Loading...
2-25-14 searchable packetTable of Contents Agenda 3 Final Map for Main Street Cupertino Staff Report 8 A - Draft Resolution 10 B - Final Map 11 C - Subdivision Improvement Agreement 18 Call for Review of the Planning Commission's approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a weekly mobile food truck event in the parking lot of a commercial establishment Staff Report 30 A - PC Staff Report 32 B - PC Resolution 36 C - Draft PC Minutes 40 D - Call for Review 51 E - Project Description 55 F - Traffic Analysis 60 G - Plan Set 66 Architectural and Site Approval Application for final refinements to the previously approved Shops 1, 3-5, 7-8, Pads 1-3, Town Square, Flex 1 & 2, Office 1 & 2, Parking Garage, and associated site and landscaping design of the Main Street Cupertino Project Staff Report 71 A - Draft Resolution 77 B - Resolution No. 12-098(M) - condition 35 84 C - Site plan with relevant building elevations approved at the January 20, 2009 Council meeting 110 D - Site plan with relevant building elevations approved at the May 15, 2012 Council meeting 125 E - Site plan approved at the September 4, 2012 Council meeting 135 F - Comments from Lisa Warren 136 G - Project plan set, January 24, 2012 139 H - Revised elevations, February 6, 2014 140 I - DRC Staff Report, February 6, 2014 147 J - Draft DRC Minutes 158 K - Recommended changes to the flex 1 building from the City's Architectural Consultant 165 L - ASA Package Descriptions 166 M - Landscape Narrative 177 N - Material & color, will be available at Council hearing 179 Tree removal permit to allow the removal and replacement of additional trees that are unhealthy or in conflict with the utilities/infrastructure for the Main Street Project Staff Report 180 1 A - Draft Resolution 183 B - Tree removal plan (Sheet L-8.1 & L-8.2)186 C - Project arborist letter 188 D - Sheet L-4.1b planting imagery 190 Joint Use Agreement for Main Street Park and Cupertino Main Street Town Square Staff Report 191 A - Resolution 12-098(M) - Condition 15 193 B - Joint Use Agreement 219 2 AGENDA    CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL ~ SPECIAL MEETING  10350 Torre Avenue, Community Hall Council Chamber  Tuesday, February 25, 2014  6:45 PM    CITY COUNCIL MEETING    PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE     ROLL CALL     CEREMONIAL MATTERS AND PRESENTATIONS    POSTPONEMENTS    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.    1. Subject:  Final Map for Main Street Cupertino    Recommended Action:  Adopt Resolution No. 14‐121 approving the Final Map  (Tract No. 10172)         3 Tuesday, February 25, 2014  Cupertino City Council   Description: Final Map: Tract No. 10172; Property Owner: Main Street Cupertino  Aggregator, LLC; Location: North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard on both sides of  Finch Avenue, west of N. Tantau Avenue and south of Vallco Parkway (APN 316‐ 20‐078, 316‐20‐079, and 316‐20‐085)   Staff Report  A ‐ Draft Resolution  B ‐ Final Map  C ‐ Subdivision Improvement Agreement  Page: 7  SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES    PUBLIC HEARINGS    2. Subject:  Call for Review of the Planning Commissionʹs approval of a Conditional  Use Permit to allow a weekly mobile food truck event in the parking lot of a  commercial establishment    Recommended Action:  Uphold the Planning Commissionʹs approval     Description: Application No(s): U‐2013‐09; Applicant(s): Benjamin Himlan (Whole  Foods Market); Location: 20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard; APN# 326‐31‐022; Call for  Review of the Planning Commissionʹs approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow  a weekly mobile food truck event in the parking lot of a commercial establishment   Staff Report   A ‐ PC Staff Report  B ‐ PC Resolution   C ‐ Draft PC Minutes  D ‐ Call for Review  E ‐ Project Description   F ‐ Traffic Analysis  G ‐ Plan Set  Page: 29   4 Tuesday, February 25, 2014  Cupertino City Council   3. Subject:  Architectural and Site Approval Application for final refinements to the  previously approved Shops 1, 3‐5, 7‐8, Pads 1‐3, Town Square, Flex 1 & 2, Office 1 &  2, Parking Garage, and associated site and landscaping design of the Main Street  Cupertino Project    Recommended Action:  1. Consider referrals from the Design Review Committee  (DRC) of an Architectural and Site Approval to: a. Provide clarification of Resolution  12‐098(M) as to the criteria for Architectural Site Approval, including Condition 35;  and/or b. Amend Resolution 12‐098(M) as to the role of the DRC for Architectural  Site Approval 2. If Resolution 12‐098(M) is amended, consider adopting Resolution  No. 14‐122 regarding the Architectural and Site Approval Application (ASA‐2012‐ 15)     Description: Application(s): ASA‐2012‐15; Applicant(s): Kevin Dare (500 Forbes,  LLC); Location: southeast corner of Vallco Pkwy and Finch Ave   Staff Report  A ‐ Draft Resolution   B ‐ Resolution No. 12‐098(M)  ‐ condition 35  C ‐ Site plan with relevant building elevations approved at the January 20, 2009  Council meeting  D ‐ Site plan with relevant building elevations approved at the May 15, 2012 Council  meeting  E ‐ Site plan approved at the September 4, 2012 Council meeting  F ‐ Comments from Lisa Warren  G ‐ Project plan set, January 24, 2012  H ‐ Revised elevations, February 6, 2014  I ‐ DRC Staff Report, February 6, 2014  J ‐ Draft DRC Minutes  K ‐ Recommended changes to the flex 1 building from the Cityʹs Architectural  Consultant  L ‐ ASA Package Descriptions  M ‐ Landscape Narrative  N ‐ Material & color, will be available at Council hearing  Page: 70     5 Tuesday, February 25, 2014  Cupertino City Council   4. Subject:  Tree removal permit to allow the removal and replacement of additional  trees that are unhealthy or in conflict with the utilities/infrastructure for the Main  Street Project    Recommended Action:  Adopt Resolution No. 14‐123 approving the removal and  replacement of an additional 28 trees for the Main Street Project     Description: Application(s): TR‐2013‐39; Applicant(s): Kevin Dare; Location:  southeast corner of Vallco Pkwy and Finch Ave   Staff Report  A ‐ Draft Resolution  B ‐ Tree removal plan (Sheet L‐8.1 & L‐8.2)  C ‐ Project arborist letter   D ‐ Sheet L‐4.1b planting imagery   Page: 179    ORDINANCES AND ACTION ITEMS    5. Subject:  Joint Use Agreement for Main Street Park and Cupertino Main Street Town  Square    Recommended Action:  Authorize the City Manager to execute a Joint Use  agreement for Main Street Park and Cupertino Main Street Town Square     Staff Report  A ‐ Resolution 12‐098(M) ‐ Condition 15  B ‐ Joint Use Agreement  Page: 190    REPORTS BY COUNCIL AND STAFF    ADJOURNMENT       6 Tuesday, February 25, 2014  Cupertino City Council           The City of Cupertino has adopted the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure §1094.6; litigation  challenging a final decision of the City Council must be brought within 90 days after a decision is  announced unless a shorter time is required by State or Federal law.    Prior to seeking judicial review of any adjudicatory (quasi‐judicial) decision, interested persons must  file a petition for reconsideration within ten calendar days of the date the City Clerk mails notice of the  City’s decision. Reconsideration petitions must comply with the requirements of Cupertino Municipal  Code §2.08.096. Contact the City Clerk’s office for more information or go to  http://www.cupertino.org/index.aspx?page=125 for a reconsideration petition form.     In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the City of Cupertino will make  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.    Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Cupertino City Council after publication of  the packet will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at City Hall,  10300 Torre Avenue, during normal business hours and in Council packet archives linked from the  agenda/minutes page on the Cupertino web site. 7 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354 www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting: February 25, 2014    Subject  Final Map for Main Street Cupertino.     Recommended Action  Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Final Map (Tract No. 10172)  pursuant to the Draft Resolution (Attachment A).    Description  Final Map:   Tract No. 10172  Property Owner:  Main Street Cupertino Aggregator, LLC  Location:  North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard on both sides of Finch Avenue,  west of N. Tantau Avenue and south of Vallco Parkway  (APN 316‐20‐078, 316‐20‐079, and 316‐20‐085)    Background  The project site consists of three (3) vacant parcels on the north side of Stevens Creek  Boulevard on both sides of Finch Avenue, west of North Tantau Avenue and south of Vallco  Parkway.     On September 4, 2012, City Council approved an 18.5 acre mixed use development  consisting of six (6) parcels which include retail buildings, office buildings, a hotel, a loft  apartment, and a parking garage (designated as common area). The project approval  included the approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map pursuant to the Subdivision Map  Act.    Discussion  As required by the Subdivision Map Act, the Final Map (Attachment B) being presented  substantially conforms to the approved tentative map.  Approval of this map is  administrative per Subdivision Map Act Section 66458.    Subdivision improvements include: construction of sidewalk, curb and gutter,  driveways, street lights, bus stops, pavement and the removal and replacement of street  trees and other landscaping along the project’s frontage on Stevens Creek Boulevard,  Tantau Avenue and Vallco Parkway; a new traffic signal at the intersection of Vallco  8 Parkway and Main Street (located in close proximity to the vacated portion of Finch  Avenue); traffic signal modifications at the intersections of Vallco Parkway/Tantau  Avenue and Stevens Creek Blvd/Tantau Avenue; angled parking along Vallco Parkway;  and a landscaped median island on Vallco Parkway and Stevens Creek Boulevard.      Onsite storm water improvements have been required, in conformance with the  Municipal Regional Permit, and consist of rain gardens, infiltration trenches and  hydrodynamic separators.  Storm water trash capture facilities will be installed onsite to  prevent trash from entering the City storm drain system.  Other onsite storm water  facilities will collect and infiltrate storm water into the ground, to reduce the quantity  and potential pollutants from storm drainage runoff to the City storm drain system and  receiving water bodies.   Upon City Council approval of the Final Map, Public Works  shall collect various required fees and bonds including a $1,125M Park Bond, $450,000  Parking Conversion Fund for Vallco Parkway, $400,000 for traffic mitigation at  Homestead & Lawrence, $100,000 Traffic Calming Fund to address potential impacts to  adjacent neighborhoods, $65,000 for creek trail improvements and various other fees  and bonds related to the subdivision improvements as established and listed in the  Subdivision Improvement Agreement (Attachment C).      ____________________________________  Prepared by:  Winnie Pagan, Associate Civil Engineer   Reviewed by:  Timm Borden, Director of Public Works  Approved for Submission by:  David Brandt, City Manager  Attachments:      A – Draft Resolution  B – Final Map  C – Subdivision Improvement Agreement    9 ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION NO. 14‐___     THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A FINAL  MAP (TRACT NO. 10172) LOCATED NORTH OF STEVENS CREEK  BOULEVARD ON BOTH SIDES OF FINCH AVENUE, WEST OF NORTH  TANTAU AVENUE AND SOUTH OF VALLCO PARKWAY   (APN 316‐20‐078, 316‐20‐079, and 316‐20‐085)    Final Map:  Tract No. 10172  Property Owner: Main Street Aggregator, LLC    WHEREAS, the proposed Final Map substantially conforms to the approved  Tentative Map; and    WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council for approval and for  authorization to record the Final Map located at the north side of Stevens Creek  Boulevard on both sides of Finch Avenue, west of North Tantau Avenue and south of  Vallco Parkway.    NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Final Map is hereby approved  and the City Clerk is hereby authorized to sign said Final Map.     PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Cupertino, this  25th day of February, 2014, by the following vote:    Vote:   Members of the City Council    AYES:    NOES:    ABSENT:   ABSTAIN:       ATTEST:     APPROVED:                       Grace Schmidt, City Clerk   Gilbert Wong, Mayor, City of Cupertino    1 10 Attachment B 11 Attachment B 12 Attachment B 13 Attachment B 14 Attachment B 15 Attachment B 16 Attachment B 17 City of Cupertino SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT Main Street Cupertino APNS: 316-20-078, 079 & 085 This AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this day of , 2014, by and between the CITY OF CUPERTINO, a municipal corporation of the State of California, (“CITY”), and Main Street Cupertino Aggregator, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Subdivider”) for a mixed development for retail, hotel, commercial, office and residential use located at northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau Avenue. RECITALS 1.Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California and the City’s local ordinances and regulations relating to subdivision maps, Subdivider has presented to the City for approval a final subdivision map (the “Map”) for the subdivision of certain real property in the City of Cupertino, designated as Tract No. 10172 (the “Subdivision”). 2.Subdivider has prepared and City has approved the following plans and related specifications (the “Improvement Plans”) for construction, installation and completion of certain public improvements in connection with the Subdivision (the “Improvements). The Improvement Plans are on file in the City’s Department of Public Works and are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. 3.Subdivider, has also offered for dedication to City certain streets, ways and easements delineated on the Map (the “Dedications”). 4.On __ __, 20__, the City Council approved the Map and offers of dedication shown on the Map, conditioned on Subdivider entering into this Agreement to construct and complete the Improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of City’s approval of the Map, and in order to insure satisfactory performance by Subdivider of its obligations under the Subdivision Map Act and the Cupertino Municipal Code, City and Subdivider agree as follows: 1.SUBDIVIDER’S OBLIGATION TO CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS a.Completion of Improvements. Subdivider, at its own expense, and in compliance with all provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, the Cupertino Municipal Code, the Map and any amendments thereto, and other applicable laws, shall furnish, install, and construct all required improvements in conformance with the Improvement Plans. The decision of the City Engineer shall be final as to whether any material or workmanship meets the plans, specifications, and standards as set forth. b.Compliance with applicable laws and rules. Subdivider shall construct the Improvements and the Improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the most current Standard Specifications of the Department of Public Works, California Department of Transportation, State of California, and in accordance with the specifications of the Cupertino Sanitary District where applicable. Wherever the words “State” or “California Division of Highways” are mentioned in the State Specifications, it shall be considered as referring to the City of Cupertino; also wherever the “Director” or “Director of Public Works” is mentioned, it shall be considered as referring to the City Engineer. In case of conflict between the State Page 1 of 12 Attachment C 18 Specifications and the specifications of the CITY, and/or the Cupertino Sanitary District, the specifications of the CITY and/or the Cupertino Sanitary District shall take precedence over and be used in lieu of such conflicting portions. c.Repair and replacement of damaged public facilities. Subdivider shall, at its own expense, repair or replace all public improvements, public utility facilities, surveying monuments and other public facilities that are destroyed or damaged as a result of any work under this agreement. Subdivider shall promptly notify the City Engineer of such damage and shall obtain the City Engineer’s approval of all repair and replacement of damaged facilities. d.Subdivider’s responsibility until City’s acceptance. Until City accepts the Improvements, Subdivider shall be responsible for the care and maintenance of such improvements and shall bear all risks of loss or damage to the improvements. City shall not have any liability for any accident, loss or damage to the Improvements prior to their completion and acceptance by City. City’s acceptance of the Improvements shall not constitute a waiver of any defects in the Improvements or Subdivider’s obligation to repair such defects as provided in section 9 of this Agreement. e.Time for installation of improvements. SUBDIVIDER shall install and complete the Improvements within one (1) year from the date of execution of this AGREEMENT, or such longer period as may be specifically authorized in writing by the City Engineer pursuant to section 1(f) of this Agreement (time extensions). In the event the SUBDIVIDER fails or refuses to complete the Work within the specified period of time, the CITY, at its sole option, shall be authorized to complete the Work in whatever manner the CITY shall decide. In the event the CITY completes the Work, the CITY may recover all costs incurred thereby from the SUBDIVIDER or the SUBDIVIDER’S surety or both. No final inspection shall be granted or street improvements shall not be accepted unless all the requirements for safety purposes are installed, such as sidewalks, handicap ramps, street lights, etc. f.Time extensions. The City Engineer, in his or her sole discretion, may approve, in writing, a request for extension or completion of the time required for construction of the Improvements upon a showing of good cause by the Subdivider. Good cause may include delay resulting from an act of the City, acts of God, strikes, boycotts, or similar job actions which prevent the conduct of the work. In approving a request for time extension, the City Engineer may impose reasonable related conditions, such as requiring Subdivider to furnish new or modified improvement security guaranteeing performance of this Agreement, as extended, in an increased amount necessary to compensate for any projected increase in the estimated total cost of Improvements, as determined by the City Engineer. g.Permits. Subdivider shall, at its own expense, obtain and comply with the conditions of all necessary permits and licenses for the construction of the Improvements and give all necessary notices and pay all fees and taxes required by law. 2.ACQUISITION AND DEDICATION OF EASEMENTS OR RIGHTS OF WAY a.SUBDIVIDER offers to dedicate all of the public easements (Public Utility Easement, Public Pedestrian Access Easement, Public Vehicular Access Easement, Emergency Vehicle Access Way and Sidewalk Easement) shown on the Map for Tract No. 10172 as filed for record with the County of Santa Clara, which is made a part hereof by reference (the “Dedicated Property”). Upon the condition precedent that the SUBDIVIDER shall perform each and every covenant and condition of this AGREEMENT, the CITY agrees to accept said real property offered for dedication. Page 2 of 12 Attachment C 19 The Dedicated Property shall be free and clear of all liens or encumbrances except those which the CITY agrees to waive in writing. Subdivider agrees not to revoke this offer of dedication, and to keep said offer open until the CITY accepts offer. Upon execution of this Agreement, Subdivider agrees to dedicate to the CITY the real property as described in Tract No. 10172, and shall provide such other executed conveyances, or instruments necessary to convey clear title as herein required. The SUBDIVIDER shall provide, at the SUBDIVIDER’S sole cost and expense, to the City at the time of acceptance of dedication and recordation of deed as necessary, (1) a preliminary title report issued by a title insurance company relating to the property offered for dedication, and (2) a standard policy of title insurance issued by a title insurance company and insuring the CITY, showing that the Dedicated Property is free and clear of all liens or encumbrances except any that the City expressly agreed to waive. b.Subdivider shall acquire any easement and right-of-way necessary for completion of the Project at its own cost and expense. However, that in the event eminent domain proceedings are required, the CITY for the purpose of securing said easement and right-of-way, SUBDIVIDER shall deposit with CITY, a sum covering the reasonable market value of the land proposed to be taken and, to be included in said sum, shall be a reasonable allowance for severance damages, if any. It is further provided that in addition thereto, such sums as may be required for legal fees and costs, engineering, and other incidental costs in such reasonable amounts as the CITY may require, shall be deposited with the City of Cupertino. 3.INSPECTION AND FINAL ACCEPTANCE a.Subdivider shall at all times maintain proper facilities and safe access for inspection of the Improvements by the City Engineer. b.Upon completion of the improvements or any category of improvements in compliance with the Improvement Plans and all applicable City standards, then the City Engineer shall certify completion of the Improvements. Subdivider shall bear all costs of inspection and certification for acceptance. Acceptance by the City Engineer shall not constitute a waiver by the City of any defects in the Improvements. 4.QUITCLAIM DEED SUBDIVIDER, when requested by the CITY, shall quitclaim all his/her rights and interests in, and shall grant to CITY authorization to extract water from the underground strata lying beneath said project. SUBDIVIDER agrees to execute a “Quitclaim Deed and Authorization” in favor of CITY, when presented to him/her for signature. 