th~ fcnec, or cyclone, with stet! stalces or pipc~ 3s posts. If thc fence ,s within the dripline of thc u-;cs, the foliar fringe outside [ne fence shall be raises to offset thc chance of limb breakage from construction cqu~pmem encroaching w~thin ~hc dnpliae lumoer aha o~h:r m~tcrials, ~isposcd-af paint~, sobcnts or other noxious m~ter~al~, 9arKed cars, grading equipment an¢ o~hcr nervy ~quipment. Thc MAYNE ~ ~Y~E RT COMPANY APR-OT-O~ 14:31 FRO~-PROM~THEUS R~L ~STATE GROUP BSO-595-53T4 I-b~ r.oo/uo r-sol III GR_~, D TN G/F.X C A V A T'[N' O All gra0ing plans thai specify gra~mg *lthin the dripline- of any tree, o r within the distance from the trunk aS outlined in SEC--"T'iON II when sai~ distance i~ outside ~ne driplin~, sh~l first be r~vi~w~d by ;~c certif~e~ If trenching :s necessar), within the ar~a as described above, said trencining m~nelled and smaller roots s~al} be cut smoo~ly to the si~e of the trench. Thc $;~e of the ~e trench s~oui~ be draped immediately ~:th t~o layers of untre~t:~ ~urlap to a ~epth of 3 f~t from the surface. The ~urlap shall be Ti~e arbonst on {he job shall ha'~e {he re~pollsibility of observing all ongoing activities f~a~ may ~ffect me trees, and ~r~crlDing necessary remedial work ;o. all arborist act:~mes speelfi~ in S~ONS I, II an~ Iii In a~aztion. prumn$, w~;n ~ypes an~ tzchniques as o~thn~d in the "Pruning O~iaelines" (I995) of t~e Int:rnat~onal So~:e;). of Arboriculture, shall De prescribed a~ necessary F~rtllizing, mulching, aeration, irrigalion, drainage, pest control requirements and State Agricultural P=sr Control laws All specjficltJons ~all the local County Agr,cuh~ral Commiss:oners Office provi~e~ in the Evalua:~on G~:de Fublished by ~he International Society of ArOoriculrure. shall be asses~eO for ~amagzs to the trees Upon completion of the project, the arborist '~hall re~,irw ali work onclertaKen files, compaction. ~rainag~. pruning and future remedial work. The arbori$~ shoul~ s~bml~ a final repor~ in ~ntmg euthning the ongoing remedial care MAYNE ~ EXPERT COMPANY ~AY-O6-O~ FROM-PROMETHEUS REAL ESTATE GROUP 65n-596-53F4 BREAKDOWN OF TREE SURVEY Saron GarQens Cupertino, CA 5/2/03 Trees Removed Trees Saved 60 or less > 60 1 1 5 2 2 8 3 3 9 4 T-1 5 T-2 19 6 7-3 25 7 T-4 27 8 14 28 9 15 3O 10 16 32 11 17 34 13 20 45 14 22 46 15 23 47 16 24 48 17 32a 49 18 32b 56 19 32c 59 20 32d 63 21 32e 64 22 38 65 23 39 66 24 40 67 25 41 70 26 42 72 27 43 73 28 50 74 29 51 75 30 52 76 31 53 77 32 54 78 33 55 79 34 57 35 60 36 61 37 62 38 67a 39 69 4O 71 41 76a 42 80 43 81 44 82 4 6 7 10 12 13 21 26 29 31 33 33a 35 36 37 54 58 EXHIBIT C EXHIBIT D Resident Relocation Program For Saron Gardens Redevelopment April 29, 2003 Prometheus is seeking approval to redevelop the existing Saron Gardens Apartments into 55 detached single-family homes. Saron Gardens Apartments includes nine apartment buildings, one house, on-grade parking, a swimming pool and a small open space. There are 39 apartments and 1 single-family house on the property. Prometheus values its residents and wants to keep them informed about the proposed project. In order to make the transition as smooth as possible for the residents, Prometheus has prepared this Resident Relocation Program. The Program includes the elements explained below. Resident Relations Manager Prometheus will have a Resident Relations Manager on-site prior to the start of construction to work with and assist the residents during the relocation period. The Resident Relations Manager will be able to proactively work closely with residents to provide information and quickly respond to resident issues. Informational resources such as apartment listings, moving company listings, and information on how to qualify for BMR units will be made available to residents. Prometheus greatly values it customers and wants to make sure their needs are met and their issues are resolved. Early Notification Prometheus will meet with residents prior to completing the entitlement process to provide an overview of the project plans and timeline. Prometheus also plans on communicating with residents regularly regarding the specific details of the proposed project after the entitlement process. During this early notification process, the Resident Relations Manager will work closely with residents to provide specific information about other apartments in the area, moving supplies, truck rental, moving companies, and storage facilities. This early notification will allow residents to prepare and be organized for their relocation. In order to provide residents adequate time to find alternative housing, Prometheus will notify each resident with at least 60 days notice in advance of the required move out date. Residents who move from the project during this 60-day period to another rental property within Santa Clara County, will receive a refund of their deposit, a moving allowance and rental assistance as outlined below. Refund Deposit Prometheus wants to refund security deposits to residents as quickly as possible. A check for the security deposit will be available at the leasing office on the scheduled move-out date. Prometheus will refund security deposits at the time of move-out, so long as the following criteria are met: rent must be current, apartment must be vacated on or before their scheduled move-out date, all personal belongings removed from the site, apartment is free from debris, and fixtures of the apartment are not removed. Provided the previous criteria are met, the deposit check will be given to the resident when they return their keys to the leasing office, as opposed to being mailed within 21 days. In addition, if the previous criteria are met, Prometheus will waive cleaning charges. Moving Allowance We recognize our residents will be incurring moving expenses. In an effort to assist our residents, Prometheus will provide a $500 moving allowance per apartment. Any residents who have special needs that affect their ability to move will receive a moving allowance not to exceed $1,000. The moving allowance check will be given to the resident along with their deposit when they return keys to the leasing office provided they have met the criteria addressed in the above Refu~ d Deposit section. .Rental Assistance In order to ensure that residents do not incur significantly higher rental expenses for the first year after they relocate, Prometheus will provide rental assistance. In order to qualify for rental assistance, the resident would need to relocate to another rental property within Santa Clara County within the 60-day notice period described in the Early Notification section of this program and provide a copy of their lease. The rental assistance to be provided to the residents would be as follows: · For months one through six after relocation from the property, Prometheus will pay for up to 20% of the prior rent at Saron Gardens. · For months seven through twelve after relocation from the property, Prometheus will pay for up to 10% of the prior rent at Saron Gardens. The rental assistance shall be paid on the schedule required by the resident's lease at the relocated property. Dispute Resolution In the event that a dispute arises regarding the implementation of this program, the dispute shall be resolved through mediation. The City of Cupertino and Prometheus will mutually agree upon the selection of the mediator. t By: Feh¢ & Peeps Assoczates~ oue Lee ,,,oz ' ~v ......... ~ EXHIBIT E I:FliR ~< PEEP. 5 MEMORANDUM To; Gary Ci~ao, Planning Dcpm'tment Robert Eckols, P.E, Jane Bierstedt, P.E. Datc: May I. 2003 Subject: Parking Analysis Jbr the Saron Gardens I'rgiect pmj,:~r No. IO35-571 This metnt)randum summarizes thc findings and conclusions of the parking analysis conducted by t"ehr & Peers Associates. Inc. related tts thc proposed Saron Gardens residential project. Thc parking analysis inclndcd two types of surveys, a survey of actual guest parking demands at several existing, sirrdlar residential developments in the Sonth San Francisco Bay A~ea. and mtother survey or' currcnt residential parking rcquirememS of local jurisdictiot~s Guest Parking Surveys Six existing residential prO. iccls were identified for the survey. These sites we e .,,clccte~ for tl]eir similaritie~ n) the proposed project as well as their location and guest parking mrrangemcnts. Most of the sites had no, or limited, access to any ol~-strcct parking; therel'orc, it was possible to capture the total guest parking demand at these sites. Five of thc sites had between '15 and 60 units, so the), are similar in size to the proposed project. The s~xth site. the Waterfalls, ha:, 114 units. All six sites provide two-car garages for each unit. Each facility was sm'~ eyed o~ a wcckday night after 12:00 am (midnight), Friday evening after 8:00 pm, and Saturday a[tcrnooB between 3:00 and 4:00 pm. These dine periods were considered mbc indicators of peak periods for guest parking demand/use. During each coent the number vehicles parked in guest spaces, chi driveway aprons (where available), and in any available tm-street parking were recorded. 255 N Market Streel, Suite 200 San Jose. CA 951 I0 {408) 278-t700 Fax (408) 278 1717 ~ww.fchrandpeer,.com t By: Fehr & Peers Associates; 408 287 1/1¢; iway-~-ud ~..,r,v,, , ..~ .... Table I summarizes the restllts of Lh¢ parking counts by type of space (gueSt, driYeway apron, or el-street). 'l'ablc I also indicates the number of units in thc deveh~pment, the number of guest parking spaces available on thc site. and a guest-parking rate as a ratit* o£ the number of guest spaces used pet' residential uuit Based ou the rest. tits of these parking surveys, actual guest p~gkit~g us~.tge rates at these eacilities ranged from a low of 0. I I spaces per unit to a high of (I.83 spaces per unit. In five out of the six k)cmions snrveycd the highest gaest parldng demand was on weekday ~ights. The lo,.vest parking rate occurred at the facility where there ,~ppem's to be thc strongest enforcement of pm'king rules the Watcrl'atls. On average, thc actual guest pm'king demand for the six sties is 0.47 spaces per unil. If the Waterfalls data is not included in the calculation, the average guest parking demand is 0.53 spaces per unit. Zoning Ordinance Survey In addition tt~ thc field survey described above, Fehr & Peers conducIcd a survey of residential parking requirements ¢*r jurisdictions in thc San l-'rancisco Bay Area. This survey involved rex. iewing the current zoning ordinances or phoning thc plantling dcpm'tments. Table 2 summarizes thc i'esuhs ~f this survey £or sixteen jurisdictions: most located in thc South Bay or Peninsula Arcas. Table 2 summarizes the parking requirement~ for 3-bedroom residential units and the associated guest parking a.ssuming that each unit has two designated covered spaces or a two-car garage. Most jurisdictions have "Mubifamily" parking requirements that iuclude sin~le-I'amily attached, townhouse, condominium, and (often) apartment uses. Parking rcq~fircmcnts are typically specified thc number of parking spaces reqtfired by the type of uuit (studio, I -bedroom. 2-bedroom, etc.). Somc of the jurisdictions include gnest parking in these per-unil requirements and stwne have specific guest parking ratios. For this table we have presented any fraction over 2.0 spaces per unit as the guest parking requirement or thc actual guest parking requirement listed in thc zoning ordinance. It By: Fehr & Peers Associates~ 408 287 1717; Nlay-l-03 12:48PM; wage Table 1 Surve of Existin Guest Parkin Parked Yehlctes ObserveCl Cupertino, CA Day oi Week Driveway 4/,11/2003 Fdday 4.12/2003 Saturday Perking $~pp-~. 42 12:00 AM 1 26 B:O0 PM 19 4;00 PM 2/ Units > 114'~ ~ -- Parkln¢ Supply Friday 8:00 PM Total 6 o o 12 0 0 20 0 0 24 1 0 42 32 35 t2 2O 25 Demand (Used Spaces) / Unit 0.70 0.41 0.63 018 0,22 -- 45 8 I 5 14 0.30 8 3 4 13 0.28 8 t 4 13 0.28 nd Towne Cente¢, Mountain view, CA J/ Units = 60 park/r? 42 " 4/~ Friday 1~:00 AM 40 1 9 Friday 8:00 PM 39 0 6 Saturday 4:00 PM 37 2 7 50 0.83 45 0.75 46 0.77 Unas=49 ~3~''Friday- I 12; I 4/11/2003 0o AM I 20 I 0 7 27 0,55 4/11:200 Friday ~ 8;00PM I 20 I 2 12 3a 0,69 4/12120031 Saturday / 4:00 PM ~ 21 [ 0 ~ ~ 32 0.65 ~ San Jo~, CA~ ,t~ ~"~' ' 3~ By: Fehr & Peers Aesoc&ates~ 408 287 1717; May-l-03 12:48PM; Fage b/u TabLe 2 Multifamil ~ldential uriadlction City :osier City --rcmont ~.yward Altos Park Jrements Guest Parking 3.Bedroom UBIt' 20 0.20 2 0 1.50 2.0 ~ultifarn[ly 2,0 0,50 Single Family. Low & Medium Donsity 2,0 __ 1.00 Townnouso, Condos ccd Apartments 2,0 0.50 Average Rat~ 2,0 0.39 Salon Gardens 2.0 0.~ SS of Zoning 100% 200% 4 By: Feh¢ & Peens Associates; 408 287 1717; May-l-03 12:49PM; Page 6/6 [:FHF, ~ ]~F ~S Conclusions Based <m thc two surveys conducted by Fehr & Peers, the following conclusi ns cat~ be drawn related to guest-parking usage al~d local guest parking reqLnrcments. · peak gtmst purking usage at the six sites sm'veyed ranged from 0.i 1 to 0.83 spaces per unit. The average peak guest parking usage rot the sites was between 0.43 and 0.47 spaces per unit. , · Based on Ihe parking requirements of other It)cai jurisdictions the guesl-park~ng ratios for thc proposed development would ~ange from O. 1 i to 1.50 spaces per unit. The average guest-parking ratio for the,it risdictionx surveyed is 0.39 spaces per nnit. Based on t~is intbrmation, providing guest parking at a ratio of 0.$0 spaces per unit is adeqnatC. TRANSPORTATION COf~$ULTANT$ EXHIBIT F MEMORANDUM To: Glenn Goepfert, Assistant Director of Public Work.~ Copies to: Ion Moss, Promcthuas Jeff White, Prometheus Jane A. Bierstodt, P.E. Date: March 24, 2003 Subject: Saron Gardens Traffic Analysis 1035-571 Fchr & Peers conducted a focused traffic analysis for the proposed Saron Gardens project. The project will replace an existing 40-uttit apartment complex with up to 55 single-family detached dwelling units, llae project is located on Rainbow Drive on the west side of the north-south portion just to the west olde Anza Boulevard. Site vehicular and pedestrian access will be provided via one driveway on Rainbow Drive at (approximately) the same location as the driveway to tho existing apartment complex. Pedestrian access will also be provided to Poppy Way. A conceptual site plan is attached. The fomtsed traffic tmalysis addresses the net-trip generation of the project and site access. Potential Lnterseetion impacts are also addressed. Trip Generation Estimates The proposed project will add traffic to the surrounding roadway system because of the increase in the number of dwelling units and the change in the type o£ dwelling units (apartments vers-,~ single-family detached dwelling units). Thc ,amounts of traffic generated by the existing apartment complex and by the proposed project during the AM and PM peak hours of the adjacent streets were estimated by applying trip generation rates and trip generation equations from the Institute of Transportatim~ Engineers, Trip Generation, to the number of units. Rates and equations for apartments and for low-rise apartments were used to estimate the muount of traffic generated by the existing use. (The existing complex enntains one and two-story buildings.) The estimates are presented in Table A-1 (attached). TI~e estimated number of trip gm~erated by the proposed project is approximately 41 to 48 AM peak-hour trips and 56 to 63 PM peak-hour trips. The range is due to the difference in the average rates and the equations, which take into account the reduced economies of scale (increase in trips per unit) for smaller neighborhoods. The trip estimates for the apar~tents range fi.om 10 to 26 AM peak-hour trips and 23 to 40 PM peak-hour trips. www. fehrandpeer~.com ~ By: ~enr & Heers Associates; FEtlgc & PEERS Intersection Impacts Thc closest signalized intersection to the site is Rainbow Drive and De Anza Boulevard. Approximately 3,975 vehicles usc this intersection during thc PM peak hour.i It opm-ares at an overall Levol of S~rvic~ (LOS) B, a good operating level, during tho PM peak hour with priority given to the hcavy volumes on De Anza Boulevard.. The net-added project traffic constitutes less than a one-percent increase in use of this intersection. The small increase in traffic volumes due to the project will not noticeably affect interszctioa operations. ' Source: (:ivy of Cup~rdno Uaffic count on October 17, 2001. Current AM peak period counts were not ~vailabl¢. t By'. Fehn & PeePs Associates; SARON GARDENS APN 366-19-075 APN 366-19-076 APN 366-19-048 R3: Multi-Family Residential R3: Multi-Family Residential RI: Single-Family Residential PROJECT DESCRIPTION The existing Saron Gardens Apartments will be redeveloped into 55 detached single- family homes. Saron Gardens includes nine apartment buildings, one house, on-grade parking, a swimming pool and a small open space. There are 39 apartments and 1 single- family house on the property. The proposed project Will create 53 single-family homes with access to Rainbow Drive and 2 single-family homes on Poppy Drive. CIIY OF CUPERTINO City of Cupertino 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3,251 FAX (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Project Title: Saron Gardens Itaff Use Only A File No. >cA ase File No. ttachments Project Location: 7308 & 7310 (A-E) Rainbow Drive Project Description: Demolition of nine apartment buildinqs and one sinqle-family house in order to construct 55 detached sinqle-family homes on property currently zoned P(R3) & R1. Portions of the project will be rezoned from P(R3) to P(Res). Environmental Setting: The project site is located in a residential neiqhborhood surrounded by similar residential uses with the exception of a commercial nursery (Yamaqami's) located along the south easterly corner of the project area. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Site Area (ac.)- 4.03 Building Coverage- 31 Proposed Bldg. - 122,437 s.f. Zone- P(R3)/R1 Med/hiqh Assessor's Parcel No. - 366 19 48 Assessor's Parcel No. - 366 19 75 Assessor's Parcel No, - 366 19 76 If Residential, Units/Gross Acre - 13.64 % Exist. Building-. N/A s.f. G.P. Designation - Res Low & Unit Type #A Unit Type #B Unit Type #C Unit Type #D Unit Type #N Unit Type #P Total# Rental/Own Bdrms Total s.f. Price 13 Own 3 2,174 750,000 5 Own 3 2,165 750,000 10 Own 4 2,324 750,000 21 Own 3 2,186 750,000 4 Own 3 1,914 625,000 2 Own 4 3,274 1,200,000 Applicable Special Area Plans: (Check) [] Monta Vista Design Guidelines [] [] N. De Anza Conceptual [] [] Stevens Crk Blvd. Conceptual [] If Non-Residential, Building Area - s.f. Employees/Shift - Parking Required Project Site is Within Cupertino Urban Service Area - S. De Anza Conceptual S. Sara-Sunny Conceptual Stevens Creek Blvd. SW & Landscape FAR - Max. Parking Provided YES [] NO [] A. CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN SOURCES 1. Land Use Element 2. Public Safety Element 3. Housing Element 4. Transportation Element 5. Environmental Resources 6. Appendix A- Hillside Development 7. Land Use Map 8. Noise Element Amendment 9. City Ridgeline Policy 10. Constraint Maps CUPERTINO SOURCE DOCUMENTS 11. Tree Preservation ordinance 778 12. CityAerial Photography Maps 13. "Cupertino Chronicle" (California History Center, 1976) t4. Geological Report (site specific) 15. Parking Ordinance 1277 '16. Zoning Map '17. Zoning Code/Specific Plan Documents 18. City Noise Ordinance C. CITY AGENCIES Site 19. Community Development Dept. List 20. Public Works Dept. 21. Parks & Recreation Department 22. Cupertino Water Utility D. OUTSIDE AGENCIES 23. County Planning Department 24. Adjacent Cities' Planning Departments 25. County Departmental of Environmental Health OUTSIDE AGENCIES (Continued) 26. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 27. County Parks and Recreation Department 28. Cupertino Sanitary District 29. Fremont Union High School District 30. Cupertino Union School District 31. Pacific Gas and Electric 32. Santa Clara County Fire Department 33. County Sheriff 34. CALTRANS 35. County Transportation Agency 36. Santa Clara Valley Water District OUTSIDE AGENCY DOCUMENTS 37. BAAQMD Survey of Contaminant Excesses 38. FEMA Flood Maps/SCWND Flood Maps 39. USDA, "Soils of Santa Clara County" 40. County Hazardous Waste Management Plan 41. County Heritage Resources Inventory 42. Santa Clara Valley Water District Fuel Leak Site 43. CalEPA Hazardous Waste and Substances Site OTHER SOURCES 44. Project Plan Set/Application Materials 45. Field Reconnaissance 46. Experience w/project of similar scope/characteristics 47. ABAG Projection Series B. C. D. E. F. C. Complete all information requested on the Initial Study Cover page. LEAVE BLANK SPACES ONLY WHEN A SPECIFIC ITEM IS NOT APPLICABLE. Consult the Initial Study Source List; use the materials listed therein to complete, the checklist information in Categories A through O. You are encouraged to cite other relevant sources; if such sources are used, job in their title(s) in the "Source" column next to the question to which they relate. If you check any of the "YES" response to any questions, you must attach a sheet explaining the potential impact and suggest mitigation if needed. When explaining any yes response, label your answer clearly (Example "N - 3 Historical") Please try to respond concisely, and place as many explanatory responses as possible on each pare. Upon completing the checklist, sign and date the Preparer's Affidavit. Please attach the following materials before submitting the Initial Study to the City. ,/Project Plan Set of Legislative Document ,/Location map with site clearly marked (when applicable) EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: ISSUES: ,- = cz .- ~o [and Supporting Information Sources] · = ~ o ~ _E _E I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a [] [] [] [] scenic vista? [5,9,24,41,44] b) Substantially damage scenic resources, [] [] [] [] including, but not limited to, trees, reck outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? [5,9,11,24,34,41,44] c) Substantially degrade the existing visual [] [] [] [] character or quality of the site and its surroundings? [1,17,19,44] d) Create a new source of substantial light or [] [] [] [] g are, wh ch would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? [1,16,44] II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farm[and Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? [5,7,39] b) Conflict with existing zoning for [] [] [] [] agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? [5,7,23] [] [] [] [] c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? [5,7,39] ISSUES:[and Supporting Information Sources] III. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air i pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? [5,37,42,44] b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? [5,37~42,44] c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? [4,37,44] d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? [4,37,44] e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? [4,37,44] IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on i any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game i or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? i [5,10,27,44] b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural ' community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or i US Fish and Wildlife Service? [5,10,27,44] i c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by i ISSUES: I [and Supporting Information Sources] I Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? [20,36,44] · d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? [5,10,12,21,26] e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? [11,12,41] i f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? [5,10,26,27] Discussion: Item E - Less than s~gnificant impact with mitigation measures The arborist report prepared by Mayne Tree Expert Company, Inc., dated March 25, 2003 identified 93 trees on the project site. The applicant has made efforts in preserving the existing trees to the maximum extent possible, including transplanting approximately 16 existing trees. A total of 33 trees are proposed to be removed as part of this project. The majority of the removed trees are not considered specimen or heritage trees according to the City's Tree Ordinance. However, 6 specimen trees are proposed to be removed (5 oaks and I cedar). These trees are either in poor condition or located within the proposed building footprint. The applicant is required to plant 6 - 48 inch box Coast Live Oaks to replace the removed specimen oak and cedar trees as a condition of the project. In addition, the arborist report has identified specific tree projection measures that will be included in the project conditions as well. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? [5,13,41] b) Cause a substantial adverse change in , the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? [5,13,41] SSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? [5,13,41] d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? [1,51 VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. [2,14,44] ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? [2,5,10,44] iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including l?quefaction? [2,5,10,39,44] l iv) Landslides? [2,5,10,39,44] b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the ! loss of topsoil? [2,5,10,44] c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is . unstable, or that would become unstable as i a result of the project, and potentially result I n on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, ~ subsidence, hquefacbon or collapse? [2,5,10,39] i d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code substantial risks to life or (1997), creating property? [2,5,10] ' e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or , alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? [6,9,36,39] ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] Discussion: A geotechnical report has been prepared by Lowney Associates dated March 13, 2003. )il condition of the t site and that the )osed project may be constructed as planned provided that the design and construction are performed in accordance with specific recommendations outlined in the report. These conditions are added as conditions to the project. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or [] [] [] [] the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? [32,40,42,43,44] b) Create a significant hazard to the public or [] [] [] [] the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? [32,40,42,43,44] c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle [] [] [] [] hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? [2,29,30,40,44] d) Be located on a site which is included on a [] [] [] [] list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? [2,42,40,43] e) For a project located within an airport land [] [] [] [] [ use p an or, where such a plan has not been i adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or I working in the project area? [ ] I f) For a project within the vicinity of a private [] [] [] [] i airstrip, would the project result in a safety i hazard for people residing or working in the J project area? [ ] J g) Impair implementation of or physically [] [] [] [] i interfere with an adopted emergency I response plan or emergency evacuation ISSUES: -- [and Supporting Information Sources] plan? [2,32,33,44] ~ h) Expose people or structures to a [] [] [] [] significant risk of loss, injury or death ~ involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?[1,2,44] VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY I "Would the project: I a) Violate any water quality standards or [] [] [] [] waste discharge requirements? [20,36,37] ' b) Substantially deplete groundWater [] [] [] [] supplies or interfere substantially with r groundwater recharge such that there would ~ be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been I granted)? [20,36,42] e) Create or contribute runoff water which [] [] [] [] would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or I provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? [20,36,42] f) Otherwise substantially degrade water [] [] [] [] quality? [20,36,37] I g) Place housing within a 100-year flood [] [] [] [] ~ hazard area as mapped on a federal F cod i Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate I Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 2,38] ..... ~ce within a 100-year flood hazard area [] [] [] [] i structures which would impede or redirect i flood flows? [2,38] ] i) Expose people or structures to a significant [] [] [] [] i risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, i including flooding as a result of the failure of i a levee or dam? [2,36,38] i J) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or SSUES: [and Supporting Information mudfiow? [2,36,38] Discussion: Item E - Less than significant impact A storm water drainage study is required and shall be completed as part of this project prior . to the Planning Commission Public Hearing. The study shall assess the project's impact on the existing area storm water drainage system. Specific mitigation measures identified in the drainage study shall be included-as Conditions of the project to the satisfaction of the D rector of Public Works Department. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established [] [] FI- [] commun ty? [7,12,22,41 ] b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, [] [] [] [] ! policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, ~ local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? [1,7,8,16,17,18,44] Ic) Conflict with any applicable habitat [] [] [] [] I conservation plan or natural community I I conservation plan? [1,5,6,9,26] I ~ X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the i project: Ia) Result in the loss of availability of a known [] [] [] [] I mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? i [5,10] I b) Result in the loss of availability of a [] [] [] [] , locally-important mineral resource recovery I site delineated on a local general plan, ! specific plan or other land use plan? [5,10] i Xl. NOISE -- Would the project result in: [ a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, [] [] [] [] i noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other i agencies? [8,18,44] ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? [8,18,44] c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [8,~ 8] d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [8,18,44] e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? [8,18,44] f) For a project within the vicinity of a private i airstrip, would the project expose people res ding or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? [8,18] X POPULATION AND HOUSING --Would the project: a) nduce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or nd rect y (for example, through extension of i roads or other infrastructure)? [3,16,47,44] b) Displace substantial.numbers of existing , housing, necessitating the construction of ! replacement housing elsewhere? [3,16,44] I c) Displace substantial numbers of people, I necessitating the construction of i replacement housing elsewhere? [3,16,44] ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] nU~ = ! Discussion: Items b & c - Less than significant with mitigation measures According to General Plan Policy 3-8, the City's existing multi-family rental units provide housing opportunities for household of varied income levels. Therefore in general, the / existing multi-family rental units should be preserved to the maximum extent possible. In the event when a proposed development or redevelopment of a site would cause a loss of multi-family rental housing units, the City will require mitigation measures to offset the impacts. There are 39 apartment units and 1 single-family home on the project site currently. The project is proposing to demolish the existing housing units and construction 55 single-family housing units. It should be noted that the proposed project is increasing the overall number of housing units by 15 units. As a mitigation measure, the project is required to provide a relocation program with provisions to relocated existing apartment residents to other comparable apartment units (in terms of size, condition, quality, age and I rent) within the Cupertino Union School District. The Housing Committee prior to the I Planning Commission Hearing shall review the relocation plan. Also, the project will be required to provide 20% Below Market Hate units which is b% more man wna[ ~ne ul~y s normally requires (15%) to offset the Iow income housing that are displaced as part of this project. These mitigation measures will be included as conditions of the project. Xlll. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? [19,32,44] [] [] [] [] I Police protection? [33,44] [] [] [] [] Schools? [29,30,44] [] [] [] [] Parks? [5,17,19,21,26,27,44] [] ~. [] ~ i Other public facilities? [19,20,44] [] [] [] [] XlV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of [] [] [] [] existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? ,-~ ~. .E.- ~o~ ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] I [5,17, ~ g,2~ ,25,27,441 l b) Does the project include recreational [] [] [] [] facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? [5,44] [ i XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is [] [] [] [] substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? [4,20,35,44] , b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, [] [] [] [] a level of service standard established by the I county congestion management agency for ~ designated roads or highways? [4,20,44] c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, [] [] [] [] including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? [4,?] d) Substantially increase hazards due to a [] [] [] [] design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [20,35,44] e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [] [] [] [] . [2,19,32,33,44] fr!~Re~s~ult in inadequate parking capacity? [] [] [] [] g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or [] [] [] [] i programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? [4,34] ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] Discussion: Items a & f - Less than significant with mitigation measures Traffic: The project is required to install one new stop sign at the driveway exit along Rainbow Drive. Sidewalk access from the project site to Rainbow Drive for access to public transportation and bicycle access shall be provided as part of this project. The Public Works Department has reviewed a traffic analysis prepared by Fehr & Peers on March 24, 2003. The report considered the net-trip generation of the project, site access and the potential impacts on adjacent intersections and determined that there will be no significant traffic impacts. The mitigation measures/recommendations identified in the traffic analysis and by the Public Works Department shall be implemented as conditions of the project. Parking: The applicant is required to submit a parking analysis demonstrating that the proposed parking will adequately serve the project to the satisfaction of the Director of Community )roved )rior to the Plannin Commission Hearing. XVl. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? [5,22,28,36,44] b) Require or result in the construction of I new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? [36,22,28,36] c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? [5,22,28,36,44] e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing l,-~ommitments? [5,22,2_8,36,44~]_ ssuEs: [and Supporting Information Sources] f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? [40,46] g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? [] XVlI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by City Staff) a) Does the project have the potential to [] [] degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or i animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or preh story? [] b) Does the project have impacts that are [] [] individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past i projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of prObable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental [] [] effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ["J ........ PREPARER'S AFFIDAVIT I hereby certify that the information provided in this Initial Study is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief; I certify that I have used proper diligence in responding accurately to all questions herein, and have consulted appropriate source references when necessary to ensure full and complete disclosure of relevant environmental data. I hereby acknowledge than any substantial errors dated within this Initial Study may cause delay or discontinuance of related project review procedures, and hereby agree to hold harmless the City of Cupertino, its staff and authorized agents, from the consequences of such delay or discontinuance. Print Preparer's Name ~_~L~ ~ ~ ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (To be Completed by City Staff) ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. [] Aesthetics [] Agriculture Resources [] Air Quality [] Biological Resources [] Cultural Resources [] Geology/Soils [] Hazards & Hazardous [] Hydrology / Water [] Land Use / Planning Materials Quality [] Mineral Resources [] Noise [] Population / Housing [] Public Services [] Recreation [] Trensportation/Treffic [] Utilities / Service [] Mandatory Findings of Systems Significance DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) finds that: [] The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [] Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [] The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. [] The proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL iMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. [] Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) pobe¢~voided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE LA/~A~ON, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the s/~/ddSroject, nothing further is required. . , Staff Evalu~; ER"C-~Dhairperson Date CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE April 9, 2003 As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure, adopted by the City Council of the City of Cupertino on May 27, 1983, as amended, the following described project was reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Cupertino on April 9, 2003. PROIECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION Application No.: Applicant: Location: Z-2003-01, TM-2003-01, U-2003-02 (EA-2003-03) Jeff White (Prometheus) 7310 Rainbow Drive, A-E DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST Zoning (Z-2003-01) to rezone a 4.03 acre parcel from PR3) to P(Res). Tentative Map (TM-2003-01) to subdivide a 4.03-acre parcel into 55 residential parcels and one common parcel. Use Permit (U-2003-02) to construct 55 single-family residences and site improvements on a 4.03-acre parcel. FINDINGS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE The Enviroru-nental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Mitigated Negative Declaration with the following mitigations: 1. Trees: The applicant is required to plant 6 - 48' box Coast Live Oaks to replace the removed specimen oak and cedar trees. The arborist report has identified specific tree projection measures that will be included in the project conditions as well. 2. Storm water drainage: A storm water drainage study is required and shall be completed as part of this project prior to the Planning Commission Public Hearing. Specific mitigation measures identified in the drainage study shall be included as conditions of the project to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works Department. 3. Relocation program: The project is required to provide a relocation program with provisions to relocated existing apartment residents to other comparable apartment units within the Cupertino Union School District. 4. Belozo Market Rate units: The project is required to provide 20% BMR units. The applicant is demolishing all 40 units and proposing 15 additional new units for a new total of 55 units. 20% will be taken from these 15 additional new units resulting in 3 BMR units. 5. Traffic Impacts: The applicant is required to install one new stop sign at the driveway exit along Rainbow Drive and sidewalk access from the project site to Rainbow Drive. The applicant is required to submit a traffic analysis discussing potential traffic impacts. These finding identified in the analysis shall be implemented as conditions of the project to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works Department. 6. Parking: The applicant is required to submit a parking analysis that shall be r,~viewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to th7 e~n~ission Public Hearing. Steve P~aseck~''~ - "-'- "~ - - Director of Community Development g/erc/REC EA-2003-03 CITY OF CUPERTINO MITIGATED NEGATIVE 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 17 1977, 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 June 16, 2003. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION EA-2003-03 Application No.: Applicant: Location: Z-2003-01, TM-2003-01, U-2003-02 Jeff White (Prometheus) 7310 Rainbow Drive, A-E DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST Zoning (Z-2003-01) to rezone a 4.03 acre parcel from PR3) to P(Res). Tentative Map (TM-2003-01) to subdivide a 4.03-acre parcel into 55 residential parcels and one common parcel. Use Permit (U-2003-02) to construct 55 single-family residences and site improvements on a 4.03-acre parcel. FINDINGS OF DECISIONMAKING BODY The City Council granted a Mitigated Negative Declaration with the following mitigations: 1. Trees: The applicant is required to plant 6 - 48" box Coast Live Oaks to replace the removed specimen oak and cedar trees. The arborist report has identified specific tree projection measures that will be included in the project conditions as well. 2. Storm water drainage: A storm water drainage study is required and shall be completed as part of this project prior to the Planning Commission Public Hearing. Specific mitigation measures identified in the drainage study shall be included as conditions of the project to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works Department. 3. Relocation program: The project is required to provide a relocation program with provisions to relocated existing apartment residents to other comparable apartment units within the Cupertino Union School District. 4. Below Market Rate units: The project is required to provide 20% BMR units. The applicant is demolishing all 40 units and proposing 15 additional new units for a new total of 55 units. 20% will be taken from these 15 additional new units resulting in 3 BMR units. 5. Traffic Impacts: The applicant is required to install one new stop sign at the driveway exit along Rainbow Drive and sidewalk access from the project site to Rainbow Drive. The applicant is required to submit a traffic analysis discussing potential traffic impact-?~'hese finding identified in the ana~'~s shall be implemented as conditions of the project to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works Department. 6. Parking: The applicant is required to submit a parking analysis that shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to the Planning Commission Public Hearing. Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development CERTIFICATE OF THE CITY CLERK This is to certify that the above Negative Declaration was filed in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Cupertino on City Clerk g/erc/negEA200303 SARON GARDENS EXTERIOR MATERIALS 4/23/03 LOT# PLAN I P 2 P 3 [32 4 C1 5 D1 6 C2 7 D2 8 B 9 B 10 B 1'1 B 12 B N 15 N 16 C1 17 D2 18 N 19 DI 20 A2 21 N 22 D1 23 Al 24 A1 25 D1 26 N 27 D2 GROUP LOT# 28 29 3O 31 32 33 lib 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 ]lb 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 lib 52 ~a 53 54 55 PLAN GROUP C1 D1 C2 D2 ~b A1 D1 Cl DI Al A2 D1 ll'b D1 C2 A2 D2 C2 D1 DI A1 A1 DI DI C1 D1 A2 D2 C2 A1 SIDING rRIM I BD&BAT BASE ROOF ~1o. I 1 2 3 I Lap S 3B Cult St Comp l! CoolGr 31ueGr Ivory Green CS1 CR1 ~=!~;~ 10 Wm Gr Ivory Rust Cedar 0S2 CR2 ~ ? Sage Cream Blue Gr Cedar CS2 CR2 [[ Cern P BB Cult St Tile ]Ia 13 Lt Gr Ivory Cedar Rust CS1 TR1 Ub 6 Yellow Green Ivory Black CS2 TR2 ~ $ Clay Cream Black Green CS1 CR1 55 SIDING / TRIM Cool Gray: KM 227 Westwood Warm Gray: BM HC 87 Ashley Gray Sage: ICl 948 Monsoon Cream: BM HC 30 Philadelphia Cream Ivory: ICl 2003 Cielo Blanco Blue Gray: BM HC 159 Philipsburg Blue Rust: BM HC 49 Mayflower Red Cedar: ICi 325 Autumn Blush Green: ICl 1204 Nob Hill Black: ICl 1484 Mary Janes CEMENT pLASTER: Light Gray: ICl 523 Heron Gray Yellow: ICl 528 Golden Needles Clay: Pittsburgh 4284 Apple Brown Betty CULTURED STONE: CS1 El Dorado Limestone "Pasadena" CS2 El Dorado Limestone "Cheyenne" TILE ROOFING: TR1 Monier Slate "Highland Gray" TR2 Monier Slate '"Term Cotta" COMPOSITION SHINGLE ROOFING: CRI Celotex "Shadow Gray" CR2 Celotex "VVeathered Wood" ~ISTIANI JOHNSON ARCHITECTS SARON GARDENS EXTERIOR MATERIALS SIDING TRIM 4/22/2003 ROOF STONE Ia lb Ic IIa IIc CHRISTIANI JOHNSON ARCHITECTS Planning Commission Mmutes 3 May 12, 2003 In response to Com. Miller's question if they would be required to construct underground tanks for filtering, Ms. Shrivastava said that it was not expected at this point. The requirements are less stringent for this project because it is prior to July 15; after July 15, they become more stringent. Responding to Com. Wong's questions, Ms. Shrivastava said and three story buildings in the project; she illustrated the one story and noted was consistent with the height of the rest of the site. She said that height was l Relative to the existence of the HVAC in the main building and its close to Rancho San Antonio, she said that there was a condition of approval for noise they comply with the ordinance relative to the HVAC equipment and any other project is close to a sensitive land use. In response to Chair Chen's questions about the none of the trees proposed for removal were s~ of the trees, Ms. Shrivastava said that Mr. G. Arcello, HK1T Architects, clarified the center; and there is an assisted living assisted living, and within assisted livin dementia care. The difference is jurisdiction of the State } killed nursing facilities was one component of which is the one being expanded as the of that will be dedicated to Alzheimer's has to be licensed until it is under the Chair Chen opened I there was no one who wished to speak. Com. Corr said that it was an e supported the application. the project, traffic was appropriate addition to concurred with fellow excellent she supported the ect, that it would be an asset to the community, and he Saadati said he supported the project. Com. Miller said he liked the current exercise room is inadequate and would be an iect. He said he supported the project. Com. Wong said he sioners. He said he visited the facility and felt the design was ~nit was needed. He said he supported the project. Chair Chen said MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: moved approval of negative declaration EA-2003-01 5-0-0 MOTION SECOND: VOT3g: Com. Wong moved approval of the use permit Application U-2003-01 in accordance with model resolution and changes incorporated. Com. Corr Passed 5-0-0 Application Nos.: Applicant: Location: TM-2003 -01; U-2003-02; Z-2003 -01; EA-2003 -03 Jeff White (Prometheus) 7310 Rainbow Drive, A-E Tentative Map to subdivide a 4.03 acre parcel into 55 residential parcels and one common parcel. Use Permit to construct 55 single family residences and site improvements on a 4.03 acre parcel Zoning to rezone a 4.03 acre parcel from PR3 to R(Res) Tentative City Council date: .lune 2, 2003 Planning Commission Iv,mutes 4 May 12, 2003 Staff presentation: Chair Chen noted receipt of several e-mails relative to the conflict in schedules with the CiW Council study session. She said the Planning Commission does not make the final decision; they are making recommendation to City Council and there is still time for public input, and discussion would move forward on the item. Com. Corr said from a process standpoint he was concerned with proceeding with the discussion of the application while interested parties were attending a conflicting meeting in the council chambers. He said they are often criticized for doing things that the public cannot comment on, and when there is a conflict in a schedule like this, they get criticism also. Mr. Piasecki noted for the record that because the City Council meeting was being held at the same time, an announcement would be made in the City Council meeting when the item was commencing so that those attending the City Council meeting could join the others in the Planning Commission meeting. He commented that the City Council meeting would likely go on for some time. Mr. Gary Chao, Associate Planner, noted corrections to the staff report. The applicant is Saron Gardens LLC not Prometheus; Page 1 of staff report, project data should be corrected to read 7 - 2 story units and 48 - 3 story units. There is a memo containing a condition relating to the BMR units, staff is recommended that it be added to the use permit resolution and there are two correspondences received today from adjacent residents and one from a member of the Housing Commission. Mr. Chao reviewed the application as outlined in the staff report. He reviewed the General Plan, zoning, site analysis, architecture, tree removal, traffic, parking, school impacts, BMR units, resident relocation assistance program and comments from the neighborhood meetings as outlined in the staffreport. Staff recommends approval of the negative declaration, use permit application, tentative map application and the rezoning application. Com. Wong inquired about the possibility of grandfathering the students into the CUSD or Fremont Union High School Distr/ct if they were displaced to another school other than the one which they were presently attending. Mr. Chao indicated that staff would check with the school district, but if the Planning Commission felt it necessary or appropriate, a condition could be added for staff to communicate with the school district to see if they would be flexible in their policy to allow those children to be grandfathered into certain schools in the district. Relative to the issue of tenant relocation, Mr. Chao said that the applicant had a meeting with the tenants last week and since staff was not present at the meeting, the question would be deferred to the applicant. Com. Wong questioned if it was possible to push the BMR units up as they were virtually tearing down the entire building complex. Mr. Piasecki said that the applicant's input may be requested; if the Planning Commission feels that it is necessary to offset the policy in the General Plan that covers mitigating the loss of multi-family units, it is the Planning Commission's discretion to make a recommendation to increase that number. Relative to emergency vehicle access, Mr. Piasecki clarified that there is no vehicular access directly offPoppy Way to the project. He said emergency vehicles can go into the project from either side and get out either side. Com. Miller questioned if the drainage requirements were the same as the last application reviewed. Mr. Chao said he was not certain of the drainage requirements for the last project, but the drainage study at this point was fairly conceptual and the Public Works Department will evaluate the more detailed drainage plan before the final map is approved. Planning Commission Minutes 5 May 12, 2003 Com. Saadati said he was also concerned about the children having to change schools. Mr. Chao said that the applicant has a list of alternate apartment complexes that the tenants could chose to relocate to, but was not certain if they were in the same school district. Com. Corr said that relative to BMR units, the development would have to generate 8 BMR units; what is being discussed is 8 plus an additional number of units because of the number of the added number of units on the site. He questioned what the total number of BMR units would be. Mr. Chao said that credits are given to the existing number of units, hence on the project site there are 39 apartment units and one single family home, which is 40 units total; so the entire project is increasing the total amount of number of units by 15 and the way BMR is calculated is based on the difference; 20% of the 15 additional units proposed by the project will go towards the required number of BMR units, in this case 30. Mr. John Moss, Prometheus, said he concurred with the information in the staff report and he would focus on three main issues, including the results of meetings with stakeholders of the proposed development; tenant relocation plan and parking. He clarified that they as the applicant were not the owners of Saron Gardens Apartments. The first issue of stakeholder was defining them as the neighbors of this project, city of Cupertino, as well as the residents of Saron Gardens. He said relative to the neighborhood, they felt they were proactive in soliciting neighborhood input in the early stages of the conception of the development, with formal notices to surrounding neighborhood, and neighborhood meetings. He said in general the reaction after adjustments were made to the plans, were fairly neutral or positive; and although they did not have 100% neighborhood support, they either supported or had people that were neutral as far as the project was concerned. In response to the concerns about building heights expressed at the meetings, the architects revised the plans and brought those homes down to two stories, resulting in a total of five homes that were reduced relative to height and all of the homes planned on the site immediately adjacent to a single family homeowner are two story in height. Ones that back up to the multi-family units on Rainbow were internal to the project and are three story. Other issues raised were the construction noise, dust, and timing of construction, which are issues w/thin the city ordinances and will be conformed w/th. He said they would have water trucks for the dust and will work within the timeframes permitted by the city. Other issues were privacy issues and related to landscape planting at the perimeter of the property and also fencing. Relative to the landscaping planting, Mr. Moss said that they planned on maintaining most of the mature landscape material presently on the site and planned to plant where there isn't adequate plant material now. Reconstruction of fences is also planned between the project and the neighbors at heights of 7 to 8 feet as requested by the neighbors. Relative to the pedestrian access to the property, Mr. Moss said that Prometheus supports the city's philosophy relative to walkability and pedestrian connectivity; however, only in sites they feel are appropriate. They do not feel that this site is an appropriate site for creating a pedestrian connection out from Rainbow Drive onto DeAnza, whereas it would be at other locations within the city. He said a concern was related to the safety of the residents purchasing the homes and having a pedestrian path going by their front doors, their back doors and down the alleyways where they drive. That access presumably of course is allowed during the day and also during the middle of the night as well when it does not seem appropriate for that use. He said he would appreciate the Planning Commission commenting on the issue and not having it as a requirement. He said favorable comments from the neighborhood meetings in included the fact that for sale units were being developed at the site; positive comments on the architectural style incorporated; the site plan layout; the landscape plan and overall the quality of the architecture. Planning Coramission Minutes 6 May 12, 2003 Mr. Moss reported on the meetings with the city's design consultant and staff regarding the architectural style for the project, resulting in changes made by the architect at the suggestion of Larry Cannon. Meetings were also held with the other stakeholders, the residents of Saron Gardens apartments; and they were informed that it would be a minimum of 6 months before they would be in a position to break ground on the project and begin construction. He said the relocation plan was reviewed and the listing of available apartments was distr/buted and discussed at the meetings. Mr. Moss reviewed the relocation plan which is a result of the input of the planning staff and Housing Commission. He reviewed parking, stating that the city does not have a parking ordinance for this type of development. A parking consultant was asked to put together a study to review the subject in more detail, and looked at it in two ways; they looked at other studies in the Bay Area and at more than a dozen cities in the Bay Area, concluding that in average the requirements were 2.4 parking stalls per unit. The proposed development is 2.8 stalls per unit. In addition they looked at it from the standpoint of what is the actual demand for parking for these types of developments in Silicon Valley; they looked at other developments similar in characteristics relating to the onstreet parking and lack thereof; they looked at 6 prOperties and concluded that the average demand was 2.47 stalls per unit which was in line with the zoning requirements for the greater Bay Area based on the cities reviewed. He reiterated that they were providing 2.8 stalls per unit. Relative to the BIvlR issue, he said it has been less than a year since Cupertino has revisited their BMR program; last year the City Council adopted the revised BMR program and within that program increased the BMR from 10% to 15%; they also reviewed the issue about existing residences that are rebuilt will be exempt from the BMR requirement and that was done consciously as well. He said their stance on that is there is a 15% requirement for the differential in units which translates to 2 units beIng at the BMR level; staff is recommending going from 2 units to 3 units which he said they were not comfortable with and have limited means to be able to provide an additional unit given the tradeoffs as far as the impact to the viability of the development like this. He said to go into some level beyond that clearly is not consistent with what the city recently approved nor consistent with the viability of the project. Mr. Moss addressed the school relocation issue, stating that their plan and hope is to clearly not have any resident that has to be relocated from their school. He said to the best of their ability, they would help to ensure that the students can remain in their current schools. He said the other schools in the school district are also top quality, and although they may not have the test scores as shown from Monta Vista, they are clearly top quality schools not only in the Bay Area and California, but also in Cupertino, and certainly would hope that it would be an unlikely scenaho that somebody needs to move to an apartment that is not in that school area; but that it would not be considered a compromise as far as the quality of the school although it may be disruptive as far as relocation is concerned. He expressed confidence that there is an ample supply of apartments within Cupertino School District for residents to relocate at comparable rents. Relative to the coverage ratio question, Mr. Moss said he did not know what the existing coverages were; the fire department has the emergency vehicular access coming off Poppy Way as a requirement which he said he was agreeable to. He said the turf block alternative shown in the photo was acceptable as a solution to providing adequate access to emergency vehicles. In response to Com. Wong's questions regarding the pedestrian access and emergency vehicle access, Mr. Moss said that he supported the emergency vehicle access; but said that the pedestrian access did not appear to be of significant value and would be a concern for the residents of the property to have the public walking in front of their doorsteps. He said the topic having a gate which the fire department would need a key for to access in the event of emergency would have to Planning Commission Minutes ? May 12, 2003 be reviewed with the fire department. In the event there was a requirement to leave it open and not gate it, he said they would not be opposed to that; but would not want to have a formal easement coming through the property, because of the liability issues associated with that. Mr. Moss also answered questions about building height. Mr. Dave Johnson, architect, stressed that the project was a collaborative process, working with staff, fire district, building officials, and the city's consultant. He said they had several meetings with all of the above and responded to neighbors' concerns, and felt they went a long way to meet what the city was requiring. He said the prototype for the community was a 19th century style of town such as Mendocino, Carmel, Pacific Grove or Nantucket; houses that are close together and pedestrian oriented. He said it was captured not only in the site plan, but also with preserving existing trees and creating a small outdoor park for the residents, and also for the architecture designed to be more of cottage style in appearance. Responding to specific questions, he said they were willing to add trellises to the houses facing Poppy Way, and would lower the height of Unit D. He added that townhouses and single family houses are not subject to the Fair Housing Act or ADA because multi-story units are exempted, hence there is no requirement for that in the project. Relative to the density or total number of dwelling units permitted on this property if built out to its ultimate, 70 dwelling units would be allowed on the parcel, at a density of over 17 units per acre, when in fact the proposal is for 55, at a density of 13-1/2 per acre. Chair Chen opened the meeting or public input. Rae Stevenson Norris, 7314 Rainbow Drive, No. C, read the following document into the record: "Two weeks ago we received notice from Prometheus Real Estate Group of their intention to acquire our homes, evict us, and build 55 three story densely packed single family houses. Many of us met w/th John Moss and Jeff White a few days ago on the evening of Wednesday, May 7. At this meeting they handed out the attached "Resident Relocation Program" and we all discussed it. The plan was fairly self-explanatory except for a provision conveyed verbally that "rental assistance" would only be available to those who rented a new place at higher rent that they're presently paying. After discussion many of us feel that the features of the plan offered are designed to induce smooth compliance with all Prometheus requirements. We further feel that the many conditions on receiving any assistance at all will predictably eliminate many of our forty families from the program, thus saving money for Prometheus. It is proposed that forty Cupertino families be evicted from their homes so that a great deal of money can be made offthe property, under permits and approvals from city government. We believe it is the city government's responsibility to see that a relocation program designed for the good of the displaced families is included as a required part of the permitting process. We all live here because, for a great variety of reasons, Saron Gardens has been the best place for us. To be forced to find somewhere else to live brings up all manner of issues in our lives. It is a great stress for us. For all of us it involves costs, hard choices, and compromises in our lives that are not compensated or addressed by the proposed relocation program. The resulting disruption may lead people to choices that do not involve immediate leasing of another more expensive rental in Santa Clara county, thus rendering them ineligible for the biggest part of the assistance. Also the opportune moment to make the move may not be in the f'mal sixty days which will begin when Prometheus decides. The prudent residents will begin seeking a new situation as soon as permits are approved and the property changes hands, or even before. Planning Commission Minutes 8 May 12, 2003 Another issue for residents is the spreading out of relocation compensation payments over the following year. The Prometheus method requires that we submit copies of our new rental agreements and wait patiently and hopefully for our promised checks. We would have no clear legal recourse should they not come. It puts us in a position comparable to that of welfare recipients. At a later time we will be living separately and each have all the power of a single person faced with a multi-million dollar corporation and its own house lawyers. At that point all we would be able to do is come to the door with hat in hand and say "please". For these reasons we ask that you write into the permitting process a new relocation program, mandatory to Prometheus with the following provisions: Relocation assistance will be provided hq a per unit lump sum payment, the amount which is based solely on present rent paid. Payment is to be due upon presentation of keys in accordance with the tenant's present rental agreement with Saron Gardens. All tenants presently renting at Saron Gardens are eligible and can move out at any time beginning now without sacrificing eligibility. Along with this payment will come payment of all outstanding tenant deposits made to Saron Gardens. Tenants with existing leases can end their lease early if they so desire. There are t be no conditions on how the relocation assistance money is used. Completion of these payments will then end the relationship between the resident and Prometheus with no further worries or mediations required. Residents may not be rendered ineligible for assistance based on a small technical violation of any of a multitude of conditions. In particular conditions of removal of personal belongings, having unit free from debris, and all fixtures intact provisions are susceptible to abuse and must be eliminated. Tardiness in move out due to hardship may reduce the allocated assistance as mediated by a third party without automatically ending all eligibility. The issue of removing personal belongings an debris from premises about to b e bulldozed should be handled by Prometheus through the provision of all the free debris box service residents need to facilitate their move. Hitherto with one family moving out at a time this problem has been handled by existing dumpster service. This will not be adequate in the last sixty days. Requiring 40 families to get all discards to the dump themselves imposes an unreasonable burden. One major concern for many of us is the continuity of our children's education at Regnart, Kennedy and Monta Vista. We ask the city, in cooperation with the Fremont Union High School District and the Cupertino Union School District to guarantee the right of our children currently in these schools or scheduled to begin this fall to continue in their present schools and system until high school graduation. The obvious item missing thus far is the amount of assistance to be offered. The plan offered by Prometheus, for those they consider completely eligible, would be $500 for moving and up to $2,700 in rental assistance, for a total of $3,200. This amount must be viewed as a ceiling rather than a straight-on offer because many residents would end up not qualifying in whole or in part due to the structure of conditions in which the offer is framed. Predictably, this will greatly reduce the total payout Prometheus will make. We proposed for the lump sum relocation assistance payment described in point number one above a sum in the mount of three times the Planning Commission Minutes 9 May 12, 2003 existing Saron Gardens rent for the unit. Based on the average of $1,500 rent per unit, this would mean an average of $4,500 per unit for a total of about $180,000. This may seem like a lot of money. However, this is a large project in which a lot of money will be made. We are the people to be put out and distressed so that this can happen. A decent and respectful compensation plan for us is a normal and proper expense. At the May 7 meeting, Mr. Moss told us that the new units across Rainbow Drive from us have successfully sold for $650,000 each. He characterized the project they have in mind here would be higher quality and ora nicer, less dense layout. Also these units would not be practically hanging over the freeway as those are. So for round purposes, we guess a price tag of $800,000 per unit. This would produce a gross income for the project of 44 million dollars. The compensation plan we propose constitutes about four tenths of a percent (.41%) of this figure. We ask the city of Cupertino to act on our behalf to ensure that this plan be made a condition required for Prometheus to receive permission to pursue this project. We ask that it b e done in a way that enforcement will not be a problem for us. We will be happy to meet to discuss this further. We thank you for representing us as our lawmakers." John Guarino, 7308 Rainbow Drive, said he was opposed to the project, and agreed with the content of the letter. He said he was concerned that his two children would not be able to continue in the same school with the same friends and would be difficult for them. An ~nidentified male speaker said he concurred with the previous speakers. Sayyeda Rizvi, 7308 Rainbow, said she was opposed to the project and supported the document. She said she had two teenage daughters and they were at a critical age and did not want to leave the area and their friends. She said she wanted her daughters to be able to complete their education at Monta Vista High School; and requested that the tenants have more time, and stay at least until the end of the year. Anju Garg, 7308 Rainbow, No. 2, indicate she was opposed to the project, and said that her son attended Kennedy Jr. High, and did not want to move the children from their schools. She said she agreed with the previous speakers, and that they all were experiencing the same problems. Nam Sook Lee, 7316 Rainbow, No. A, said she had children in Regnart school and wanted to have them remain there with their friends. She said she felt the developers were interested in making money and not concerned with the children's education. Xuedong Wang, 7318 Rainbow, No. C, said that her daughter did not want to leave her friends, and wanted a guarantee that the children could remain in their current schools until they graduated. She noted she was opposed to the project. David Wang, 7308 Rainbow, No. 5, said he has resided in the complex since 1992 and the children were happy there because of the environment. He asked that the children remain in their same schools until graduation. Ying Yu, 7318 Rainbow, No. A, said she was opposed to the project, and agreed with the document read and hoped the new project would be affordable. She said she was also concemed Planning Commission Minutes l0 May 12, 2003 about her two daughters and that they stay in their present schools. She urged the Planning Commission to approve the proposed relocation plan. Michael Krein, 7308 Rainbow, #10, unit 10, said their units had garages, which the proposed project does not have. He said the garages are between the units and provide more privacy. He said it would not be easy to find a replacement unit within 60 days, and asked the Planning Commission to consider expanding the timeframe to 120 days or more. He said the cost impact is going to be about $3000 to $4000 to move; Prometheus has offered $500 and a 60-day timeframe. He said he was opposed to contributing a $3500 tax-like amount to Prometheus; and said he felt Prometheus should bear the financial burden of relocating the tenants. He indicated he was opposed to the project. Peter Azarenok, 7310 Rainbow, No. D, said he attends Kennedy Jr. High and does not want to leave the school because he has friends there. He said his family has moved three times and he womes that he will not be able to remain at Kennedy and then Monta Vista. He said if he moved he would not be able to ride his bike to school and having a bike would be useless. He indicated he was opposed to the project. Tom Dragosavac, 7308 Rainbow, No. A said the document is supported by 34 signatures and would have had more, but the document was drafted only the night before, and time was a factor. He said the enthusiasm and support for the alternate relocation program from the residents is strong enough that people are on board with it; they want it and need it, and he urged the Planning Commission to consider it. He said he learned that three months rent is state required when people are relocated because of the living conditions in substandard housing and they can no longer live there. He said the residents feel that amount is more in line with what they need, which could be a standard for comparison other than the standard followed in Campbell. Relative to the footprint of the project, he suggested that the Planning Commissioners visit the site and look at the one across the street; it may help flush out some of the data that has been passing through