Loading...
Exhibit CC 09-18-2012#14 Biltmore development Print http://us-mg4.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=37fhpnvicp13v3 ca1-4-42. Subject: September 18th council meeting,parking allocation for the proposed Prometheus development From: k k(mckibbikawaayahoo.com) To: citycouncil©cupertino.org; Date: Monday. September 17.2012 12:58 PM Dear Council Members, At the June 4th 2012 council meeting I highlighted the inadequate parking being proposed by Prometheus Real Estate for the expansion of the Biltmorc Apartments as well as the Stevens Creek proposed development. After reading the September 18th 2012 council packet for this project I see that the proposed ratio of 1.70 parking stalls per residential unit has not changed. As a reminder I pointed out to the Council that presently The Biltmore Apartments have a ratio of 2.00 on site parking stalls per unit. This is after the expansion of the complex in 1998 by 24 more apartments. Including the 41 street parking locations on Blaney and Rodrigues, used essentially exclusively by The Biltmore residents,this equates to a ratio of 2.23 parking stalls per unit. Walking through the complex at night on three different times in August and September I counted an average of only 12 empty parking stalls( easily attributed to vacancy). The present proposal of adding 12 more units and reducing the parking stalls by 34 will reduce the parking ratio to 1.71 stalls per unit. For the proposed housing portion of the Stevens Creek Development, Prometheus is proposing a parking ratio of 1.70 stalls per apartment unit. Keep in mind that there is no public street parking near this location to deal with the huge amount of overflow residential parking the new apartment complex will generate at a 1.70 ratio. Keeping in mind that the present Biltmore configuration at 179 units requires a ratio of 2.23 parking stalls per unit(this includes the public parking on Blaney and Rodrigues)to adequately service this complex, the total development proposal is short 102 parking stalls. This is two and a half times the amount of public parking being presently supplied on Blaney and Rodrigues! Please ask the developer and city staff where these cars will be parking? The parking being proposed for the commercial portion of the development is also inadequate. Presently Chili's, at 6000 sq.ft.,has 87 parking stalls to service the restaurant. The proposed commercial building at 7000 sq. ft. has a proposal of 55 parking stalls. If this falls within the city parking requirements I can see why every retail commercial establishment built in the last 12 years has had woefully inadequate parking. Please consider reducing the housing portion of this development based on realistic parking requirements and not ones that do not even meet common sense. At the June 4th city council meeting staff and the developer were directed to resubmit plans base on 50 to 60 apartment units and increased retail space of 10,000 to 15,000 sq. ft. Why doesn't the staff 1 of 2 9/17/2012 1:02 PM Print http://us-mg4.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=37tlipnvIcp13v3 report for the September 18 meeting reflect these mandates from the Council? Thank you for your consideration Robert McKibbin 2 of 2 9/17/2012 1:02 PM 9/18/2012 DP-2011-06,ASA-2011-20,TR-2012-18 DP-2011-05,ASA-2011-19,TR-2012-13 20030,2006O51evens Creek BIvd,100415 Blaney Ave,Vacant Lot,and 101595 Blaney Ave The applicant,Prometheus Real Rotate Group,is requeeting approval of the following applications: •....... ...,.gym M- 0 � Stevens Creek Sfre Mixed-Use Pro/eft Biltmore Aparbnenn • Development Permit(DP-21111-O6) • Development Permit(DP-2011-05) • Archilermral Site Approval(ASA-2011-20) • Architectural Slte Approval(ASA-2011-19) • Tree Removal Permit(TR-2012-18) Tree Removal Permit(TR-2012-13 Project Site&Background Information } -V" Bellmore Aparhrmrta his existed rtm nt com 1 " ueiv]� P ex aince 3 The exutmg apartments were T x 17'.-;- approvedforanexpansrnnm { 1998/19Afor24admhonalunos •N � F @�.� i. r�ratelalen]9•,,,i� CunrNreeO sl,ofS ii by 1,office,quasi pubLc, ��_ ti, end residential uses New],(10(l square foot pIT St=7:72;,`",;t7"°"` ]8 apartment units proposed on Stevens Creek site(staff supports 76),12 proposed on Bdtmare ✓� ,_.,_.�.w,z,,,, .0 Aparttnents site Previous Meetings •Planning Commission Meeting:May 8,2012 •First City Council Meeting:June 4,2012 . • City Council Direction: >Reduce the number of units proposed on the Stevens Creek Site ➢Increase the amount of exclusive parking for the commercial use >Consider increasing the amount of commercial space >Enhance the project architectural design 1 9/18/2012 Proposal Comparison P mposa Iemvd•d M ec _:C.n, Pmp44 Swan Creek S4 Residential udtr 87 anie 7e unna s grecommends 76 unla Deceit, 17.01 DUCrt.AC. a.._nU,a M. r (roweled ro vat_- ,June<.1011 Cauncil m▪e tng) RaWe•1W Radag 178,unn 155 g6Cae7 unm 1.74,14 - 136 Wee, Sluff ,eeamme,ds 1.rdi n, COMM epw(1.rlueg for 50,reul and 55 gates(04,335 100 .354, 5011.40410,en410, reeeurmll re+numll 1.4111 g Raga 36' Rura,esine Mdltiaea ReldeoiW rsD 12 untie N,Change Mash, 17.34 DU,G An. Nn C1.4ge Rnidemiel Pertllq and-523 1.68 q,uueuna=321 grce Reme�. 11.01n.Raigtl o No Chmge Heart of the City Specific Plan/ Housing Element Site •Project complies with Heart of the City requirements for landscaping,common open space,private outdoor space,access, streetscape,setbacks,height,building bulk,and design. •The project site is a designated Housing Element site(excluding the Chili's site and Biltmore Apartments) • Adoption of Housing Element was a community process which included public participation from community gawps,focus group meetings,and workshops • Total of 73 Housing Element Sites identified • Site visits with Housing and Community Development to convince them that these sites were vable • Final adoption by Council in June 20)10 •Chili's restaurant(6,000 sq ft)will be replaced with 7,000 square foot commercial building Housing Element Summary • Housing Element Site#4(includes Village Falafel,excludes Chili's site) allows approximately 64 units.However,with street centerline area included,about 74 units are allowed. • Project site(excludes Village Falafel,includes Chili's site)allows approximately 87 units(80 units with commercial space,commercial surface parking,and landscaping subtracted per HOC) •Staff recommends the number of units specified in the Housing Element, and also recommends transferring the allotted units from the Village Falafel site to this project for the following reasons: • Village Falafel site is ton small to meet the requirements of HOC and provide a retail and housing component. • Site is not large enough to accomnx data remit,residential and parking for both uses. • Size of a mixed-use project on this site would not be able to support underground parking. • For the above reasons,staff believes that future development on this parcel would continue to be exclusively commercial in nature. 2 9/18/2012 Parking Ratio Stevens Creek Site Biltmore Apartments Site Apartments Commercial Fairting Addition Room 1-Bedroom 41 78 4 82 2-Bedroom 37 93 8 101 3-Bedroom 0 8 0 8 Sq n 7,00e TaaiApartmem3 78 179 12 111 Ste.Recommends 78 Prod ded 0n3ae Parktpg 1388asidgrt1al ,Be Commarolal 328 Bosideraial Parking#a*i9 L78 per unit I1.791nr71 ardtsl WOn 1,08. thui I netted "4,,,; 'r it141.3409mtn0 S5ComnmanF.,,°; _ e"as9asa»aamf Parking Ratio(conk) •Staff recommends a parking ratio of 1.78 for Stevens Creek site (136 residential stalls for 76 units) •Commercial parking is sufficient for 100%restaurant uses(55 spaces) •Underground parking is now replaced with above-grade tuck- under garages •Parking ratio at existing Biltmore site is 1.68 as was previously proposed (321 residential stalls for 191 units) Architectural and Site Changes •Central walkway from commercial building connecting Building A added •Parking lot brick and accent paving • High quality limestone tiles added to commercial building with more vibrant colors •Enhanced porch and front entry features •Additional color palettes •Building B redesigned with flat roof and pitched roof 3 9/18/2012 Architectural Changes-Retail Elevation ' .. i, 1 1i rill i . Architectural Changes- Residential Elevations Building A ,,,,wo,,,,m,..;1W.ii:;:i '"„„, -VI 'R a l�� . -i ?, g. . i IP— r _ Building B Building C f ft i! fIti LD Building 0 Development Allocation •Project will not draw from Heart of the City's commercial balance of 123,087 sq ft.A net of 14,082 square feet will be returned to balance, for a new commercial balance of 137,169 sq k •Project will draw from Heart of the City's residential balance of 308 residential units. A remaining balance of 220(308-88)residential units will be available if proposed project is approved with staff's recommendation(76 units on Stevens Creek site,12 units on Biltmore site) 4 9/18/2012 Community Outreach •Neighborhood meetings were held on the following dates: • Tuesday,September 11,2012 • Thursday,May 31,2012 • Wednesday,March 14,2012 Community Concerns: Community Benefits: Traffic Impacts Redevelopment of Existing Site School Impacts New Retail Component Driveway location(Blaney) Architecture Parcel Tax Conformity to Heart of the City Requirements Corner Site Not Included •City Notice of Public Hearing mailed out to neighbors within 300 feet on August 30,2012 •City website created and updated with project details and information •Several community members have expressed their concerns with the impact the project will have on schools,traffic,placement of driveways,and density • Under State law,the City is not permitted to consider school impacts as a determining factor for project review and approval Recommendation A. Staff recommends that the City Council approve Mitigated Negative Declaration EA-2011-16, Development Permit DP-2011-06,Architectural Site • Approval ASA-2011-20,and Tree Removal Permit TR- 2012-18 for the Stevens Creek site in accordance with the Draft Resolutions. B. Staff also recommends that the City Council approve Mitigated Negative Declaration EA-2011-15, Development Permit DP-2011-05,Architectural Site Approval ASA-2011-19,and Tree Removal Permit TR- 2012-13 for the Biltmore site in accordance with the Draft Resolutions. 