5.SECURITY a.Required Security. Prior to execution of this Agreement, Subdivider shall provide the following security to City in a form acceptable to the City: (1) Faithful performance. Security for faithful performance in the amount set forth in Part A of Exhibit A, the SCHEDULE OF BONDS, FEES AND DEPOSITS, attached and incorporated by reference as Exhibit B. (2) Labor and Materials. Security for labor and materials in the amount set forth in Part B of Exhibit A, the SCHEDULE OF BONDS, FEES AND DEPOSITS, attached and incorporated by reference as Exhibit C. b.Form of Security. Subdivider shall provide as security, bonds executed by a surety company authorized to transact a surety business in the State of California and approved by the City as to sufficiency. In the event that the SUBDIVIDER shall fail to faithfully perform the covenants and conditions of this AGREEMENT, or to make any payment, or any dedication of land, or any improvements herein required, the Page 3 of 12 Attachment C 20 CITY shall call on the surety to perform this AGREEMENT or otherwise indemnify the CITY for the SUBDIVIDER’S failure to do so. In lieu of a surety bond, the SUBDIVIDER may elect to secure this AGREEMENT by depositing with the CITY (1) Cash; (2) A cashier’s check, or a certified check payable to the order of the City of Cupertino; or (3) A certificate of deposit, or instrument of credit acceptable to the City and meeting the requirements of Government Code Section 66499 (a) or (b). The amount of said cash, checks, certificate of deposit, or instrument of credit shall be as designated by the City Engineer, and shall be the equivalent to that which would have been required had the SUBDIVIDER furnished the CITY with a faithful performance surety bond. In the event that the SUBDIVIDER shall fail to faithfully perform the covenants and conditions of this AGREEMENT, or to make any payment, or any dedication of land, or any improvements herein required, the CITY may apply the proceeds of said security thereto. c.Release of Security. No release of surety bond, cash deposit, check or certificate of deposit shall be made except upon approval of the Director of Public Works. Schedule for bond and insurance release for paper bonds are as follows: (1) Release of 90 percent of the faithful performance bond upon acceptance by the Director of Public Works. (2) Release of the remaining 10 percent of the performance bond at one year from acceptance after all deficiencies have been corrected and in the absence of any claim against such bond. (3) Release of the entire labor and material bond at six months from acceptance after all deficiencies have been corrected and in the absence of any claim against such bond, reduced to an amount equal to the total amount claimed by all claimants for whom liens have been filed and of which notice has been given to the City, plus an amount reasonably determined by the City Engineer to be required to assure the performance of any other obligations secured by the security. The balance of the security shall be released upon settlement or release of all claims and obligations for which the security was given. (4) Liability insurance, provided by the SUBDIVIDER to hold the CITY harmless in the event of liability arising from the project, to be retired at the end of one year if all deficiencies have been corrected and in the absence of any claim against the insurance. 6.PAYMENT OF REQUIRED FEES a.Permits and licenses. Subdivider shall, at its sole expense, obtain all necessary permits and licenses for the construction and installation of the Improvements, give all necessary notices, and pay all fees required by City ordinance, including but not limited to the fees described in this Agreement, and all taxes required by law. b.Fees. Subdivider shall pay fees in the amounts set forth in Exhibit A, including but not limited to the following, as required: (1) Inspection Fees. SUBDIVIDER shall pay all necessary direct expenses for inspection, checking, etc. incurred by CITY in connection with said Project, and that SUBDIVIDER shall have deposited sufficient funds with CITY, prior to execution of this AGREEMENT. Should construction costs vary materially from the estimate from which this sum is calculated, the City Engineer shall notify SUBDIVIDER of any additional sum due and owing as a result thereof. (2) Storm Drainage Fee. SUBDIVIDER shall deposit with the CITY, prior to execution of this AGREEMENT, a storm drainage charge in connection with the said Project in accordance with the requirements established in Resolution 4422, March 21, 1977. Page 4 of 12 Attachment C 21 (3) Map Checking Fee. SUBDIVIDER shall deposit with CITY, prior to execution of this AGREEMENT, for office checking of final map and field checking of street monuments, in compliance with Section 4:1 of Ordinance No. 47 (Revised 12/04/61) of CITY. (4) Park Fee. SUBDIVIDER shall pay such fees and/or dedicate such land to the CITY, prior to execution of this AGREEMENT, as is required within Section 18-1.602, Park Land Dedication, Cupertino Municipal Code. Park fees are calculated in accordance with action originally adopted by the City Council on March 19, 1991 and Chapter 14.05 or Section 18-1.602 of the Cupertino Municipal Code and as subsequently amended. (5) Reimbursement Fee. SUBDIVIDER shall deposit with the CITY, prior to execution of this AGREEMENT, a reimbursement fee for any street improvements that have been installed by the City, or by another property owner. Subdivider shall pay the City for the cost of the land at the cost to the City, or another property owner, and shall pay a street improvement reimbursement charge for the improvements which the City or another property owner, installed on the street abutting or included in the benefited property, in an amount equal to the total improvement costs for each particular benefited property as set forth in a reimbursement agreement. Payments for both land and improvements shall include simple interest in the amount of seven percent per year, to be calculated in the following manner: (i) Land Cost. Interest to accrue from the date the street improvements are accepted by the City to the date the street improvements reimbursement charge is paid, or if the land is purchased by the City for a City project, from the date of purchase to the date the charge is paid. (ii) Improvement Cost. Interest to accrue from the date the street improvements are accepted by the City to the date the street improvement reimbursement charge is paid, or if installed by the City, from the date installation commenced to the date the charge is paid. (iii) Provided, however, that the interest shall be waived if the adjoining property owner dedicates or has dedicated to the City land necessary for the street improvements, or where no such dedication is necessary. 7.DEVELOPMENT MAINTENANCE DEPOSIT SUBDIVIDER shall pay to the CITY, prior to execution of this AGREEMENT, the amount set forth in Exhibit A as a development maintenance deposit. City may use the deposit at its discretion to correct deficiencies and conditions caused by the SUBDIVIDER or his/her contractor that may arise during or after the construction of the development, and to obtain copies of approved plans for the CITY’s files. If the costs exceed the amount deposited, SUBDIVIDER shall pay actual overage prior to return of original plans. Any unexpended amount will be returned to the SUBDIVIDER at the time all bonds are released in accordance with paragraph 5 of this agreement. 8.STREET TREE INSTALLATION SUBDIVIDER shall provide funds to the City for purchase and planting of street trees as deemed appropriate by the City Engineer; or shall, at the discretion and at such time as deemed appropriate by the City Engineer, plant street trees in conformance with the standards of the City of Cupertino. The variety, number and location of trees are subject to City’s prior approval. Page 5 of 12 Attachment C 22 9.MAINTENANCE AND WARRANTY a.Warranty Period. Subdivider guarantees and warrants the Improvements and agrees to remedy any defects, damages, or imperfections in the Improvements arising from faulty or defective materials or construction of the Improvements for a period of one (1) year after City’s final acceptance of the Improvements. Subdivider’s obligation under this section shall include the repair, replacement, or reconstruction of all irrigation systems and all trees, shrubs, ground cover and landscaping for the required one-year period. b.Warranty repairs and replacements. If, within the warranty period, the Improvements or any part of the Improvements fail to fulfill any of the requirements of this Agreement or the Improvement plans and specifications, Subdivider shall repair, replace or reconstruct any defective or otherwise unsatisfactory parts of the Improvements without delay and at no cost to City. If (a) Subdivider fails to commence repairs within thirty (30) days of the date of mailed written notice from City, or (b) City determines that public safety requires repair before Subdivider can be notified, City may, at its sole option, perform the required repair itself. Subdivider agrees to pay the cost of any repairs City performs pursuant to this agreement and City may, at its sole option, recover that cost as a lien against Subdivider’s property. 10.SANITARY DISTRICT SUBDIVIDER shall file with the CITY, upon execution of this AGREEMENT, a letter from the Cupertino Sanitary District stating that the SUBDIVIDER has submitted plans for review by the District and that sanitary sewers are available to serve all lots within the Project. 11.GOVERNMENT COSTS SUBDIVIDER shall file with the CITY, upon execution of this AGREEMENT, substantial evidence that all provisions of Section 66493, Article 8, Chapter 4 of the Government Code, pertaining to special assessments or bonds, have been complied with. 12.UTILITIES SUBDIVIDER shall pay to Pacific Gas and Electric Company, AT&T, and/or appropriate utility companies, all fees required for installation of overhead and/or underground wiring circuits to all electroliers within said property and all fees required for undergrounding as provided in Ordinance No. 331 or subsequently adopted ordinances of CITY or regulations of the appropriate utilities when the SUBDIVIDER is notified by either the City Engineer, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, AT&T, or appropriate utility companies that said fees are due and payable. 13.HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION a.City or any of its officers, employees or agents shall not be liable for any injury to persons or property occasioned by reason of the acts or omissions of Subdivider, its agents, employees, contractors and subcontractors in the performance of this Agreement. Subdivider further agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, is officials, agents, and employees from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss of any sort, including but not limited to attorney fees and litigation expenses, because of or arising out of acts or omissions of Subdivider, its agents, employees, contractors and subcontractors in the performance of this Agreement, including all claims, demands, causes of action, liability or loss because of or arising out of, in whole or in part, the design and construction of the improvements. This indemnification and agreement to hold harmless shall extend to injuries to persons and damages or taking of property resulting from the design or construction of the Subdivision, and the public improvements described in this Agreement, and in addition, to adjacent property owners as a consequence of the diversion of waters from the design or construction of public drainage systems, streets and other public improvements. Page 6 of 12 Attachment C 23 b.Acceptance by City of the Improvements shall not constitute an assumption by City of any responsibility for any damage or taken covered by this section. City shall not be responsible for the design or construction of the subdivision or the improvements pursuant to the approved Improvement Plans or map, regardless of any negligent action or inaction taken by the City in approving the plans or map, unless the particular improvement design was specifically required by City over written objection by Subdivider, indicating that the particular improvement design was dangerous or defective and suggested an alternative safe and feasible design, submitted to the City Engineer before approval of the particular improvement design. c.After City’s acceptance of the Improvements, Subdivider shall remain obligated to correct or eliminate any defect in design or dangerous condition created by defects in design or construction, provided however, that developer shall not be responsible for routine maintenance. Provisions of this section shall remain in full force and effect for ten (10) years following City’s acceptance of the Improvements. Subdivider acknowledges and agrees that Subdivider shall be responsible and liable for the design and construction of the Improvements and other work done pursuant to this Agreement and that City shall not be liable for any acts or omissions in approving, reviewing, checking, correcting, or modifying any Improvement Plans or related specifications or in approving, reviewing or inspecting any work or construction. The improvement security shall not be required to cover the provisions of this paragraph beyond the guarantee and warranty period specified in this agreement. 