people's ears. Ying Yu, 7318 Rainbow, No. A, was opposed to the project, and spoke on behalf of Judy Wu, who is concerned about providing a stable environment for her young children. She asked that the city let the children remain at Regnart school so they wouldn't have to be relocated. Trudi Wallick, 7390 Rainbow, No. 1, said she was opposed to the project, and said her home was behind the proposed project and would be impacted by the construction, and the noise and the dust. She said the apartment residents stayed in the complex for a long time and it was important the children go to the same schools. She said she did not hear anything about meetings or the local neighbors; and would like to remain involved. She asked that she be contacted about the meetings. Vera Scott, 1320 Flower Court, said she has talked to the representatives of Prometheus repeatedly, and has maintained that the density of the project is too over*vhelming. She expressed concern that the setbacks behind her property will only be 10 feet. She said Prometheus reps said they were planning to plant trees such as fern pine which should be fast growing, but with a 10 foot setback it was questionable that the future owners would be able to maintain large trees in their minimal backyards. She said she hoped the setback would be changed to 20 feet. She said they also discussed the windows in the two story houses and was told that the master bedroom would overlook her property; and she was asking that mitigation be required for the second story windows and also require a 20 foot setback along her property line. Planning Commission M~nutes 11 May 12, 2003 Michael Savage, 7308 Rainbow Drive, #12, said he was opposed to the project, and expressed support for the document read earlier and also with some of what Michael Kline said regarding the garage units. He said they were difficult to find especially in the configuration of the garages between the units which provides privacy; the single story unit has no neighbors above or below to disturb residents. He said he felt the move out compensation package was inadequate and urged the Planning Commission to consider the proposed compensation package Ms. Norris presented earlier. Ned Britt, 20850 Peppertree Lane, said he was in favor of the project; and sent an email asking that the hearing be postponed since it was a controversial project, and everyone has spoken against some aspect of it. Since it was not postponed, he asked that the Planning Commission defer action on it to consider some of the proposals submitted and get more public input before action is taken. Robert Levy, 10802 Wilkinson presented an encyclopedia to illustrate that the issue has been a common event in history; history books reference the enclosure acts in England, where property was enclosed and all tenants were moved out so that the landowner could make a greater profit; which he said is the present situation. He said as far as the development itself, if they were tearing down 18 buildings in the Town Center and putting this development in there so there weren't people being relocated in the process, he might be interested in looking at one of the units, since being able to live close enough to shopping, city hall and the library would be desirable. Mr. Levy said that after looking at the plans he had questions such as where the furnaces were located, the emergency access from Poppy has big trees planted in it and was there enough room around the trees for emergency vehicle to get through. He questioned the BMR calculations; that if all tenants moved out tomorrow, and the developers came through and leveled everything, and left it for three years, before they had people moving in, would that then be considered 55 new units being built and consequently 15% of them would have to be BMR? Does the fact they are rebuilding them but not doing it in a cyclic fashion so the present tenants would move into the new ones, mean they are rebuilding at the existing 39 units; which he said did not appear to be the case. Relative to parking, he said it appeared that with single family units, normally the parking requirement is 4 spaces per unit. He said his impression was that there were 2.8 parking spaces per unit, and he wanted to see the place where the City Council said there was no change for BMR in resident units if rebuilding; but he felt it implied an insensitivity of the city and of the developer; and he said for the present tenants, it looks dreadful. He indicated he was neutral on the project. Siu Kung, 1319 Poppy Way, indicated she was opposed to the project, and said she was concerned about the project since they proposed to build 55 units, and that she felt it would be very congested. She illustrated an area that would protrude out; and she also questioned the emergency driveway and whether in the future it would become a regular driveway. She said there would be many children living in the complex, and her children were now on the waiting list for Kennedy Jr. High, and questioned how the city would accommodate that. She said the three story building would also impact her privacy as it would have a view into her house. Mr. Piasecki clarified that it was an emergency access easement which there are no improvements to make for a driveway coming out with this plan; and there would be no incentive on the developer's part to do that; the portion sticking out is because staff is insisting that the applicant preserve those trees. He said he was not certain where the alignment would be, but it will have to be far enough out to save the trees. Relative to the view from Poppy he said the speaker was correct that one would be able to look over the two story single family homes and see the three Planning Commission M~nutes 12 May 12, 2003 story home silhouetted. The street will be remain as it presently is, except that the curb will come back in. In response to Com. Wong's question if a wait list existed for Kennedy Jr. High, Mr. Piasecki said that the city could talk with the school district and communicate the residents' concerns about school attendance for their children, and stress the importance of keeping the children in whatever school they are presently in, to find out if the school district can accommodate those requests; but the city has no control over the issue. Yalan Mao, Whiteflower Court, said she was concerned about privacy issues and agreed with the speaker's view, and would like to have those borderline houses be 20 feet away and also consider the window placement changed for privacy. She said she expressed her concerns at the last meeting and hoped the city would support the residents. Alla Khodorkovskry, 7308 Rainbow, No. 7, said she had daughters in school and did not want to disturb the children by changing schools. She said that she felt $500 in moving costs was not enough, and that the residents did not have a lot of money to absorb the moving costs themselves. Maksim Likharev, 7316 Rainbow, No. B, said he agreed with the concern expressed about changing schools. Barbara Johns, 1272 Poppy Way, spoke in favor of the project, noting that she felt something would go in the lot next door, and hoped for a project similar to the proposed one. She said she felt it was an ideal layout, although she would prefer to have a park included. She said she liked the project and the developers had worked with her to listen to her concerns about the three story buildings, and reduced them to two story, and eliminated the side windows. Dennis Whitaker did not speak. An unidentified female speaker referred to the relocation package and asked what authority the city had relative to the proposal. Mr. Piasecki said he felt the city, ultimately the City Council, would have the authority to establish the reasonable requirements for helping tenants find comparable housing in the area, and relocation assistance; or to send them back to the Housing Commission to figure out what is a reasonable number. He said options for the Planning Commission include asking the applicant if they are willing to take a continuance to answer the first fundamental question if the school district is willing and able to accommodate those students through high school; if they are outside the district, it would be harder, but within the CUSD or FUHSD if the district is able to accommodate that, that seems to answer one fundamental question. Mr. Piasecki emphasized that the city does not have any authority with the school districts, they can only ask them. The applicant can address the issue if they would be willing to sit down and go through these points that were presented to them as well as the city. Some of the other issues were fundamental issues related to the project from surrounding property owners; the impacts are known, the visibilities are known, and they probably present some additional information on setbacks, how much trees are going to be retained, screen out these buildings, there are things they can do to demonstrate whether that is positive or negative. In response to Com. Saadati's request for clarification on the BMR, Mr. Piasecki said the BMR program is very definitive; it states a credit is given for existing units since the impacts have Planning Commission M~nutes 13 May 12, 2003 presumably already been created; the net impact of the development is the net increase in the number of units. If the 15% was applied to the entire project, there would be a disincentive to do any redevelopment of any sites because of the high cost; each BMR unit in this category is probably a subsidy of $.5 million each, hence it is not inexpensive to provide BMR housing units, which are the current rules. He said the applicant has been working under that number; and staff has asked they increase it to 20% in deference to the policy in the current General Plan; that goes from 2 to 3 units, which amounts to $.5 million to provide that additional unit. Relative to the question if the existing project was demolished entirely and lay fallow for a couple of years, he said he would refer to the BMR manual to see how it is handled. He said there may be a certain amount of time given for credit for existing units. In response to Com. Saadati's question if it had been applied to other development, Mr. Piasecki recalled the small project on Rodriguez with two existing houses that received credit for both from the BMR and also from the standpoint of the park dedication fees, another fee that is credited based on the existing units. He said it was not a frequent occurrence. He noted that there was another possibility of the Villa Serra apartments doing something similar, the owner has withdrawn that request temporarily, and that would be lreated the same. Mr. Piasecki said that a previous speaker's reference to the state requirements for three months of rent subsidy, was applicable to when low income tenants are forced to require to leave a deficient unit in terms of livability standards. He said he was not familiar with that standard, and would investigate it further. Chair Chen closed the public input portion of the meeting. Com. Saadati said he understood the concerns raised about the schools and noted the school session is ending in approximately a month. He said he felt it would be appropriate to continue the item and address some other issues and find a middle ground. He said he also had two children and said the impact on the children is the important thing to consider when considering moving. The community has stressed a lot of emphasis on the impacts, yet the developer has rights also. Com. Saadati said the development is pleasing, denser, has for sale and for rent housing which is consistent with what the developers are encouraged to provide. He said he was hopeful that continuing the item would allow time to resolve many of the issues. Com. Corr said that staff was correct that the Planning Commission and city does not have control over the school districts; there are two different school districts to deal with and operate independently from one another. He encouraged communication with the school districts to see the project goes forward, and if some consideration could be g/yen to those parents of the students to continue to attend the schools they would like to attend. He said he also felt that depending on where a family ends up living, it will have a greater impact on what school they want to go to than just the particular channel they are in right now. Because if you move far away; it isn't convenient to go to school clear across town; you would i-ather go to school in the neighborhood where you are and where your friends and neighbors are going; which is what they are doing today, so it would be wonderful if all these families would be able to relocate within the attendance area they are in. There are not a lot of apartment units in the Regnart attendance area but the people in this community in that area tend to want to get into that channel taking them through Kennedy to Monta Vista High School and there are a number of options that would allow them to do that. He said the comments heard related to the tenants, the existing conditions and the relocation problem, not to the project itself. Some people spoke against the project in terms of the 10 foot setbacks, but otherwise felt the project was an attractive looking project. However, there appears to be a Planning Commission Minutes 14 May 12, 2003 perceived problem regarding communication with the residents and their just being brought into the discussion. He noted that there have been meetings with the Housing Commission and a number of discussions about how to work out a relocation plan, but they didn't involve the people who were involved, but involved those at other levels. Com. Con: said he supported the notion to take more time to work with the community of people to talk about what the provisions of the relocation plan would be. The BIvlR discussion was accurate; those are the rules, and although he would like to see more units, he would support it. Relative to the parking issue, there has been discussion that when there is planned development or mixed use development, there is no particular updated parking ordinance for that. There is a need for one and he said they should move in that direction. Com. Con: addressed the issue of the pedestrian access, stating that the street could logically go through the development and would be like any other neighborhood in the city with a street passing through, with people walking up and down the street. He said there is a problem if it is considered an enclave and does not go in there. He said he supported the plan as proposed. In terms of the comment about the village green, he said the .61 acres is open space and not large enough to consider a park. Com. Con: said that in conclusion he supported what was happening, but felt more time was needed to work with the community and work out some of the issues. Com. Wong said he was in favor of continuing the item; and expressed his appreciation to the applicant and the public for providing their input. He said it was clear there is a concern about the schools and relocation plan. He said the project itself is well designed, and he felt that they could work with CUSD and FUHSD and see if they could accommodate the 24 elementary school students and the 6 high school students. He said he understood the residents' feelings as he had a daughter who would eventually attcmd Cupertino Middle School and Homestead High. Relative to the parking, he said he concurred with Com. Con: that there should be a policy regarding parking in planned developments and mixed use developments. He said he felt that for three and four bedroom units there would be at least two or three cars, and 2.8 was not practical, and would be pleased if more spaces were added. Relative to tenant relocation, it is a difficult situation and he said he understood why the applicant waited until the last minute because having to be relocated is a very touchy subject. Now that the residents are aware, he said it would be beneficial to have them provide their input to the Housing Commission because their lives are being affected and they disagree with the current relocation plan. He said he hoped they would send e-mails and send more suggestions to city staff and suggest ways to improve it. Relative to the BMR, the plans are already set, and although he wished it could be changed, an entire complex is being demolished and building a brand new one, and even though the applicant bumped it up to three, he said he still found it difficult. He said he differed from staff relative to emergency vehicle access; if emergency access is needed, that is fine. Pedestrian access should be closed off at it is private property. Com. Wong urged the applicant to work with the residc~nts on Wildflower and Poppy as well to address their concerns. He said he was moved by the public input and understood their concerns, especially the student Peter from Kennedy Middle School. Com. Miller said he supported a continuance of the item, since there were many unresolved issues that need to be resolved before moving forward. He said the overriding issue is what happens with the relocation plan and where people go. Kennedy Middle is a problem, which is why they are dividing the district up, hopefully relative to the elementary school and the high school. He said he concurred with other Planning Commissioners' comments; it is unfortunate that the meetings did not take place sooner with the residents since it is clear that these issues might have been solved sooner. He said the project was a well designed project and he liked the architecture; the circulation flows very well, and given that it is tight space, it still has lots of landscaping and open space and the design of the buildings are such that you don't feel closed in. Relative to the Planning Commission Minutes 15 May 12, 2003 pedestrian access, he said he was unsure since he understood the walkability issue, but felt it would not be a major effort to go around the project to get from one side to the other and it is not clear why people would want to walk though the project in the first place. Com. Miller said he was also sensitive to Com. Wong's comment that it is private property, which was not the same as a single family neighborhood where the streets are not private property, but are public property. He said he was in favor of the project, and relative to the concept, would like the applicants to work with the residents more and with staff in terms of resolving some of the issues. Chair Chan said she liked the project, which was well designed, and also provides the BMR units the community needs and also increases the number of houses. She said she welcomed the project to Cupertino. She expressed concern about the pedestrian path being open to the public, noting that it was private property and there would be a liability issue. She said she was also concerned about the school issue and the setbacks which should be addressed as well. Chair Chen said she supported continuing the item to allow the applicant time to work on outreach solutions. Com. Con' said that following Up on Com. Miller's comments about the involvement of the community, he felt the developer should be commended. Some issues have come up where the residents said they didn't know what was going on, and Com. Miller made the comment that this is an incomplete process and the last group has just been involved and more time is needed for that. He said the applicant has been a good job in involving the greater community, but that it is just not finished yet. Com. Miller said he was not implying that the applicants had not done a adequate job on outreach to the community at large, but he was aware that it took place, and he concurred with Com. Corr relative to the issue. He said it was unfortunate that for whatever reasons, the residents weren't involved sooner. Mr. Moss said he was agreeable to continuing the item to address the issues further. Relative to the school issues, he said the relocation plan could be revisited as well. He said he preferred if possible to segregate those two issues from the issue of the project relative to the site plan, architecture, density and other typical issues and have them reviewed at another meeting, and vote on the other issues this evening. The school and relocation issues could be discussed at another meeting. Mr. Piasecki said the fundamental other issue is the setback issue, which needs further study. The suggestion discussed is a radical change to the plan and requires certain removal of the driveway and the concurrence of the fire department. If the applicant also wishes to remove the pedestrian connection, it should be taken out and staff would recommend denial of the whole project on that basis. He said he had a problem with developments like this, if pedestrian access through there can be provided, if it is intended to create enclaves, staff would rather put public streets in these situations so that people feel more comfortable with the conventional public street access arrangement. He said staff is flexible and tries to accommodate the project and then they want to be turned into an enclave and he said he felt it is not good for integrated projects with the surrounding fabric of the neighborhood. Mr. Piasecki said he felt strongly about it but was not opposed to putting hours through which one can walk through there, such as daylight hours only which is what is done for parks in some cases; but to completely eliminate it would be the wrong thing to do. He said staff would recommend denial of the project in that case. He said he would like the opportunity to go back and restudy the setback issue. Planning Commission Minutes 16 May 12, 2003 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Com. Wong moved to continue the application to May 27, 2003 Planning Commission meeting Com. Corr Passed 5-0-0 OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: None REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Environmental Review Committee: No meeting held since the last report. Housing Committee: No meeting held since the last report. Mayor's Breakfast:. Chair Chen said she would attend the May 204 meeting. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Mr. Piasecki reminded those present of the joint study session with thc City Council on Monday, May 19th at 5:00 p.m. DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: None ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. to the joint study session with City Council on Monday, May 19t~ at 5:00 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Elizabeth Ellis Recording Secretary Planning Commission M~nutes 3 May 27, 2003 PUBLIC HEARING Chen moved the agenda to Item 5. CP-2003 -01, EA-2003 -02 City Citywide Planning Continued from Plannit consistency with the General Plan tppealed fMay 12, Staff presentation: Mr. plan for 2003-04 and completing the modifications. Stevens Creek Boulevards. $1.2 million is general fund money, million, approximately $1 million is streets which is the annual maintained because it covers maintenance of effort that he management funds that would cit3 Public Works i said that the capital improvement ects under such as the library, civic center sports c and civic park at the comer of DeAnza and $3 million of which being grants or special funds. Of the $1.2 management program which is listed under 9400 seals done on city streets each year. It has been the year, and more importantly it is a for T21 funds and other types of payment · .5 times their ability to do that work. Chair Chen opened the no one present who wished to speak. MOTION: Com. moved that Applications with the General Plan for five, and EA 2003-02 were in Improvement Program SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Wong Com. Saadati Passed 4-0-0 genda back to Item 4. Application Nos.: Applicant: Location: TM-2003 -0 I, U-2003 -02, Z-2003-01, EA-2003 -03 Saron Gardens, LLC 7310 Rainbow Drive, A-E Tentative Map to subdivide a 4.03 acre parcel into 55 residential parcels and one common parcel. Use Permit to construct 55 single family residences and site improvements on a 4.03 acre parcel Zoning to rezone a 4.03 parcel from (PR3) to P(Res) Continued from Planning Commission meeting of May 12, 2003 Tentative City Council date: June 16, 2003 Staff presentation: Mr. Gary Chao, Assistant Planner, reviewed the background of the application and said that relative to the relocation program, staff received a letter and a revised relocation plan from the Saron Gardens resident association, stating that the residents did not support the relocation program presented to them at the residents' meeting on May 22nd. Mr. Chao reviewed the major changes in the revised relocation plan which was distributed. He reported that Planning Commission Minutes 4 May 27, 2003 Prometheus will now provide a garbage dumpster to facilitate the disposal of residents' debris from their property; and the relocation allowance has been increased to a lump sum for each resident equal to three times the monthly rent being paid at the time of relocation. Staff has reviewed the revised relocation plan and recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the revised relocation plan dated May 22nd as part of the project. Relative to the concerns about the setbacks, the applicant has revised the site plan to allow two of the end units to have 20 feet side yard setbacks instead of 10 feet originally proposed. Mr. Chao reviewed the revised site plan; school impacts and meetings with the school districts; and pedestrian path as outlined in the staff report. Mr. Chao clarified that the school districts could only accommodate students that live in Saron Gardens past December 2003, and only applies to elementary students and high school seniors; not Kennedy Jr. High students because it is over capacity at present. He said that the tenants will receive a refund of their deposit and the three months rent at the time they check their keys out. Com. Corr suggested that the residents be given the names of contact persons in both school districts to contact relative to the school attendance issues. Mr. John Moss, Prometheus, said that they revised the relocation plan in response to the residents' input. He reviewed the changes in the relocation plan. One change was the removal of the condition that the tenant would have to relocate within the County of Santa Clara; now the tenant can move anywhere and still have the benefit. Prometheus also removed the condition that the tenant could only receive the assistance if they moved to another rental property where the rent was greater than the present rent; the tenant can now move to a lower rent and still get relocation assistance. The monetary assistance was originally going to be spread over several months; that has been changed to one lump sum at the time the tenant moves out of the apartment. The 60 day notice provision has also been eliminated; as soon as Prometheus becomes the owner of the property, the residents would be entitled to the benefits at any time they would move out. Relative to the school issue, Mr. Moss said that the applicants had been proactive to set up a meeting with both school districts, their preference was to be able to grandfather in the schools that the residents' children are attending now throughout their tenure; however, the school districts clearly communicated their position on the subject. Mr. Moss said that was understandable from his viewpoint, given the fact that they have people coming to them on a daily basis with the same type of request. He said they provided a list of available apartments with a list of schools associated with each rental property. He reiterated that all the schools in Cupertino were excellent schools. He said relative to the parking issue, they looked at trying to create as much parking as possible, resulting in a net increase of 2 parking stalls by eliminating the road shown before; noting that the only reason the road was there before was the assumption it was needed for fire access; and after meeting with the fire department, it is not an absolute requirement of the fire department. Relative to the setback issue, Mr. Moss said they met with the neighbor most impacted, and the change was favorably received by the neighbor. The pedestrian path was discussed before, and given the concerns stated in the staff report, the pedestrian path is an acceptable part of the application. Mr. Moss said he felt they had reasonably addressed all of the issues. The neighbors they met with over the last 8 months have created a number of changes shared previously, and he said he still felt the majority of the neighbors were either neutral regarding the project or were in favor of the project. Mr. Moss said that the new tenants would be informed what the plans for the redevelopment are, and would not be eligible for the relocation program. The prospective tenant would make the decision as to whether they would want to move in under those circumstances. Planning Commission Minutes 5 May 27, 2003 Com. Wong referred to Page 4-7, stoop height of unit type D, and asked for feedback on the concem of the design issue. Mr. Chao said that Unit Type D, as it appears, is higher than other unit types, and if one is standing at grade level, it is at head level; therefore staff is suggesting a condition that the applicant revisit the design of those units and in particular all the Unit Type Ds to see if they can lower it to a more pedestrian friendly height, so that the first thing seen is not like the top of the landing on the entry landing. Mr. Piasecki said that the applicant believes they can accommodate that. Mr. David Johnson, Christiani Johnson Architects, said that the height was set at 6 feet for some internal planning reasons, but there is no practical obstruction to lowering the height to be more in keeping with the other units and they would work with staff to find a height they are comfortable with. Chair Chen opened the meeting for public input. Mr. Dennis Whitaker, 20622 Cheryl Drive, asked if the heights were still 36 feet from the base, and what the per-acre density was. Mr. Piasecki said the density was 13.6. Mr. Whitaker said the biggest concern he had was not with the developers and the plans, but with the Planning Commission and City Council and their quest to retain as much BMR as possible. He said he felt that the primary reason for the families with children living in that area is to stay within the specific school system they selected. He said he hoped that the city government would show the concerns and consistencies with all the developments and the BMRs by giving decent considerations prior to displacing the families and make certain that those families desiring to stay in the specific elementary middle school and high schools would be able to. He said those not concerning themselves with staying in the specific areas should not face financial burdens now or in the future for being forced to relocate. He said he felt the developers had done a good job in offering the financial assistance. Relative to the BMR program, he questioned if people in the future are forced to relocate from a development, would they be able to become a top priority on the waiting list for BMR housing, to specifically stay in the school districts where they are at. He reiterated that all five schools in the high school district were top schools, but noted that some had a higher ratio of students going on to college. He urged the efforts to continue toward allowing the students to stay in the school they are attending. Ms. Trudy Wallick, 7390 Rainbow Dr.,/ti, reiterated Mr. Whitaker's remarks. She questioned the grading as she resided behind the apartments, so that the people behind won't get swamped with more water. She encouraged more dialogue with the school districts about displacing the children since the residents were being forced to move out of their apartments. Mr. Piasecki said that the speaker could talk with the applicant's architect regarding the grading. He said they would have to meet all the normal standards, and would not be able to drain across the neighbor's property. Mr. Tom Dragosavac, 7308 Rainbow Drive, #A, said he was speaking on behalf of the resident association, and thanked Prometheus for responding to the residents' revised relocation plan they submitted for consideration. He commented that since there was no letterhead or signature on the printout from Prometheus, the residents questioned what guarantee they had. He said he has assured those concerned that he would make certain that the version of the plan included as a condition of the permits is identical to the version the residents had in their possession. Mr. Dragosavac said there was also concern about the date that the property would change hands; Mr. Moss indicated that the property would change hands 30 days after City Council approval. Planning Commission Mtnutes 6 May 27, 2003 Regarding the schools, he said he was hopeful that the Planning Commission and City Council level of concern would be strong on the residents' behalf with the school districts, since the school districts would respond to high levels of concern expressed by their fellow institutions. He said on his own behalf he was expressing concern about a comment made weeks earlier about the Planning Commission's remarks that they were grateful to Prometheus for providing owner occupied housing in order to displace rental housing. He said all the people living in rental housing in Cupertino should be informed if it is a policy to eliminate their residences in the long term and invite developers to eliminate rental housing in favor of owner occupied. He said it becomes a political question, and when the demolition of owner occupied housing is used as an excuse to no longer build the BMRs that someone said should be built, it compounds the problem of affordable housing. He said it did not make sense that affordable housing is being eliminated and less affordable housing is being provided, because the affordable housing is being eliminated. Ms. Rae Stevenson Norris, 7314 Rainbow Dr., #C, requested assurance as a condition of issuing building permits to Prometheus that the City Council certify that Prometheus has fulfilled all of the conditions listed in their relocation plan. She said that relative to the district agreements for Regnart and Kennedy students, during the next school year the Saron Gardens complex in Cupertino in the Regnart and Kennedy school area is being tom down to make way for construction of houses on the property. The residents of Saron Gardens are being forced to move out. She said it is very difficult to find a new apartment in the Regnart/Kennedy area; not many complexes exist and these have very low vacancy rates. There are 13 children in this apartment complex attending Regnart Elementary School, ranging from the first to the fifth grade, and three children that attend Kennedy middle school and plan to attend Monta Vista in the next year. She said they are asking that their families be given passes and continue to attend those schools; as well as the four children in the complex who attend Monta Vista and three children who attend currently Kennedy Middle School and plan to attend Monta Vista in the next year if they rent an apartment anywhere in the two districts. She asked for the support of the city officials for this request and said she hoped to meet on this matter with the city and the district officials in the very near future. Ms. Tatiana Azarenok, 7310 Rainbow Dr., #D, said that many concerns had been discussed at the city hall meeting two weeks ago about new relocation plans, school problems, etc. She said she had planned to stay in the complex because of the excellent schools. She said the complex was well maintained and well managed, and 16 units have garages which are hard to find. She said she felt the property was not a good location for 55 new homes because of the high density, and she felt that destroying the buildings and forcing 40 families to move out was not a well thought out plan. She said Cupertino had a lot of empty spaces that remain undeveloped for many years. She invited those present to find time to visit Saron Gardens and then consider if it is a good idea, and is it really necessary for the city or for adjacent neighborhoods. Ms. Khushroo Shaikh, 11640 Wildflower Ct., said she lived next to the development and said she was most impacted by the development. She said she discussed her privacy concerns with Prometheus and she was pleased with their approach and that they were willing to work with her on the problems. They have revised the plans to allow