5 C°P`i cc_ - l g - z # l Lf MARIN Santa Clara County Housing Action Coalition RI The Santa Clara County Housing Action Coalition is comprised of a broad range of organizations and individuals who have, as a common goal,the vision of affordable,well-constructed and appropriately located housing September 14, 2012 Cupertino City Council 200 E. Santa Clara San Jose, CA 95113 Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers, On behalf of the Santa Clara County Housing Action Coalition, we are writing to express our support for the housing proposal called Biltmore Adjacency by Prometheus Real Estate located near Blaney and Stevens Creek. By way of reference, the Housing Action Coalition includes more than 100 organizations and individuals. Its goal is the production of well-built, appropriately-located homes that are affordable to families and workers in Silicon Valley. Organizations participating in the HAC represent business, labor, environmental organizations and many more. The Housing Action Coalition supports housing proposals on appropriate sites that use land more efficiently and provide quality design that promotes transportation choice. Additionally, and especially in communities such as Cupertino, we strongly support developments that include an affordability component. With high quality schools, it is important that cities like Cupertino work hard to make sure that all income levels are afforded access to superior educational opportunities. This site is within the Heart of the City Plan, an plan that recognizes the area as an appropriate location in which to intensify use. Despite those clear policy goals, along with the fact that 3 of the 4 parcels are housing element sites, we were dismayed to see that the Council asked for a reduction in the number of homes from the original proposal. As housing advocates, we see this frequently. City by city, site by site, decision makers whittle back the number of homes permissible on sites that are, for all intents and purposes, appropriate for more height and density. Individually, these land use decisions seem inconsequential. Collectively, they add up to an overall deficit in housing county- wide. This is clearly evidenced by the recent uptick in Silicon Valley rents. Supply outpaces demand and Silicon Valley workers compete for a finite supply of homes. Cupertino is a part of a region that has a persistent housing deficit, a deficit that threatens our ability to provide for those who gird the foundation of our economy. Although we are dismayed that the number of homes proposed has been reduced, we encourage the Council's approval of the Biltmore Adjacency Apartments. More homes along Steven's Creek will help alleviate the region's need for housing in a location that offers numerous 224 Airport Parkway, Suite 620, San Jose amenities within walking distance. And, with the growth of Apple, it is increasingly important that homes be located nearby. We encourage your support of this proposal. Thank you for your consideration of our comments. Sincerely, Margaret Bard Adam Montgo HAC Co-Chair HAC Co-Chair Kirsten Squarcia From: Karen B. Guerin Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 1:48 PM To: Kirsten Squarcia Subject: FW: September 18th council meeting, parking allocation for the proposed Prometheus development From: k k [mailto:mckibbikawayahoo.com] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 12:58 PM To: City Council Subject: September 18th council meeting, parking allocation for the proposed Prometheus development Dear Council Members, At the June 4th 2012 council meeting I highlighted the inadequate parking being proposed by Prometheus Real Estate for the expansion of the Biltmore Apartments as well as the Stevens Creek proposed development. After reading the September 18th 2012 council packet for this project I see that the proposed ratio of 1.70 parking stalls per residential unit has not changed. As a reminder I pointed out to the Council that presently The Biltmore Apartments have a ratio of 2.00 on site parking stalls per unit. This is after the expansion of the complex in 1998 by 24 more apartments. Including the 41 street parking locations on Blaney and Rodrigues, used essentially exclusively by The Biltmore residents, this equates to a ratio of 2.23 parking stalls per unit. Walking through the complex at night on three different times in August and September I counted an average of only 12 empty parking stalls(easily attributed to vacancy). The present proposal of adding 12 more units and reducing the parking stalls by 34 will reduce the parking ratio to 1.71 stalls per unit. For the proposed housing portion of the Stevens Creek Development, Prometheus is proposing a parking ratio of 1.70 stalls per apartment unit. Keep in mind that there is no public street parking near this location to deal with the huge amount of overflow residential parking the new apartment complex will generate at a 1.70 ratio. Keeping in mind that the present Biltmore configuration at 179 units requires a ratio of 2.23 parking stalls per unit ( this includes the public parking on Blaney and Rodrigues) to adequately service this complex, the total development proposal is short 102 parking stalls. This is two and a half times the amount of public parking being presently supplied on Blaney and Rodrigues! Please ask the developer and city staff where these cars will be parking? The parking being proposed for the commercial portion of the development is also inadequate. Presently Chili's, at 6000 sq.ft., has 87 parking stalls to service the restaurant:. The proposed commercial building at 7000 sq. ft. has a proposal of 55 parking stalls. If this falls within the city parking requirements I can see why every retail commercial establishment built in the last 12 years has had woefully inadequate parking. Please consider reducing the housing portion of this development based on realistic parking requirements and not ones that do not even meet common sense. 1 At the June 4th city council meeting staff and the developer were directed to resubmit plans base on 50 to 60 apartment units and increased retail space of 10,000 to 15,000 sq. ft. Why doesn't the staff report for the September 18 meeting reflect these mandates from the Council? Thank you for your consideration Robert McKibbin 2 , , I . Boulanger, In(.:305 N. NI:Olinda Ave. 0 tilartgerm _....--- .—) Pitune•IUK.77l.9000 -Wi—T H L 13 A I< I. R— Fa. UK:2 3.9810 IN ww.Iebouianger,cum September 17, 2012 Dear Mayor Santoro and Members of the City Council: As the owner of Le Boulanger in Cupertino, I support the proposal by Prometheus Real Estate Group to re-develop the Biltmore Adjacency property located on the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Blaney Avenue to construct 78 new apartment homes and 7,000 square feet of retail. I understand that the proposed development is planned at a density of 25 units per acre, residential parking is approximately 1.70 spaces per unit and it would include retail directly fronting Stevens Creek Boulevard, two stories of apartments off of Blaney Avenue and three stories directly behind the retail. Furthermore, parking for the retail is planned to support 100% of the space for restaurant use whici I believe will be instrumental to its success. I understand that this development meets all of the applicable zoning requirements such as density, height, setbacks and parking. The development is on a Housing Element site and would construct approximately 78 of the 83 required units for this area. I believe it will also provide more affordable housing opportunities for the employees of many Cupertino businesses. Especially with Apple's plans to develop three million square feet of office space creating approximately thirteen thousand new jobs. Aside from the obvious economic benefits this development would provide to the city, I believe that creating high density housing off of SI:evens Creek Boulevard near mass transit and retail is an excellent example of smart transit oriented development. I encourage the City of Cupertino to approve this green, sustainable, pedestrian II friendly, transit-oriented development. Sincerely, ??? ---c- ,..