14.INSURANCE SUBDIVIDER shall maintain in full force and effect at all times during the term of this Agreement and shall provide to the CITY a copy of said insurance policy prior to starting work within the public right-of-way. The policy of insurance shall name the CITY and members of the City Council of the City of Cupertino individually and collectively, and the officers, agents and employees of the CITY individually and collectively, as additional insured. Said separate policy shall provide bodily injury and property damage coverage to the foregoing named CITY and individuals covering all the Work performed by, for, or on behalf of said SUBDIVIDER. Both bodily injury and property damage insurance must be on an occurrence basis; and said policy or policies shall provide that the coverage afforded thereby shall be primary coverage to the full limit of liability stated in the declarations, and if the CITY, its members of the City Council individually and collectively, and the officers, agents and employees of the CITY, individually and collectively, have other insurance against the loss covered by said policy or policies, that other insurance shall not be called upon to cover a loss under said additional policy. The insurance carrier shall be licensed to do business in the state of California and provide proof of their ratings. All ratings should be Best’s Guide Rating of A, Class VII or better or that is acceptable to the CITY. Each of said policies of insurance shall provide coverage in the following minimum amounts: for general liability for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage $1,000,000 each occurrence, with an aggregate limit of not less than $2,000,000. SUBDIVIDER shall file with the City Engineer at or prior to the time of execution of this AGREEMENT by the SUBDIVIDER evidence of insurance coverage satisfactory to the City. Each policy or policies shall bear an endorsement precluding the cancellation or reduction in coverage without giving the City Engineer at least thirty (30) days advance notice thereof. In the event that the Improvements are situated in or affect the area of jurisdiction of a separate municipality or political subdivision of the State of California, the required insurance shall also name the other jurisdiction(s) as additional insured. Page 7 of 12 Attachment C 24 15.MAPS AND/OR IMPROVEMENT PLANS Subdivider shall provide CITY with the following maps and/or plans at the SUBDIVIDER’S expense: A. A mylar blackline and three (3) prints of fully executed parcel map. B. A mylar blackline and three (3) prints of fully executed improvement plans. C. A scan in raster format of all executed improvement plans and map. D. One (1) ½ size prints of fully executed plans and map. The SUBDIVIDER agrees to pay the CITY from the development maintenance deposit the cost for all prints of plans and maps. If costs exceed the amount deposited the SUBDIVIDER is required to pay actual overage prior to return of original plans. 16.ASSIGNMENT Subdivider shall not assign this agreement without the prior written consent of the City. Any attempted or purported assignment in violation of this paragraph shall be null and void and have no force or effect. The sale or other disposition of the Project shall not relieve Subdivider of its obligations under this agreement. If subdivider intends to sell the Project or any portion of the Project to any other person or entity, Subdivider may request a novation of this Agreement and substitution of improvement security. 17.COVENANT RUNNING WITH THE LAND This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon the heirs, administrators, successors, assigns and transferees of the Parties, and shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder and constitute a covenant running with the land. Upon any sale or division of the Property, the terms, covenants, conditions and restrictions of this agreement shall apply to each parcel, and the owner or owners of each parcel shall succeed to the obligations imposed upon Subdivider by this Agreement. 18.DEFAULT, BREACH, AND REMEDIES TO CITY a.Default. Default of Subdivider shall include, but not be limited to: (1) Subdivider’s failure to timely commence construction of Public Improvements under this Agreement; (2) Subdivider’s failure to timely complete construction of the Improvements; (3) Subdivider’s failure to timely cure any defect in the Improvements; (4) Subdivider’s failure to perform substantial construction work for a period of 20 consecutive calendar days after commencement of the work; (5) Subdivider’s insolvency, appointment of a receiver, or the filing of any petition in bankruptcy, either voluntary or involuntary, which Subdivider fails to discharge within 30 days; (6) The commencement of a foreclosure action against the subdivision or a portion thereof, or any conveyance in lieu or in avoidance of foreclosure; or (7) Subdivider’s failure to perform any other obligation under this Agreement. b.City reserves all remedies available to it at law or in equity for breach of Subdivider’s obligations under this Agreement. The City shall have the right, subject to this section, to draw upon or use the appropriate security to mitigate City’s damages in the event of default by Subdivider. City’s right to draw upon or use the security is in addition to any other remedy available to City. The parties acknowledge that the estimated costs and security amounts may not reflect the actual cost of construction of the improvements and, therefore, City’s damages for Subdivider’s default shall be measured by the cost of Page 8 of 12 Attachment C 25 completing the required improvements. City may use the sums provided by the security for completion of the Improvements in accordance with the Improvement Plans. c.In the event that Subdivider fails to cure any default under this Agreement within twenty (20) days after the City mails written notice of such default to Subdivider and Subdivider’s surety, Subdivider authorizes City to perform the obligations for which Subdivider is in default and agrees to pay the entire cost of such performance by City. d.City may take over the work and complete the Improvements by contract or by any other method the City deems appropriate, at the expense of Subdivider, and Subdivider’s surety shall be liable to City for any excess cost or damages to City resulting therefrom. In such event, City, without liability for so doing, may take possession of and use any of Subdivider’s materials, appliances, plant and other property that are at the work site and are necessary to complete the Public Improvements. e.Subdivider’s failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement constitutes Subdivider’s consent for the City to file a notice of violation against all lots in the Subdivision or to rescind or otherwise revert the subdivision to acreage. Subdivider specifically recognizes that the determination of whether a reversion to acreage or rescission of the subdivision approval constitutes an adequate remedy for Subdivider’s default shall be within City’s sole discretion. The remedy provided by this Subsection is in addition to all other remedies available to City, and Subdivider agrees that the choice of remedy or remedies for Subdivider’s breach shall be within City’s discretion. f.In the event that Subdivider fails to perform any obligation under this Agreement, Subdivider agrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by City in securing performance of those obligations, including but not limited to fees and charges of architects, engineers, attorneys and other professionals, and costs of suit and reasonably attorneys’ fees. g.City’s failure to take enforcement action with respect to a default, or to declare a breach, shall not be construed as a waiver of that default or breach or any subsequent default or breach by Subdivider. 19.SUBDIVIDER NOT AGENT OF CITY Neither Subdivider nor any of Subdivider’s agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of City in connection with the performance of Subdivider’s obligations under this Agreement. 20.SUBDIVIDER TO WARN PUBLIC Until final acceptance of the improvements, Subdivider shall give good and adequate warning to the public of any dangerous condition of the Improvements, and shall take reasonable actions to protect the public from such dangerous condition. 21.NOTICES All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Agreement shall be given in writing and conclusively shall be deemed served when delivered personally or on the second business day after the deposit thereof in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, registered or certified, addressed as hereinafter provided. All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from Subdivider to City shall be addressed to City at: City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Ave. Cupertino CA 95014 Attention: Public Works Director/City Engineer Page 9 of 12 Attachment C 26 All notices, demands, requests, or approvals from City to Subdivider shall be addressed to Subdivider at: Main Street Cupertino Aggregator, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 203 Redwood Shores Parkway, Suite 200 Redwood City, CA 94065 Attention: Peter Pau 22.NO VESTING OF RIGHTS Performance by Subdivider of this Agreement shall not be construed to vest Subdivider’s rights with respect to any change in any zoning or building law or ordinance. 23.TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE Time is of the essence in the performance of this agreement by subdivider. 24.NONDISCRIMINATION Subdivider, its agents, employees, contractors and subcontractors shall not discriminate in any way against any person on the basis of age, sex, race, color, religion, sexual orientation, actual or perceived gender identity, disability, ethnicity, or national origin in connection with or related to the performance of this Agreement. 25.GOVERNING LAW AND ATTORNEY FEES This Agreement shall be interpreted under, and enforced by the laws of the State of California excepting any choice of law rules which may direct the application of laws of another jurisdiction. The Agreement and obligations of the parties are subject to all valid laws, orders, rules, and regulations of the authorities having jurisdiction over this Agreement (or the successors of those authorities). Any suits brought pursuant to this Agreement shall be filed with the courts of the County of Santa Clara, State of California. If City sues to compel Subdivider’s performance of this Agreement, or to recover damages or costs incurred in completing or maintaining the work on the Improvements, Subdivider agrees to pay all attorneys’ fees and other costs and expenses of litigating incurred by the City, even if Subdivider subsequently resumes and completes the work. 26.RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES Neither Subdivider nor any of its contractors, employees or agents shall be deemed to be agents of the City in connection with the Performance of Subdivider’s obligations under this agreement. 