privacy in her bedroom and not have the house so close to hers. She said the plan was a good plan and would be an asset to the neighborhood and to Cupertino. She said she had a concern about allowing a pathway through the property and said if it was necessary to have a gate at the pathway so that people are not lingering in the area. Planning Connnission Minutes 7 May 27, 2003 Chair Chen asked staff for clarification on the request for the relocation plan being part of the permit. Mr. Piasecki said that the applicant has to demonstrate that they met the conditions of approval that must be met prior to the issuance of building permits, and the relocation plan would be one of those conditions staff would evaluate. He said it is possible that they may be in a situation where they are requesting permits and they have one or two remaining tenants who have set dates when they will be relocating, and staff would hold those permits until they have successfully relocated those tenants or paid the three times rent that has been discussed. The city will follow through on the conditions of approval. He said the building permit process is a public process and the public can review the records. In response to Com. Corr's and Com. Wong's questions, Mr. Piasecki noted that the date referred to in Condition 14 should be changed to May 22 and would be reflected in the model resolution. He said that the names of the contact persons at the school districts would be made available to the residents. Mr. Piasecki said that the pathway would be lighted. Mr. Chao noted that the lighting of the pathway issue is part of the condition of approval. Mr. Moss clarified that the contract with the owner of the property allows the applicant to close 30 days after the approval should there be approval by the City Council. Mr. Piasecki clarified that there was a rezoning action taking place which calls for a second reading by the City Council and then the rezoning doesn't become effective for 30 days after that. Depending on how their contract is worded or what level of assurance they have from the first reading, second reading and the 30 days, they want to start that clock at a different time period. Mr. Moss said that the relocation plan would become effective when Prometheus takes possession and ownership of the property, potentially 30 days and 2 weeks (for second reading) after the City Council meeting of June 16t~. In response to Com. Miller's request for clarification on the BMR program, Mr. Piasecki said there was no provision currently in the BMR program manual that would make an exception for the case. He said they could pass the comment to the Housing Commission the next time they address the BMR program and can relay it to the City Council when this item comes up to them. Should the Council wish to consider such a change, there is a waiting list for the BMR housing and that would have to be considered. Relative to the school district issue, Com. Miller said that there would be a time lag between when the residents move out and when units are available for new residents and new children to move in and replace them in the school district, and it would be up to a year or 18 months. Perhaps the school district might have some flexibility given the fact that they are not going to be overburdened by additional children by allowing the present children to continue to stay for some period of time, until the new units at a minimum are filled. Com. Miller referred to the earlier comment from a speaker that the Planning Commission had stated a preference for units for sale vs. rental units. He said that he did not make such a comment, and felt that the city needs a good combination of rental units and for sale units and he said he felt there was not an intent to get rid of rental units and add for sale units. He said it was important that the city has an appropriate mix of both rental and for sale units. Com. Miller said he was pleased and impressed with the level of community outreach that the applicant has accomplished. The community and the stakeholders have participated at a professional level and come to a reasonable solution given circumstances and everyone's position. Planning Commission Minutes 8 May 27, 2003 He said he felt the project was a good project and would be an asset to the city; and said the loss of some rental units was unfortunate, but those issues happen as a function of the marketplace more than a function of direction by the City Council, Planning Commission or staff. Mr. Chao referred to Condition 4, relative to decorative pavers. He said that the applicant was concerned with the interlocking paver requirement for economic impact reasons. The interlocking pavers are more environmentally friendly, and it is the city's objective to maximize onsite storm drainage retention. If appropriate and approved by the Planning Commission, the condition could be revised to state that either interlocking pavers or other special pavement materials that looks like or feels like pavers with water permeability shall be used and to be approved by the Design Review Committee. Mr. Piasecki said that the issues were the aesthetic issue, wherein the interlocking pavers have texture not available with stamped concrete; what the staff is interested in is the aesthetic issue and the permeability issue. It is problematic to put pavers on sand on driveways because the first heavy truck that goes over it impacts it and it cannot be compacted enough. Staff feels that stamped concrete could be utilized, but some level of water permeability is needed, such as drains or holes drilled into the structure. Staff suggests the wording in the last line "...interlocking pavers, or other material that looks like interlocking pavers, with water permeability." Com. Wong said that he supported the project. Relative to the comment about rental vs. for sale units, he said in his nearly one year on the Planning Commission the project has been one of the hardest decisions he has made, since it will displace 39 residents. Regarding rental units, being a property manager, he said it was private property and they own the piece of property which the residents are renting. He said he has been to Saron Gardens many times and feels that it is a rough jewel in Cupertino that needs a lot of work; and said for the age of the building the tenants are paying market rate rent for that type of building; and it is located in a nice neighborhood. Com. Wong said he felt that the applicant worked hard with the residents to provide a good relocation package; and did a fine job in removing many of the clauses and also working with the letter given two weeks ago. He said Prometheus gave a lot and satisfied many of his concerns. Relative to the school issue, he said he requested the grandfathering of the children and the applicant made a good effort with staff to talk with both CUSD and FUHSD. He reiterated that all of the city's schools were excellent and it is the parent's choice that they want a particular school; if the tenants are relocated the applicant with do their best to see if the children can be relocated in the schools as well. Regarding the parking issue, he said he appreciated staff and the applicant trying to get two more spaces. He said his previous comments regarding the pathway remained the same; he said he was in favor of lighting on the pathway to address the safety and security issues. Relative to design, he said for a tight space they had a lower density compared to what they could have proposed. They could have also put in for rent and for sale apartments and increased the density. He said he would like to see the letter as a condition of approval to guarantee it. Com. Miller said he supported the project as his previous comments indicated. Com. Con' said that there were four issues remaining from previous meetings: the relocation plan, the setbacks, the school impacts and the pedestrian path. He said he was pleased that the issues were resolved and the application was presented back to the Commission within the two week time period. He said he wished there was a better resolution to the school issue; everybody really gets involved in the schools their children attend, and they want to stay there which is understandable; however, it is not in the purview of the city to make that decision. By working with Prometheus and getting the names of the people in the districts to talk to, hopefully it may help with the issue. Relative to the issue of the for sale and rental units, he said a number of rental Planning Commission M~nutes 9 May 27, 2003 properties have come through lately, and the Planning Commission is then questioned about approving all the rental units, and asked why not have more for sale units. From that standpoint, the Planning Commission is pleased to see one come through, but it was not fi.om the standpoint of saying they do not want to have rental housing in Cupertino, as it is crucial to Cupertino. Chair Chon said she concurred with the other commissioners that the project was a very well planned project; and was pleased that all the issues were resolved in such a short period. She said she concurred with the change staff proposed to give flexibility to the applicants when it is time to build the project. Chair Chen said she strongly supported Com. Corr's suggestion to provide the school contact persons to the tenants; and also to change the date to May 22nd on Condition 14 for the tenant relocation program. MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: VOTE: Com. Miller moved approval of Application U-2003-02, Z-2003-01, EA-2003-03 and TM-2003-01 in accordance with the model resolution and the suggested changes. Com. Corr Com. Saadati Passed 4-0-0 Application Nos.: Applicant: EXC-2003-01 Li-Sheng Fu APN 342-22-045 Road Hillside Planning to construct a 4,245 for tandem parking decision residence on slopes greater than 30% and a ~ 12, 2003 Staff presentation: Mr. for the hillside exception vacant lot, as outlined in Preservation of the building and roof Geologic conditions; activities plan. Senior Planner, reviewed the background of the application of a 3,210 square foot residence on an existing He reviewed the following project issues: (1) the area; (2) Design of the project, including setbacks, simple · ' wall heights; (3) Privacy landscaping needs; (4) (6) (7) Storm drainage; and (8) Construction : site plan, second floor plan, elevations and landscape negative declaration and the hillside exception. was condition possible flows and of Mercedes Road during construction He also noted covered. Mr. Jung said that there was a not impeding Mercedes Road. to the drainage issue, he said that a was to install a french drain at of the driveway, which captures the drainage inlet that could conve' drainage swale. Page 6-10, Condition 10, contained verbiage that emergency access along Road shall not be impeded. referred to the drainage, and said it was his g that drainage before was the same as after construction. Ms. Wordell said that it was not yet a legal ADAC Laboratories 5/23/03 10:20 PAGE 1/10 RiEhtFAX To: Cupertino Planning Commission From: Saron Gardens Resident Association Re: Prometheus' revised Resident Relocation Plan Date: May 22, 2003 We, representing the Saron Gardens Resident Association, want to express our appreciation and support for the new revised Resident Relocation Program pres~ated by us by Prometheus today, 5/222/03. A copy is attached. We hope you will include this exact plan as a condition of project approval. We are yet to be included in discussion regarding our children's schooling. As an Association we will be looking to meet soon with city officials and represenfatives of the school district to discuss ou~ children's future in the Cupertino schools. Sincerely, MAY ~ 7 2003 LCL2.::- . ....... ADAC L&bora%ories 5/23/0B lO:ZO ~A~ z/±u ~gnLr~a Resident Relocation Program For Saron Gardens Redevelopment May 22, 2003 Prometheus is seekin4?, approval to redevelop the existing Saron .Cmrdens Apartments into 55 detached single-family homes. Saron Gardens Apartments includes nine apartment buildings, one house, on-grade parking, a swimming pool and a small open apace. There are 39 apartments and 1 single-family house on the property. prometheus values its residents and wants to keep them informed about the proposed project. In order to make the transition as smooth as possible for the residents, Prometheus has prepared tl~s Resident Relocation Program. The Program includes the elements explained below. Resident Relations Manager Prometheus will have a Resident Relations Manager on-site prior to the start of construction to work with and assist the residents during the relocation period. The Resident Relations Manager will be able to proactively work closely with residents to provide information and quickly respond to resident issues. Informational resources such as apartment listings, moving company listings, and information on how to qualify for BMR units will be made available to reii'dents. Prometheus greatly values it customers and wants to make sure their needs are met and their issues are resolved. Notification Prometheus will meet with residents prior to completing the entitlement process to provide an overview of thc project plans and timeline. Prometheus also plans on communicating with residents regularly regarding the specific derails vf &e proposed project after the entitlement process. During this early notification process, the Resident Relations Manager will work closely with residents to provide specific information about other apa~ tments in the area, moving supplies, track rental, moving companies, and storage facilities. This early notification will allow residents to prepare and be organized for their relocation. In order to provide residents adequate time to f'md alternative housing, Prometheus will notify each resident with at least 60 days notice in advance of the required move out date. ADAC L&bor&toFies 5/23/03 10:20 PAG~ ~/IO ~iEntm^x Refund De op..9_~ Prometheus wants to refund security deposits to residents as quickly as possible. A check for the security deposit will be available at the leasing office on the scheduled move-out date. Prometheus will refund security deposits at the time of move-out, provided the fo~towim, criteria are met: rent must be current and the apartmen_.t must be vacated on or be'~ore th~ scheduled move-out date. In addition, all personal belongings and debris must be removed from the property and fixtures of the apartment shall not be removed. Prometheus will be reasonable in its evaluation of resideut's compliance with these provisions. Provided the previous criteria arc meti the deposit check will be given to thc resident when they return their keys to the leasing office, as opposed to being mailed within 21 days. In addition, if'the previous critcrla are met, Prometheus will waive cleaning charges. Dumpsters will be provided to facilitate the disposal ofresident's debris from the property. These dumpsters shall not be used for the disposal of any items for non- residents of Saron Gardens. Relocation Allowance At move-out, each resident will be provided with a lump sum relocation allowance equal to three times the monthly rent being paid by that resident at the time of relocation. All residents that move out within the timeframe defined in this relocation program and after the date that Prometheus acquires Saron Gardens Apartments are entitled to this relocation allowance. The only conditions on receiving this allowance are those stated in this Resident Relocation Plan. Disoute Re_.~s0Jtltj_og In the event that a dispute arises regarding the implementation of this program, the dispute shall be resolved through mediation. The City of Cupertino and Prometheus will mutually agree upon the selection of the mediator. ADAC Laboratories 5/23/03 10:20 PAGh ~/10 ~ight~AK SAP. ON GARDENS RESIDENT ASSOCIATION We, the undersigned, hereby associate together under the name of Saron Gardens Resident Associatioa for the following purposes: 1. To maintain and improve the quality of life at Saron ~ardens 2. To secure a decent and helpful relocation_assis .mn.ce pack,,a.g, al_ °,,n_.g.~..e, lines ~ -- "a" 12 to the pl.nnlng cormmsmon aha ~J .~.oun~u we prOpOse~ on1¥1 ~ - · . · 3. T~ secure for our children in t]{¢ public schools the n~ht to continue ,- th¢~ present schools and syst~ until ~raduntion, without being deprived of this by a forced relocation for de¥¢]opment purposes. To fa¢ilitale the fulfillment of goals number 2 and 3 abo¥¢, v~ appoint a steering committee of the following six residents to spemk ~nd act on our behalf with sll psrtiem conc~ned. 1. Tati~na Az~cnok, 7310 #D, 996-3216 2. Tom Dragosavac; 7308 #A, 777-0194 3. 3ohn Gtmrino, 7308 #15,253-6493 4. Pu~e Norris, 7314 #C, 252-1193 5. Michael Savage 7308 #12, 253-6493 6. Ying Yu, 7318 #A, 366-0461 ADAC L&bor&torios 5/23/03 10:20 PAGE 5/10 Right~'AX SARON GARDENS RESIDENT ASSOCIATION We, the undersigned, hereby associate together under the name of Saron Gardens Resident Association for the following purposes: 1. To maintain and improve the quality of life at Saxon Gardens 2. To secure a decent and helpful relocation assistance package along the lines we proposed on May 12 to the Planning Commission and City Council 3. To secure for our children in the public schools the right to continue in their present schools and system until graduation, without being deprived of this by a forced relocation for development purposes. To facilitate the fulfillment of goals number 2 and 3 above, we appoint a steering committee of the following six residents to speak and act on our behalf with all parties concemed. 1. Tafiana Az~¢nok, 7310 #D, 996-321 2. Tom Dragosava¢, 7308 #A, 777-0194 · 3. John Gua~no, 7308 ~15,~ qq[' 4. Rae No~s, 7314 ~C, 252-1193 5. Michael Savage 7308 ~12, 253-6493 6. Ying Yu, 7318 ~A, 366-0461 ADAC Lmboratorie~ 5/23/0B 10:20 PA6h U/lO SARON GAR.DENS RESIDENT ASSOCIATION We, the undersigned, hereby associate togcther under the name of Saxon Gardens Resident Association for the following purposes: 1. To maintain and improve the quality of life at Saxon Gardens 2. To secure a decent and helpful relocation assistance package along the lines we proposed on May 12 to the Planning Commission and City Council 3. To secure for our children in the public schools the fight to continue in their present schools and system until graduation, without being deprived of this by a forced relocation for development purposes. To facilitate the fulfillment of goals number 2 and 3 above, we appoint a steering committee of the following six residents to speak and act on our behalf with all parties concerned. 1. Tatiana Azarenok, 7310 #D, 996-3216 2. Tom Dmgosavac, 7308 #A, 777-0194 3. John Ouarino, 7308 #15, ~a3-6495 qqG 4. Rae Norris, 7314 #C, 252-1193 5. Michael Savage 7308 #12, 253-6493 ' 6. Ying Yu, 7318 #A, 366-0461 5, ¢.~,~,- ctV, L.',,, lO. ._ td~~. ~4~ ~,-~¢~_'. .... ADAC Laboratories 5/23/03 i0:20 PAG~ '//lo SARON GARDENS RESIDENT ASSOCIATION We, the undersigned, hereby associate together under the name of Saron Gardens Resident Association for the following purposes: 1. To maintain and improve the quality of life at Saron Gardens 2. To secure a decent and helpful relocation assistance package along the lines we proposed on May 12 to the Planning Commission and City Council 3. T~ secure for our children in the public schools the right to continue in their present schools and system until graduation, without being deprived of this by a forced relocation for development purposes. To facilitate the fulfillment of goals number 2 and 3 above, we appoint a steering committee oftbe following six residents to speak and act on our behaif with all parties concerned. I. Tatiana Azarenok, 7310 #D, 996-3216 2. Tom Dragosavac, 7308 #A, 777-0194 3. John Ouarino, 7308 #15,253-6493 4. RaeNords, 7314 #C, 252-1193 5. Michael Savage 7308 #12, 253-6493 6. Ying Yu, 7318 #A, 366-0461 10. ADAC Laboratories SARON GARDENS RESIDENT ASSOCIATION We, the undersigned, hereby associate together under the name of Saron Gardens Resident Association for the following purposes: 1. To maintain and improve thc quality of life at Saron Gardens 2. To secure a decent and helpful relocation assistance package along the lines we proposed on May 12 to the Planning Commission and City Council 3. To secuxe for our children in the public schools the right to continue in their-. present schools and system until graduation, without being deprived of this by a forced relocation for development purposes. To facilitate the fulfillment of goals number 2 and 3 above, we appoint a steering committee of the following six resideats to speak and act on our behalf with all parties concemed. 1. 2. Tatiana Azarenok, 7310 #D, 996-3216 Tom Dragosavac, 7308 gA, 777-0194 3. John Guadno, 7308 #15,~ -4. Kae Norris, 7314 #C, 252-1193 5. Michael Savage 7308 #12, 253-6493 6. YingYu, 7318 #A, 366-0461 10: ADAC Labor&torios 5/23/03 lO:ZO SAI{ON GARDENS R.ESIDENT ASSOCIATION We, the undersigned, hereby associate together under the name of Saron Gardens Resident Association for the following purposes: 1. To maimain and improve the quality of life at Satori Gardens 2. To secoxe a decent and helpful relocation assistance package along the lines we proposed on May 12 to the Planning Commission and City Council 3. To secure for our children in the public schools the right to continue in their present schools and system until graduation, without being deprived of this by a fomed relocation for development purposes. To facilitate the fulfillment of goals number 2 and 3 above, we appoint a steering committee of the following six residents to speak and act or. our behalf with all parties concerned. 1. Tatiana Azarenok, 7310 #D, 996-3216 2. Tom Dragosavac, 7308 gA, 777-0194 3. John Guarino, 7308 #15, ~ qq 6- -~¢s ~ 4. Rae Norris, 7314 #C, 252-1193 5. Michael Savage 7308 #12, 253-6493 6. Ying Yu, 7318 #A, 366-0461 10. ADAC L&bor&tori~8 ~/z~/o~ lo;zo PAO~ ±o/lo ~gnzr^A SARON GARDENS RESIDENT ASSOCIATION We, the undersigned, hereby a~so¢iate together under thc name of Saroa Gardens Resident Association for the following purposes: 1. To maintain and improve the quality of life at Satori Gardens 2. To secure a decent and helpful relocation assistance package along the lines we proposed on May 12 to the Planning Comrrdssion and City Council 3. To secure for our children in the public schools the fight to continue in their present schools and system until graduation, without being deprived of tiffs by a forced relocation for development purposes. To facilitate the fulfillment of goals number 2 and 3 above, we appoint a steering committee of the following six residents to speak and act on our behalf with all parties concerned. 1. TatianaAzarenok, 7310 #D, 996-3216 2. Tom Dragosavac, 7308 #A, 777-0194 3. John Guarino, 7308 #15, ~ 4. RaeNorris, 7314 #C, 252-1193 5. Michael Savage 7308 #12,253-6493 6. Ying Yu, 7318 #A, 366-0461 10. To Planning Commission and City Council City of Cupertino Cuperano Ca 95014 From: Residents of Saron Gardens Arts. 7308-7318 Rainbow Dr. Cupertino Ca 95014 Re: Intmdistrict passes for Regnart/Kennedy students Date: May 27,2003 Sometime during the next school year, our apartment complex, which is located in Cupertino, in the Regnart/Kennedy Schools area, Saron Gardens Apartments, is being tom down to make way for construction of houses on the property. The residents of Saron Gardens are being forced to move out. It is very difficult to find a new apartment in the Regnart/Kennedy are~ Not many complexes exist, and these have very low vacancy rates. There are 13 children in this apattment complex that go to Regnart Elementary School, ranging from the 1th to the 5th grade and 3 children that go currently in Kennedy Middle School and plan to attend Monta Vista in the next year. We ask that their families be give Intradistdct passes that would allow these students to move to an aparhnent complex anywhere within the Cupertino Union School District and continue to attend Regnart and Kennedy Schools. We ask the support of City officials for this request. We hope to mee~ on this matter with City and District officials in the very near future Sincerely, Saxon Gardens Resident Association To Planning Commission and City Council City of Cupertino Cupertino Ca 95014 From: Residents of Saron Gardens Arts. 7308-7318 Rainbow Dr. Cupertino Ca 95014 Re: Intradislrict passes for MontaVista School students Date: May 27,2003 Sometime during the next school year, our apartment complex, which is located in Cupertino, in the Monta Vista High School area, Saron Garden Aparhnents, is being tom down to make way for construction of houses on the property. The residents of Saron Garden are being forced to move out. It is very difficult to fred a new apartment in the Monta Vista area. Not many complexes exist, and these have very low vacancy rates. There are 4 children in this apartment complex that go to Monta Vista, ranging from the 9th to the 11th grade and 3 children that go currently in Kennedy Middle School and plan to attend Monta Vista in the next year. We ask that their families be give Intradistrict passes that would allow these students to move to an apartment complex anywhere within the Fremont Union High School District and continue to attend Monta Vista High School. We ask the support of City officials for this request. We hope to meet on this matter with City and District officials in the very near future Sincerely, Saron Gardens Resident Association FROM-PROMETHEUS REAL ESTATE GROUP LEGEND JaQLJN DAR? LJN[ CENTERLIN[ LOT LINE LOT LINE TO BE REMOVED ADJACENT LOT LINE MONUUENT AREA = 170,795 SO. T-12E P.OZ/02 F-D28 RAINE~OW FuTuRE LOTS 1 AND 2 TO ZONED AS R-1 I [ .. q~,7-- $c - DRIVE vl.-~;, =, L BASIS OF BEARINGS BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON AR[ BASE0 ON THE ~ONUwENTED C£NT£RLIHE OF POPP~ ON "TRACT HO. 2016. SPRINGAROEN ~NIT NO. FILEO FOR RECORD IN BOOK 12~ OF w~PS AT 16. CENTERLINE BEARING T~KEN AS SOUTH 00'D0'31" EAST, CREE GAN+ D 'ANGEL 0 £nginoera . Planners . Su~ce~or$ 1075 N. TENTH STRE-F-I',, SUITE lO0 SAN JOSE, CA 95112 (408)998-123,~ ZONING PLAT SARON GARDENS CUPERTINO, CALIFORNI~ NJH DESIGN: DBV DATE: SCALE: l"= 100' REv: - SARON GARDENS PLAM~IG 8UBIVITTAL - 03;?.4.03 REVISION 3 - 06.06.03 RAINBOW DRIVE ELEVATION PROJECT DIRECTORY PROJECT ADDRESS: Saron Gardens CupedJno, California DEVELOPER: Saro~ Gardens. LLC. 350 Bddge Parkway Redwood City. CA 94065 Tel: 650.596.5300 Fax: 650~596.5374 ARCHITECT: Chds6ani Johnso~ Architects 655 Third Street, Suite 350 San Francisco, CA 94107 Tel: 415.243.94~4 Fax; 415.243.9485 CIVIL ENGINEER: Creegan & D'A~gelo 1075 North Ten~ Street, Suite 100 San Jose, CA 95112 Tel: 408.998.1234 Fax: 408.998.0944 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT; Carducci and Associates 555 Beach, 4th Floor San Francisco, CA 94133 Tel: 415.674.0990 Fax: 415.674.0999 PROJECT DATA: PROJECT DATA: ZONING/LOT INFORMATION DENSITY ~ITE AREA CALCULATION tOTAL SITE AREA = 4.03 ACRES - 175,616 SQUARE FEET PARKING CALCULATIONS i UNIT $~ZE # OF UNITS CARS~UNIT GARAGE SURFACE TOTAL FLOOR AREA RATIO CALCULATIONS JNIT CALCULATIONS SARON GARDENS CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SARON GARDENS, LLC. APPLICABLE CODE INFORMATION: SHEETINDEX VICINITY MAP C-~NERAL NOTES SARON GARDENS CIVIL DRAWING INDEX DEMOLITION NOTES BASIS OF BEARINGS Q I SARONGARDENS - CML NOTES TREE REMOVAL NOTES PROJECT BENCHMARK Crv'D.,NOTES TREE PROTECTION NOTES MATERIALS~ , ,, ~ -- ~: ,'~' , ~ ......... ~' ~ ....... ~~ '. ;i ~ ;~ ' I ,, ~~ ~ J A ~,~ .... ~ ~ , J .... ~ ,~ . ~ D ~ ..... ~Ir ' f ' t=~ ~~ ~ ~.~ L~. J I ~ ~ J IIIIIH, , , C ~ -~-~x~.~ .... ~ x~ ~ x .... ~x~ -- ~ _~ , [sEE s~ c. SARON GARDENS CPEECAN+D'ANCELO 1'=20' 6-06-03 ;z ~ . ~ - ~ ~ - - . -' .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ , , ~ ,, ~ ~ ~ ~ n J , ~ j ~ .... ~~ ~m -,~~..,;>:~ -,~.-~ ~...~.<:, ,,,~,, .... ~,, ,.~ /~ .... ~,*~ ~, u> ~***~*****'~*****~ ~ SARON GARDENS LEGEND ~RAGE E~CE - ~NE GRADING 4' CUrB AND GUI I~H , ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ I I ' ~ I ~ ~~ ~ SARON RAINBOW 23 CREEGAN~. D'ANGELO SARON GARDENS DRIVE LEGEND BASIS OF BEARINGS NOTES Sheet Title SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS LLC SARON GARDENS SARON 6ARDENS LLC SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS LLC CONCEPTUAL IRRI6ATION PLAN 74,7500 )E~ENCH B2235 (~PIC, NIC TAD, LE/AGCE5SItDLt= PICNIC TABLE 0 C. ONC,~.EFI'iE PA'v'IN~ SECTION (~) P~.,EGAST CONG~E~TE SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS LLC O~t~.AIDE AT EI2~t~ OF PAVIN~ GONC~.~TtE PA'VI N~ (~ JOINT ~FGTION~ blO.IAI tDANO D'FC, OI'.'iPODED Gt~,NITE (IDG) Sl ~ LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS pATH 0 A~CHEZ2 ~LL.I~ SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS LLC LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS H ~e, ADE (~)DOUt~LE A~GHEO TFa..ELLI5 SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS LLC LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS ~' ~OOD FENCE SARON GARDENS GAGON GARDENS llC LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS (~)VALVE tSOX INSTALLATION ~ 5OIL 50IL ~ .E~.TION F~<:2~. ON-~IT'¢ TOP50II SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS LLC TO U~m, PLANTING AND IRRIGATION DETAILS 25 FLOOR SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. VILLAGE GREEN LI.I *NOTE: NFPA 13R FIRE SPRINKLERS PROVIDED AT ALL Cl AND C2 UNITS. NORTH ARCHITEC~JRAL SITE PLAN REVISION 3 KITCHEN DINING ROO ~ A1: 'f~iRD FLOOR PLAN ~ ~'1- S~coND FLOOR F'LAN TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE - 1743 S.F. SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. (~A1 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN FLOOR PLAN- TYPE A1 REVISION 3 DINING RO0 (~A2 - THIRD FLOOR PLAN ~"~ A2 - SECOND FLOOR PLAN A2]FIRsT FLbC)R PLAN TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE - 1743 S.F. SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. FLOOR PLAN - TYPE A2 REVISION 3 TYPE A2 - ELEVATIONS SARON GARDENS S/L~ON GARDENS, I.LC. TYPE Al - ELEVATIONS BUILDING ELEVATIONS 'I'TPE A1 & A2 REVISION 3 (~B - THIRD FLOOR PLAN ~ B:~I:~0ND FLooR PLA~ TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE - 1760 S.F, SARON GARDENS CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SARON GARDENS, LLC. B: Fi.RST FLOOR PLAN FLOOR PLAN - TYPE REVISION 3 SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. TYPE B - ELEVATIONS REVISION 3 ( MASTER !~DINING R (~)Cl - THIRD FLOOR PLAN (~Ci: SE~C)ND FLooR pLAN TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE - 1893 S.F. SARON 6ARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC, Z Cl: FIRST FLOOR PLAN FLOOR PLAN- TYPE C1 REVISION 3 TYPE C2 - ELEVATIONS U~II/ SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. (~ TYPE C1 - ELEVATIONS BUILDING ELEVATIONS TYPE C1 & C2 REVISION 3 ¥ Z tat) STORAGE D: ~oND FLOOR ~LAN ~ DJ FIRST FLooR PLaN /~ D- LOWER FLOOR PLAN TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE - 1758 S.F. SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. FLOOR PLAN - TYPE D1 REVISION 3 21L~= TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE - 1758 S.F. SARON GARBENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. DN ENTRY ~ p~2_. ~L.OWI::P, ~LOOR PLA~ FLOOR PLAN -'TYPE D2 REVISION 3 TYPE D2 - ELEVATIONS SARON GARDENS CUPERTINO, SARON GARDENS, LLC. TYPE DI - ELEVATIONS BUILDING ELEVATIONS TYPE DI&D2 REVISION 3 N - SECOND FLOOR PLAN (~N - FIRST FLOOR PLAN t/4'=~'~' 609 SQ. FT. TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE - 1493 S.F. SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. FLOOR PLANS TYPE N REVISION 3 TYPE N ~ TRAC~ ~ oNLY SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. TYPE N - ELEVATIONS BUILDING ELEVATIONS TYPE N REVISION 3 P ~ SECOND FLOOR pLAN 114"~1'-~" 759 GROSS SCI. FT. 759 NET SQ. FT. SETBACKS SETB~KS PROVIDED REQUIRED GROUND FLOOR FRONT 2(Y-0' 20'~)' SECOND FLOOR TO GROUND FLOOR AREA RATIO GROUND FLOOR ,~REA 2,067 S.F 73% TOTAL AREA 3,274 GROSS S.F. LIVING ROOM 15'-1' X 12'4' pOWdER DINING ROOM ENTRY L~UNDRY GARAGE SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. ~ PI&2 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN 2,515 GROSS SQ FT. SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, U.C. ~"~ TYPE P1 - ELEVATIONS EL~VAT!ON~ ~IE TOTAL AREA LESS I~IAN 6' HIGH AND MORE THAH 2' OVERLAPPED (SHADED AREA) IS EQUAL TO MORE THAN FIFTY PERCENT OF TOTAL pE p~ ~EI. EvATI°N~ SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. ELDVATIOND REAR SIDE FRONT CHRISTIANI JOHNSON SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. A1 04-28-03 ELEVATIONS ~8,,=~,.o,, REAR SIDE FRONT CHRISTIANI JOHNSON SARON GARDENS CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SARDN GARDENS, LLC. A2 04-28-05 ELEVATIONS N FRONT B FRONT CHRISTIANI JOHNSON SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. B N ELEVATIONS 04-28-03 REAR FRONT CHRISTIANI JOHNSON SARON GARDENS CUPERTINO, ~ALIFORNIA SARON GARDENS, LLC. Cl 04-28-03 ELEVATIONS ~"=~'-o" REAR FRONT CHRISTIANI JOHNSON SARON GARDENS CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SABON GARDENS, LLC. C2 04-28-03 ELEVATIONS ~8,,--~,-o,, REAR FRONT CHRISTIANI JOHNSON SARON GARDENS CUPERTINO, C~UFORNIA SARON GARDENS, LLC. D1 04-28-03 ELEVATIONS REAR SIDE FRONT CHRISTIANI JOHNSON SARON 6ARDENS CUPERTINO, CAUFDRNIA SARON GARDENS, LLC. D2 04-28-03 ELEVATIONS ~"=~'-~" FRONT CHRiSTiAN[ JOHNSON SARON GARDENS SARON GARDENS, LLC. P1 04-28-03 ELEVATIONS FRONT CHRISTIANI JOHNSON SARON GARDENS P2 CUPERTINO, CALIFOflNIA 04-28-03 SARON GARDENS, LLC. ELEVATIONS VIEW INTO VILLAGE GREEN VIEW WEST FROM RAINBOW DRIVE TO MAIN ENTRY DRIVE ITYOF City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 Fax: (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department Summary Agenda Item No. ~ Agenda Date: July 7, 2003 Application No.: Applicant: Location/APN: GPA-2003-01 City of Cupertino 23500 Cristo Rey Drive / 342-53-001through 342-53-259/342-54-01 through 342-54-016/342-55-001 through 342-55-045 Application Summary: General Plan amendment to change the land use designation on the Forum site from Residential Very Low 5-20 Acre S/D to Quasi-Public/Institutional subject to 5-20 Acre Slope Density Formula upon Residential Development. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: · Approve Negative Declaration, file number EA-2003-05; and · Approve the General Plan amendment, GPA-2003-01 per the model resolution. Project Data: General Plan Designation: Residential Very Low 5-20 Acre S/D Zoning Designation: Specific Plan: Project Consistency with: General Plan: Zoning: Specific Plan: P(Institutional) NA No. Current land use designation proposed to be changed to Quasi-Public/Institutional subject to 5-20 Acre Slope Density Formula upon Residential Development Yes. NA DISCUSSION The original Forum senior living facility (Application 32-U-85/16-Z-85) was approved on the 56-acre site in 1985. As part of the approval, the property was rezoned as P(Institutional) (Exhibit B) allowing institutional senior living and care facilities. The General Plan land use designation for the site is Residential Very Low 5-20 Acre S/D (Exhibit C). At the time the project was approved, Pohcy 2-80 in the General Plan allowed quasi-public uses in any land use designation subject to certain conditions. When policy 2- 80 was eliminated in March 2002, the City neglected to cortform the Forum parcel to the General Plan. Therefore, the zoning and use on the site were inconsistent with the General Printed on Recycled Paper GPA 2003-01 The Forum - 23500 Cristo Rey Drive July 7, 2003 Page 2 Plan land use designation. This is contrary to state law, which requires that the zoning map should be consistent with the General Plan. In March 2003, the Forum applied for a use permit (U-2003-01) to build a 24-unit (21,000 square foot) Alzheimer care facility and a 3,500 square foot fitness center. At the time of the application, the inconsistency of the zoning and use of the site with the General Plan was not identified. Staff has therefore brought forward a General Plan amendment request to change the General Plan land use designation of the site from Residential Very Low 5-20 Acre S/D to Quasi-Public/Institutional subject to 5-20 Acre Slope Density Formula upon Residential Development as shown in Exhibit A. Use permit U-2003-01, approved on May 19, 2003, was conditioned upon the approval of the General Plan amendment. On June 9, 2003, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the General Plan amendment. Staff supports the General Plan amendment because it will bring the Forum site, with an existing quasi-public use approved in 1985, into conformance with the General Plan. Also, the use permit (U-2003-01) did not have any significant environmental impacts. Since the current General Plan amendment only involves a change to the land use designation, it will not have any additional environmental impacts. ENCLOSURES: Model Resolution for GPA-2003-01 #03-139 (including Exhibit A - Proposed General Plan Land Use Map) Planning Commission Resolution #6194 Exhibit B - Zoning Map Exhibit C - Existing General Plan Map Initial Study Negative Declaration Staff report to City Council dated May 5, 2003 Memo from Assistant City Attorney dated April 22, 2003. Prepared by: Aarti Shrivastiva, Senior Planner of Community Development APPROVED BY: David W. Knapp, City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 03-139 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ADOPTING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE FORUM PROPERTY FROM RESIDENTIAL VERY LOW 5- 20 ACRE S/D TO QUASI-PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL SUBJECT TO 5-20 ACRE SLOPE DENSITY FORMULA UPON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino initiated applications for a General Plan Amendment as described in this resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices were given in accordance with the procedure ordinance of the City of Cupertino and the City Council has held at least one public hearing on the matter; and WHEREAS, the Application No.: GPA-2003-01, request to amend the general plan land use element. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Cupertino that after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for General Plan Amendment, application no. GPA-2003-01 is hereby approved with the proposed properties subject to the changes in General Plan Land Use Map shown in Exhibit A. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of July, 2003, by the following vote: Vote AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN Members of the City Council ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk G:\Planning~ PDREPORT\ RES\ GPA-2003-01cc.doc Mayor, City of Cupertino GPA-2003-01 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6194 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE FORUM PROPERTY FROM RESIDENTIAL VERY LOW 5-20 ACRE S/D TO QUASI-PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL SUBJECT TO 5-20 ACRE SLOPE DENSITY FORMULA UPON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SECTION I: PROIECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Location: APN#s: GPA-2003-01 (EA-2003-05) City of Cupertino 23500 Cristo Rey Drive 342-53-001 through 342-53-259/342-54-01 through 342-54-016/342-55-001 through 342-55-045 SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a General Plan Amendment, to change the General Plan land use designation from Residential Very Low 5-20 Acre S/D to Quasi-Public/Institutional subject to 5-20 Acre Slope Density Formula upon Residential Development, as indicated in Exhibit A, for the site described in Section I of this resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing and considered public testimony from citizens and interested groups; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that the General Plan amendment is necessary to bring a site with an existing quasi-public use into conformance with the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that there will not be significant environmental impacts since the site has an existing quasi-public use built in conformance with hillside policies. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for General Plan Amendment are hereby recommended for approval, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution; and Resolution No. 6194 Page 2 GPA-2003-01 June 9, 2003 That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. GPA-2003-01 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 9, 2003, and are incorporated by reference though fully set forth herein. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of June 2003, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Miller, Saadati, Wong and Chairperson Chen COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development /s/Angela Chen Angela Chen, Chairperson Planning Commission CUPEI TINO City of Cupertino 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3251 FAX (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Project Title: Forum at Rancho San Antonio Project Location: 23500 Cristo Rey Drive EA File No. EA-2003-05 Case File ~o. Attachments Project Description: General Plan Amendment to chanqe the land use desiqnation for the Forum at Rancho San Antonio from Residential Very Low 5-20 acre slope density to Residential Very Low 5-20 acre slope density/Quasi-Public Institutional. Environmental Setting: The site is currently a senior livinq facility consistinq of 60 villas, 275 qroup livinq quarters, 82 personal care units and a 40,000 sq.ft, community buildinq with dininq and recreational services for the facility. The applicant has proposed to add 24 units of skilled nursinq and a 3,500 sq.ft, fitness center (not part of the current application). PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Site Area (ac.) - 56 acres Building Coverage - 26.84% Exist. Buildings- 632,090s.f. Proposed Bldg. - NA G.P. Designation -Residential Very Low 5-20S/D Zoning - P(Institutional) Assessor's Parcel No. - 342-53-001 through 342-53-259/342-54-01 through 342-54-016/342-55- 001 throu.qh 342-55-045 If Residential, Units/Gross Acre - 7.35 units/qr.ac. (existing) Unit Type #1 Unit Type #2 Unit Type #3 Unit Type ¢/4 Unit Type #5 Total# Rental/Own Bdrms Total s.f. Price Applicable Special Area Plans: (Check) [] Monta Vista Design Guidelines [] N. De Anza Conceptual [] Stevens Crk Blvd. Conceptual If Non-Residential, Building Area - NA Employees/Shift - N._~A Parking Required- Project Site is Within Cupertino Urban Service Area - [] S. De Anza Conceptual [] S. Sara-Sunny Conceptual [] Stevens Creek Blvd. SW & Landscape FAR - 33% for entire site Max. 0 spaces Parking Provided- 0 spaces YES [] NO [] A. CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN SOURCES 1. Land Use Element 2. Public Safety Element 3. Housing Element 4. Transportation Element 5. Environmental Resources 6. AppendixA- Hillside Development 7. Land Use Map 8. Noise Element Amendment 9. City Ridgeline Policy 10. Constraint Maps B. CUPERTINO SOURCE DOCUMENTS 11. Tree Preservation ordinance 778 12. CityAerial Photography Maps 13. "Cupertino Chronicle" (California History Center, 1976) 14. Geological Report (site specific) 15. Parking Ordinance 1277 16. Zoning Map '17. Zoning Code/Specific Plan Documents 18. City Noise Ordinance C. CITYAGENClES Site 19. Community Development Dept. List 20. Public Works Dept. 21. Parks & Recreation Department 22. Cupertino Water Utility D. OUTSIDE AGENCIES 23. County Planning Department 24. Adjacent Cities' Planning Departments 25. County Departmental of Environmental Health D. OUTSIDE AGENCIES (Continued) 26. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 27. County Parks and Recreation Department 28. Cupertino Sanitary District Eo 29. Fremont Union High School District 30. Cupertino Union School District 31. Pacific Gas and Electric 32. Santa Clara County Fire Department 33. County Shedff 34. CALTRANS 35. County Transportation Agency 36. Santa Clara Valley Water Distdct OUTSIDE AGENCY DOCUMENTS 37. BAAQMD Survey of Contaminant Excesses 38. FEMA Flood MapslSCVWD Flood Maps 39. USDA, "Soils of Santa Clara County" 40. County Hazardous Waste Management Plan 41. County Heritage Resources Inventory 42. Santa Clara Valley Water District Fuel Leak Site 43. CalEPA Hazardous Waste and Substances Site OTHER SOURCES 44. Project Plan Se'dApplication Materials 45. Field Reconnaissance 46. Experience w/project of similar scope/characteristics 47. ABAG Projection Series 48. Geotechnical Investigation Update, Mactec Engineering and Consulting, Inc. (February 18, 2003) to update the original Geotechnical Investigation, Earth Sciences Associates (September 1988). 49. Trip Generation and Parking Analysis, Fehr and Peers, Inc., April 8, 2003. g. C. D. E. F. G. Complete all information requested on the Initial Study Cover page. LEAVE BLANK SPACES ONLY WHEN A SPECIFIC ITEM IS NOT APPLICABLE. Consult the Initial Study Source List; use the materials listed therein to complete, the checklist information in Categories A through O. You are encouraged to cite other relevant sources; if such soumes are used, job in their title(s) in the "Source" column next to the question to which they relate. If you check any of the "YES" response to any questions, you must attach a sheet explaining the potential impact and suggest mitigation if needed. When explaining any yes response, label your answer clearly (Example "N - 3 Historical") Please try to respond concisely, and place as many explanatory responses as possible on each page. Upon completing the checklist, sign and date the Preparer's Affidavit. Please attach the following materials before submitting the Initial Study to the City. -"Project Plan Set of Legislative Document ,,/Location map with site clearly marked (when applicable) EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a [] [] [] [] scenic vista? [5,9,24,41,44] b) Substantially damage scenic resources, [] [] [] [] including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? [5,9,11,24,34,41,44] c) Substantially degrade the existing visual [] [] [] [] character or quality of the site and its surroundings? [1,17,19,44] d) Create a new source of substantial light or [] [] [] [] glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? [1,16,44] Item a-d- No Impact The project is not expected to have an adverse impact aesthetically since no new buildings are or tree removals are included in the scope of the project. II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or FarmJand of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? [5,7,39] b) Conflict with existing zoning for [] [] [] [] agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? [5,7,23] ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? [5,7,39] Item a-c - No Impact No agricultural land will be impacted. , III. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? [5,37,42,44, 49] b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? [5,37,42,44, 49] c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? [4,37,44, 49] d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial [] [] pollutant concentrations? [4,37,44, 49] e) Create objectionable odors affecting a [] [] substantial number of people? [4,37,44] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] Items a-e - No Impact The BAAQMD has designated the Kaiser Permanente quarry as one of the "toxic hot spots" for air quality hazards. A Health Risk Assessment (HRA) for the facility in 1991 was accepted by the BAAQMD (Oak Valley EIR) which concluded that the amounts of pollutants as reported did not constitute a significant health risk to the general population in the vicinity of the Kaiser Permanente facility. Estimating the path of the pollutants, the HRA concluded that the exposure would be considerable less on higher elevations with the maximum exposure areas being the residential area west of Foothill Boulevard and south of Stevens Creek Boulevard, especially the hillside sites closest to the facility. The project is a facility for the elderly. Since the levels of exposure for maximum exposure sites do not represent a health hazard, project clients at the Forum site, which is at a higher elevation, would not be exposed to a health risk due to pollutants from the quarry. The project would therefore not expose sensitive receptors (children, the elderly, the acutely ill, and the chronically ill) to substantial pollutant concentrations. The proposed development will not have any operations that will subject customers, employees or neighbors to objectionable odors. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: [] [] [] [] a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? [5,10,27,44] b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? [5,10,27,44] c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? [20,36,44] d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery 5 ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] sites? [5,10,12,21,26] e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? [11,12,41] f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? [5,10,26,27] Item a- f- No Impact The project is proposed on a developed site and will not impact threatened or endangered biological resources. The project includes landscaping, which will provide additional vegetation on the site. No Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans cover the project area. None of the existing trees are proposed to be removed. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in [] [] [] [] the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? [5,13,41] [] [] [] [] b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.57 [5,13,41] c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? [5,13,41] i VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -Would the I project: a) Expose peop e or structures to potential i substanbal adverse effects, ~nclud~ng the risk d) Disturb any human remains, including [] [] [] [] those interred outside of formal cemeteries? [i ,5] Item a-d No Impact The project is currently developed with similar uses and is not in a sensitive archeological ~ area of the City. There are no historical resources on the site. j[and SuppoSing Information Sources] ~of loss, Jnju~, or death involving: i) ~upture or a known eadhquake ~ault, as delineated on the most recent AlquJst-PrJolo Ea~hquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geo]ogJs~ ~or the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known ~ault? ~efer to Division o~ Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. [2,14,44,48] ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? [2,5,10,44,48] iii) Seismic-related ground la,lure, including liquefaction? [2,5,10,39,44,48] iv) Landslides? [2,5,10,39,44,48] b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss o~ topsoil? [2,5,10,44,48] c) Be Io~ated on a 9eologJ~ unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as ~ result of the pro~ect, and potentially result in on- or off-site I~ndslJde, lateral spreading, subsidence, lique[act~on or ~ollapse? [2,5,~ 0,39,44,48] d) Be located on expansive ~oJl, 3s defined in T~ble 18-1-B o~ the Uniform Building Code (~ 997), creating substantial risks to li~e or prope~y? [2,5,10,44,48] e) Have ~oil~ Jn~pable o~ adequately suppodJn9 the use o[ septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available ~or the disposal o~ waste water? [6,9,36,39,4~,48] ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] n~ Item afl-iii), c-d - Less Than Siqnificant Impact According to the Cupertino General Plan, the site is in a VF-I zone for which specific hazards may include flood inundation from Permanente Creek and ground shaking and ground failure associated with the Monta Vista, Berrocal and/or San Andreas faults. According to the City's Geological Hazards map, the site is located in the "Valley Floor Terrain Hazard Zone," which is defined as "nearly flat, urbanized valley floor and Iow rolling foothills area near St. Josephs Seminary." The potentially active Monta Vista and Berrocal fault have been mapped approximately 1,500 and 3,500 feet southwest of the site, respectively. The active San Andreas fault zone is located approximately four miles southwest of the site. The existing project was built based on a by a Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Earth Sciences Associates (September 1988). The current project does not involve the construction of new buildings. Item a(iv) b, e - No Impact The current project does not involve construction of new buildings. Therefore, no landslide activity soil erosion or loss of topsoil is expected due to the project. The site is served by an existing sewer system. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? [32,40,42,43,44] b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? [32,40,42,43,44] c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? [2,29,30,40,44] d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? [2,42,40,43] e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted_,__within two miles of a public airport 8 [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] or public use airpor[, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? [ ] f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? [ ] g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? [2,32,33,44] h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?[1,2,44] [] [] [] [] [] [] Items a-h - No Impact The proposed project will not generate additional hazardous waste, increase risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances, interfere with emergency services, increase exposure of people to hazardous waste or increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass or trees. The current project site is not listed as a contaminated site in the State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List. The project site is not within a two-mile radius of the nearest airport (Moffett Airfield/San Jose Airport). Therefore, there would be no related impacts on people residing or working in the project area. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or [] [] waste discharge requirements? [20,36,37] b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or panned uses for which permits have been e runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] 9 ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? [20,36,42] d) Otherwise substantially degrade water [] [] [] [] quality? [20,36,37] e) Place housing within a 100-year flood [] [] [] [] hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? [2,38] f) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area [] [] [] [] structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? [2,38] g) Expose people or structures to a [] [] [] [] significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? [2,36,38] h) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or [] [] [] [] mudflow? [2,36,38] Items b,e-h - No Impact Soil borings indicate subsurface water from a depth of 13 feet to 24 feet below the surface. The geologic study concluded that subsurface water seepage would be unlikely during excavation in dry seasons. Potential for flooding due to Permanente Creek (Zone A) will not affect the project site since the flooding area is about 800 feet from the project site as is confined to the narrow portion along Permanente Creek. There is a storage tank site located northeast from the project site close to the intersection of Hwy 280 and Foothill Boulevard. However, since the site is sloped upward from the tank site, structural failure resulting in an immediate discharge of full contents would be directed away from the project site. Because there are no nearby bodies of standing water, there is no risk of tsunami or seiche inundation at the site. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING -Would the project: a) Physically divide an established [] [] [] [] community? [7,12,22,41] [] [] [] [] b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] mitigating an environmental effect? [1,7,8,16,17,18,44] c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? [1,5,6,9,26] .e c '~ ~ [] [] Items a-c - No Impact The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Residential Very Low 5-20 acre S/D. The site is currently zoned P(Institutional). The project site is developed with existing institutional uses, When originally approved in 1985, the original project was in conformance with the General Plan which allowed quasi-public uses in any land use designation. Because of the recent deletion of Policy 2-80 from the General Plan (on March 18, 2002), quasi-public uses on sites that do not have a Quasi-public/Institutional land use designation must seek a General Plan amendment. The current project involves a General Plan amendment to change the land use designation to Quasi-public/Institutional to make the zoning consistent with the General Plan. Since the property is already being used as an institutional use, the project will have no impact. X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known [] [] [] [] mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? [5,10] b) Result in the loss of availability of a [] [] [] [] locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? [5,10] Items a-b - No Impact Mineral resources are not known to exist on the project site. XI. NOISE -- Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? [8,18,44] c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of [] [] [] [] excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise Levels? [8,18,44] [] [] [] ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] [8,18] d) A substantial temporary or periodic [] [] increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [8,18,44] e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? [8,18,44] f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? [8,18] Item a-f- No Impact The site is located in an area with noise levels 60dB (DNL) and less, which is considered normally acceptable for new development. The City's Municipal Code standards (Chapter 10.48 Community Noise Control) for this type of development are that exterior noise may not exceed 55 dB at night and 65dB in the daytime. The site will not be subject to excessive levels of groundborne vibration or groundborne noise. The current project is a General Plan amendment and does not propose new uses or increase in the existing use. Th___e projec__~t is not withi~n a_ two-mile~radiu~s of~any public airports or private airstrips. XlI. POPULATION AND HOUSING --Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an [] [] [] [] area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? [3,16,47,44] b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [3,16,44] c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [3,16,44] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] 12 ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] Item a-c - No Impact The project does not propose a new use or an increase in existing uses. Therefore, the proposed project would not induce substantial population growth. Aisc, since the project provides residential facilities for the elderly and anticipates an additional employment of 11 employees, it will not create a demand for housing that would be inconsistent with the General Plan. The proposed project would not displace existing housing since it is proposed on a landscaped portion of the site. Xlll. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the ~ublic services: Fire protection? [19,32,44] Police protection? [33,44] Schools? [29,30,44] Parks? [5,17,19,21,26,27,44] Other public facilities? [19,20,44] [] [] [] [] Item a -No Impact ~'~' ~roj;~t"i's~'l~)~ated in an urbanized area served by municipal services, including fire protection, police protection, and maintenance of public facilities such as roads. The I project does not include new uses or an intensification of the existing use. XlV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of [] [] [] [] existing neighborhood and regiOnal parks or i other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? [5,17,19,21,26,27,44] b) Does the project include recreational [] [] [] [] facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the __ ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] environment? [5,44] . Item a -No Impact The original project was approved with a var ety of recreation facilities for the senior housing and institutional uses. The current project does not involve new or intensified uses. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: [] [] [] [] a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? [4,20,35,44,49] b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? [4,20,44,49] c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? [4,49] d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [20,35,44,49] e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [2,19,32,33,44,49] f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [17,44,49] g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? [4,34,49] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] Items a-g - No Impact The project is a General Plan amendment to change the land use designation and does not include new uses or an intensification of the existing use. The proposed project will not result in any change in air traffic patterns. The Fire Department has determined that emergency vehicle access will be adequate. No additional parking will be required for the project. XVl. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment [] [] [] [] requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? [5,22,28,36,44] b) Require or result in the construction of [] [] [] [] new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? [36,22,28,36] c) Require or result in the construction of [] [] [] [] new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant i environmental effects? [5,22,28,36,44] e) Result in a determination by the [] [] [] [] wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? [5,22,28,36,44] f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient [] [] [] [] permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? [5,44] I g) Comply with federal, state, and local [] [] [] [] statutes and regulations related to solid I waste'~ [5,44] ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] !E.- ~ o Items a-q - No Impact Sanitary sewer service and capacity is available through the Cupertino Sanitary District. Since the project does not involve new uses or intensification of the existing uses, the project is not expected to increase demands that would exceed wastewater treatment · requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. ~The project will be required to comply with all federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. 16 ! I$$UF$:Supporting Information Sourcesl !land a) Does the project have the potential to · degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental . effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? I c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or [indirectly? I hereby certify that the information provided in this Initial Study is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief; I certify that I have used proper diligence in responding accurately to all questions herein, and have consulted appropriate source references when necessary to ensure full and complete disclosure of relevant environmental data. I hereby acknowledge than any substantial errors dated within this Initial Study may cause delay or discontinuance of related project review procedures, and hereby agree to hold harmless the City of Cupertino, its staff and authorized agents, from the consequences of such delay or discontinuance. Preparer's Signature Print Preparer's Name /2/2~¢'/2 ,.?~///~ ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. [] Aesthetics [] Agriculture Resources [] Air Quality [] Biological Resources [] Cultural Resources [] Geology/Soils [] Hazards & Hazardous [] Hydrology / Water [] Land Use / Planning Materials Quality [] Mineral Resources [] Noise [] Population / Housing [] Public Services [] Recreation [] Transportation/Traffic [] Utilities / Service [] Mandatory Findings of Systems Significance DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) finds that: ~ The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [] Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [] The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. [] The proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. [] Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because ali potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) halve been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE E~C~N, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the ~f'ol~osedj~oject, nothing further is required. 18 Date Date CITY OF CUPERTINO NEGATIVE 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 17 1977, May 1, 1978, and July 7, 1980, the following described project was granted a Negative Declaration by the City Council of the City of Cupertino on July 7, 2003. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION EA-2003-05 Application No.: Applicant: Location: GPA-2003-01 (EA-2003-05) City of Cupertino Citywide DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation for the Forum at Rancho San Antonio from Residential Very Low 5-20 acre slope density to Residential Very Low 5-20 acre slope density/Quasi-Public Institutional. FINDINGS OF DECISIONMAKING BODY The City Council granted a Negative Declaration since the project is consistent with the General Plan and there are no significant environmental impacts. Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development CERTIFICATE OF THE CITY CLERK This is to certify that the above Negative Declaration was filed in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Cupertino on City Clerk g/erc/negEA200305 CITY OF CUPERtiNO City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 Fax: (408) 777-3333 Corrtmtmity Development Department Housing Services Summary Agenda Item No. Agenda Date: Ma,/5, 2003 Application No.: GPA-2003-01 Applicant: City of Cupertino Location/APN: 23500 Cristo Rey Drive / 342-53-001through 342-53-259/342-54-01 through 342-54-016/342-55-001 through 342-55-045 Application Summary: Consideration of setting a public hearing for a General Plan amendment to change the iand use designation on the Forum site to bring it into conformance with the General Plan. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council take the following action: · Authorize a public hearing to amend the General Plan GPA-2003-01. Project Data: General Plan Designation: Residential Very Low5-20 Acre S/D Zoning Designation: Specific Plan: Project Consistency with: General Plan: Zoning: Specific Plan: P(Institutional) NA No. Current land use designation proposed to be changed to Residential Very Low 5-20 Acre S/D/BQ (Quasi-public) Yes. NA DISCUSSION The Cupertino Municipal Code Section 20.02.025 requires City Council authorization prior to initiating consideration of a General Plan Amendment. The proposal is to authorize a General Plan amendment to change the land use designation of the Forum site to bring it into conformance with the General Plan. The original Forum senior living facility (Application 32-U-85/16-Z-85) was approved on the 56-acre site in 1985. As part of the approval the property was rezoned as P(InsfitufionaI) or Planned Development (Exhibit A) allowing institutional senior living and care facilities. The General Plan land use designation for the site is Residential Very Low5- 20 Acre S/D (Exhibit B). At the time the project was approved, Policy 2-80 in the General Plan allowed quasi-public uses in any land use designation subject to certain conditions. Since the deletion of Policy 2-80 in March 2002, the zoning and use on the site are / ~ Printed on Recycled Paper GPA 2003-01 May 5, 2003 Page 2 inconsistent with the General Plan land use designation. This is contrary to state law, which requires that the zoning map should be consistent with the General Plan. In March 2003, the Forum applied for a use permit (U-2003-01) to build a 24-unit (21,000 square foot) Alzheimer care facility and a 3,500 square foot fitness center. The application will be heard at the Plarming Commission and City Council within the two months. At the time of the application, the inconsistency of the zoning and use of the site with the General Plan was not identified. Staff has therefore brought forward a General Plan amendment request to change the General Plan land use designation of the site from Residential Very Low 5-20 Acre S/D to Residential Very Low 5-20 Acre S/D/BQ (Quasi-public) as shown in Exhibit C. A policy will be added to the Land Use element in the General Plan to ensure that future development on the site will be sensitive to the landforms and topography of the area. If the use permit U-2003-01 is approved, its approval will be conditioned upon the approval of the proposed General Plan amendment. Other sites with similar inconsistencies are expected to be brought into conformance with the General Plan update with a new policy and possible land use designation changes. Findings For General Plan Amendment To initiate an amendment, the City Council must find that a proposed amendment will benefit the City and is compatible with the existing goals and policies of the General Plan and the amendment should meet at least one of the following criteria: 1. The proposal appears to support the existing general plan goals and objectives (although the degree of public benefit could not be fully ascertained until the project is fully assessed); Staff believes that when policy 2-80 was eliminated, the City neglected to conform the Forum parcel to the General Plan. The proposed amendment would bring the existing zoning and use, approved in 1985, in conformance with the General Plan. The proposal represents an unforeseen land use trend that has not been previously considered; The zoning and use was approved as part of a City process in 1985 and the use has been in existence for a number of years, so this is not an unforeseen trend. 3. The existing general plan policy, which precludes the proposal is based upon outdated or inaccurate information. The elimination of Policy 2-80 was based on the inappropriateness of large quasi-public uses in a non-quasi-public land use designation. The current proposal is to bring an existing quasi-public site with P(Institutional) zoning and a residential/institutional use into conformance with the General Plan. This finding can be made. Staff therefore believes that there is sufficient cause to consider an amendment to the land use element to bring the Forum site in conformance with the General Plan. Processing The processing steps for a General Plan Amendment are as follows: 1. City Council initiates consideration of a General Plan Amendment at a regular meeting. GPA 2003-01 May 5, 2003 Page 3 2. Plarming Commission holds an advertised public hearing to discuss the amendment and makes a recommendation to the City Council. 3. The City Council holds an advertised public hearing to approve or deny the Planning Commission recommendation. If the City Council makes a "substantial modification" to the recommended amendment that was not discussed by the Planning Commission, the item must return to the Planning Commission (California Government Code 65356). Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development APPROVED BY: David W. Knapp, City Manager ENCLOSURES: Exhibit A - Zoning Map Exhibit B - General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit C - Proposed General Plan Land Use Map Memo from Deputy City Attorney dated April 23, 2003. G:k Plam'&~gkPDREPORTk pcGPArepor tskGPA-2003-01.doc 3 MEMORANDUM To; Aarti Shrivastava, Senior Planner From: Eileen Murray, Assistant City Attorney Date: April 22, 2003 Re: Forum Application Regarding the Forum application: As you are aware the zoning must be consistent with the General Plan. Apparently, the Forum property, designated as R5-20 in the General Plan, was zoned Institutional under policy 2-80, which allowed quasi-public projects in residential zones. When policy 2-80 was eliminated the City neglected to conform the Forum, and a few other inconsistently zoned parcels, to the General Plan. To make the zoning and General Plan consistent now, for these several parcels, we can a) conform the zoning to the General Plan or b) amend the General Plan to reflect the current zoning. If we conform the zoning to the General Plan we will create non-conforming uses, which we don't necessarily want. Therefore, our office suggests that we amend the General Plan map designations for these few parcels to create consistency. Since the General Plan amendment will affect more properties than the Forum, we recommend that the General Plan Amendment be a separate item, concurrent with the Forum application. If there is some reason that the two items cannot be calendared concurrently, the Forum application can be conditioned upon the General Plan amendment approval. __ QUASI-PUBLIC/INS2 UTIONAL SUBJECT TO 5-20 ACRE SLOPE DENSITY FORMULA UPON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. EXHIBIT A Monta Vista Planning Area 'C0mmercial "Store Front"lResidentialllndusbffal Light Ind us~ial/Residsntial Nelgh~orhood Commercial / Residential Ne~ght;orhood Camm / Residential / Quasi-Public Residential ~4.4 DU/Gr Ac Residential 4.4-7.7 DUIGr Ac Residential 4.4-12 DUIGr Ac PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN Land Use Map PROJECT P(MP) EXHIBIT B N,,x N Monta Vista RHS A-215 Zoning Map PROJECT SITE EXHIBIT C Monta Vista Planning Area City of Cupe~no Land Use Map CITY OF CUPE INO 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 FAX (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department SUMMARY AGENDA NO. 9{) AGENDA DATE July 7, 2003 SUMMARY: Consider the appeal of Application R-2003-03, a Design Review Committee approval of a new two-story 4,463 square foot residence, Dick Fang, 10110 Mann Drive, APN 326-19-005. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council may take one of the following actions 1. Approve the appeal thereby overturning the Design Review Committee approval and concurring with the Planning Commission to allow allow the greater exterior wall height; 2. Approve the appeal to allow the greater exterior wall height with the following modifications to improve the project's consistency with the Design Guidelines: a. Reduce the second-story plate height to 8'; b. Reduce the entry height to match the eave height of the single-story section of the house; c. Convert the three-car-wide garage into a two-car-wide garage with one tandem space; 3. Deny the appeal and uphold the Design Review Committee approval; 4. Schedule a study session to review the application of the RI Ordinance and the Design Guidelines to single-family development. BACKGROUND Project Back,round On February 3, 2003, Mr. Hung applied for a special permit from the Design Review Committee for a two-story residence with the maximum 45% floor area ratio (FAR). Preliminary Application Compromises At the preliminary stages of this application, staff identified the following inconsistencies related to the Design Guidelines: Printod on Recycled Paper R-2003-03 Appeal 2 1. 9' plate height on the second story. The Guidelines recommend shorter wall heights and vaulted ceilings to achieve interior volume. The typical plate height on the second story is 8'. 2. 11' plate height in the living room and dining room. The Guidelines recommend 8' plate heights with a vaulted ceiling to achieve interior volume. 3. 13'6' entry height. The Guidelines recommend that the entry height match the neighborhood pattern of eave lines, which would be about 10'. 4. Three-car garage. The predominant pattern of development in the neighborhood has two-car garages. The form of the three-car garage is not consistent with the neighborhood. The use of the three-car garage results in a condition where about half of the front elevation consists of garage doors. A two-car garage with a tandem space would result in a higher percentage of living space along the front elevation. The applicant agreed to make the height reduction on the first floor living room from 11' to 10'. Staff supported the request for the maximum floor area despite the other Guideline issues, since the applicant made an effort to improve the project's conformance to the Guidelines with the height reduction. Design Review Committee When the project was presented to the Design Review Committee, the applicant requested that the Committee approve the project with taller plate height. The applicant was asking for an 11' plate height instead of a 10' plate height. Commissioner Saadati suggested that the applicant explore a step-down, "sunken" living room to achieve the goal of a taller interior ceiling height without increasing the exterior height. Also, instead of using a coffered ceiling, a full vaulted ceiling could be used to gain even more interior volume without changing the exterior height. Commissioner Saadati concluded that he considered a 10' plate height to be tall enough. Commissioner Wong also stated that the 10' plate height was generous, also citing that the applicant was proposing a 9' plate height on the second story when most applicants used 8' plate heights. Commissioner Wong stated that he would not support the additional building height for compatibility reasons. Appeal - Planning Commission The applicant, Mr. Hung appealed the Design Review Committee decision. The appeal form did not include any rationale for the appeal; it only stated that they wanted an 11' plate height in the living room. The appellant gathered eleven signatures of residents in the extended neighborhood who supported the appellant's request and presented them on the day of the Planning Commission hearing. R-2003-03 Appeal 3 The following summarizes the Planning Commission comments at the April 14, 2003 hearing: (the minutes are attached to Exhibit A) · Commissioner Miller stated that he considers this a "transitional neighborhood." He cited the ordinance finding that the project is compatible with the predominant neighborhood pattern. He considers that the predominant neighborhood pattern is in transition to new two-story residences. He stated that he opposes trying to make new projects be compatible with older designs; instead new projects should be compatible with new designs. Because the neighborhood was built in the 1950s, he believes that many of these homes are in the last phase of their useful life and that redevelopment should be encouraged. · Commissioner Saadati stated that trees or shrubs could screen the difference in height. With the planting, and because the neighbors support the project, he would support the project. He was concerned that this would set a precedent. · Commissioner Wong referred to the Design Guidelines as "the stick" for "the carrot" of the additional floor area. At the Design Review Committee hearing, it was hard for him to see if the project was compatible. Since the neighbors support the project, he supports it too. · Commissioner Corr stated that since he was on the Commission when the City was addressing the "monster home" issue, he is torn between being consistent with past approvals and allowing the project with the greater height. He stated that ff the house were located next to "monster homes", then there is no problem. · Chairperson Chen questioned what determines compatibility - mass or design. She stated that old design leading new design was a problem. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the appeal on a 3-2 vote. Chairperson Chen and Commissioners Miller and Wong supported the appeal. Commissioners Saadati and Corr opposed the appeal. DISCUSSION R1 Ordinance Background This section is a summary of the staff's understanding of the 1999 R1 Ordinance Amendment that the City Council adopted to address the following issues: 1. Reduce the visual mass and bulk of new development. 2. Mitigate visual and privacy impacts from two-story development. 3. Encourage single-story development. 4. Hold two-story projects up to a higher standard through the application of Design Guidelines, with the rationale that two-story projects inherently cause greater impacts than a single-story project. R-2003-03 Appeal 4 The following table outlines the fundamental philosophy of the City's single-family design review process. Building Type Impacts Required Design Mitigations Single-story house Some None Two-story house with 35% More Some FAR or less Two-story house with more Most Most than 35% FAR As a result of the 1999 amendment, a two-story project with a floor area ratio greater than 35% must receive a special permit from the Design Review Committee. To approve the permit, the project must meet the following findings: 1. The project will be consistent with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan, any applicable specific plans, zoning ordinances and the purposes of this title. 2. The granting of the special pemdt will not result in a condition that is detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. 3. The proposed addition/home is harmonious in scale and design with the general neighborhood. 4. The proposed addition/home is generally consistent with design guidelines developed by the Director of Community Development. (note: the guidelines were adopted by the Gty Council in 1999) 5. The proposed addition/home will not result in significant adverse visual impacts as viewed from adjoining properties. Guidelines vs. Ordinance When an applicant proposes a two-story house with a floor area ratio over 35%, the Design Guidelines are applied to reduce project impacts so that the approval findings can be made. That means that applicants for large two-story homes are asked to make design changes that a single-story project would not have to make. The application of the Design Guidelines results in more restrictions than the Ordinance alone. This is consistent with the intent of the design review process to hold larger two-story development to a higher standard. If the Ordinance were believed to address community concerns sufficiently, then the Council would not need Design Guidelines or a Design Review process. The Neighborhood Based on past direction from the City Council during the establishment of the Design Review process, the "neighborhood" is defined by looking at three houses on R-2003-03 Appeal 5 either side of the subject site, and those homes across the street. Of the three houses on either side of the appellant's property, only one has a second story. The houses across the street do not front on Marm Drive, but on side streets. Of the four houses across the street, two are two-story. Of the ten homes in the immediate neighborhood, only three are two-stoW. At the Planning Commission hearing on April 14, 2003, Commissioner Miller stated that neighborhood might be undergoing a transition from older homes to newer two-story homes. After the Planning Commission hearing, staff conducted research to examine the development activities in the project vicinity over time. Exhibit C shows all building permit applications from January 1, 2001 to June 18, 2003 on a citywide map and in a graph. Since 2001, only single-story projects have taken place in the extended neighborhood. Citywide, the amount of two-story development is less than 25% of all development projects in the R1 zone. Exhibits D through G show data for the surrounding area. Exhibit D shows the year in which the homes were built. Six new residences were built between 1994 and 1999. All were two-story homes. This is consistent with the events that led to the creation of stricter regulations for two-story development in 1999. Exhibit E shows the distribution of two-story homes in the vicinity. Exhibit G shows the distribution of three-car garages in the vicinity. The data indicates that the neighborhood has not undergone a significant amount of redevelopment and that the recent trend in the City is for single-story development. Neighborhood Support The appellant submitted additional signatures from neighbors who support his project with an 11' plate height. Of the ten homes in the immediate neighborhood, the appellant has received signatures in support from seven of them. Alternative Methods to Achieve Higher Interior Volume There are alternative methods to attain greater interior volume in his living room instead of increasing the exterior wall height. 1. Use a different footing design that will lower the entire house by at least six inches. See Diagram 4 in the Planning Commission staff report (Exhibit A). 2. Put the living room and dining room on a slab foundation, resulting in a "sunken" room as suggested by Commissioner Saadati. 3. Utilize vaulted ceilings instead of coffered ceilings to achieve more interior volume. Precedent This appeal, if approved, will set a wall height precedent for future applicants. One application that is going to be heard by the Design Review Committee on July 16, R-2003-03 Appeal 6 2003 for two-story residence with the maximum floor area with a single-story section that is approximately two to three feet taller than the neighboring single- story homes and a three-car garage. The affected neighbor has indicated to staff that the project's single-story wall height should be reduced. Ci_ty Council Action Three options are available to the City Council. With each option, an expectation of the long-term outcome is described. 1. City Council approval of the appeal, without any modifications. This is the Planning Commission recommendation. If the City Council approves this appeal, it is important to define the unique circumstances or conditions that warrant the inconsistencies with the Guidelines to avoid creating a precedent for future applications. 2. City Council approval of the appeal with some or all of the staff recommended modifications as shown in Exhibit H. Approval of the appeal with the staff recommended modifications would result in less staff emphasis on tall single-story wall planes and more emphasis of other areas. Specific direction from the Council concerning issues to focus on will assist staff and the Design Review Committee with future projects. 3. City Council denial of the appeal and uphold the Design Review Committee decision. 4. Schedule a study session to review the application of the R1 Ordinance and the Design Guidelines for single-family development. Enclosures: Plan Set Exhibit A - Planning Commission staff report and DRC plan set Exhibit B - Minutes to the April 14, 2003 Planning Commission meeting Exhibit C - Building Permits from 1/1/01 to 6/18/03 Exhibit D - Survey of Vicinity - Year Built Exhibit E - Survey of Vicinity - Number of Stories Exhibit F - Survey of Vicinity - Support Exhibit G - Survey of Vicinity - Three Car Garages Exhibit H - Alternative Front Elevations Exhibit I - Design Review Conformance Form Exhibit J ~ Appellant's List of Supporters Prepared by: Peter Gilli, Senior Planner Steve P~aseck~'''' _. x.~_~. ~ 'i Director of Community Development Approved by: City Manager EXHIBIT A CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torte Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: R-2003-03 Agenda Date: April 14, 2003 Appellant (s): Chich Hung Property Location: 10110 Mann Drive (APN#: 326-19-005) RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission has the option to make the following recommendation to the City Council: 1. Deny the appeal and uphold the Design Review Committee's decision, or 2. Uphold the appeal and deny or modify the Design Review Committee's decision. Project Data: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: Project Consistency with: General Plan: Zoning: Environmental Assessment: Residential Low (1-5 D.U./ACRE) RI-10 Yes. Yes. Exempt. BACKGROUND On March 5, 2003, the Design Review Committee (DRC) approved the applicant's request to demolish an existing single-family home and construct a new 4,463 square foot two story residence with 45% FAR located at 10110 Mann Drive. The applicant is appealing DRC's decision and is requesting that the living room plate height be raised from 10 feet to 11 feet. The applicant discussed the plate height issue at DRC. The Committee found that an increase of wall height would cause the proposed home to be out of scale with the immediate adjacent single-story homes; therefore the request was denied. DISCUSSION Appellant: The appellant is appealing the approval based on the desire for a higher living room plate height (see enclosed appeal form). The appellant did not submit any formal written justification to further explain the basis of the appeal. City of Cupertino April 14, 2003 M-2003-03 Page 2 Staff: Neighborhood Compatibility According to General Plan Policy 2-15, the City is charged to ensure that the scale and density of new residential development and remodeling is reasonably compatible with the City's predominant single family residential pattern, except in areas designated for higher density housing. The R1 Ordinance Section 19.28.050 states that new two-story homes shall not be disproportionately larger than or out of scale with the neighborhood pattern in terms of building forms, roof pitches, eave heights, ridge heights, and entry feature heights. Staff and the City's architectural consultant have worked extensively with the appellant's architect on the design of the proposed house. Revisions have been made to simplify the roof design and reduce the over mass & height of the house in order to be more compatible with the immediately adjacent single-story homes. Staff believes that a balance has been reached with the approved design. The following excerpts and diagram are from the City's Residential Design Guidelines that specifically provide design solutions for new two-story developments next to existing single-story homes: Diagram 1 · Balance the appearance of new two-story development with those of the existing neighborhood by keeping similar architectural form, roof pitch, eave and ridge heights. · In new home developments, use one story element at the edges of development abutting existing one-story homes to soften the transition. By raising the living room ceiling plate height by a foot (from 10 feet to 11 feet) per the appellant's request, the exterior wall height of the house will also be raised from 11 feet to 12 feet. Currently, the approved exterior wall height at the living room area is approximately one foot over the exterior wall height of the single-story home immediately left of the project site (see diagram 2). If the appellant's request is granted, City of Cupertino April 14, 2003 M-2003-03 Page the proposed exterior wall height at the living room edge abutting the existing single- story home will be approxhnately two feet higher, which would present an abrupt transition. Since 1999, the Design Review Committee has consistently required that eave lines be lowered to be compatible with the neighboring houses. In 2000, the City Council & Planning Commission were introduced the issue of compatible wall heights and had no objection to limiting heights more than the ordinance when neighborhood compatibility issues are met. Therefore staff is not in support of the appellant's request. Adjacent Existing Single-Story Home / Approved Two-Story Residence pproved Living Room Exterior Height Diagram 2 Vaulted Ceiling Vs. Higher Plate Heights Instead of increasing the plate height and the exterior wall height, vaulting the interior ceiling is another design solution that is available to the appellant if additional interior volume is desired. The appellant is aware of this option but has chosen not to utilize it. Diagram 3 City of Cupertino April 14, 2003 M-2003-03 Page 4 Foundation Options There are several foundation options that could be utilized to reduce the exterior wall heights by up to six inches. The following diagram demonstrates that by varying the design of the foundation, the over all finish floor could be lowered significantly. The applicant is aware of these options but has chosen not to utilize them. Standard footing detail. First floor level is about one foot above grade. Deeper footing, more digging for crawl I but the height of the building is reduced by about one foot without losing any interior volume. Diagram 4 Submitted by: Gary Chao, Assistant Planner Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development ~t~,..~ ENCLOSURES Appeal Form Approved Plan Set G:~lanning~PDREPORT~AppealsLR-2003-03pc.doc City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3223 APPEAL Application No. Applicant(s): Appellant(s): name, address, phone number Decision of Dkector of Co~ffi~ Decision ofPl~ng Co~si,~ ~D~,~:a Date of detonation of D~ector or m~ling of notice of City decision: ',3- Basis of appeal: Signature(s) ~ apl It'/ ~d return to the attention of theZ Please complete form, ~nclude City Clerk appeals/appck forml.doc To be completed by City Clerk staff StaffForm - Appeals (attach to Appeal form submitted) 1. Application No. ~- 2 2. Fee submitted? Yes f No 3. Date of decision or mailing: 4. Date appeal received: 5. Hearing scheduled for 6. Notification sent to: Applicant(s) Appellant(s) Interested parties Planning Department 7. ,~ Date legal notice published: appeals~staff, doc SITE PLAN I FEB ~:-?'303 ..A.NEW RESIDENCE FOR:, "MR. & MRS. VIC HUNG · 101 10 MANN DRIVE .CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA BLDG [~TA PARCEL MAP INDEX VICINITY MAP / RITE ,: ~ ~ll~ FIRST KITC~N FOYER !1 DNNG ROOM (G ROOF PLAN Application Number , MASTER BEDROOM SECOflO FLOOR PLAN i Application Number . Signature TYPICAL N(~TES: ., FT1 ,' ,i~ ITl iApp~ication Number Date ~'~ ~,ECTION ~ SECTION A6 EXHIBIT B inures 2 April 14, 2003 ~wta ~ ION: ~ Com. Corr moved t~o~move A:pplication TM-2002-05, U-2002-12, '~q~002-04, EA~ff02-24 (Mit) from the calendar SECOND: VOTE: Pass~,d~ 5-0-0 ORAL CO~CATIOI'qS?~ne Non PUBLIC lcI~ARII~G Application No.: Applicant: Location: R-2003~03 Dick Fang (Hung residence) 10110 Mann Drive Appeal of approval of a new two-story 4,463 square foot residence Planning Commission decision final unless appealed Staffpresentation: Mr. Gary Chao, Associate Planner, reviewed the background of the application as outlined in the staff report. The applicant is appealing the Design Review Committee's decision and requesting that the wall height be increased from 10 feet to 11 feet. He illustrated photos of other homes in the area, and reviewed the R1 design guidelines relative to the application. The solution offered by the design guidelines is that the architects or design could use vaulted ceilings rather than high exterior walls to achieve interior volume desired. Staff and the city's architectural consultant have worked extensively with the applicant's architect on the design of the proposed house; revisions have been made to simplify the roof designs, reductions have been made to the overall.mass and the height of the house and the house had bean flipped to provide more harmonious interface at the same time minimizing privacy impacts. Staff believes that a balance has been reached; therefore does not support the appellant's appeal. By raising the living room ceiling by merely one foot per the appellant's request, the exterior wall height of the house will also be raised. Currently the approved exterior wall height at the living room area is approximately one foot over the exterior wall height of the single family home immediately left of the project site. If the appellant's request is granted, the proposed exterior wall height of the living room edge abutting the existing single story home will be more than two feet higher which would present an abrupt transition. He reviewed the design options for the appellant. Mr. Chao said that the Planning Commission could recommend to the City Council to deny the appeal and uphold the DRC decision or uphold the appeal and deny or modify the DRC decision. Com. Miller said that when he looked at the house it appeared the house on the right had a higher cave than the house on the left of the applicant's house. Mr. Chao concurred. Com. Miller asked that by flipping the plan, if in that version they are just one foot above the cave line and they flip it to the other side, which has a higher cave line to begin with, aren't they just one foot above at that point. Mr. Chao said that according to the architect, it would be two feet above, with the desired 11 foot plate heights, they would be at least two feet above the cave height of the existing single story home shown. Com. Wong referred to Page 2-1 ... "the committee found that an increase of wall height would cause the proposed home to be out of scale with the immediate adjacent single-story homes; therefore the request was denied." He clarified that since he was on the DRC with Com. Saadati it was a request from the applicant for a higher plate on the living room. He said he declined it at Planning Commission Minutes 3 April 14, 2003 that time because they did not have a photo of the living room for the higher roof. He said that after seeing the new drawing he was open to it. He pointed out his concern in the staff report the alternative footing. He said it was brought up in the R1 hearing, and noted that lowering it six inches would likely be a higher cost, and questioned if the benefit would outweigh the cost of lowering it to six inches. He said the applicant has a fight to chose not to do it. Com. Corr said he concurred with Com. Miller that the height of the house on the right was higher than the house on the left, and noted that the middle house is not the existing house; the existing house is gone and this house which is higher has been put in its place and they want to add another foot above that. He noted the two requests, one to discuss extending the plate height by one foot, which is on the agenda, and second that they were presenting the notion of flipping the house. Com. Saadati said that relative to Com. Wong's comment regarding the foundation, he had seen foundations built which lowered homes before and said it was not an unusual design. He requested that the advantages and disadvantages of flipping the house be discussed. Mr. Chao reviewed that the applicant came to DRC on March 5, 2003 requesting that the elevation be flipped, with the justification that they had a better view from their master bedroom window; and staff found that flipping it provided a more ideal interface since there would be a garage next to a garage, and on the other side, a living room next to the neighbor's living room. Staff and DRC concurred with the applicant's request and approved with the elevation; flipping it back would result in a garage next to somebody's living room. Com. Wong said that it was stated at the DRC hearing that staff could go either way if they wanted to flip the house because originally it was the other way. Mr. Chao said if they can lower the cave heights as previously suggested, to no more than a foot higher than the cave height of the adjacent single family home, he felt staffwould not object, but staffwould like to point out that ideally it is a better interface or elevation to have the garage next to a garage, and living room next to somebody else's living room. Relative to the distance of the second floor to the adjacent house, Com. Saadati asked how much further it would be by flipping. Mr. Chao said he did not have that information because the applicant just submitted the revised elevation. Com. Saadati estimated that it would be 5 to 10 feet further, and privacy-wise, would be providing some improvement. Mr. Chao said if it is flipped, according to the applicant's request, the second floor will be closer to the single family home on the left which according to the drawing, has either a living room or bedroom, as opposed to the garage on the other side. He said that several home owners, including the two home owners immediately adjacent to the project site, signed the petition. Com. Wong asked for comment on compatibility and harmonious, as well as mass and bullc He said by raising it one foot higher for the plate in the living room, it would likely come down more to compatible or harmonious, or would there still be a question regarding mass and bulk on the living room because the overall height of the building will still be the same? Mr. Chao said that by raising it, the concern is that the eave height is going to be now two feet more than the existing single family home on the right side. To be consistent with previous findings by the DRC, on similar projects, it has been determined that within one foot, plus or minus, is an acceptable compatibility level. In response to Com. Corr's question, Mr. Chao said Planning Connmssion Minutes 4 April 14, 2003 that the R1 ordinance allows the maximum height plate of 12 feet high, and 5 feet from the side yard setback. Mr. Piasecki added that it is largely not only based on what the ordinance says and what the guidelines say, but also the precedent that DRC has been implementing over the last 3 or 4 years where they have been doing it case by case. Mr. Dick Fang, applicant, said that in August 2002 when the sketches were finished, he told his client that the DRC approved a maximum height in the living room of 10 feet, which is one foot higher than the neighbor. He said his client wanted a height of 11 feet or more and it was explained that the city could be contacted to discuss the issue. He said the project was submitted in the sketch stage and discussed with staff, and staff returned it with two issues; the three car garage which was then recessed; and flipping the house. He said that is the reason when they submitted it to the DRC that they flipped the house, putting the living room on the south side and garage where illustrated. He explained his rationale for flipping the building and said that he felt the home was compatible with the neighbors if they kept height of the living room 11 feet. He then reviewed the foundation options. Com. Saadati clarified Mr. Fang's statement, that he preferred to have the elevation to remain as illustrated rather than flip it. Mr. Fang said it was better because the garages are side by side with the living room on the other side. If it is raised a foot, it is two feet plus and if flipped on that side, it is two feet. Chair Chen opened the meeting for public input. Ms. Andrea Lin, 10074 Mann Drive, said she supported the appellant's request to have the ceiling height increased to 11 feet. Mr. Dennis Wightman, 10092 Mann Drive, said he supported the application. Com. Wong asked if Mr. Wightman had concerns if the floor height was higher and it was flip flopped. Mr. Wightman said he did not have a concern, since the sides of the houses have no windows and there were no privacy issues associated with it. He said he was satisfied with Mr. Hung's explanation. Mr. Chich Hung, applicant, compared the height of his walls to his neighbors. He said staff suggested lowering the living room floor, but he was concerned for his young children's safety and the possibility of them tripping on the step down. He said they would still need vaulted ceilings to reach the desired height. He said there were 15 to 18 homes within 200 to 300 feet from his home with 11 foot wall living room height and also big office buildings. He said he had 33 signatures of support from his neighborhood. He said he did not want to be treated as a special case, he just wanted his rights served as a resident of Cupertino. The city ordinance has a 12 foot wall daylight plane which the appeal floor plan is within its limit. He questioned the purpose of the ordinance if they did not follow it. He expressed his appreciation for the support, and said he hoped the future ordinance would have more precise measurements to follow. He said in some cases plan approval or not is dependent on the personal view which sometimes is subjective. Chair Chen asked if Mr. Hung was content with either floor plan with the garages on the right or the left. Mr. Hung said he preferred the side with no window on the second floor, just the bathroom window which does not present a privacy issue. Planning Commission Minutes 5 April I4, 2003 Mr. Roy Hampton, 21821 Oalcview Lane, said he supported his neighbor, the comparisons listened to this evening, and said he understood they were looking at the compatibility of the neighborhood. He pointed out that his home was a two story, next to another two story house, which is a progression in Cupertino. As the older homes get refurbished they become two story homes, and there is a difference in elevation of the road, resulting in a foot of change in elevation. Mr. Hampton said it was not a massive house, it meets the detailed regulation and he supported it. Mrs. Yvonne Hampton, a Cupertino resident since 1974 said she has seen the neighborhood go from single story to two story homes; and said the home was an attractive solution to gaining a second story and more square footage; w/th no vertical wall on each side, and a pleasant transition keeping in scale with the neighborhood. She said she supported the applicant having his home built, and said that families with changing lifestyles want more square footage in their homes. Chair Chen closed the public input portion of the meeting. Com. Miller said that a significant amount of houses in the neighborhood had been redeveloped and likely were there before the ordinance since there are quite a few with higher plate lines and eave lines; there is a large development at the edge of the property; all two story with high room ceilings and high plate heights. He said it was clear that the neighborhood was in transition and it is not clear that the ordinance addresses a transition neighborhood as well as it might. He said there were two patterns of development and in the ordinance it talks about the predominant pattern in the neighborhood. Since the applicant is not proposing something above the requirement of 12 feet, he is within the strict ordinance guidelines. Relative to compatibility, if it is stated that it is compatible with the old way of doing things in the 50s then it doesn't work; however, if it is stated that it is compatible with the new way with the pattern that seems to be developing, then it is compatible. What is also being heard is that compatibility with the new way, with redevelopment of two story homes, is what the neighborhood desires. He said the intent of the ordinance is to protect the neighbors but in this case the neighbors are not asking for protection; and it is not clear that just another foot on a living room wall height is an incompatible thing with architectural styles. Com. Miller said he was inclined to favor the applicant. He said as noted earlier, the homes were built in the 50s and are in the high maintenance phase of their useful life and they are generally on larger lots. From a desirable standpoint and an economically viable standpoint it makes sense that these properties get redeveloped, brought up to code, more insulated and a new architectural style for the neighborhood. He said he did not see a reason to discourage that and in this case it almost seems like it is more an issue of personal choice on the applicant's part. Mr. Piasecki clarified that the project at the end of the street on Stevens Creek Boulevard was referred to as Eaton Place or Coventry; built by Summerhill Development about 5 or 6 years ago and is on the former Monta Vista Hardware Store site. It is a higher density, small lot, single family development, not a conventional single family development. He said that the issue was 10 or 11 foot height. In response to Com. Saadati's question if other trees and shrubbery were going to be planted there, Mr. Chao said not on that side since there are no proposed two story windows along that elevation on the second floor; therefore no new landscaping is required along that side. Com. Saadati said that considering the neighbors on either side are not objecting to additional height, he did not object as long as some trees were planted to soften the additional foot. Overall the building looks nice and is proportioned right; the reason they did not approve the additional height is because the previous application that was submitted was not approved and there were no neighbors to speak Planning Commission Minutes 6 April 14, 2003 for it. He said he was not certain if the house approval would set a precedent in the future relative to the ordinance. Mr. Piasecki said that the report has been based on precedent and is called case law. The cases in the past have been with one foot taller, it would set a new precedent to treat other applicants the same way this applicant has been treated; decisions are made based on what is good for the overall neighborhood. He said it would set a precedent since everyone is treated equally; they are not applied for one person who has neighbors who agree with their application and another way for an applicant that does not have neighbors agreeing; the law is applied unilaterally. Mr. Chao said if the house is under 35% there are still a set of findings that the director has to make, some of which have been discussed and includes making sure that the eave heights and the ridge lines entry heights are comparable with the adjacent single family, so they are built in the findings that staff would have to make to approve it. Mr. Piasecki said he knew of no other case in the last three years where there has been a conflict on a home under 35%, with an 11 foot or 12 foot high wall incompatible with its neighbor. Com. Wong said he concurred with Corns. Saadati and Miller. He noted for the record that he met with Mr. Gilli regarding DRC issues and he let Gary Chao know that he had met with the applicant on Friday at City Hall for about 20 minutes. He said he asked for photos as it was difficult during the DRC meeting to see if it was compatible or not. He said he was still frustrated with the ordinance not being compatible with the guidelines; whenever 35% FAR is exceeded, you have to go into the