___c?:7-a,___C Daniel P. Brunello President Le Boulanger, Inc. Legoulanger cc -fs-/a i y Karen B. Guerin From: Ducote, Michael [MDucote @prometheusreg.com] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 7:50 PM To: Mark Santoro; Gilbert Wong; Orrin Mahoney; Rod Sinks; Barry Chang Cc: Aarti Shrivastava; Simon Vuong Subject: Fwd: Welcoming the new project. Dear Mayor and Council Members, Below is an email from a neighbor living at Adobe Terrace who attended our last neighborhood meeting. Her residence is two sites over from ours within walking distance. Thanks. Sent from Mike Ducotes iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Kavitha Joseph <kavitha1oseph(alhotmail.com<mailto:kavithalosephOhotmail.com» Date: September 17, 2012 5:53:53 PM PDT To: " 'Ducote, Michael'" <MDucoteOprometheusreg.com<mailto:MDucote(alprometheusreg.com» Subject: Welcoming the new project. Hi Mr. Michael Ducote, After coming to your open house last week and viewing your project for 20030 Stevens Creek Blvd, I am very much happy to see the new development plan. As a neighborhood resident of the new development [I reside at Adobe Terrace] I would very much welcome the new project. Currently, as the back lot of the present eateries are vacant and lonely I see lot of people misusing the back spaces. At times I could see suspicious activities going on in this areas particularly at late evenings and at night when it is dark. Hence, I would rather encourage and would love to see this project to come up so that we the neighborhood residents can live peacefully. Thanks for explaining the whole plan and hope your project gets a nod from the Cupertino City Council. Thank you, Mary Agnes 17th September 2012. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This communication and any accompanying document(s) are confidential and may be privileged. They are intended for the sole use of the addressee. If you received this transmission in error, you are advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance upon the communication is strictly prohibited. Moreover, any such inadvertent disclosure shall not compromise or waive the attorney-client privilege as to this communication or otherwise. If you have received this communication in error, please contact me at the above Internet address or by telephone at 650-931-3400. Thank you. 1 ccer-[k1 , Vii( Karen B. Guerin From: Moss, Jonathan [JMoss @prometheusreg.com] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 7:03 PM To: Mark Santoro; Rod Sinks; Orrin Mahoney; Gilbert Wong; Barry Chang; Aarti Shrivastava; dbrandt @cupertino.org; ckorade @cupertino.org Subject: Proposed Biltmore adjacency Development Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Staff: Since there has been a fair amount of recent discussion regarding parking, I am sharing with you certain data that may be useful related to this subject for our proposed development at Biltmore. To date, we have not included any on-street parking stalls in our proposed parking counts. After reviewing the City's Parking Regulations in 19.124(last page), we understand that the on-street parking that exists on Blaney and Rodriguez totals 45 parallel stalls and has never been included in our proposed parking stall supply number both for the existing property and the Biltmore Adjacency property. As Section 19.124.060 states, "The applicant submits a detailed parking study which demonstrates that the proposed use is compatible with the proposed parking supply. Adjacent on—street parking may be included in the parking supply." Therefore, when adding these 45 stalls to the parking count, our ratio for stalls dedicated only to the residential units on the two properties is as follows: Biltmore Existing Property Parking Stalls(garage and open) 358 Biltmore Adjacency Stalls Dedicated to Residential 133 Parallel Stalls on Blaney and Rodriguez 45 Total Stalls 536 Total Units—Biltmore Adjacency and Existing Biltmore 269 (179 existing Biltmore, 78 new at Adjacency, 12 new at Biltmore) Total Stalls/Total Units 1.99 stalls/unit If one does not include the on-street parking, our proposed parking count is 1.70 stalls/unit. The parking study recently created by the City's independent parking consultant surveyed 6 similar existing Cupertino apartment properties and concluded that the average parking demand is 1.33 stalls/unit. This is based on actual parking counts after midnight on a weekday, not theoretical calculations. Our proposed 1.70 number is 28%greater than this average. If our proposed parking stall count is 1.99 as shown above,this represents a supply of 50% more stalls than the 1.33 demand. The city's parking regulations (19.124) explicitly allow for parking to be approved at a number consistent with a valid parking study. The City of Mountain requested the same study and the 5 apartment properties in that City averaged 1.12 stalls/unit. These are formal studies and the City has the written reports. Our 1.70 figure is 46%greater than this average. If the 1.99 figure is used, this represents a supply of 71% more stalls than the 1.16 demand. Additionally, some individuals have stated that the existing Biltmore parking lots have relatively few vacant stalls at night. As reflected in the City's independent parking study, 77 stalls were vacant at the existing Biltmore property. A 1 large number of the garages are vacant on any given night and that is reflected in the parking study's inspection of the property. One last item—our revised plans since June reflect an additional 14 parking stalls for the Biltmore Adjacency site that are intended to be additional stalls for the retail customers. The parking is now significantly greater than the City's zoning requirements for retail and equal to the City's requirements for a restaurant use. We hope this clarifies some of the parking issues related to our proposed plans on the Biltmore Adjacency property. Thank you. JON MOSS, I,XLCI""I WI,VICE PRESIDENT &PARTNER PROM1 HIE( REAL ESTATE GROUP ■ �i 4 ,II ti ,\\ A \l l t ) Ii ,\I : (,i()0'.! )160 I \\ 34,(Y) INIOSS(ri;PROMI,TI II,USRE?C.0 M WWV('.PROMI:TIIEUSRr;.c.,.COMM CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This communication and any accompanying document(s) are confidential and may be privileged. They are intended for the sole use of the addressee. If you received this transmission in error, you are advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance upon the communication is strictly prohibited. Moreover, any such inadvertent disclosure shall not compromise or waive the attorney-client privilege as to this communication or otherwise. If you have received this communication in error, please contact me at the above Internet address or by telephone at 650-931-3400. Thank you. 2 Kirsten Squarcia From: Karen B. Guerin Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 11:19 AM To: Kirsten Squarcia Subject: FW: City Council meeting tomorrow From: Amudhan K [mailto:amudhan kOhotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 10:05 AM To: Mark Santoro Subject: City Council meeting tomorrow Dear Mr. Mayor, This is Amud Krishnamurthi, a Cupertino resident writing to you about a proposal that is going to be reviewed today by the City Council. In my opinion, for various reasons this proposal of building additional apartments may not be advantageous for the residents. I am one of the resident living close to this intersection and we travel a lot through this intersection both on week days and weekends. As it is, it is crowded. As I drive in Blaney the street side parked cars in that apartment makes it already crowded streets. With proposed new apartments, the traffic will increase thus increasing the difficulty for the current residents' traffic life due to congestion caused by additional automobiles. When I moved to South bay area, Cupertino used to be one of the nice little City, not over crowded with commercial complexes. Building more and more apartments like this may change that. Sincerely, Amud Krishnamurthi 10555 Orange Tree Lane, Cupertino, CA 95014 http://cupertino.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaVic wer.php?view id=13&event_id=459 In the minutes from the June 4 meeting, the City Council advised the builder, Prometheus, to come back with a new design. http://cupertino.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view id=13&event id=459&meta id=76371 In the minutes from the above link, City Council instructions to Prometheus on June 4 were: "direction to the applicant to revise the project 1:o include approximately 60 apartment units instead of 80, increase in the number of parking stalls and increase in the amount of provided retail commercial space on the Stevens Creek site." Tomorrow Prometheus is going to propose 90 apartments (not the recommended 60 suggested on June 4 by City Council)!!! I don't see the figures being suggested for Retail space or parking to be discussed. 