27.SEVERABILITY The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 28.INTEGRATED AGREEMENT This Agreement represents the full and complete understanding of every kind or nature whatsoever between the parties hereto, and all preliminary negotiations and agreements of whatsoever kind or nature are merged herein. No verbal agreement or implied covenant shall be held to vary the provisions hereof. Any modification of this Agreement will be effective only by written execution signed by both City and Subdivider. All unchecked boxes do not apply to this Agreement. Page 10 of 12 Attachment C 27 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this agreement to be executed by their respective, duly authorized officers on the date listed above. Approved as to form: CITY OF CUPERTINO: City Attorney Timm Borden, P.E. Director of Public Works SUBDIVIDER: Peter Pau Main Street Cupertino Aggregator, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Attachments: Exhibit “A”- Schedule of Bonds, Fees, Deposits Exhibit “B”- Faithful Performance Bonds Exhibit “C”- Labor and Materials Bonds Subdivision Improvement Agreement Main Street Final 02-06-14 Page 11 of 12 Attachment C 28 Exhibit A SCHEDULE OF BONDS, FEES, AND DEPOSITS Street Improvement Category: PART A. Faithful Performance Bond: 110-2211 $2,000,000.00 PART B. Labor and Material Bond: 110-2211 $2,000,000.00 PART C. Checking and Inspection Fee: 110-4538 $120,000.00 PART D. Development Maintenance Deposit: 110-2211 $ 3,000.00 (PAID) PART E. Storm Drainage Fee – Basin 3 215-4073 $146,097.00 PART F. Street Light – One-Year Power Cost: 110-4537 NA PART G. Map Checking Fee: 110-4539 $8,574.00 (PAID) PART H. Park Fee: Zone III 280-4083 NA PART I. Reimbursement Fee NA PART J. Parking Conversion Fund (Project Condition 29) 110-2211 $450,000 PART K. Traffic Mitigation @ Homestead & Lawrence (Project Condition 87) 110-2211 $400,000 PART L. Traffic Calming (Project Condition 93) 110-2211 $100,000 PART M. Emergency Vehicle Preemption Fund (Project Condition 94) $15,000 PART N. Creek Trail Improvements (Project Condition 49) 110-2211 $65,000 PART O. Park Bond (Project Condition 25) 110-2211 $1,125,000 Page 12 of 12 Attachment C 29 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3308 www.cupertino.org CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT  Meeting: February 25, 2014    Subject  Call for Review for Off the Grid Mobile Food Market.    Description    Applicant:   Benjamin Himlan (Off the Grid)  Location:   20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard (APN 326‐31‐022)    Discussion  Background  On November 5, 2013, Benjamin Himlan applied for a Conditional Use Permit to allow  for a weekly outdoor food market at the Whole Foods Market on 20955 Stevens Creek  Boulevard.  On January 28, 2014, the Planning Commission considered the request and  approved the use permit application on a 4‐1 vote (Lee voted no). Please refer to  Attachments A and C for the staff report and meeting minutes. On February 11, 2014, a  Council Member called the Planning Commission’s decision up for review (Attachment  D).    Planning Commission Hearing  The following is a summary of the comments expressed at the January 28, 2014  Planning Commission hearing:  • A Commissioner expressed concerns about potential traffic impacts and congestion  on Stevens Creek Blvd. and requested that the location of the market be moved  further away from Stevens Creek Blvd. in order to lessen traffic impacts.    • Another Commissioner did not support the application. She was concerned with the  aesthetics of the food trucks and whether they were a good fit for Cupertino. She  was also concerned about traffic impacts on Stevens Creek Boulevard.  • A representative from Whole Foods Market supported the mobile food market. He  stated that the Tuesday market day was their slowest business day of the week and  they were willing to provide parking attendants during the market hours. He was  30 also excited to have the opportunity to partner with the city and Off the Grid to  create a good environment for their customers and the community.  • A representative from the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce stated that while Whole  Foods is a valued business partner in Cupertino, there may be concerns related to  food trucks potentially impacting some of the local restaurants.      Additional Conditions of Approval  The Planning Commission added the following conditions based on the comments  received during the January 28, 2014 hearing:  • The use permit shall be reviewed after six months from the date of approval.  The  Planning Commission has the ability to conduct a public hearing to modify or  revoke the permit if substantial complaints have been received that have not been  addressed by the applicant.    • For the first six months of operation, the location of the event shall be in the second  parking aisle closest to Stevens Creek Blvd.  • A parking attendant will be present to direct traffic for the first month of operation.  • No alcohol shall be permitted unless approved by the Planning Commission.  • The event shall not operate the week of Christmas and Thanksgiving.  ____________________________________    Prepared by: Kaitie Groeneweg, Planning Department   Reviewed by:  Gary Chao, Asst. Director of Community Development; Aarti  Shrivastava, Director of Community Development  Approved for Submission by:  David Brandt; City Manager    Attachments:      A. Planning Commission staff report dated January 28, 2014  B. Planning Commission resolution, January 28, 2014  C. Planning Commission draft meeting minutes, January 28, 2014  D. Call for Review Form, February 11, 2014  E. Project History and Business Description  F. Traffic Analysis (Hexagon Transportation Consultants)  G. Plan Set      31   COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY HALL  10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014‐3255  (408) 777‐3308 • FAX (408) 777‐3333  PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT    Agenda Item No.     Agenda Date: January 28, 2014    Applications: U‐2013‐09  Applicant: Benjamin Himlan (Off the Grid)  Location: 20955 Stevens Creek Blvd. (APN 326‐31‐022)    APPLICATION SUMMARY:   Use Permit (U‐2013‐09) to allow the operation of a weekly mobile food market in the parking lot of an  existing commercial establishment.      RECOMMENDATION:  Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Use Permit in accordance with the draft  resolutions (Attachment 1).    PROJECT DATA:  General Plan Designation Commercial / Office / Residential  Zoning Designation Planned General Commercial and Residential   P(CG, Res)  Lot Size  232,959 sq. ft. (5.34 acres)  Existing building area (no change) 67,144 sq. ft. Existing building height (no change) 45 ft.  Existing parking supply (no change) 376 stalls   Hours of operation:  Current Whole Foods Market hours 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM, seven days a week  Proposed hours for Off the Grid 5:00 PM to 9:00 PM, every Tuesday  Project Consistency With:  General Plan Yes  Zoning Yes  Environmental assessment Categorically Exempt    BACKGROUND:  Application Request  The applicant, Benjamin Himlan, representing Off the Grid is requesting a Use Permit to operate a  weekly outdoor mobile food market at the Whole Foods Market on 20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard. The  mobile food market is a collection of individual food truck venders that gather weekly and operate  similar to a farmer’s market. The General Commercial (CG) Ordinance requires a Conditional Use  Permit at Planning Commission Level for any commercial uses which are neither permitted uses nor  32 U‐2013‐09                    Off the Grid  January 28, 2014   excluded uses and which are, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, consistent with the character  of the general commercial zone.     Other Community Markets  Cupertino currently has two outdoor markets operating weekly events. In 2000, Cupertino’s original  farmers market at Vallco Shopping Center was approved on a temporary trial basis and obtained a  permanent approval in 2002. Currently, the Vallco farmers market operates every Friday from 9 a.m. to 1  p.m. at Stevens Creek Boulevard and Wolfe Road. In 2011, a second farmers’ market at the Oaks  Shopping Center on Stevens Creek at Highway 85 was approved operating every Sunday from 9 a.m. to  1 p.m.    Existing Center and Surroundings  The project site is located within the parking lot of Whole Foods Market, on the intersection of Stevens  Creek Boulevard and Stelling Road. To the west of the site is the Cupertino Sports Center and Schell; to  the east is the Stevens Creek Office Center; to the north is the Abundant Life Assembly of God; and to  the south and across the street is a commercial shopping center and the Union Church of Cupertino. The  nearest residential property is approximately 265 feet away from the property line.                                                              Site Plan    DISCUSSION:  Mobile Food Market Operation  The applicant is proposing a Tuesday market with opening hours from 5 p.m. to 9 p.m.  Typical setup  and clean up times are approximately 1 hour before and after the opening hours for a total timeframe of  33 U‐2013‐09                    Off the Grid  January 28, 2014   4:00 p.m to 10:00 p.m. The proposed market area is the most southerly parking lot aisle, encompassing 38  parking stalls, which the applicant estimates can accommodate a maximum of 9 vendors who will be  offering a range of specialty food items.     Key Issues  Staff has identified the following key issues and placed conditions in the resolution to address them.  • Parking ‐ Should parking demand for the site exceed the parking supply the applicant is required to  come back to obtain another Use Permit to create a formal shared parking agreement between  Whole Foods Market and the adjacent Abundant Life Assembly of God Church.  • Outdoor Live Entertainment –Amplified entertainment activities are prohibited at the market,  unless otherwise approved by the Director of Community Development for special events.    • Cleanup ‐ The applicant will be responsible for cleaning up the parking lot after each market event.   • Review of Operations – Staff is recommending an automatic one year review of the permit.     Traffic  Off the Grid held a trial event at Whole Foods Market on Tuesday, October 15, 2013 from 5 p.m. to 9 p.m.  The event involved setting up mobile food trucks in the second row of the parking lot and the City  Traffic Consultants were present to observe the traffic and parking conditions. Traffic was observed  during peak traffic periods of the event and congestion was found to be within acceptable City‐adopted  traffic congestion standards.     Traffic operations were observed to function adequately during the event. Little to no queues formed at  the Stevens Creek Blvd. and Stelling Road parking lot entrances. Based on the Traffic Consultant’s  recommendation, the applicant has agreed to move the truck setup area to the parking aisle closest to  Stevens Creek Blvd. and block off access to this parking aisle to minimize any vehicular conflict or  queuing near the driveway entrance along Stevens Creek Blvd.          Parking   Presently the Whole Foods Market parking supply exceeds the City’s parking requirements by  aproximatly 95 parking stalls. Vendor and customer parking will be primarily in the Whole Foods  Market lot and secondarily in the adjacent Abundant Life Assembly of God parking lot.  During the trial  run the studied parking area had little utilization and adequately accommodated the market area  vendors and established customer parking demands.    OTHER DEPARTMENT/AGENCY REVIEW  The City’s Public Works Department; Building Division; the Santa Clara County Fire Department;  Cupertino Sanitary District; and the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Department have reviewed the request  and have no objections to the project. Their pre‐hearing comments have been incorporated as conditions  of approval in the draft resolutions.    