compatibility with the guidelines. He said he hoped they could tighten it up or correct it as the applicants are frustrated. Mr. Hung did a good job in communicating with the neighbors, getting buyin, which is what they encourage the residents to do. He said he supported the project and that the neighbors also supported the project. Com. Corr said he was having a difficult time with the issue because of the backlash from the community when the monster homes were built. They were asked to do something about it and did; and now people are asking why shouldn't they be able to build them? He said if this house was built in a neighborhood where all those monster homes had been built already, it would not be questioned since it would be deemed compatible w/th everything there; in fact it is shorter because those others had the miler ones, yet as you go through that neighborhood, you look around and see houses that are much taller than this and those are the ones that caused so much backlash. The question is one of compatibility; is this house compatible with its neighbors or not, and through that neighborhood there are bigger homes and smaller homes immediately adjacent on the left. The question is, what is compatibility? - it does fit within the R1 ordinance, it is less than 12 feet. He said on one hand he was tom with the notion of sticking to his guns in terms of what was said in the past; but on the other hand, a good case has been made for saying this one because of where it is and the houses around it probably is compatible. He said when dealing with the compatibility issue, it was difficult to say that it would set a precedent; what is the precedent? not the plate height because it is 10 or 11 feet, not at 12. He said he had to ponder it longer. Com. Wong said relative to Com. Corr's comment, he wanted to clarify they were addressing the plate height of the living room, not the monster homes. He said he understood the essence of the 1999 ordinance that they did not want to have monster homes in Garden Gate or in Rancho Rinconada. He said they were now talking about design, and felt that by adding another foot, there are questions if height is more important or design more important. Their goal was to have a good design and should try to shy away from monster homes because this is not really a monster Planning cormmssion Minutes 7 April 14, 2003 home, this is a very well designed house, is symmetrical and tries to fall as much under the ordinance as much as possible. Com. Miller said he felt it was a key issue that they could agree it was a transition neighborhood; the houses are old and the neighbors are likely thinking that they want to redevelop with a design different from 50 years ago. He said it was difficult to expect the residents to stay with a design that was implemented 50 years ago; it is 2003 and newer designs are more fashionable and more desirable and they should be allowed to make that choice as a neighborhood. Chair Chen said she questioned what determines the compatibility - height or material and design? She also said that she had a problem with the old design that defines the neighborhood. The new design is a well designed home that is supported by the neighbors, and may be the future design that determ/nes what a neighborhood will be like. She said she supported the project as proposed by the appellant. MOTION: SECOND: NOES: VOTE: Com. Wong moved to uphold the appeal and support the applicant's raising of the living room height by another foot; according to the drawing submitted by the applicant Com. Miller Coms. Saadati and Con' Passed 3-2-0 Mr. Piasecki noted that the recommendation would be forwarded to City Council on May 5, 2003. Com. Con' clarified that he voted no to support what they had been through, with the monster homes and the problems and trying to solve them, and the backlash from the community. He said he might have voted differently if he felt it would go either way since he liked the house design. He said he did not feel the subject house would be a problem, but was voting in favor of where they have been and to be consistent in how they apply the ordinance. Com. Saadati said his main concern was setting precedent and was not certain that in the future they would have the same situation coming up again and again, especially at the DRC level. He said he felt in general the house was compatible with the neighborhood and by putting some trees and softening the adjacency issue it would help; but he was uncertain about the future impact. Mr. Piasecki said that Com. Wong talked about the frustration applicants feel about the discrepancies between the ordinance and the guidelines. He said from staff's perspective no one is more frustrated than staff as they are the messengers, and put stock in what was done in the past and many people have participated in that and the wording that went into the ordinance and ultimately the guidelines. He said they want clarification as they do not like the role they are placed in. Com. Wong asked Mr. Piasecki if it would be better to have the Planning Commission go back to the guidelines and give suggestions to the Planning Commission or City Council because specifics were not addressed in the last three meetings. Mr. Piaseckl said that it could be discussed in a workshop format; staff will bring the R1 ordinance back and the specific topic should be discussed in terms of what is considered compatibility; if a tree is planted and it softens the interface, is 12 feet appropriate or 11 feet or two feet offset? Planning Commission Minutes 8 April 14, 2003 Chair Chen thanked staff for the excellent job in working to maintain the compatibility based on all the work done before and Mr. Piasecki's leadership. In the future, all the design and development still has to be reviewed on a case by case basis. Application Nos.: Applicant: EXC-2001-08, EA-2001-13 (Mit) Amar Gupta E1 Cerdto Road Hillside private road to construct a 6,500 square foot residence on driveway on slopes greater than 30% and a 500 cubic yard Planning appealed. Staff presentation: Mr. Gilli, Senior Planner, exception to construct a sin residence on a also for development on than 30% and grading quantity allowed on the He noted application. the application for the hillside exceptions exception to exceed the amount of ~-mails received in support of the There was a brief discussion about removed it would be removed offsite. exported, it would be taken to a Wong expressed concern about concerned about the quarry. Mr. Gilli said that if dirt needed to be Public Works said that if fill had to be or to a landfill or taken out of the county. Com. and down Stev*ns Creek; residents are akeady Mr. Piasecki clarified that another He said if there was extra fill they would be preferable to move it off with trucks hauling the dirt. '.yen thou as little of the natural terrain as possible. pack it on top of sites as it would slide. It would cause some extra traffic and noise Mr. Gilli summarized that the ~ fill and the balance but being done to mitigate the ~ is recommending that the driveway considered requesting 1 that they don't need. staff would like to In conclusion declaration and hearing. grading impacts of the part of the exception. stay on the access easement on abandon their fights to further discussion with other :ondition which is what the that the Planning Commission the hillside exception subject to the model information on the amount of cut and or is and for those reasons staff to Condition 16, Mr. Gilli said >roperty itself. Staff had of the access easements olefice, is representing. the mitigated negative at the Saadati's question about roof material and color dark and it is anticipated that the dark green and dark brown will, Com. also expressed concern about excess fill on top of the cause s. He said he was certain a geotechnical engineer would address all of any fill that is going to be taken place. Mr. Goepfert said there is approval of a concept that wdl be further ~nvest~gated by the noted that it was a together. which could those and the ,,~,° ~ - ' Subjec Site" ~ ~ ~ Exhibit C BUILDING PERMITS (from 0'1101101 to 061'18~03) City Limits One Story Addition/New Home Two Story Addition/New Home · ~ ' Stevens Creek Boulevard EXHIBIT D: Year Built (source - Cou.t,V LEGEND ['-~ N/ew r~icienc~ built 1998.1999--- resK SubjeCt Site -- WOODBURY DR MONTE CT .I GARDENVIEW OAKVIEW --PI nne ' elopme~t T' constructed~ln 1_9~:. EXHIBIT E: Number of Stories LEGEND CORTE MADERA LN -] Onc-~ry '~esidence _l CT WOODBURY DR MONTE CT ' GARDENVIEW "" OAKVIEW : '" -7' cons _in~ 1994' EXHIBIT F: Support for the Appellant L"'L'E~'END CORTE' MADEIRA LN t I L 1 WOODBURY DR ,:-- ..... ~ MONTE CT \ / i ! Green is the subject site Light Green supports the Appellant's Request EXHIBIT G: Three Car Garages .;'END '--~ORTE MADER,~. LN -- Three'ca~-gardge WOODBURY DR ! .A_pproXima~e 300' ; OAKVIEW Z EXHIBIT H EXAMPLE OF FULL CONSISTENCY WITH GUIDELINES (6' models for scale) Highest level of compatibility with form and scale of neighborhood. First story eave heights match neighbors. Entry eave height matches neighbors. Second story plate height reduced. - Tandem garage used to present a better facade to street. PARTIAL GUIDELINE CONSISTENCY Moderate compatibility of form and scale with neighborhood. - First story eaves are at least two feet higher than neighbor on right. Entry matches single-story eave height. Second story plate height reduced. - Tandem garage used to present a better facade to street. APPELLANT REQUEST Less compatibility of form and scale with neighborhood. - First story eave are at least two feet higher than neighbor on right. - Entry is nearly 14', the maximum under RI, not compatible with neighboring eave heights. - Second story plate height is 9', resulting in an extra foot of height and mass. - Three car garage is incompatible with the predominant neighborhood pattern of and presents less attractive facade to the street. EXHIBIT I DESIGN REVIEW CONFORMANCE FORM (1 of 7) Community Development Department 10300 Torte Avenue (408) 777-3308 / Fax (408) 777-3333 Cupertino, CA 95014 platming~cupertino.org http://www.cuper tino.org/plannlng Excerpts of the Single Family Design Gu/delines are included below. In the space provided, describe how your project meets the intent of each guidetine. Attach additional sheets of paper if necessary. Incomplete responses may result in your application being delayed. Objective New homes and remodel and addition projects offer a great opportunity to create a design that is harmonious with and enhances the neighborhood. However, for this to happen one must observe the existing neighborhood characteristics and incorporate them into their design. A special sensitivity must be shown in the design of two story homes, as they have a greater visual impact on the neighborhood. To reduce the impact of new homes on the neighborhood, incorporate the scale, form and materials found in the neighborhood Into the design. Neighborhood Compatibili~_ Objective: To soften the transition between existing single story neighborhoods and new two-story development. Problem: Architectural design of new two story homes may not account for scale, mass and bulk of existing homes in a neighborhood. Solutions · Keep soil grade changes between properties to a minimum. DESIGN REVIEW CONFORMANCE FORM (2 of 7) Community Development Department 10300 Torte Avenue (408) 777-3308 / Fax (408) 777-3333 Cupertino, CA 95014 planning~cupertino.org http://www.cupertino.org/planning Set the first floor elevation as close to existing grade as possible. This does not include split-level portion of the house. Balance ~e appear~ce of new ~o-sto~ development ~th ~xis~g neighborhood by keeping si~ ~cMt<~al fora, roof pit~ eave ~d ~dge heights. · In new home developments, use one story elern'~nt aFec~s of clEv~iolSifient-" "~' abutting existing one story homes to soften the transition. Yg'-,fl · ! Where new two-story elements or homes are proposed adjacent to single story homes, position new two story windows to protect the privacy of backyard and living ~eas existing single story homes. This can be achieved by the use of skylights, clerestory windows, reducing the size of windows, raising the sill height of windows or installing louvers on windows. Sheet 8 of 20 Rl_app_2OO4.doc revised 06/18/03 DESIGN REVIEW CONFORMANCE FORM (3 of 7) Community Development Department 10300 Torre Avenue (408) 777-3308 / Fax (408) 777-3333 Cupertino, CA 95014 planning~cupertino.org http://www.cupertino.org/planning Privacy protection between new two stories and existing one story homes can also be addressed through the planting of fast growing, non-deciduous trees and shrubs. Second story decks should be placed or designed so as not to offer direct views into adjacent property living or backyard areas. Use solid railings instead of open railings and lattice and landscape Screening on sides of decks toward sideyards. Mass & Bulk Objective: To reduce the appearance of mass and bulk of new structures. Problem New two story homes or additions having two story vertical walls appear more massive and bulky, due to lack of regard for building indentation, distance to adjacent buildings or impact to light/air to adjoining properties. How to maintain the building square footage that the public wants but reducing the visible bulk of a building. Solutions · Keep visible second stories wall heights reduced to a minimum by burying them under the roof of the first story. Rl_app_2OO4.d~c revis*d 06/18/03 ~ ! DESIGN REVIE~ CONFORMANCE FORM (4 of 7) Community Development Department 10300 Torre Avenue (408) 777-3308 / Fax (408) 777-3333 Cupertino, CA 95014 plartrdng~cupertino.org http://www.cuper tino.org/planning · Add articulations to second story walls where 6' high walls are used over a length of 24'. Reduce the height of entry features to match the eave heights of homes in a neighborhood. /il /// Use simple building for~x~s instead of overiy complex forms. Too many hips and valleys, bays, etc. can create a busy appearance. Set back second story from first floor and shape to relate to existing house. Avoid a boxy looking second story. Rl_app_2OO4.doc revised 06/18/03 DESIGN REVIEW CONFORMANCE FORM (5 of 7) Community Development Department 10300 Torre Avenue (408) 777-3308 / Fax (408) 777-3333 Cupertino, CA 95014 planning~cupertino.org http://www.cuper tino.org/plartrdng Set back second story from first floor and shape to relate to existing house. Avoid a boxy looking second story. If 1-dpped roofs fit your architectural design, they could be used because they reduce the visual mass of the roof. · The use of steep pitched roof should be avoided, If the architectural design allows. Use lighter looking materials on second story such as wood or stucco and avoid using heavy looking building materials such as stone or brick. Rl_a~_2OO4.doc revised DESIGN REVIEW CONFORMANCE FORM (6 of 7) Community Development Department 10300 Torte Avenue (408) 777-3308 / Fax (408) 777-3333 Cupertino, CA 95014 planning~cupertino.org http://www.cupertino.org/planning Streetscapes Objective: To promote good site planning techniques that will improve and beautify a neighborhood. Problem A neighborhood has a pattern as it related to building setback from street, orientation of garages/driveways, sidewalk pattern and public street tree type. This pattern should be maintained when new homes are built in a neighborhood. New two-story homes are constructed without installation of f~ont yard landscaping and t~ees to soften the mass of new two-story elements. Solutions · Plant a minimum of two non-deciduous ~rees (1-24" box, 1-15 gallon) in the front yard, in a location to soften the appearance of the two story elements of a home. · The city requires the owner to plant street tree(s) where none exist when the owner either subdivides the property, buildings a new home or improves the structure by adding twenty five (25) percent of the value of the existing structure. c/? Design the new home to match the existing neighborhood building setbacks and orientation of garages/driveway. 12 of 2o Rl_a~p_2OO4.doc reoised 06/28/03 DESIGN REVIEW CONFORMANCE FORM (7 of 7) Community Development Department 10300 Torte Avenue (408) 777-3308 / Fax (408) 777-3333 Cupertino, CA 95014 planning~cupertino.org ! http://www.cuper tino.org/planning When the garage doors are turned away from the street, use landscape planting, trellises, or the installat/on of a window(s) facing the street to soften the appearance of what would otherwise be a blank wall. · Garage doors should have a mum of contrasting color to blend in the doors appearance. · ~ ar e car g~rages could have one space setback from the other two spaces. Three single width doors instead of a single and a double width door could be used to reduce the scale of the garage. There should not be a three-car wide driveway. · Three car garages can be softened by the use of one tandem parking space behind one of the two parking spaces. R1_app_2OO4.d~ rtroised 06//8/03 EXHIBIT J CH/CH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 fl plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: :)b ~.t -.3',el ~/w/ Signature: ,'>--'¢ ~ - - Date: 3 ,)",z ///,~,,s,_: Address: z0 -32- CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 11 ft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Signature: Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: ,.) 0 ,~/~'/ ,/(~ /~L.~ ~ ~ _ S i g n at u.~r.e *-'~~...~_--~--~~--~ Date,-/---~-~> ~' -o..> Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 fi plate height living room. Sincerely, Date: " c, '~ Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr T6 Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room· Sincerely, Name:~5~¥ ails(fo.,/{,,d)~.t¢t S~gnature. hT [ Aq;q · 4 / / Date. '?'373 Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 11 ft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: Signature: Date: Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: ~)x~(~ Signature: ~/d~ rote: Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 11 ft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Slgnatu~ Date: Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 11 ft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Signature: Address: 74t~2.1 oo.l<'~,'e- ~d L~-~ CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 11 ft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: Signature: ~-~ Date: ~3 - & 5 - 6 ~ Address: CHICH T. HLTNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: ._~d~rz.,~_--~ ~z.r' ~'~ Signature: ~/~ ~.. ~x~ ...~_..._ Address: ~iEf~O ~'?~r'c~,.~ /,,~ CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 11 ft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Signature :' _"~,,',~,, Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 11 ft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: i~0~ Signature: ~v~,,'~4PL-d' Date: 9/c~/O~ Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: Signature: Date: Address: CHICI--I T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 11 ft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 fl plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: /,~/l (iL) Signature: Date: Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110,MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Slgnamr Date: ~ - -> ) - o _¢ ' Address: CH/CH T'. HUNG 10110 ¢VLANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Signa~f~~.- Date: Address: 2/~D CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 11 fi of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concem: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 fi plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: S~gnature: Date: ~1' I / Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110,MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 1 ft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: [3'~.)~ ~ Signature:'~ ~ - Date: t4/0 ~/i9 3 Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 11 ft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve ' and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: Signature: Date: Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr. To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 fi plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: ~J~di4~ Signature: ?'/1/(~¢¢ Date: fit,_: Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 11 ft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lfi of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: Signature: {/"-~ ~ Date: ~/2d/0.7 Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 fi plate height living room. Sincerely, Name:/3/~z~ Signature.~_~2..~ Date: CHICH T. HUNG 10110,M_ANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: Signature: Date: ¢/~-~' Address: CH/CH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: '~¢~v~ ~ll~lie~,l Signature: l~Jg, t ~ Date: ~[2Jv/0_5 Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 fl plate height living room. Sincerely, Date: /-//~3/~L3 Address: /z? 33-'3 CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 11 ft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: Signature: Date: Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: Signature: Date: Address: CHICH T. HUNG 10110 MANN DR. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 City of Cupertino Planning department 10300 Trorre ave Cupertino, Ca 95014 Subject: Proposal of living room plate height to 1 lft of new two stories house on 10110 mann dr To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in reference to Mr. Hung' s new two stories house project. We would like the city to know that we approve and support his project for his new house with 11 ft plate height living room. Sincerely, Name: Signature: Date: Address: CUPEI INO City Hall 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (408) 777-3212 FAX: (408) 777-3366 davek~cupertino.org OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Number Agenda Date: July 7, 2003 SUBJECT The Naming of City Facilities and Recognition of Financial Donors. BACKGROUND In the course of fundraising for the new Library, it became apparent that a policy on naming City facilities would be helpful. At the April 7th City Council meeting, Council concurred with an offer by Mayor Chang and Vice Mayor James to work with staff to develop a naming policy. The Mayor and Vice Mayor decided to add Don Allen and Rich Abdalah to the committee along with the City Manager and City Attorney. These six met on May 5th and again on June 23rd to outline the proposed policy. The City Attorney developed a draft for committee members' review, and the attached policy is recommended for City Council adoption. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached policy and procedures for naming City facilities and recognizing financial donors. Respectfully submitted: David W. Knapp, City Manager Printed on Recycled Paper City of Cupertino The Naming of City Facilities and Recognition of Financial Donors Policy and Procedure Purpose The purpose of this document is to define the policies, procedures, and responsibilities associated with the naming of city facilities, portions thereof, structures, equipment and furnishings thereof and to provide a process for the recognition of private donations and in kind contributions to the City. Policy Guidelines 1) Naminq Policy City buildings and facilities, including portions thereof, structures, equipment and furnishings should be named in a manner that will provide an easy and recognizable reference. City buildings, facilities or portions thereof, structures, equipment and furnishings may be named: a) For their geographical location, e.g., neighborhood, major street, regional area or the City itself. b) To honor or recognize individuals, including retired elected officials or community volunteers, who have made extraordinary non- monetary contributions to the City of Cupertino, the region, or to the general public. 2) Procedure for Naminq: a) The naming of any city building, facility or portion thereof, structure, equipment or furnishing, based upon the above described guidelines, shall be accomplished by the City Council, upon recommendation of the City Manager and after the conduct of at least one public hearing. b) The City Council may refer a particular naming issue to an appropriate commission for the purpose of making a recommendation to the Council. 1 c) The City Council may remove a name from a city building, facility or portion thereof, structure, equipment or furnishings when deemed by the City Council to be in the best interests of the City. 3) Recoqnition of Financial Donations and In Kind Contributions a) Unless otherwise determined by the City Council, no city building, facility or portion thereof, structure, equipment or furnishing shall be named after an individual, group, (~rganization or business as a result of a financial donation or in kind contribution to the City. b) Prior to acceptance by the City Council, a donation or in kind contribution shall first be submitted to the City Manager for recommendation to the City Council. c) A donation or in kind contribution which is accepted by the City Council may be recognized by a plaque affixed to the appropriate city building, facility or portion thereof, structure, equipment or furnishings which shall read as follows: This [identification of facility] was made possible by the generous contribution of [ person and his/her family]; or This [identification of facility] was made possible by the generous contribution of [business or organization]; or This [identification of facility] was made possible by the generous contribution of in the name of or similar language. d) e) f) The size, type and location of the plaque shall be determined, on a case by case basis, by the City Council upon recommendation of the City Manager. The City Council may also cause to be designed a plaque or other object to be affixed to the city building, facility, or portion thereof, structure, equipment or furnishings which recognizes a group of donors and contributors to the City. The City will make every effort to preserve any recognition plaque or other dedicated object. If necessary, due to repair of 2 g) h) surrounding areas, construction or redesign of a building or facility, the plaque may be relocated. If the plaque or other dedication object cannot continue to be reasonably maintained, it may be removed by order of the City Council. If the dedication includes a gift of a plant or tree, the City will provide its regular standard of landscape care for the plant or tree. If the plant or tree does not survive, the City is not obligated to provide a replacement. If the dedication includes the gift of an object such as a bench, picnic table, play equipment, etc., the City will provide its regular standard of care and maintenance for the object. Any plant, tree, or object donated to the city and any plaque recognizing the donation may be removed at the discretion of the City Council when it deems that such removal would be in the best interests of the City. A copy of these guidelines will be given to any donor or contributor, prior to submission of the donation or contribution to the City Council for acceptance. The acceptance by the City Council of any donation or in kind contribution is expressly conditioned upon adherence to these guidelines. CITY OF cupertino City of Cupertino 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 FAX (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department Summary Agenda Item No. ,,~- Agenda Date: |uly 7, 2003 Subject: Review of City Council appointments to the General Plan Task Force RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council: Complete the appointments to the General Plan Task Force BACKGROUND The City Council created a 69-person General Plan Task Force (54 by category and 15 by City Council appointment), and agreed to fill in any vacancies, should there be any, with additional appointments. The selection of the General Plan Task Force is complete, except that there are eight vacancies that need to be filled. The list of Task Force members is enclosed, as is the list of remaining applicants who can be considered for the remaining appointments. DISCUSSION The eight vacancies are shown below. All of the vacancies are due to lack of applications, except for the Housing Commission. The applicant for the Housing Commission is not a resident, so a majority of the City Council did not vote for that applicant since that category had not been designated as eligible for a non- resident. Educator (At Large): 3 Foothill-DeAnza: 1 Housing Commission 1 Retail/Office Developer 2 Small Business I Regarding filling the Housing Commission appointment, if the majority of the City Council determines that a non-resident may not serve in that category, another Housing Commissioner, Mahesh Nihalani, could be assigned to it since Printed on Recycled Paper he was appointed to the Task Force as a renter. The next-ranked person in the renter category, Dan Schofield, could be moved into his slot. This still leaves seven vacancies to fill. Staff recommends that each Council person make one additional appointment from the "remaining applicants" list. The remaining two vacancies could either be dropped, or the entire City Council could nominate and vote for two more appointments. General Plan Task Force Schedule The tentative Task Force schedule is: July 9, 16, 23 August 6, 13, 20, 27 September 10, 17 All the meetings are scheduled for the Quinlan Community Center, Cupertino Room, 7:00 - 9:00 P.M. Enclosures: General Plan Task Force Appointments Remaining Applicants Prepared by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner Submitted by: Director of Community Development Approved by: David W. Knapp City Manager G:planning/pdreport/cc/ccgeneralplan7703 General Plan Task Force Appointments- 07/01/03 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission: Joseph Walton Chamber of Commerce: Mark Burns Mike Foulkes Cupertino Union School District: Joe Sluga Educator (At Large): Vacant - no applicant Vacant - no applicant Vacant - no applicant Employee/High Tech Headquarters: Jan Black Mary Soha Environmental Group: Dave Blau Douglas Rowe Major Office Property Representative: Cynthia A. Bartlett Wong Shawna Holmes Major Retail Property Representative: Todd Lee Peter Pau Northeast Sector: Harvey Barnett Andrew Golkar Betsy Randolph Frances Edwards Winslow Northwest Sector: Stan Barkey Nina K. Daruwalla Beez Jones Nic61 Lea Parks and Recreation Commission: Kris Wang Sheriff's Department: George Hsing Small Business Representative: Dennis Whittaker Vacant - only one applicant Southeast Sector: Fari Aberg Pat Bustamante James Cai Edward A. Jajko Southwest Sector: Cary Chien Lisa A. Giefer David Greenstein Michelle Hu Teen Commission: Zack Kolev Danh Trang Fine Art Commission: Carl Orr Fire Department: Mike Glazebrook Foothill-De Anza: Vacant - no applicant Fremont Union High School District: Homer Tong Housing Commission: No Selection League of Women's Voters: Suzanne Ford Roberta Hollimon Library Commission: Kathy Stakey Public Safety Commission: Nolan Chen Renter: Charlie Ahern Kathleen Crawford Mahesh Nihalani Trudi Wallick-Harrocks Residential Developer: Jon Moss Kathy Robinson Retail/Office Developer: Vacant - no applicant Vacant - no applicant Senior Citizen: Bob Graber Frank Yap City Council Appointees: Girish Bhat Rodney Brown Matthew Cohn Erve Conens Roger Costa Robert Hendrickson Raymond Hsu Olivia Jang John Kolski Sally Larson Brian Low R.D. McLoskey Shishir Mukherjee Malka Nagel Joann Yamani Remaining Applicants Norma Agar Anthony Alexander Sunny Baeva Jean Bedor Russell Blalack Ned Britt Rusty Britt Preston Chiappa Jeanette Conens Michael Di Tore Arik Donde Larry Enoksen Linda Espinoza Aric Gilbrecht Piyush Goyal Sam Grinels Mary Jo Gunderson Norm Hackford Andrea Harris Mary Holaday John Hopkins Judy Hsiao Srigouri Kamarsu D. King Huyen Le Sheila Leimer Robert Levy Donald Linden Cindy McArthur Bob McKibbin Donald E. Moore Stacey Nitta John Noone Anne Palmer Rich Parker Zahra Pavlovic Hosamm Ramsey Zoaib Rangwala Dave Riopel David Saltzman Dan Schofield Manna Shepherd William H. Sleight Ari Strod Joanne Tong Stan Tsu Charles Walters Jim Weber Ed Wessler Penny Whittaker Wilson Widjaja Thorisa Yap Chester Yeh G: \ Planning \ GenPlan I Task Force \ Remaining Applican ts.doc CUPEI TINO City Hall 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 (408) 777-3262 FAX: (4011) 777-3366 PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE SUMMARY Agenda Item Date: July 7, 2003 Subject: Adopt the Public Access contract with KMVT for progranuning on Cable Channel 15, and authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement. Background: In September of 2002, city staff received a letter from De Anza College indicating the college could no longer continue public access services under the current agreement. Under the terms of the previous agreement, the city had paid for one full-time staff at a cost of $103,000 per year. De Anza had provided an additional subsidy ora part-time staff assistant. 40 hours of studio access and support were provided to a dozen public access producers, three of whom were Cupertino residents. In exploring all options for public access services, staff identified both De Anza College and KMVT as possible providers. Initially, both entities submitted proposals indicating they could provide services for resident producers for $45 thousand annually. In June, De Anza revised its costs to $63 thousand annually, to cover previously unidentified labor expenses. In developing its recommendation, staff considered three primary criteria: 1. Any agreement must be based on a flexible and sustainable business model in order to weather changing economic conditions; 2. Services must meet the needs of public access producers including production capacity and technology; 3. Services must be consistent with the city's communications priority that city communications are to, from, and for the residents and businesses of Cupertino. The proposal from KMVT most clearly met, and exceeded, requirements for the city and public access producers. The idea of a regional public access center has been successfully used by a number of local communities including the Midpeninsula Community Media Center (serves Atherton, East Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Palo Alto, and Stanford), Matin Telecommunications Authority (serves all Marin cotmty cities except Novato) and Community Media Access Partnership (serves Gilroy, Hollister, and San Juan Bautista). This model provides both the flexibility and sustainability necessary for small and medium-size municipalities to sustain public access through difficult economic times. Economies of scale allow that no one community must bear the full cost of maintaining staff, facilities, and current production technology. As a 501 (3)(c) corporation, KMVT serves the community of Mountain View's public and government access needs, and also supports the City of Sunnyvale and Los Altos' public and government access Pnnted on Recycled Paper needs. Cupertino's participation in this regional access center will allow both the city and producers expanded capacity and enhanced support from an organization whose primary function is to provide public access services. KMVT's new facilities will provide significantly enhanced production capabilities for public access producers than had been available in the past. The facility will also provide a more robust network, control room, and editing suites for producers. Broadcasts of current programs, training and scheduling can begin immediately upon implementation of an agreement with the city. Cupertino cable subscribers have previously only been able to see Cupertino public access as part of a combined broadcast of Cupertino and Los Altos public access programming. Initially, this same level of service will be reinstituted. However, as part of the agreement with KMVT, Cupertino's public access programming would be separated from that of Los Altos to create a dedicated channel exclusively for Cupertino. Other scheduled improvements include acquisition of state-of-the-art digital equipment and non-linear editing systems. These service enhancements are vital to maintaining public access as a distinct forum and voice for Cupertino. As a service provider, KMVT brings to the table an outstanding record of service excellence. At its 2002 international conference, the Alliance for Community Media recognized KMVT with the award for Overall Excellence in Locally Originated Programming. This was the third time in the last six years that KMVT has received this award. The city is interested in developing a long-term solution to meet the needs of Cupertino public access and working with neighboring municipalities to develop a regional agreement that would serve the city's residents for years to come. However, several issues need to be addressed. The next ten months will be used to work out the details of such arrangements. The term of the agreement with KMVT is thus, one year, beginning July 8, 2003 and terminating June 30, 2004. Recommendation: Adopt the Public Access contract with KMVT for programming on Cable Channel 15, and authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement. Rick Kitson Public Information Officer Approved for submission: David W. Knapp City Manager SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AND MOUNTMN VIEW COMMUNITY TELEVISION FOR MANAGEMENT OF CUPERTINO PUBLIC ACCESS TELEVISION PROGRAMMING THIS AGREEMENT, dated , is by and between the CITY OF CUPERTINO, a municipal corporation ("CITY"), and MOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY TELEVISION (dba KMVT), a non-profit corporation ("CONTRACTOR"). WHEREAS, CITY is in need of specialized services in relation to the management of the CITY's Public Access Television Programming (Cupertino Community Television); and, WHEREAS, CONTRACTOR possesses the skill, expertise and facih'ties to provide the required services; NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties enter into this agreement. 