1 • See the following link for a related story on this issue: http://cupertinodai ly.com/local-news/cupertino-schools-attacked-by-the-apartmentino-monster/ By the way, the Cupertino "Downtown" project, as approved by City Council, was supposed to have Senior condos (no children to add to our school population), but that builder(Sand Hill) came back to City Council to change out Senior condos and build studio and one bedroom apartments which was approved, so there will be apartments on Stevens Creek & Finch. If any of this concerns you, please e-mail the Mayor, Mark Santoro, at msantoroacupertino.orq You can also attend the meeting tomorrow and fill out a card to speak or watch the meeting on channel 26. Regards, Sharon Frieson 2 Kirsten Squarcia From: Karen B. Guerin Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:16 PM To: Kirsten Squarcia Subject: Fwd: Item#14, Agenda of Council Meeting for September 18, 2012, Prometheus Real Estate Begin forwarded message: From: Fari Aberg <abergfari @gmail.com> Date: September 18, 2012 3:07:09 PM PDT To: <msantoro@cupertino.org>, <omahoney @cupertino.org>, <gwong@cupertino.org>, <bchang @cupertino.org>, <rsinks@cupertino.org> Subject: Re: Item #14, Agenda of Council Meeting for September 18, 2012, Prometheus Real Estate Dear Mayor Santoro and Council members, As a long time resident of Cupertino, I would like to bring to your attention that I am against the proposed development plan at the intersection of S. Blaney Ave. and Stevens Creek Blvd. due to the following reasons: 1) Safety of children crossing the Stevens Creek Blvd. to access local schools 2) Major impact on elementary, middle school and high school, our schools are already saturated and are over-crowded, please note that many other housing projects are in the pipe for Stevens Creek Blvd. that will impact the schools even more. 3) The project is too dense and not suitable for the location 4) Major traffic impact at the corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and S. Blaney Ave. 5) Impact on pollution due to increase in number of cars by proposed development 6) Reduction/elimination of about 21,000 sq ft. of retail space, please do not allow this new development to take away the retail that we need and use on a daily basis such as the food market, dry cleaners, etc. Remember that the city is promoting walkability, so please do not make us to get in our cars to grab bread, milk, etc, and keep our essentail retails that we can walk to. 7) Not enough parking is allocated to match the size of the project, it seems that the new proposal has even less parking spaces. Next time you are leaving the City Hall, please pay attention to the almost new parking places that have been added on Rodrigues, and they are always full, mostly in use by Biltmore residents. I have seen the City Hall parking lot being used by Biltmore and Waterfalls, once in a while too. 8) The new proposal has a lot less open space, comparing to the original plan, this is not acceptable. 9) Reading the related documents for the updated proposal by the developer, it seems that the applicant was not listening to City Council recommendation at the last meeting. Below is from the minutes of June 4, 2012 Council meeting: "Council discussed revising the project regarding the number of units, number of parking stalls, and retail/commercial space provided on the reduce the number of units, increase the number of parking stalls, and increase the retail/commercial space on the Stevens Creek side. The applicant requested a continuance to figure out the new design. Chang moved and Sinks seconded to continue the project to a Council meeting in August with direction to the applicant to revise the project to include approximately 60 apartment units instead of 80, increase in the number of parking stalls, and increase in the amount of 1 provided retail/commercial space on the Stevens Creek site. The motion carried with Mayor Santoro voting no." Based on the Council recommendation, the maximum allowed units should be 60, not 78, as listed in the updated proposal. As residents of Cupertino, we have put our faith and trust in you, by electing you to the office, to protect us from such a development projects, as this one, proposed by Prometheus Real Estate. On the other subject, I have spent hours on the HCD web site trying to figure out what is the penalty that is talked about in the meetings related to the housing element in the General Plan and have not been able to identify any. The only item I located had to do with non-profit development and affordable housing, which by the way, I do not recall affordable housing being mentioned in this proposal. I hope at least a few of you have requested a hard copy of HCD policy or been given a pointer to its location to study and learn what the real policy is and if the city should be bound to it. It would be wonderful, when this document is found and verified, to include a pointer to it in the Council Agenda so general public can get access to it as well. As elected officials by residents of Cupertino, please remember that the City Council should protect the City, its community, its schools, its traffic, its pollution and its future growth. Please do not turn our city into a monster city, make a decision that you personally will be proud of, many years down the road, when you discuss your past Council service with your grand children and tell them about the decisions that you made during your public service! Thanks in advance for your consideration, and please do not approve this project as it stands. Regards, Fari Aberg Cupertino Resident 2 Kirsten Squarcia From: Karen B. Guerin Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:19 PM To: Kirsten Squarcia Subject: Fwd: expansion of Biltmore apts- major impact to traffic on blaney st Begin forwarded message: From: Vernon Miranda<vermir2001 @yahoo.com> Date: September 18, 2012 1:15:07 PM PDT To: <msantoro @cupertino.org> Subject: expansion of Biltmore apts - major impact to traffic on blaney st Dear Mr. Santoro, With regards to the 'Expansion of Biltmore apts' public hearing today, I would like to comment that this is going to be an adverse major impact to traffic on blaney street. Blaney Street is a narrow single lane road and already there is lots of traffic congestion during peak school hours , so much so , that also, residents of Brenda Ct town house complex opposite to this proposed site, find it hard to come out on to Blaney Street which is their only street . Please suggest not to allow traffic from this new site to come out on Blaney and lessen the number of apartment units further to mitigate traffic and also to lessen burden on overcrowded schools. Thank you, Vernon Miranda, concerned resident, Brenda Ct. 1 Kirsten Squarcia From: Karen B. Guerin Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:19 PM To: Kirsten Squarcia Subject: Fwd: in support of the proposal by Prometheus Begin forwarded message: From: Peter Cooperstein <peter(a,amicis.com> Date: September 17, 2012 1:31:31 PM PDT To: <msantoro @cupertino.org>, <omahoney(2Icupertino.org>, <gwong @cupertino.org>, <bchang(Zi cupertino.org>, <rsinks @cupertino.org> Cc: 'Peter Cooperstein' <peter @amicis.com> Subject: in support of the proposal by Prometheus Dear Mayor Santoro and Members of the City Council: As the owner of Amici's East Coast Pizzeria in Cupertino, I support the proposal by Prometheus Real Estate Group to re-develop the Biltmore Adjacency property located on the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Blaney Avenue to construct 78 new apartment homes and 7,000 square feet of retail. I understand that the proposed development is planned at a density of 25 units per acre, residential parking is approximately 1.70 spaces per unit and it would include retail directly fronting Stevens Creek Boulevard, two stories of apartments off of Blaney Avenue and three stories directly behind the retail. Furthermore, parking for the retail is planned to support 100% of the space for restaurant use which I believe will be instrumental to its success. I understand that this development meets all of the applicable zoning requirements such as density, height, setbacks and parking. The development is on a Housing Element site and would construct approximately 78 of the 83 required units for this area. I believe it will also provide more affordable housing opportunities for the employees of many Cupertino businesses. Especially with Apple's plans to develop three million square feet of office space creating approximately thirteen thousand new jobs. Aside from the obvious economic benefits this development would provide to the city, I believe that creating high density housing off of Stevens Creek Boulevard near mass transit and retail is an excellent example of smart transit oriented development. I encourage the City of Cupertino to approve this green, sustainable, pedestrian friendly, transit-oriented development. Sincerely, Peter Cooperstein 1 President Amici's East Coast Pizzeria 69 E. Third Ave. San Mateo, CA 94401 (650)373-3440 2 BA BAY AREA September 18, 2012 arson RE: Agenda Item 14, Biltmore Apartment Expansion Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers, The Building Industry Association South Bay, which represents residential and commercial builders in Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Monterey, and San Mateo Counties, appreciates the opportunity to comment on and endorse the proposed expansion and addition to the Biltmore Apartments complex located at the intersection of Stevens Creek Blvd and Blaney Blvd in Cupertino. The City of Cupertino is fortunate to have a strong economy and vibrant neighborhoods. As the local job market continues to grow and Cupertino companies hire more employees, the demand for housing increases as well. Rather than having new employees clog the highways trying to get to and from work, Cupertino has the opportunity to approve an expansion and addition to the Biltmore Apartments complex located at the intersection of Stevens Creek Blvd and Blaney Blvd in Cupertino. By approving this project without further changes, the City of Cupertino not only adds vital residential housing units but commercial space as well. Prometheus Real Estate Group has proposed a well-designed project that does not require any changes to the current Zoning Codes as well as providing further beautification to the area. For these reasons, the Building Industry Association strongly encourages the City Council to adopt, without further changes; staffs recommended actions "A" through "G" and allow Prometheus Real Estate Group to begin their proposed expansion to the Biltmore Apartment complex. Thank you for your consideration, Sincerely, Mailing Address: Bradford Speers 101 Ygnacio Valley Rd Associate Director of Governmental Affairs Suite 210 Building Industry Association, South Bay Walnut Creek California 94596 Tel(925)951-6840 Fax(925)951-6847 www.biabayarea.org Print http://us-mg4.