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT  The use permit is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per  section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines because it involves a negligible expansion of  use and section 15332 (In‐Fill Development) because the proposed use occurs within the city limits and is  surrounded by urban uses.   34 U‐2013‐09                    Off the Grid  January 28, 2014     PERMIT STREAMLINING ACT  This project is subject to the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Section 65920 – 65964).  The  City has complied with the deadlines found in the Permit Streamlining Act.     Project received: November 5, 2013  Deemed incomplete: December 5, 2013  Deemed complete: January 16, 2014    Since this project is Categorically Exempt, the City has 60 days (until March 16, 2014) to make a decision  on the project. The Planning Commission’s decision on this project is final unless appealed within 14  calendar days of the decision.     PUBLIC NOTICING & OUTREACH  The following table is a brief summary of the noticing done for this project:    Notice of Public Hearing, Site Notice & Legal Ad Agenda  ƒ Site Signage   (14 days prior to the hearing)    ƒ Legal ad placed in newspaper   (at least 10 days prior to the hearing)  ƒ 68 notices mailed to property owners within  300 feet of the project site  (10 days prior to the hearing)     ƒ Posted on the Cityʹs official notice  bulletin board  (one week prior to the  hearing)     ƒ Posted on the City of Cupertino’s Web  site (one week prior to the hearing)         CONCLUSION  Staff recommends approval of the request since it is not anticipated to have significant impacts to the  neighborhood. Additionally, the proposed market provides an opportunity for the community and  neighborhood to gather in a commercial location.    Prepared by:  Kaitie Groeneweg, Planning Department    Reviewed by: Approved by:          /s/ Gary Chao       /s/ Aarti Shrivastava      Gary Chao       Aarti Shrivastava    City Planner       Community Development Director      ATTACHMENTS:  1 ‐ Draft Resolutions U‐2013‐09  2 – Project History & Business Description   3 – Traffic Analysis (Hexagon Transportation Consultants)  4 – Plan Set  35 U‐2013‐09               CITY OF CUPERTINO  10300 Torre Avenue  Cupertino, California  95014    RESOLUTION NO. 6733    OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING   A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A WEEKLY MOBILE FOOD  MARKET IN THE PARKING LOT OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT LOCATED AT  20955 STEVENS CREEK BLVD      SECTION I:  PROJECT DESCRIPTION    Application No(s).: U‐2013‐09  Applicant:  Benjamin Himlan (Off the Grid)  Location: 20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard (APN 326‐31‐022)  Subject:  Use Permit (U‐2013‐09) to allow the operation of a weekly mobile food market in the  parking lot of an existing commercial establishment.    SECTION II:  FINDINGS FOR A USE PERMIT:    WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Conditional  Use Permit as described in Section I of this Resolution; and    WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given as required by the Procedural Ordinance of the  City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 28, 2014 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:    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:    After careful consideration of the, maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this  matter, the Planning Commission hereby approves Application No. U‐2013‐09 based upon the findings  described in section II of this resolution, the public hearing record and the Minutes of Planning Commission  Meeting of January 28, 2014, and subject to the conditions specified in section III of this resolution.           36 Resolution No. 6733 U‐2013‐09 January 28, 2014  SECTION III:  CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.    1. APPROVED EXHIBITS   Approval is based on the plan set received August 5, 2013 consisting of sixteen sheets entitled “Off the  Grid: Cupertino @ Whole Foods” except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution.    2. ACCURACY OF PROJECT PLANS  The applicant/property owner is responsible to verify all pertinent property data including but not  limited to property boundary locations, building setbacks, property size, building square footage, any  relevant easements and/or construction records. Any misrepresentation of any property data may  invalidate this approval and may require additional review.      3. OPERATIONS  a) The market shall be operated with the area delineated on the site plan exhibit.  b) The market is capped at a maximum of 9 trucks/vendors.  c) The market is approved to operate on Tuesdays between 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., allowing for one  hour set up before the market opens and one hour for break down and cleanup after the market  closes at 9:00 p.m.   d) The market shall be swept cleaned and all trash removed at the end of each market event.   e) A parking atendent will be present to direct traffic for the first month of operation.  f) The event shall not operate the week of Christmas and Thanksgiving.  g) No alcohol shall be permitted unless approved by Planning Commission.  h) The location of the event shall not be in the first parking asile closest to Stevens Creek Blvd. for the  first six months of operation.    4. NOISE CONTROL  Noise levels shall not exceed those as listed in Community Noise Control Ordinance, Cupertino  Municipal Code Chapter 10.48. If there are documented violations of the Community Noise Control  Ordinance, the Director of Community Development or Noise Control Officer has the discretion to  require noise attenuation measures to comply with the ordinance.    5. SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT  Should parking demand for the site exceed the parking supply the applicant is required to come back to  obtain another Use Permit to create a formal shared parking agreement between Whole Foods Market  and the adjacent Abundant Life Assembly of God Church.     6. TEMPORARY SIGNAGE  The applicant shall apply for a temporary sign permit for any signage used in conjunction with the  event. No signage is approved as part of this use permit.    7. BUSINESS LICENSE  The business owners and individual vendors shall obtain a City of Cupertino business licenses.    8. PREMIT REVIEW  A permit review shall be conducted by staff after six months from approval. If complaints have been  received regarding market operations that have not been addressed immediately by the applicant, then  the Planning Commission shall conduct a public hearing on the permit at which time, the approval may  be modified or revoked.   37 Resolution No. 6733 U‐2013‐09 January 28, 2014  9. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS  The applicant is responsible to consult with other departments and/or agencies with regard to the  proposed project for additional conditions and requirements. Any misrepresentation of any submitted  data may invalidate an approval by the Community Development Department.    10. MODIFICATION OF MARKET OPERATIONS  The Director of Community Development is empowered to make adjustments to the operation and  location of the mobile food market to address any documented problem or nuisance situation that may  occur.    11. REVOCATION OF USE PERMIT  The Director may initiate proceedings for revocation of the Use Permit in any case where, in the  judgment of the Director, substantial evidence indicates that the conditions of the conditional use  permit have not been implemented, or where the permit is being conducted in a manner detrimental to  the public health, safety, and welfare, in accord with the requirements of the municipal code.     12. EXPIRATION  If the use for which this conditional use permit is granted and utilized has ceased or has been  suspended for two year or more, this permit shall be deemed expired and a new use permit application  must be applied for and obtained.  13. INDEMNIFICATION  To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City  Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim,  action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to  attack, set aside, or void this ordinance or any permit or approval authorized hereby for the project,  including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in  defense of the litigation.  The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with  attorneys of its choice.  14. 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.    SECTION IV:  CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT    1. TRASH FACILITIES  Per Public Works Department requirements, the property owner must ensure that all lids for trash,  recycling, and yard waste bins remain closed when material is not being deposited into them. Bins are  not to be overfilled; material is not permitted to be stockpiled alongside bins and the area in and around  the bins shall be kept clean at all times. A yard waste bin is required at the property for food waste and  38 Resolution No. 6733 U‐2013‐09 January 28, 2014  organics. Lack of compliance with the City’s litter control measures will result in a notice of violation  and a fine.    2. EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE FOAM  Expanded PolyStyrene Foam (EPS Foam) will not be permitted for use during the event. It is the  applicant’s responsibility to inform the food vendors of this restriction and to ensure EPS foam is not  used or distributed.    3. TRASH CLEANUP  Within 24 hours of each event, the applicant is required to clean off trash and litter all on‐site storm  water facilities (the storm water treatment swales in the Whole Foods Parking lot), all areas within 25  feet of the event location, and the adjacent public sidewalk, curb and gutter areas. The applicant and  vendors are not permitted to spray down the event area to address clean up or spills. On site storm  water facilities connect to the public drain system which ultimately flows to creeks and the bay.    SECTION VI:  CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT     1. EMERGENCY FIRE ACCESS  Location of food trucks shall not obstruct required fire department emergency access and fire  applicances.    SECTION V:  CEQA REVIEW    The conditional use permit is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)  per section 15301 (Existing Fac ilities) of the CEQA Guidelines because it involves a negligible expansion of  use and section 15332 (In‐Fill Development) because the proposed use occurs within the city limits and is  surrounded by urban uses.    PASSED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of January, 2014, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of  the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:    AYES:  COMMISSIONERS: Chair Brophy, Sun, Gong, Takahashi   NOES:  COMMISSIONERS: Vice Chair Lee  ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: none  ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: none    ATTEST:      APPROVED:       /s/Gary Chao                         /s/Paul Brophy     Gary Chao      Paul Brophy  Assist. Director of Community Development Chair, Planning Commission          G:\Planning\PDREPORT\RES\2013\U‐2013‐09 res.doc  39 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 CITY OF CUPERTINO PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT MINUTES 6:45 P.M. JANUARY 28, 2014 TUESDAY CUPERTINO COMMUNITY HALL The regular Planning Commission meeting of January 28, 2014 was called to order at 6:45 p.m. in the Cupertino Community Hall, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA. by Chair Don Sun. SALUTE TO THE FLAG . ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Chairperson: Don Sun Vice Chairperson: Paul Brophy Commissioner: Margaret Gong Commissioner: Winnie Lee Commissioner: Alan Takahashi Staff present: City Planner: Gary Chao Planning Intern: Kaitie Groeneweg Asst. City Attorney: Colleen Winchester APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 1. Minutes of the January 14, 2014 Planning Commission meeting: MOTION: Motion by Com. Gong, second by Com. Takahashi, and carried 4-0-1, Chair Sun abstained, to approve the January 14, 2014 Planning Commission minutes as presented WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Kevin McClelland,Cupertino Chamber of Commerce, announced the following upcoming events for the City of Cupertino: • State of the City Address, January 29, 2014 • Lunar New Year Lunch, February 14, 2014 • Quarterly Star Awards recognizing community leaders and local businesses 40 Cupertino Planning Commission January 28, 2014 2 CONSENT CALENDAR 2. Election of Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Representatives: Gary Chao, City Planner, reviewed the process for election of Chair and Vice Chair, and assignment of Commissioners to committees. MOTION: Motion by Com. Lee, second by Com. Gong, and carried 4-0-1, Com. Brophy abstained, to nominate Com. Paul Brophy to serve as Chairperson for 2014. Newly elected Chair Paul Brophy chaired the remainder of the meeting. MOTION: Motion by Com. Sun, second by Com. Takahashi, to nominate Com. Winnie Lee as Vice Chairperson for 2014; carried 4-0-1; Com. Lee abstained. The following committee appointments were made; it was decided that alternates not be appointed to each committee. If a representative is unable to attend the meeting, the administrative clerk will be notified and she will contact commissioners for an alternate rep for that meeting. Environmental Review Committee: 1st and 3rd Thursdays, 9:30 a.m. Chair Paul Brophy will be the representative on the ERC, subject to City Council approval. MOTION: Motion by Com. Gong, second by Com. Sun, and carried 4-0-1, Chair Brophy abstained, to nominate Chair Brophy as representative to the ERC Design Review Committee: 1st and 3rd Thursdays, 5:00 p.m. The Vice Chair of the Commission serves as Chair of the Design Review Committee (DRC); Vice Chair Winnie Lee will serve as Chair of the DRC for 2014; Com. Alan Takahashi will also serve on the DRC for 2014. MOTION: It was moved, seconded, and carried 4-0-1, Vice Chair Lee abstained, that Vice Chair Lee serve as Chair of the DRC. MOTION: It was moved, seconded, and carried 4-0-1, Com. Takahashi abstained, that Com. Takahashi also serve on the DRC for 2014. Economic Development Committee: Meeting Dates to be determined Com. Gong volunteered to serve on the Economic Development Committee. MOTION: It was moved, seconded and carried 4-0-1, Com. Gong abstained, that Com. Gong serve on the Economic Development Committee for 2014. Housing Commission: 2nd Thursday, 9:00 a.m. Com. Sun volunteered to serve on the Housing Commission. 41 Cupertino Planning Commission January 28, 2014 3 MOTION: It was moved, seconded and carried 4-0-1, Com. Sun abstained, that Com. Sun serve on the Housing Commission for 2014. Mayor’s Monthly Meeting: Second Wednesday, 4:00 p.m. Conference Room A Attendance at the monthly meeting as follows: February 12 Com. Lee July 9 Vice Chair Lee March 12 Com. Takahashi August 13 Com. Takahashi April 9 Com. Gong Sept. 10 Com. Gong May 14 Com. Sun Oct. 8 Com. Sun June 11 Chair Brophy Nov. 12 Chair Brophy Gary Chao: • Reviewed dates for upcoming study sessions: February 12 Housing Element; February 18 General Plan Amendment, City Council/Planning Commission Study Session; March 4 Joint City Council/Planning Commission Housing Element Study Session. PUBLIC HEARING 3. U-2013-09 Use permit to allow the operation of a weekly mobile food market Benjamin Himlan in the parking lot of an existing commercial establishment. (Whole Foods Market) 20955 Stevens Creek Blvd. Kaitie Groeneweg, Planning Intern, presented the staff report: • Reviewed the application for the operation of a weekly mobile food market in the Whole Foods Market location, which will provide a collection of individual food truck vendors weekly, as well as seating and live entertainment for the customers. There are similar markets located in the Oaks Center and Vallco Shopping Center. She reviewed the project location, mobile food market operation, parking/traffic analysis, outdoor live entertainment, restroom locations, parking agreement, as outlined in the staff report. An automatic one-year review period shall be conducted by staff after approval. The Planning Department will make adjustments if problems are observed. • Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the application in conjunction with the proposed conditions of approval outlined in the draft resolution. • Staff answered Commissioners’ questions regarding the application, including impact on traffic while event is going on, customer parking, and location of food trucks. Gary Chao said that if the church decided after a year not to allow shared parking any longer, the city reserves the right to conduct either adjustments to the setup, whether circulation, location, to allow more parking or to curtail the use, or reduce the number of vendors or food trucks. Relative to the live entertainment, originally there were concerns with the amplified music, but the project location is not adjacent to any sensitive receptors, and the noise ordinance addresses certain times of the day and maximum decibel reading. If complaints are received, staff will respond accordingly and the music level will have to be lowered or curtailed. If it becomes a problem again, the Commission has the ability to bring the item back for review, and a condition could be added to prohibit amplified music. Com Gong suggested a condition that for the first month or first four sessions a parking attendant directing traffic flow be required. Com. Sun: • Expressed concern about potential traffic congestion around the dinner hour. He questioned the possibility of an alternative, have they had the issue before; what is the alternative to putting food 42 Cupertino Planning Commission January 28, 2014 4 trucks at the corner next to the church where there is light traffic? Said he wanted to know of any other concerns. Gary Chao: • Said that when the trial run was done along Stevens Creek and Stelling, the event was in the middle of the aisle and it would seem the further away they set up from Stevens Creek, it would allow for additional circulation, more free flow, etc. but the reverse is true, because what happens based on the consultant’s observations, is people drive into the parking lot and immediately slow down to look for parking stalls. The fact that there are available parking stalls in the first couple of aisles, makes that situation worse, because they queue up and wait to make a left hand turn and find out there isn’t any down the line which slows down traffic. The traffic engineer suggested having the event at the first row, block it off, and have a traffic attendant stand near the entrance of the first aisle; and direct people to continue if they enter the site, to seek their parking stalls further down into the parking lot so they won’t queue up the initial queue area and that will allow the circulation to be improved. Alternatively consider having the event in the last row as well. If there are any issues observed or complaints received, staff can meet with the applicant and strategize with them if there needs to be additional determination or consideration given. Based on the consultant’s recommendation, the proposal is shown on the drawing as the most ideal location. Matt Cohen, Owner of Off the Grid: • Provided a review of operations, with 24 locations in the regional Bay Area, and 8 locations in San Mateo County. Stated that all markets have two staff onsite; this location one staff would be located at entrance to event, allowing people to be flagged on and not stop in middle of the street. If needed, they could dedicate a second person to the street on Stevens Creek to help with queuing on Stevens Creek because there is a right turn off Stelling and backup can occur. • He provided an overview of the advertising of events, menus and costs of food sold. Explained the operations; every other week the same businesses would return for a period of 6 months, after every 6 months there is a rotation in the businesses that are there to keep the market interesting and fresh. Not all the businesses go away but there is a substantial percentage that change over to keep people interested and attract new customers. Com Sun: • Asked for more information about the site alternative, whether on the front of Stevens Creek or next to the church on the other side. Matt Cohen: • Said they didn’t explore all the way back against the church, because if they shut down that much parking in the lot because the way the aisles are positioned, it would be challenging for people to navigate through the actual lot by shutting that much space down in the back aisle of the lot. • It was the first draft and there were some concerns about visibility; they moved to the second aisle in and experienced the same sense of confusion about when they made the first right turn in; they were looking for parking and even we had three people on site for that event and one person flagging people on. There was still an inclination on the part of people to want to make that left turn and if someone was pulling out of the first five spaces in that first aisle, it created a backup that cascaded onto Stevens Creek. • The proposed situation would increase the choke of the entrance substantially which would allow for a greater amount of backup in front of the aisle where the market is but also encourage people to move continuously through the space into the first available parking. Com. Sun: • Asked what the disadvantage was to put it in the back, since he felt that there would be extra traffic 43 Cupertino Planning Commission January 28, 2014 5 delay at the front of Stevens Creek when people turn right into Whole Foods. Matt Cohen: • One of the primary concerns expressed to the city has been about parking capacity in the space; if the aisle is shut down all the way in the back of the space, it uses more parking spaces than were originally requested in terms of use. He said that 8 or 9 trucks at the event was ideal for a Tuesday evening event, and he was not opposed to not having a permit for serving alcohol or beer. Com Sun: • Asked if the new business coming to the parking lot would generate traffic to the Whole Foods customer or not; and how will the two businesses be complimentary to each other. Les Gavado, Asst Mgr Whole Foods Market: • Said Whole Foods was excited to have the opportunity to partner with the city and Off the Grid, and are looking forward to being a good neighbor to its customers by sharing and creating a good environment for their customers and the community. Relative to traffic issues, during the Thanksgiving and Christmas weeks it is very hectic on Stevens Creek but they feel they have perfected how to manage the parking situation within their parking lot. There will be store team members in the parking lot facilitating parking, helping customers, blocking off parkways so they can continue the flow through the parking lot; store management will observe parking on the hour. The goal is to not cause disruption on Stevens Creek or backup on Stevens Creek or Stelling, and will make sure there are ample team members in the parking lot making sure there is a good flow of traffic. Tuesday evenings is the least amount of business for the week, hence it is a great opportunity. • Relative to the location of the food trucks, at the October event, the trucks were parked in the middle of the parking lot which was ideal for customer response and good parking control. The Assembly of God Church is a good neighbor and allows shared parking when needed. Whole Foods reciprocates by providing food and beverages to the Church when they have meetings. It is a friendly agreement between the church and store. On a regular basis there is sufficient parking for the store’s team members. Com. Takahashi: • Asked staff if given there might be some tweaking and optimization based on actual volume of the event, is there flexibility written in the conditional use permit to be able to make those adjustments? Gary Chao: • With city consideration and approval, if for any reason Whole Foods or Off the Grid decide something is not working out; they could maximize it by shifting it an aisle north. They would have to bring that plan to the city. Matt Cohen: • In response to a comment that the food trucks would take away business from local establishments, he said that Off the Grid has a substantial customer base in the area; and they don’t see it as an opportunity to come in and take customers away from existing businesses; but are looking to shift demand to different times when people might choose to stay at home or be more family friendly. Their targeted demographic is young couples 25 to 45 years old with families and young professionals 20 to 40. If the application is approved, it would be about 3 weeks before the operation would begin, to allow time for compliance with conditions, securing permits, etc. Les Gavado: • Said he was confident that the weekly Tuesday event would not have a detrimental effect on their parking lot and it would provide a benefit to the community. 