1. Services by CON21L~CTOR CONTRACTOR shall provide services in accordance with Exhibit A, attached and incorporated by reference. The Parties agree that the nature of the services to be provided by CON'I'KACTOR necessitate that the services be performed on CONTRACTOR's premises, located at 1400 Terra Bella Avenue, Suite M, Mountain View, California. CONTRACTOR therefore agrees to furnish space on its premises and use of its equipment, as well as provide for cablecast services, as set forth in Exhibit A. 2. Time for Performance The term of this Agreement shall be from July 8, 2003 through June 30, 2004, unless otherwise terminated. The Parties may join in a quarterly review of performance under the Agreement to consequently resolve any mutually identified issues of concern through good faith negotiation. 3. Duties of CITY CITY to designate a Liaison person with authority to coordinate the personnel and activities of Cupertino Community Television with CONTRACTOR. CITY agrees that Cupertino producers shall adhere to all CONTRACTOR's rules and regulations as set forth from time to time in CONTRACTOR's 'User Guide". CITY further agrees that each Cupertino volunteer shall sign CONTRACTOR's 'User Compliance Agreement" and each Cupertino producer shall sign CONTRACTOR's '2~roducer Compliance Agreement" prior to any participation in CONI'KACTOR's services. IGVIVT/CO'P Agx~ent July 7, 2003 Page 1 of 4 4. Com~ation CITY agrees to pay CONTRACTOR at the rates and in the amounts specified in Exhibit B, attached and incorporated by reference. CITY agrees to pay the identified one-time playback equipment costs within forty-five (4~) days of its acceptance of this Agreement. All fixed personnel related costs and ongoing variable costs as shown in Exhibit B will be billed to CITY on a monthly basis. a. CONTRACTOR shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, creed, color, national origin, gender, age (persons 40 years or older), disability, or any other basis to the extent prohibited by federal, state or local law. All employees of CONTRACTOR shall be treated during employment without regard to their race, creed, color or national origin. b. CONTRACTOR shall comply with all federal, state and local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations and the orders and decrees of any courts or administrative bodies in any manner affecting the performance of the Agreement. 6. ~de._~.~ndent C__qontractor CONTRACTOR is acting as an independent contractor in furnishing the services and facilities and performing the work required by this Agreement, and is not an agent, servant or employee of CITY. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted or construed as creating or establishing the relationship of employer and employee between CITY and CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR is solely responsible for its obligations of required state and federal taxes. 7. Indemnity CONTRACTOR agrees to indemnify and hold harmless CITY, its officers and employees from any and all claims, demands, actions, causes of action, losses, damages, liabilities, known or unknown, and all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees in connection with any injury or damage to persons or property arising out of or in any way connected with any negligent act or omission of CONTI,~ACTOR, its officers, employees, agents, contractor, subcontractors or any officer, agent or employee thereof in relation to CONTRACTOR's performance under this Agreement. 8. Insurance CONTI~CTOR has and shall maintain, during the life of this Agreement, policies of insurance as specified in Exhibit C, attached and incorporated by reference. KMVT/CUP Agmm~ent July 7, 2003 ?age 2of 4 9. CED{Representative The City's Public Information Information Officer, as the City Manager's authorized representative, shall represent CITY in all matters pertaining to the services to be rendered under this Agreement. Ail requirements of CITY pertaining to the services and facilities to be provided under this Agreement shall be coordinated through the CITY representative. 10. CONTRACTOR Representative The CONTRACTOR's Executive Director (currently Doug Broomfield) shall represent CONTRACTOR in all matters pertaining to the services and facilities to be rendered under this Agreement. All requirements of CONTRACTOR pertaLning to the services and facilities to be provided under this Agreement shall be coordinated through the CONTRACTOR representative. 11. Notices All notices required by this Agreement shall be in writing, and shall be personally delivered, sent by first class mail with postage prepaid, or sent by commerdal courier, addressed as follows: To CITY: Public Information Officer, 10300 Torre Ave, Cupertino CA 95014 To CONI'KACTOR: Executive Director, KMVT, 1400 Terra Bella Ave., Suite M Mountain View, CA 94043 Nothing in this provision shall be construed to prohibit communication by more expedient means, such as by telephone or facsimile transmission, to accomplish timely communication, However, to constitute effective notice, written confirmation of a telephone conversation or an original of a facsimile transmission must be sent by first class mail or commercial carrier, or hand delivered. Each party may change its address by written notice in accordance with this paragraph. Notices delivered personally shall be deemed communicated as of actual receipt; mailed notices shall be deemed communicated as of three days after date of mailing. 12. Assi_m~ment Neither party shall assign or sublet any portion of this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party. 13. Termination This Agreement can be terminated by either CITY or CONTRACTOR upon provision of thirty (30) days written notice. However, it is understood that the CITY is obligated to pay the entire sum of $2,500 for equipment costs as defined in Exhibit B. KlVIVT/CUP ^g~eement July 7, 20o3 Page 3 of 4 14. .Miscellaneous Time shall be of the essence in this Agreement. Failure on the part of either Party to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver of the right to compel enforcement of such provision or any other provision. This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 15. Mediation All claims, disputes and controversies arising out of or in relation to the performance, interpretation, application or enforcement of this Agreement, including but not limited to breach thereof, shall be referred to formal mediation before, and as a condition precedent to, the initiation of any adjudicative action or proceeding, including arbitration. 16. Attorne.v's Fees In the event of any action or proceeding brought by either Party against the other under this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover court costs and the fees of its attorneys in such action or proceeding (whether at the administrative, trial, or appellate level) in such amount as the administrative body or court may judge reasonable. 17. Entire A?eement, Amendment This writing constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties relating to the services and facilities to be provided or materials to be. furnished hereunder. No modification of this Agreement shall be effective unless and until such modification is evidenced by a writing signed by all Parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement. CITY OF CUPERTINO ("C1TY") By City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney ("CONTP~CTOR") By President, Board of Directors KMVT/CL~ Agreem~t July 7, 2O03 Page 4 of 4 EXHIBIT "A' CONTRACTOR understands CII'Y'S need to provide public access services for the community of Cupertino. In providing this service, CONTRACTOR acknowledges that it has a current commi~nent to the City of Mountain View to provide public access services for the Mountain View community and CONTRACTOR will ensure that this agreement with C[I'Y will in no way affect the quality or level of service that CONTKACTOR provides Mountain View. The following outlines the conditions on which the CONTRACTOR will provide space and equipment to the CITY. 1. Producers/Volunteers Served The following Cupertino programs will be served under this agreement: A) The Better Part B) Steel and Marsilio C) Indian Vegetarian Gourmet The programs identified and the producers and users associated with such programs, shall have the first right to the Services as outlined in the ag~ement. Should the Facility Usage Caps (as defined in item 2 of this exhibit) not be met, new programs or volunteers may be served by this agreement under the following conditions: A) UsebynewprogramsandvoltmteersdoesnotexceeclFacilityUsageCaps. B) Programs axe produced by Cupertino residents C) Volunteers are Cupertino residents D) All volunteers and crew members working on said programs have been fully trained in CONTRACTOR'S workshops Cupertino producers and users that axe covered under this contzact will receive the same production priorities as Mountain View residents. 2. Facility Usage Allowance CONTRACTOR and (SIT¥ agree that the maximum facility capacities provided Cupertino producers per month under this agreement will be as follows: Equipment Hours-Days/month Yeaxl¥ Total Studio* 14 Hours 168 Editing* 24 Hours 288 Dubbing 10 Hours 120 Camcorder 4 days 48 * CITY shall pay for studio and editing hours whether hours axe used or not. This guarantees the UIT¥ that hours will be available for Cupertino use each month. Dubbing and Camcorder will be billed as used only. KMVT/CUP Exba"oit A July 7, 2003 Page 1 of 4 Cuper~no producers will be limited to the above equipment usage guarantees. The initial programs and producers identified above will have first priority to use the equipment. Each progran~ will be allocated 2 hours per month for studio production. However, the "Better Parg' will be aliocated 2.5 hours for studio production every Thursday morning of the week except the first Thursday of each month. CITY shall pay for 5 hours a month of studio time for "The Better Part_" CONTRACTOR shall cover the monthly difference. All studio times will be booked for 4-month sessions. Any times after the 4-month booking that is available under the 14 hours can be allocated on a first-come first serve basis to any Cupertino producer (current or new). No additional hours will be allocated beyond the 14 hours unless the Cupertino producer books the studio within 48 hours of the time they plan to use it. In this case, if the studio is available, the Cupertino producer will be charged personally the standard public access rates as defined in the CONTRACTOR'S Users' Guide and usage will be on a second priority level. Edit time will limited to the 24 hours per month as identified above. However, If Cupertino users want to use more edit time than 24 hours per month, they may do so but will be charged personally at the standard access rates as defined in the CONTRACTOR'S Users' Guide and usage will be on a second priority level. Dubbing time and Camcorder checkouts will be limited to the above guarantee. However, if Cupertino users want to nse more dubbing time or camcorder check-outs than guaranteed, they may do so but they will charged personally at the standard access rates as defined in the CONTRACTOR'S Users' Guide and usage will be on a second priority level. 3. Facility Equipment Availability CONTRACTOR's current equipment availability is spread throughout the week. Cupertino producers will work with CONTRACTOR'S Community Access ~r to fill the available times. Some Mountain View and Los Altos producers may be willing to swap dates with Cupertino producers if a conflict arises, however, this is not guaranteed. 4. Cupertino Producer/Volunteer Special Training CONTRACTOR shall provide training re-orientation workshops to all current Cupertino producers and volunteers. Producers and volunteers who have already been trained in a specific disdpline at Cupertino and who support one of the three programs identified in section 1 of this exhibit, can participate in a re-orientaton workshop for the same discipline at CONTRACTOR'S facility. Such workshops shall take place during the period of July 15 - August 15, 2003, with specific training dates to be determined by CONTRACTOR personnel CONTRACTOR shall cover cost of this special one- ~dme training. Producers and volunteers who do not meet the above criteria, or those that do meet this criteria but wish to take a workshop after August 15, 2003, may still sign up for a CONTRACTOR standard workshop offered to the public at large, but can not partidpate in this special training, and must pay for the workshop personally. The workshop rates are identified in the COb,rl'RACTOR Users' Guide. The special training will be offered from July 15, 2003 to August 15, 2003. The following workshops will be offered (Note, this schedule is tentative and subject to change based actual numbers needing to be trained): Workshop # Workshops Offered Max. Students/Class # Students Total KMVT/CUP Exhibit A July Z 200~ Page2of4 Studio Reorientation 2 15 30 CG Reorientation 2 6 12 Ediiing Reorientation 2 6 12 Camcorder Reorientation 2 6 12 CONTKACTOR shall noisy all producers and volunteers of the workshop schedule for this special training no later than July 11, 2003. Sign-ups for these workshops shall be on a first-come first-serve Once trained, Cupertino producers and volunteers can begin booking the CONTRACTOR facility to produce their programs. CONTRACTOR antidpates that most Cupertino programs will begin producing in August, 2003. Cablecas~ng CONTRACTOR shall provide ~dIl'¥ cable television cablecast ffme for Cupertino public access television programming that is provided by Cupertino public access producers. CONTRACTOR shall play back said programming over the cable company provided Cupertino cable television public access channel. Cupertino producers shall comply with all playback guideline as outlined in the CONTRACTOR'S User's Guide. CONTRACTOR shall provide (dlTY a separate signal for the Cupertino public access channel, allowing Cupertino video programming to be separate from Los Altos programming, if the CI'IY so chooses (except the community electronic bullelin beard, which shall still remain combined for this interim one-year contract). Other than the equipment outlined in section 6 of this agreement, CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for all playback and interface equipment necessary to fulfill the requirements of this agreement. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for scheduling all Cupertino public access programming on the designated public access channel available to the (.~1'1'¥. Each program outlined abeve shall receive ~ airings per week under this contract (See Exhibit B for detail). Any other Cupertino producers requesting playback on the Cupertino public access channel shall be provided on a first-come, first- served non-discriminatory basis and shall not deny access to any public access producers from the City based on the content of the programming, consistent with all applicable laws. The amount of playback time provided is sul~ect to the limits of this agreement as defined in Exhibit B. CONTRACTOR shall monitor the quality of the Cupertino public access channel to ensure the best quality possible given the quality of the programming provided by the Cupertino producer. CONTRACTOR shall also coordinate with appropriate cable company representatives to ensure that the connection of the cable company's system to the CONTRACTOR's playback facility is sufficient and properly functioning so as to minimize the disruption and interference with the signal quality for the dedicated public access channel. CONTRACTOR and {dl'l't' agree that playback of Cupertino programming shall begin from CONTRACTOR's facility no sooner than July 21, 2003 and no later than August 4, 2003. The par~ies further recognize that CONTKACTOR's monitoring of the Cupertino cable signal at CONTRACTOR's facility may not begin until September 1, 2003 as monitoring equipment needs to be ordered and installed upon commencement of this contract and 4 - 6 week order leads times are someffmes needed on such equipment. KMVT/CUP Exhibit A July 7, 2o03 Page 3of4 CONTRACTOR and ~dl'l'~( understand that the City of Mountain View has agreed to allow CONTRACTOR temporary access to the City of Mountain View's fiber-optic Institul~onal Network (INET) for the purposes of serving the Cfl'Y's playback needs, and that the use of the INET is conditioned upon the good faith understanding that the (dl'l'¥ and CONTRACTOR will work with the City of Mountain View to develop a long-term agreement for use of the INET. 6. Additional Equipment Purchases In order to meet the playback needs of Cupertino, CONTRACTOR has identified the following equipment which will need to be purchased at a total cost to the CITY of $2,500. This equipment will provide CONTRACTOR the ability to cablecast Cupertino Community TV's channel from CONTRACTOR'S Mountain View facility as well as monitor the cable signal of that channel. A) Fiber-optic equipment located at cable compan3gs Santa Clara cable head-end facility CITY understands that entire cost of CITY's share of the equipment is $5,000 and that CI'I'Y agrees to compensate CONTRACTOR for balance of $2,500 for equipment should (SIT¥ and CONTRACTOR enter into an agreement that extends beyond June 30, 2004. 7. Bulletin Board Services CONTRACTOR shall also provide a basic electronic bulletin board computer that will display community messages on the Cupertino public access channel during non-video programming hours. CONTRACTOR shall use an existing Targa-based system that CONTRACTOR owns for the bulletin board. All content for the bulletin board shall be provided by the CITY and conununity non-profit organizations. CONTRACTOR shall manage the bulletin board system and shall create the bulletin board pages and bill the CITY for such work as outlined in Exhibit B. Media It is understood that Cupertino producers and users currently pay for their own media to produce their programming and this arrangement will continue under this agreement. Media prices are outlined in the CONTRACTOR'S Users' Guide. KMVT/CUP Exhibit A July 7, 2003 Page4of4 EXHIBIT "B" CONTRACT COSTS Cost Personnel $9,600 Facility Usage Equi~raent Charge Monthly Use Cupertino Yearly Use Total Cost Studio (Per Hour)* $150 9 Hours^ 108 $16,200 Editing (Per Hour)* $20 24 Hours 288 $5,760 Camcorder (Per Day) $75 4 Days 48 $3,600 Dubbing (Per Hour) $10 10 Hours 120 $1,200 Total Facility Usage $26,760 * Studio and editing hours are freed mounts to provide Cupertino with guarantee that time will be available. CITY shall pay for these fixed amounts regardless of actual use to guarantee that time is available. Camcorder and dubbing shall be billed on a actual usage basis. ^ Cupeffino is guaranteed 14 hours of studio time. However, five hours will be covered by CONTRACTOR for the "Better Part" program which will produce approximately ten hours per month. CONTRACTOR supports the idea of contributing to senior discounts for community services and will partially subsidize the program. Equipment Headend Playback Equipment** $2,500 ** Actual cost of equipmem is approximately $5,000 for CITY's share. CITY agrees to pay 50% of cost under this agreement ($2,500) and the remaining balance (of up to an additional $2,500) if CITY and and CONTRACTOR agree to extend this agreement beyond June 30, 2004. Cab~cast Proms Length Timas/Wk Cost par Hour Total Cost Better Part :30 3X $15 $22.50 Steel and Marsilio :30 3X $15 $22.50 Indian Vegetarian Gourmet :31} 3._~X $15 $22.50 Total Per Week 9 $67.50 x 52 Weeks Total Yearly Playback $3,510 Bulletin Board Manage~x $2,400 M Assumes ramp-up time to input current pages and an average of three new community pages per week. TOTAL CONTRACT COSTS $44,770 KMVT CUP ExhibitB 7-7-03 July 7, 2003 Page 1 of I EXHIBrr "C" INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTRACTOR CONTRACTOR shall procure end maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persom or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work by the Contractor, his agents, representatives, or employees. Minimum Scope end Limits of Insurance Contractor shall main~in limits no less tharc 1. Commercial General Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. Deductibles and Seif-Iusured Retentions Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared end approved by the City of Cupertino. The Contractor shall guarentee payment of eny losses and relal~5 investigafious, claim administration and defense expenses Wifliln the deductible or self-insured retention~ Other Iusurence Provisions The general liability end automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. The City of Cupertino, its officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as additional insueds with respects to liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor, premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City of Cupertino, its officers, employees, agents or volunteers. 2. For eny claims related to this project, the CONTRACTOR's insurance shall be primary. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City of Cuperlino, its officers, officials, employees, agents end volunteers shall be excess of the CONTRACTOR's insurance end shall not contribute with iL Except with regards to CITY-owned equipment, in which case CITY self-insurance shall take precedence. 3. Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warrenties shall not effect coverage provided to the City of Cupertino, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. 4. The CONTRACTOR's insurence shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limils of the insurer's liability. 5. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, cancelled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days~ prior written notice by certified main, retuxn receipt requested, has been given to the City of Cupertino. Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a c~t A.IvL Besgs rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City of Cupertino. Verification of Coverage Contractor shall furnish the City of Cuperi~no with en original Certificate of Insurance effecfing the coverage required. The certificatss are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. ,MI certificates are to be received and approved by the City of Cupertino prior to commencement of work. IGM'VT/CUP Exhibit C July 7, 2003 Page 1 of 1 CITY OF CUPE INO City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 FAX (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department Housing Services Summary Agenda Item No. ~ Agenda Date: July 7, 2003 Subject: Receive a report on the inquiry regarding Asian demographics in the CDBG Consolidated Plan presented to the City Council at the June 16, 2003 meeting. Recommendation: No action necessary. Background: While preparing the Consolidated Plan for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, city staff requested demographics from the Housing Authority of the County of Santa Clara for Cupertino residents served in the Housing Authority's voucher and mod rehab programs. This information was communicated back to city staff in the form of an e-mail that listed four Asians and 22 Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders as benefiting from the programs. Discussion: The Consolidated Plan was presented at the June 16, 2003 City Council meeting for discussion. At Mayor Chang's request, city staff contacted the Housing Authority and requested that they confirm that the demographics as communicated to city staff were correct. After reviewing the numbers, Del Burgos with the Housing Authority confirmed that the numbers were transposed. The correction has been made to the Consolidated Plan document on page ten (see attached). PREPARED BY: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL: David W. Knapp, City Manager Attachments: Consolidated Plan, Page 10 Printed on Recycled Paper Public Housing and Section 8: Although there is no conventional public housing in Cupertino, the Housing Authority does maintain a supply of Housing Choice Vouchers for ~"esidents in the City. In 2003, there are 64 tenants receiving vouchers, while another five receive assistance through the Moderate Rehab program. The following table provides demographic information on this population. FAMILIES Elderly and Disabled 4 6% Elderly but not disabled 17 25% Not elderly and not disabled 6 9% Not elderly but disabled 42 61% ETHNICITY Hispanic 17 25% Non-Hispanic 52 75% RACE Caucasian 34 49% American Indian/Alaskan Native 9 13% Asian 22 32% Hawaiian/Pacific islander 4 6% Loss of Affordable Units: The only affordable housing development at risk of converting to market rate is the Sunnyview development, whose federal subsidy contract will expire in May 31, 2004. However, the development is considered at Iow risk for converting because it is owned by a non-profit organization, which has indicated that it will renew the assistance again in 2004. The City will monitor the development and will initiate contact in late 2003 with the owner and HUD to ensure that the units remain affordable. Fair Housing: Until this year, the City of Cupertino's Consolidated Planning requirements were the responsibility of the County, since Cupertino lacked sufficient population to qualify as an entitlement jurisdiction. As part of the County's efforts, it was required to complete a Countywide Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (Al) for the unincorporated areas as well as those jurisdictions with fewer than 50,000 residents. Cupertino's draft Consolidated Plan incorporates the County's Al by reference, and includes an action item in the one-year plan to conduct its own independent Al. The City places a high priority on promoting and ensuring open and free choice in housing for all persons. It is the City's intent to maintain a nondiscriminatory environment in all aspects of the public and private housing market within the City, and to foster compliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of the Fair Housing Act. Federal regulations require participating communities to certify that they are affirmatively furthering fair housing and conducting fair housing planning by: Conducting an analysis of the impediments to fair housing choice Taking appropriate actions to overcome the effects of any impediments identified through the analysis, and Maintaining appropriate records of the analysis and actions. City of Cuperiino 2003-2005 Consolidated Plan CUPEP TINO City of Cupertino 10300 Torte Avenue CupertZno, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 FAX (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department Summary Agenda Item No. ~ ~' Subject: Receive a report regarding an update on Vallco. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council note and file this report on Vallco Fashion Park. Agenda Date: ~uly 7r 2003 BACKGROUND Over the past 7 months, Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association entered into discussions with a group of investors to sell Vallco Fashion Park. Upon hearing of the plans to sell Vallco Fashion Park the City Council held a s~-udy session on April 15, 2003, to discuss the Council vision for the mall. The purchase negotiations were successfully concluded on June 12, 2003 with the sale of the property to a group of local investors. Two of the investors have contacted the city staff including Ms. Emily Chen, a local residential developer, and Mr. Alan Wong currently the owner and operator of the Jade Galore Jewelry store located in the Cupertino Village Shopping Center. DISCUSSION City Manager Dave Knapp and Community Development Director Steve Piasecki met on Thursday June 19, 2003, with Mr. Wong and Mr. Rohde, General Manager of Vallco Fashion Park. Mr. Wong indicated that they intend to lease out the vacant tenant spaces located in the lower level of the mall to retail and restaurant tenants with an international theme. They intend to attract restaurant tenants that may have a fairly large seat count of up to 1,000 seats. Mr. Rohde was later advised that entertainment uses or early morning or late night uses will require approval of a use permit and may trigger discussions relating to the existing Vallco Development Agreement. Mr. Wong indicated they that will start leasing the lower level immediately. Printed on Recycled Paper Receive a report regarding an update on Vallco. July 7, 2003 Page 2 Additionally, Mr. Wong indicated the investment group's long-range plan is to develop residential uses on the Rose Bowl site located South of Vallco Parkway and possibly elsewhere on the Vallco property although these plans are still tentative and require review and approval from the City. Attached is a recent article in the Cupertino Courier that summarizes their plans. Staff will keep the Council informed as these plans develop. ~_..~, _Prepare by:.~ Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Approved by: David W. Knapp City Manager Attachment: Cupertino Courier article dated July, 2, 2003 G:plarming/pdreport/cc/ccvallcoupdate7703 City glad to be working. with a local Vallco owner plans fop unsurPaSSed CultUral Genter i and ~uity A~sociatiOn i0~ ~m $67 minion; which is significantly ijWer than,~e $80 million oxlglnhlly ~i~ Sale'~Can end t0 about seven months of negotiations.:: : :The :group plans to revive the~h0P! Ping Center by putting neW tenants .in the lower level of VallcO. Aceording to a prepared statement, some 6f i® invest°~s' rejuvenation 1~1aris inClUde adding new restaurants and creating a food cOurt; "We are going tolrCvi~e Vallco Fashion Park and make it a destina- tion spot that will serve our wonder- fully diverse communities. Our plans include bringing tO Cupertino an international Center of culture that we believe will be unprecedented in the valley,' Wong said. Wong is already an established merchant and property owner in the Bay Area. wong owns Grand Century Shopping Center, a vietnamese-themed indoor mall~ as Hell as Jade Galore Jewelry & Watch CO., a chain of stores in Milpitas, san Francisco and Cupertino. Other principals in Wong's invest- ment group include Emily Chen and John Nguyen. Cupertino city officials welcomed Vallco's sale. "We're delighted," said Steve Piasecki, the city's dkector of com- munity development. "We finally have local owners to work with. Teachers [Vallco's previous owner] was almcult to get ahold of." piasecki said the city is excited about ihe new owners' plans to ~ .~ . ~ Vall~, page 11 Vallco: Continued from page 1 revive Vallco. "There's quite a bit of flexibility on the city's side. We're excited about the re-tenanting And we're confident this group can make it.work," Piacecki said. In recent years, Vallco, unable to compete with neighboring Valley Fair Man and Stanford Shopping Center, continuously sUmggled with high vacan- cy rate and low sales. In less than a decade, the shopping center had seen three different owners City confident in new project but no succes~ In the most recent case, Teachers began foreclosure proceedings against the Richard E. Jacobs Oroup Inc: in August 2002. Jacobs Group owed Teachers more than $60 million. Teachers finally took over Vallco on Feb. 13, 2003 after no one topped the opening bid of $55 million during a pubhc auction. During a study session on-April 15, Piasecki calculated that Vanco's under- performance costs the city about $1 million a year in sales tax revenues. cu?e T nO City Hall 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (4-08) 777-3212 FAX: (408) 777-3366 davek~cupenino.org OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Number Agenda Date: July 7, 2003 SUBJECT Accept Report on Cupertino Courier-sponsored "A Time to Talk: a Cupertino Forum". BACKGROUND In response to thc recent press on diversity and changing demographics, the Cupertino Courier has planned "A Time to Talk: a Cupertino Forum" on Saturday, August 9th, from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at St. Jude's Church at the comer of McClellan and Stelling. Because of the Public Dialogue Consortium's work with the community on diversity issues, I am arranging to have Shawn Spano facilitate this important public discussion. Shawn will help design the forum, recruit and train facilitators, facilitate the forum and prepare a summary report. Attached is a copy of Shawn's proposal. The Publisher of the Courier, David Cohen, is working with the World Journal to form a collaboration on this project. St. Jude's Rector, the Reverend Karen Siegfriedt, has offered the use of the Church's parish hall for the event. This forum is an important next step in Cupertino's long standing commitment to bringing the community's rich diversity to bear on community issues. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Accept report. No action required. Respectfully submitted: David W. Knapp, City Manager Printed on Recycled Paper June 26, 2003 TO: David Knapp, City Manager FR: Shawn Spano, PDC Project Manager RE: Community Forum Proposal The PDC proposes to contract with the City of Cupertino for the following services: (1) Plan and design an effective event that includes a combination of large-group presentations and small group dialogues; (2) Consult with you and the leadership of the Silicon Valley Community Newspapers to clarify and define event participants, goals, and activities; (3) Provide a communication skills training for community members to prepare them to facilitate the small group dialogues at the community forum; (4) Facilitate the forum; and (5) Write a summary report. Budget: · Project design & development $1,500 · Meetings and consultations $1,500 · Recruitment and facilitation training $1,500 · Event facilitation $1,500 · Summary report $300 Total: $6,300 CUPER TINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 FAX (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department SUMMARY AGENDA N°. 20 AGENDA DATE July 7, 2003 SUMMARY: Consider the appeal of Application R-2003-03, a Design Review Committee approval of a new two-story 4,463 square foot residence, Dick Fang, 10110 Mann Drive, APN 326-19-005. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council may take one of the following actions 1. Approve the appeal thereby overturning the Design Review Committee approval and concurring with the Planning Commission to allow allow the greater exterior wall height; 2. Approve the appeal to allow the greater exterior wall height with the following modifications to improve the project's consistency with the Design Guidelines: a. Reduce the second-story plate height to 8'; b. Reduce the entry height to match the eave height of the single-story section of the house; c. Convert the three-car-wide garage into a two-car-wide garage with one tandem space; 3. Deny the appeal and uphold the Design Review Committee approval; 4. Schedule a study session to review the application of the R1 Ordinance and the Design Guidelines to single-family development. BACKGROUND Project Background On February 3, 2003, Mr. Hung applied for a special permit from the Design Review Committee for a two-story residence with the maximum 45 % floor area ratio (FAR). Preliminary Application Compromises At the preliminary stages of this application, staff identified the following inconsistencies related to the Design Guidelines: Printed on Recycled Papor 1~ '~1