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?sand=37fhpnvIcp13v3 CC1—(i Subject: September 18th council meeting, parking allocation for the proposed Prometheus development From: k k(mckibbikawa @yahoo.com) To: citycouncil @cupertino.org; Date: Monday, September 17,2012 12:58 PM Dear Council Members, At the June 4th 2012 council meeting I highlighted the inadequate parking being proposed by Prometheus Real Estate for the expansion of the Biltmore Apartments as well as the Stevens Crcck proposed development. After reading the September 18th 2012 council packet for this project I see that the proposed ratio of 1.70 parking stalls per residential unit has not changed. As a reminder I pointed out to the Council that presently The Biltmore Apartments have a ratio of 2.00 on site parking stalls per unit. This is after the expansion of the complex in 1998 by 24 more apartments. Including the 41 street parking locations on Blaney and Rodrigues, used essentially exclusively by The Biltmore residents, this equates to a ratio of 2.23 parking stalls per unit. Walking through the complex at night on three different times in August and September I counted an average of only 12 empty parking stalls( easily attributed to vacancy). The present proposal of adding 12 more units and reducing the parking stalls by 34 will reduce the parking ratio to 1.71 stalls per unit. For the proposed housing portion of the Stevens Creek Development, Prometheus is proposing a parking ratio of 1.70 stalls per apartment unit. Keep in mind that there is no public street parking near this location to deal with the huge amount of overflow residential parking the new apartment complex will generate at a 1.70 ratio. Keeping in mind that the present Biltmore configuration at 179 units requires a ratio of 2.23 parking stalls per unit(this includes the public parking on Blaney and Rodrigues)to adequately service this complex,the total development proposal is short 102 parking stalls. This is two and a half times the amount of public parking being presently supplied on Blaney and Rodrigues! Please ask the developer and city staff where these cars will be parking? The parking being proposed for the commercial portion of the development is also inadequate. Presently Chili's, at 6000 sq.ft.,has 87 parking stalls to service the restaurant. The proposed commercial building at 7000 sq. ft. has a proposal of 55 parking stalls. If this falls within the city parking requirements I can see why every retail commercial establishment built in the last 12 years has had woefully inadequate parking. Please consider reducing the housing portion of this development based on realistic parking requirements and not ones that do not even meet common sense. At the June 4th city council meeting staff and the developer were directed to resubmit plans base on 50 to 60 apartment units and increased retail space of 10,000 to 15,000 sq. ft. Why doesn't the staff 1 of 2 9/17/2012 1:02 PM Print littp://us-mg4.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=37thpnvIcp13v3 report for the September 18 meeting reflect these mandates from the Council? Thank you for your consideration Robert McKibbin 2 of 2 9/17/2012 1:02 PM 9/18/2012 • DP-2011-06,ASA-2011-20,TR-2012-18 DP-2011-05,ASA-2011-19,TR-2012-13 20030,2006051evene Creek Ulod,100l15 Blaney Ave,V accent Lot,and 10]59 S Blaney Ave The applicant,Prometheus Real Estate Group,ie requeeNng approval of the following applicatlone: � `�`i. 9 F , "' Stevens Creek Sire Mixed-Use Projr,i BiiOno"AP arnnen6 • Development Permit(DP-2011-(16) Development Permit()0-2011-05) • Architectural Site Approval(ASA-2011-20) • A,[6,1,-uraISlle Approval(ASA-2011-19) • Tree RemovaI Pernut(TR-2012-18) Tree Removal Permit(7R-2012-13 Project Site&Background Information j �+ • BJtmoP.rrnetrnents has existed 'rj I ( t E1 )y asap apar[mentmmplex since y ?� q '!� the 1970s s 1lie exishng apartments were i b4 (( ,p approved for an rvpansron m r-..-,' {. t � . 1998/199900r 2i addd,ona(lots •¢ (@r a total @0179 'ts N 7.: and rentl�s dad by•"" ""•'i€ miner al 7d Cl'nhublic, and resident I ses • New 7,00 oth .fro] n IF]ding fronting �„(?"" StevensrCreek Blvd �y' v� Stevens Creek slM(taU supports " 76),12 proposed on Bdtmore '.dr ..—� s:"`"fi�i` ,p Apartments sde Previous Meetings •Planning Commission Meeting:May S,2012 •First City Council Meeting:June 4,2012 • City Council Direction: Reduce the number of units proposed on the Stevens Creek Site Y Increase the amount of exclusive parking for the commercial use ➢Consider increasing the amount of commercial space 9 Enhance the project architectural design 1 9/18/2012 Proposal Comparison Fie aa.m asd b,PC Cum*/maxi Residemil Units 87 ands 75 aniu Staff recommends rb uniu. Nom -01 uwHr.Ac. 24.22 DD,G.An. @ b>n /corrected ,z! n � June _mamx,kn meeting/ Raee.Re Parking I l5 name.=155 spaces Qb'unit 174/one = 136 nee.. Staff rcommends 1.r&una Comm.Pntive ceR(parku,y far 507,reuil and 55 space.(parking for(00',eadown 50%R e.-dawn remurml) rwur.° Building Height BBaonSire Additional Reideelet nits 12 was No Change Musky 0_?4 DWG.Ac. No Change Reidmlie Pmiug 1.69 qmeavtina 323 168 unn=3.1 macea SSidiogHnge _.6 No Change Heart of the City Specific Plan/ Housing Element Site •Project complies with Heart of the City requirements for landscaping,common open space,private outdoor space,access, streetscape,setbacks,height,building bulk,and design. •The project site is a designated Housing Element site(excluding the Chili's site and Biltmore Apartments) • Adoption of Housing Element was a community process which included public participation from community groups,focus group meetings,and workshops • Total of 13 Housing Element Sites identified • Site visits with Housing and Community Development to convince them that these sites were viable • Fu,al adoption by Council in lune 2010 •Chili's restaurant(6,000 sq ft)will be replaced with 7,000 square foot commercial building Housing Element Summary • Housing Element Site#4(includes Village Falafel,excludes Chili's site) allows approximately 64 units.However,with street centerline area included,about 74 units are allowed. • Project site(excludes Village Falafel,includes Chili's site)allows approximately 87 units(80 units with commercial space,commercial surface parking,and landscaping subtracted per HOC) • Staff recommends the number of units specified in the Housing Element, and also recommends transferring the allotted units from the Village Falafel site to this project for the following reasons: • Village Falafel site is too small to meet the requirements of HOC and provide a retail and housing component. • Site is not large enough to accommodate retail,residential and parking for both uses. • Size of a mixed-use project on this site would not be able to support underground parking. • For the above reasons,staff believes that future development on this parcel would continue lobe exclusively commercial ie nature 2 9/18/2012 Parking Ratio • Stevens creep Site Biltmore Apartments Site Apartments CommemaI rxisnm Addition rumre 1-Bedroom 4 7 8 n-Bedroom 3 9 • 101, 3-Bedroom B Sort 7,.rr otalApartments i 7 17' 1911 •Of Reconnnends dedo3-9B4 'zrkLl 136Aaidmtiai' $LOmrnerd t _ 321 Residerde f t„u Natio 1.71i..tmC 1.144v7t Wilts , ti A lB8 V0*s Parking Ratio(cont.) •Staff recommends a parking ratio of 1.78 for Stevens Creek site (136 residential stalls for 76 units) •Commercial parking is sufficient for 100%restaurant uses(55 spaces) •Underground parking is now replaced with above-grade tuck- under garages •Parking ratio at existing Biltmore site is 1.68 as was previously proposed(321 residential stalls for 191 units) Architectural and Site Changes •Central walkway from commercial building connecting Building A added •Parking lot brick and accent paving •High quality limestone tiles added to commercial building with more vibrant colors •Enhanced porch and front entry features •Additional color palettes • Building B redesigned with flat roof and pitched roof 3 9/18/2012 Architectural Changes-Retail Elevation k veil . W , 4 _ l:.r'a .I r N II wl tkii I + i!1 Architectural Changes- Residential Elevations Building A ft ! .>te." 6,y Er<t — 1 ! -jji �"F F. Viz. a h , 4 VI Rata ° - 6 ® 41.- . Building B Building C ri1i iii iii E Et El Building D Development Allocation •Project will not draw from Heart of the City's commercial balance of 123,087 sq ft.A net of 14,082 square feet will be returned to balance, for a new commercial balance of 137,169 sq ft •Project will draw from Heart of the City's residential balance of 308 residential units. A remaining balance of 220(308-88)residential units will be available if proposed project is approved with staff's recommendation(76 units on Stevens Creek site,12 units on Biltmore site) 4 9/18/2012 Community Outreach •Neighborhood meetings were held on the following dates: • Tuesday,September 11,2012 • Thursday,May 31,2012 • Wednesday,March 14,2012 Community Concerns: Community Benefits: Traffic Impacts Redevelopment of Existmg Site School Impacts New Retail Component Driveway Location(Blaney) Architecture Parcel Tan Conformity to Heart of the City Requirements Comer Site Not Included •City Notice of Public Hearing mailed out to neighbors within 300 feet on August 30,2012 •City website created and updated with project details and information •Several community members have expressed their concerns with the impact the project will have on schools,traffic,placement of driveways,and density • Under State law,the City is not permitted to consider school impacts m a determining factor for project review and approval Recommendation A. Staff recommends that the City Council approve Mitigated Negative Declaration EA-2011-16, Development Permit DP-2011-06,Architectural Site Approval ASA-2011-20,and Tree Removal Permit TR- 2012-18 for the Stevens Creek site in accordance with the Draft Resolutions. B. Staff also recommends that the City Council approve Mitigated Negative Declaration EA-2011-15, Development Permit DP-2011-05,Architectural Site Approval ASA-2011-19,and Tree Removal Permit TR- 2012-13 for the Biltmore site in accordance with the Draft Resolutions. 5 C-oei ) - is - ( z ! II ameniff Santa Clara County Housing Action Coalition The Santa Clara County Housing Action Coalition is comprised of a broad range of organizations and individuals who have, as a common goal,the vision of affordable,well-constructed and appropriately located housing September 14, 2012 Cupertino City Council 200 E. Santa Clara San Jose, CA 95113 Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers, On behalf of the Santa Clara County Housing Action Coalition, we are writing to express our support for the housing proposal called Biltmore Adjacency by Prometheus Real Estate located near Blaney and Stevens Creek. By way of reference, the Housing Action Coalition includes more than 100 organizations and individuals. Its goal is the production of well-built, appropriately-located homes that are affordable to families and workers in Silicon Valley. Organizations participating in the HAC represent business, labor, environmental organizations and many more. The Housing Action Coalition supports housing proposals on appropriate sites that use land more efficiently and provide quality design that promotes transportation choice. Additionally, and especially in communities such as Cupertino, we strongly support developments that include an affordability component. With high quality schools, it is important that cities like Cupertino work hard to make sure that all income levels are afforded access to superior educational opportunities. This site is within the Heart of the City Plan, an plan that recognizes the area as an appropriate location in which to intensify use. Despite those clear policy goals, along with the fact that 3 of the 4 parcels are housing element sites, we were dismayed to see that the Council asked for a reduction in the number of homes from the original proposal. As housing advocates, we see this frequently. City by city, site by site, decision makers whittle back the number of homes permissible on sites that are, for all intents and purposes, appropriate for more height and density. Individually, these land use decisions seem inconsequential. Collectively, they add up to an overall deficit in housing county- wide. This is clearly evidenced by the recent uptick in Silicon Valley rents. Supply outpaces demand and Silicon Valley workers compete for a finite supply of homes. Cupertino is a part of a region that has a persistent housing deficit, a deficit that threatens our ability to provide for those who gird the foundation of our economy. Although we are dismayed that the number of homes proposed has been reduced, we encourage the Council's approval of the Biltmore Adjacency Apartments. More homes along Steven's Creek will help alleviate the region's need for housing in a location that offers numerous 224 Airport Parkway, Suite 620,San Jose amenities within walking distance. And, with the growth of Apple, it is increasingly important that homes be located nearby. We encourage your support of this proposal. Thank you for your consideration of our comments. Sincerely, Margaret Bard Adam Montgo HAC Co-Chair HAC Co-Chair Kirsten Squarcia From: Karen B. Guerin Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 1:48 PM To: Kirsten Squarcia Subject: FW: September 18th council meeting, parking allocation for the proposed Prometheus development From: k k [mailto:mckibbikawayahoo.com] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 12:58 PM To: City Council Subject: September 18th council meeting, parking allocation For the proposed Prometheus development Dear Council Members, At the June 4th 2012 council meeting I highlighted the inadequate parking being proposed by Prometheus Real Estate for the expansion of the Biltmore Apartments as well as the Stevens Creek proposed development. After reading the September 18th 2012 council packet for this project I see that the proposed ratio of 1.70 parking stalls per residential unit has not changed. As a reminder I pointed out to the Council that presently The Biltmore Apartments have a ratio of 2.00 on site parking stalls per unit. This is after the expansion of the complex in 1998 by 24 more apartments. Including the 41 street parking locations on Blaney and Rodrigues, used essentially exclusively by The Biltmore residents, this equates to a ratio of 2.23 parking stalls per unit. Walking through the complex at night on three different times in August and September I counted an average of only 12 empty parking stalls( easily attributed to vacancy). The present proposal of adding 12 more units and reducing the parking stalls by 34 will reduce the parking ratio to 1.71 stalls per unit. For the proposed housing portion of the Stevens Creek Development, Prometheus is proposing a parking ratio of 1.70 stalls per apartment unit. Keep in mind that there is no public street parking near this location to deal with the huge amount of overflow residential parking the new apartment complex will generate at a 1.70 ratio. Keeping in mind that the present Biltmore configuration at 179 units requires a ratio of 2.23 parking stalls per unit ( this includes the public parking on Blaney and Rodrigues) to adequately service this complex, the total development proposal is short 102 parking stalls. This is two and a half times the amount of public parking being presently supplied on Blaney and Rodrigues! Please ask the developer and city staff where these cars will be parking? The parking being proposed for the commercial portion of the development is also inadequate. Presently Chili's, at 6000 sq.ft., has 87 parking stalls to service the restaurant. The proposed commercial building at 7000 sq. ft. has a proposal of 55 parking stalls. If this falls within the city parking requirements I can see why every retail commercial establishment built in the last 12 years has had woefully inadequate parking. Please consider reducing the housing portion of this development based on realistic parking requirements and not ones that do not even meet common sense. i At the June 4th city council meeting staff and the developer were directed to resubmit plans base on 50 to 60 apartment units and increased retail space of 10,000 to 15,000 sq. ft. Why doesn't the staff report for the September 18 meeting reflect these mandates from the Council? Thank you for your consideration Robert McKibbin 2 I t Boulnger, In(. 0 :3U:i N. Alalhilda Ave. 1aflQei ! Sunmvale, CA 9,1085 Phone 10h.ii 1.90110 �� —T H E 13 A K E R-- �•- Fax 108.523.98tu www.leboulanger.com September 17, 2012 Dear Mayor Santoro and Members of the City Council: As the owner of Le Boulanger in Cupertino, I support the proposal by Prometheus Real Estate Group to re-develop the Biltmore Adjacency property located on the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Blaney Avenue to construct 78 new apartment homes and 7,000 square feet of retail. I understand that the proposed development is planned at a density of 25 units per acre, residential parking is approximately 1.70 spaces per unit and it would include retail directly fronting Stevens Creek Boulevard, two stories of apartments off of Blaney Avenue and three stories directly behind the retail. Furthermore, parking for the retail is planned to support 100% of the space for restaurant use which I believe will be instrumental to its success. I understand that this development meets all of the applicable zoning requirements such as density, height, setbacks and parking. The development is on a Housing Element site and would construct approximately 78 of the 83 required units for this area. I believe it will also provide more affordable housing opportunities for the employees of many Cupertino businesses. Especially with Apple's plans to develop three million square feet of office space creating approximately thirteen thousand new jobs. Aside from the obvious economic benefits this development would provide to the city, I believe that creating high density housing off of Stevens Creek Boulevard near mass transit and retail is an excellent example of smart transit oriented development. I encourage the City of Cupertino to approve this green, sustainable, pedestrian friendly, transit-oriented development. Sincerely, ? ? .----i" ...---__C??.- ..e3:-:?;,—C-L-Le;) Daniel P. Brunello President Le Boulanger, Inc. Le8oulanner CC- 1 Karen B. Guerin From: Ducote, Michael [MDucote @prometheusreg.com] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 7:5C) PM To: Mark Santoro; Gilbert Wong; Orrin Mahoney; Rod Sinks; Barry Chang Cc: Aarti Shrivastava; Simon Vuong Subject: Fwd: Welcoming the new project. Dear Mayor and Council Members, Below is an email from a neighbor living at Adobe Terrace who attended our last neighborhood meeting. Her residence is two sites over from ours within walking distance. Thanks. Sent from Mike Ducotes iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Kavitha Joseph <kavithajosephPhotmail.com<mailto:kavithajoseph@hotmail.com» Date: September 17, 2012 5:53:53 PM PDT To: " 'Ducote, Michael"' <MDucote @prometheusreg.c_om<mailto:MDucote()prometheusreg.com» Subject: Welcoming the new project. Hi Mr. Michael Ducote, After coming to your open house last week and viewing your project for 20030 Stevens Creek Blvd, I am very much happy to see the new development plan. As a neighborhood resident of the new development [I reside at Adobe Terrace] I would very much welcome the new project. Currently, as the back lot of the present eateries are vacant and lonely I see lot of people misusing the back spaces. At times I could see suspicious activities going on in this areas particularly at late evenings and at night when it is dark. Hence, I would rather encourage and would love to see this project to come up so that we the neighborhood residents can live peacefully. Thanks for explaining the whole plan and hope your project gets a nod from the Cupertino City Council. Thank you, Mary Agnes 17th September 2012. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This communication and any accompanying document(s) are confidential and may be privileged. They are intended for the sole use of the addressee. If you received this transmission in error, you are advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance upon the communication is strictly prohibited. Moreover, any such inadvertent disclosure shall not compromise or waive the attorney-client privilege as to this communication or otherwise. If you have received this communication in error, please contact me at the above Internet address or by telephone at 650-931-3400. Thank you. 1 CC q--(k—i Karen B. Guerin From: Moss, Jonathan [JMoss @prometheusreg.com] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 7:03 PM To: Mark Santoro; Rod Sinks; Orrin Mahoney; Gilbert Wong; Barry Chang; Aarti Shrivastava; dbrandt©cupertino.org; ckorade@cupertino.org Subject: Proposed Biltmore adjacency Development Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Staff: Since there has been a fair amount of recent discussion regarding parking, I am sharing with you certain data that may be useful related to this subject for our proposed development at Biltmore. To date, we have not included any on-street parking stalls in our proposed parking counts. After reviewing the City's Parking Regulations in 19.124 (last page), we understand that the on-street parking that exists on Blaney and Rodriguez totals 45 parallel stalls and has never been included in our proposed parking stall supply number both for the existing property and the Biltmore Adjacency property. As Section 19 124.060 states, "The applicant submits a detailed parking study which demonstrates that the proposed use is compatible with the proposed parking supply. Adjacent on—street parking may be included in the parking supply." Therefore,when adding these 45 stalls to the parking count, our ratio for stalls dedicated only to the residential units on the two properties is as follows: Biltmore Existing Property Parking Stalls (garage and open) 358 Biltmore Adjacency Stalls Dedicated to Residential 133 Parallel Stalls on Blaney and Rodriguez 45 Total Stalls 536 Total Units—Biltmore Adjacency and Existing Biltmore 269 (179 existing Biltmore, 78 new at Adjacency, 12 new at Biltmore) Total Stalls/Total Units 1.99 stalls/unit If one does not include the on-street parking, our proposed parking count is 1.70 stalls/unit. The parking study recently created by the City's independent parking consultant surveyed 6 similar existing Cupertino apartment properties and concluded that the average parking demand is 1.33 stalls/unit:. This is based on actual parking counts after midnight on a weekday, not theoretical calculations. Our proposed 1.70 number is 28%greater than this average. If our proposed parking stall count is 1.99 as shown above, this represents a supply of 50% more stalls than the 1.33 demand. The city's parking regulations(19.124) explicitly allow for parking to be approved at a number consistent with a valid parking study. The City of Mountain requested the same study and the 5 apartment properties in that City averaged 1.12 stalls/unit. These are formal studies and the City has the written reports. Our 1.70 figure is 46%greater than this average. If the 1.99 figure is used, this represents a supply of 71% more stalls than the 1.16 demand. Additionally, some individuals have stated that the existing Biltmore parking lots have relatively few vacant stalls at night. As reflected in the City's independent parking study, 71 stalls were vacant at the existing Biltmore property. A 1 large number of the garages are vacant on any given night and that is reflected in the parking study's inspection of the property. One last item—our revised plans since June reflect an additional 14 parking stalls for the Biltmore Adjacency site that are intended to be additional stalls for the retail customers. The parking is now significantly greater than the City's zoning requirements for retail and equal to the City's requirements for a restaurant use. We hope this clarifies some of the parking issues related to our proposed plans on the Biltmore Adjacency property. Thank you. JON MOSS, E;XECUIIVE VICE PRESIDENT &PARTNER PROMETI ZEES REAL ESTATE GROUP \\ \I \II ( V PIN ,N.1 (6IT ] U';) I \ J NI()()SS(i PRONII 1TE IIAISRI;G.CO;A1 WWW.PROMf II?USRI?G.cONI CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This communication and any accompanying document(s) are confidential and may be privileged. They are intended for the sole use of the addressee. If you received this transmission in error, you are advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance upon the communication is strictly prohibited. Moreover, any such inadvertent disclosure shall not compromise or waive the attorney-client privilege as to this communication or otherwise. If you have received this communication in error, please contact me at the above Internet address or by telephone at 650-931-3400. Thank you. 2 Kirsten Squarcia From: Karen B. Guerin Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 11:19 AM To: Kirsten Squarcia Subject: FW: City Council meeting tomorrow From: Amudhan K [mailto:amudhan kfthotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 10:05 AM To: Mark Santoro Subject: City Council meeting tomorrow Dear Mr. Mayor, This is Amud Krishnamurthi, a Cupertino resident writing to you about a proposal that is going to be reviewed today by the City Council. In my opinion, for various reasons this proposal of building additional apartments may not be advantageous for the residents. I am one of the resident living close to this intersection and we travel a lot through this intersection both on week days and weekends. As it is, it is crowded. As I drive in Blaney the street side parked cars in that apartment makes it already crowded streets. With proposed new apartments, the traffic will increase thus increasing the difficulty for the current residents' traffic life due to congestion caused by additional automobiles. When I moved to South bay area, Cupertino used to be one of the nice little City, not over crowded with commercial complexes. Building more and more apartments like this may change that. Sincerely, Amud Krishnamurthi 10555 Orange Tree Lane, Cupertino, CA 95014 http://cupertino.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaV iewer.php?view id=13&event id=459 In the minutes from the June 4 meeting, the City Council advised the builder, Prometheus, to come back with a new design. http://cupertino.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view id=13&event id=459&meta id=76371 In the minutes from the above link, City Council instructions to Prometheus on June 4 were: "direction to the applicant to revise the project to include approximately 60 apartment units instead of 80, increase in the number of parking stalls and increase in the amount of provided retail commercial space on the Stevens Creek site." Tomorrow Prometheus is going to propose 90 apartments (not the recommended 60 suggested on June 4 by City Council)!!! I don't see the figures being suggested for Retail space or parking to be discussed. 1 See the following link for a related story on this issue: http://cupertinodaily.com/local-news/cupertino-schools-attacked-by-the-apartmentino-monster/ By the way, the Cupertino Downtown I project, as approved by City Council, was supposed to have Senior condos (no children to add to our school population), but that builder (Sand Hill) came back to City Council to change out Senior condos and build studio and one bedroom apartments which was approved, so there will be apartments on Stevens Creek & Finch. If any of this concerns you, please e-mail the Mayor, Mark Santoro, at msantoroCa cupertino.orq You can also attend the meeting tomorrow and fill out a card to speak or watch the meeting on channel 26. Regards, Sharon Frieson 2 Kirsten Squarcia From: Karen B. Guerin Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:16 PM To: Kirsten Squarcia Subject: Fwd: Item#14, Agenda of Council Meeting for September 18, 2012, Prometheus Real Estate Begin forwarded message: From: Fari Aberg <abergfari @gmail.com> Date: September 18, 2012 3:07:09 PM PDT To: <msantoro(aicupertino.org>, <omahoney @cupertino.org>, <gwong @cupertino.org>, <bchang @cupertino.org>, <rsinks @cupertino.org> Subject: Re: Item #14, Agenda of Council Meeting for September 18, 2012, Prometheus Real Estate Dear Mayor Santoro and Council members, As a long time resident of Cupertino, I would like to bring to your attention that I am against the proposed development plan at the intersection of S. Blaney Ave. and Stevens Creek Blvd. due to the following reasons: 1) Safety of children crossing the Stevens Creek Blvd. to access local schools 2) Major impact on elementary, middle school and high school, our schools are already saturated and are over-crowded, please note that many other housing projects are in the pipe for Stevens Creek Blvd. that will impact the schools even more. 3) The project is too dense and not suitable for the location 4) Major traffic impact at the corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and S. Blaney Ave. 5) Impact on pollution due to increase in number of cars by proposed development 6) Reduction/elimination of about 21,000 sq 1t. of retail space, please do not allow this new development to take away the retail that we need and use on a daily basis such as the food market, dry cleaners, etc. Remember that the city is promoting walkability, so please do not make us to get in our cars to grab bread, milk, etc, and keep our essentail retails that we can walk to. 7) Not enough parking is allocated to match the size of the project, it seems that the new proposal has even less parking spaces. Next time you are leaving the City Hall, please pay attention to the almost new parking places that have been added on Rodrigues, and they are always full, mostly in use by Biltmore residents. I have seen the City Hall parking lot being used by Biltmore and Waterfalls, once in a while too. 8) The new proposal has a lot less open space, comparing to the original plan, this is not acceptable. 9) Reading the related documents for the updated proposal by the developer, it seems that the applicant was not listening to City Council recommendation at the last meeting. Below is from the minutes of June 4, 2012 Council meeting: "Council discussed revising the project regarding the number of units, number of parking stalls, and retail/commercial space provided on the reduce the number of units, increase the number of parking stalls, and increase the retail/commercial space on the Stevens Creek side. The applicant requested a continuance to figure out the new design. Chang moved and Sinks seconded to continue the project to a Council meeting in August with direction to the applicant to revise the project to include approximately 60 apartment units instead of 80, increase in the number of parking stalls, and increase in the amount of 1 provided retail/commercial space on the Stevens Creek site. The motion carried with Mayor Santoro voting no." Based on the Council recommendation, the maximum allowed units should be 60, not 78, as listed in the updated proposal. As residents of Cupertino, we have put our faith and trust in you, by electing you to the office, to protect us from such a development projects, as this one, proposed by Prometheus Real Estate. On the other subject, I have spent hours on the HCD web site trying to figure out what is the penalty that is talked about in the meetings related to the housing element in the General Plan and have not been able to identify any. The only item I located had to do with non-profit development and affordable housing, which by the way, I do not recall affordable housing being mentioned in this proposal. I hope at least a few of you have requested a hard copy of HCD policy or been given a pointer to its location to study and learn what the real policy is and if the city should be bound to it. It would be wonderful, when this document is found and verified, to include a pointer to it in the Council Agenda so general public can get access to it as well. As elected officials by residents of Cupertino, please remember that the City Council should protect the City, its community, its schools, its traffic, its pollution and its future growth. Please do not turn our city into a monster city, make a decision that you personally will be proud of, many years down the road, when you discuss your past Council service with your grand children and tell them about the decisions that you made during your public service! Thanks in advance for your consideration, and please do not approve this project as it stands. Regards, Fari Aberg Cupertino Resident 2 Kirsten Squarcia From: Karen B. Guerin Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:19 PM To: Kirsten Squarcia Subject: Fwd: expansion of Biltmore apts- major impact to traffic on blaney st Begin forwarded message: From: Vernon Miranda<vermir2001 @yahoo.corn> Date: September 18, 2012 1:15:07 PM PDT To: <msantoro @cupertino.org> Subject: expansion of Biltmore apts - major impact to traffic on blaney st Dear Mr. Santoro, With regards to the 'Expansion of Biltmore apts' public hearing today, I would like to comment that this is going to be an adverse major impact to traffic on blaney street. Blaney Street is a narrow single lane road and already there is lots of traffic congestion during peak school hours , so much so , that also, residents of Brenda Ct town house complex opposite to this proposed site, find it hard to come out on to Blaney Street which is their only street . Please suggest not to allow traffic from this new site to come out on Blaney and lessen the number of apartment units further to mitigate traffic and also to lessen burden on overcrowded schools. Thank you, Vernon Miranda, concerned resident, Brenda Ct. i Kirsten Squarcia From: Karen B. Guerin Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 3:19 PM To: Kirsten Squarcia Subject: Fwd: in support of the proposal by Prometheus Begin forwarded message: From: Peter Cooperstein <peter @amicis.com> Date: September 17, 2012 1:31:31 PM PDT To: <msantoro(a,cupertino.org>, <omahoney @cupertino.org>, <gwong @cupertino.org>, <bchangna,cupertino.org>, <rsinks(&,,cupertino.org> Cc: 'Peter Cooperstein' <peter@amicis.com> Subject: in support of the proposal by Prometheus Dear Mayor Santoro and Members of the City Council: As the owner of Amici's East Coast Pizzeria in Cupertino, I support the proposal by Prometheus Real Estate Group to re-develop the Biltmore Adjacency property located on the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Blaney Avenue to construct 78 new apartment homes and 7,000 square feet of retail. I understand that the proposed development is planned at a density of 25 units per acre, residential parking is approximately 1.70 spaces per unit and it would include retail directly fronting Stevens Creek Boulevard, two stories of apartments off of Blaney Avenue and three stories directly behind the retail. Furthermore, parking for the retail is planned to support 100% of the space for restaurant use which I believe will be instrumental to its success. I understand that this development meets all of the applicable zoning requirements such as density, height, setbacks and parking. The development is on a Housing Element site and would construct approximately 78 of the 83 required units for this area. I believe it will also provide more affordable housing opportunities for the employees of many Cupertino businesses. Especially with Apple's plans to develop three million square feet of office space creating approximately thirteen thousand new jobs. Aside from the obvious economic benefits this development would provide to the city, I believe that creating high density housing off of Stevens Creek Boulevard near mass transit and retail is an excellLent example of smart transit oriented development. I encourage the City of Cupertino to approve this green, sustainable, pedestrian friendly, transit-oriented development. Sincerely, Peter Cooperstein 1 President Amici's East Coast Pizzeria 69 E. Third Ave. San Mateo, CA 94401 (650)373-3440 2 BA BAY AREA September 18, 2012 it, V.2 IN >t, AI19N RE: Agenda Item 14, Biltmore Apartment Expansion Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers, The Building Industry Association South Bay, which represents residential and commercial builders in Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Monterey, and San Mateo Counties, appreciates the opportunity to comment on and endorse the proposed expansion and addition to the Biltmore Apartments complex located at the intersection of Stevens Creek Blvd and Blaney Blvd in Cupertino. The City of Cupertino is fortunate to have a strong economy and vibrant neighborhoods. As the local job market continues to grow and Cupertino companies hire more employees, the demand for housing increases as well. Rather than having new employees clog the highways trying to get to and from work, Cupertino has the opportunity to approve an expansion and addition to the Biltmore Apartments complex located at the intersection of Stevens Creek Blvd and Blaney Blvd in Cupertino. By approving this project without further changes, the City of Cupertino not only adds vital residential housing units but commercial space as well. Prometheus Real Estate Group has proposed a well-designed project that does not require any changes to the current Zoning Codes as well as providing further beautification to the area. For these reasons, the Building Industry Association strongly encourages the City Council to adopt, without further changes; staffs recommended actions "A" through "G" and allow Prometheus Real Estate Group to begin their proposed expansion to the Biltmore Apartment complex. Thank you for your consideration, Sincerely, Mailing Address: Bradford Speers 101 Ygnacio Valley Rd Associate Director of Governmental Affairs Suite 210 Building Industry Association, South Bay Walnut Creek California 94596 Tel(925)951-6840 Fax(925)951-6847 www.biabayarea.org