44 Cupertino Planning Commission January 28, 2014 6 The public hearing was opened. Kevin McClelland, Cupertino Chamber of Commerce: • Congratulated Chair and Vice Chair on election of new officers for 2014, and thanked the Planning Commissioners for their hard work and good efforts in the previous year. He said that the Chamber is conflicted regarding the conditional use permit; While Whole Foods is an amazing business partner in Cupertino and they wish them success, on the flip side there have been issues and concerns with food trucks coming into town. If someone is going to Panera Breads or Panda Express and weren’t attracted to the food trucks, there is no need for a permit, the event should not be occurring. The reality is it is going to potentially hurt some of the local restaurants. The tax revenue to the city is going to be much more marginal than the tax revenue that all the other restaurants in the area are going to generate. The public hearing was closed. Gary Chao: • Commented that the city of Cupertino received the sales tax revenue from the food trucks, although the trucks may be from other cities. Chair Brophy: • Said he was not certain he agreed with the traffic consultant’s idea that it would work better by putting it up front; Stevens Creek entrance is the slowest one; people enter the parking lot and want a space in the front row and wait for someone to back out and traffic becomes backed up. It is not clear if that is the way it is and the way it is going to be for 6-3/4 days a year that for 4 hours every Tuesday night that people’s behavior will change as a result of suddenly those spaces going away. Gary Chao: • Said he could not comment on anything more in terms of what the traffic consultant said, and he was not present to defend his position. He said it made sense to him because it was a busy intersection with or without the addition to the lineup, and the traffic consultant said most of the queuing was because people are trying to make a right turn onto Stelling from Stevens Creek. It is the right turn lane at the intersection past the Whole Foods site at the gas station. • It is for the Commission’s consideration; staff suggests that the project be reviewed the first year in, or a shorter review period if they feel one year is too long. Staff would bring in their observations, confirm complaints or issues that they have experienced, and at that time potentially consider additional adjustments or changes; and having conversations with the applicant on additional layout changes. He recommended that as one of the conditions to add; and should the Commission decide to move forward with approval, he recommended that they provide clarification by adding a condition that requires the onsite attendant to direct onsite traffic. The attendant cannot stand in front of Stevens Creek or on the sidewalk to do the work, but on the private driveway on the property to help people cross the driveway to free up the circulation as people drive down the main aisle from Stevens Creek as well, reinforcing blocking off the aisles so that people can get to where they need to go. Matt Cohen: • Said Off the Grid does not pay rent for the use of the parking lot Whole Foods likely views it as a complementary use, that will increase brand loyalty and community at their stores, not a loss of sales. Com. Sun: • Relative to sale tax, Com. Sun that he understood there was almost no tax revenue on food and beverages. 45 Cupertino Planning Commission January 28, 2014 7 Colleen Winchester, Asst. City Attorney: • Explained that the State Board of Equalization is currently wrestling with the pricing on mobile food trucks because many times they want to price it as $2 for a particular item as opposed to $2 plus tax; there are pending regulations before the State Board of Equalization to try and clarify the issue how much each individual city gets because they are supposed to pay tax based on the location where they sell the product. Gary Chao: • Said that each individual vendor is considered a contractor and must pay sales tax on food sold. The vendors working with Off the Grid have to have their own individual business license for Cupertino, including Off the Grid. He summarized items to be incorporated into the motion: 1. Consider adding a condition to clarify having the need for attendants to direct onsite traffic. 2. Reminder to delete Condition 4 as it relates to prohibition on amplified music because they are going to have to meet city noise ordinance, and that it is permitted. 3. Consider earlier review period as opposed to waiting one year into the business. 4. Noted that Off the Grid confirmed that they are not going to be doing business during Thanksgiving and Christmas weeks. It would be prudent to memorialize that in the condition of use period as well to prevent confusion down the road. 5. Clarification for the record that any modifications would have to be approved by the Director of Community Development which includes tweaking the setup etc. • Said the Commission could dictate the format for review process; a timeframe for review is set usually annually, first year or six months into the business; staff will collect data, observations, complaints or concerns and bring it back to the Commission for the Director of Community Development report. If there are concerns, it is up to the Planning Commission at the time of the report to decide through a motion/vote whether they want to open it up formally and agendize the use permit for review. At that time it will be advertised and applicant will be invited back for discussion. Com. Takahashi: • Supports the event; it is a community event and is an element of the city of Cupertino that is an area of growth; more community events. The farmers’ markets were successful; there was similar reluctance with regard to noise and concerns but none came to fruition. The food truck event is a step up from farmers’ market as the farmers’ market tends to attract the shopper only, buys their food and leaves the site; the dining is a different experience; the customer will go there and shop for foods they are interested in and there will be a diversity of foods available. There is also the consumption of foods and music which adds to the community gathering aspect. • Whole Foods sees the event as a positive and good thing and there is a positive relationship, a synergistic relationship between the two entities. He applauded Whole Foods in terms of their view of the community as well as demonstrated by their relationship with the church where they don’t have a formal written agreement and provide them some things and have access to shared parking when needed; a mutual benefit. • There will be an impact from the traffic because you are adding people and there will be more cars. The traffic cost is well worth the benefit of having the event, and can be mitigated. If traffic becomes more of an issue, hopefully more people will look for alternate ways to get there or park further away and walk. Good food and good music are cornerstones to community events that promote community gathering; the food trucks will make it a positive event. He said he was excited about the event. Com. Gong: • Said she agreed that the event offering was excellent for community development. She addressed Kevin McClelland’s concern about reduction in tax revenue; said she was hopeful that the concern of tax leakage would not occur from Cupertino residents going to other cities, but would attract residents 46 Cupertino Planning Commission January 28, 2014 8 from other cities and mitigate the concern of reduction of tax revenue by having a greater base from other cities. Said she supported a six month review since it would give residents peace of mind; last year there was a concern about traffic gridlock and mitigating that is beneficial to the success of that type of event. She said that having parking attendants guiding the traffic flow is very important. Vice Chair Lee: • Said looking at the aesthetics she was not convinced that the food truck business was a perfect fit for the community. The food truck event would have outdoor entertainment and would be noisier than the current farmers’ market in the city. She remarked that if they liked it, perhaps other supermarkets would have more of the events, and there would be farmers’ markets on Fridays, and also have been approved for Wednesdays and Sundays, and the current one would add Tuesdays. Down the road, the Planning Commission in Cupertino likes the outdoor activities, if there is one every week, perhaps supermarkets will follow the lead. Com. Sun: • Said that two years ago when there was a second farmers’ market, there were community concerns and he voted against it. After approval it was there almost every weekend and it is was successful. He said in general he encouraged all new businesses coming to Cupertino, but was concerned about the effect on traffic and parking on Stevens Creek. Chair Brophy: • Said he was initially reluctant to support the application, but many of his concerns were answered at the hearing. He felt that Whole Foods would not enter into the agreement for the event if they felt it was counter-productive to their main store business especially if they are not collecting any rent; but they feel this will help in terms of additional sales and bringing different customers in at different times to do their market shopping. He said he did not feel that putting it on the front spot where traffic is most jammed up was a good idea. He prefers an informal process where the food truck event be put in their first choice location in the middle of the lot where it was in the test. Matt Cohen: • Said it would be their first choice to begin with; and he was willing to communicate with staff on moving it to an alternate place in the parking lot if the Commission was willing to let them work with staff to test it out in the way the traffic engineer suggested. Chair Brophy: • Said his preference would be to do it on a trial and error basis rather than putting it into the motion; begin with locating it where preferred and move it further north or south if warranted. Said he felt it did not need to be created as a formal administrative process. • Other issues raised: delete the condition relative to the music (said he regretted removing the music feature in the Oaks case to mollify some of the critics). The music feature of the event turned out to be a success. If there is a problem that arises with amplified music prior to the six month period, staff can deal with it on an informal basis. Six month review period is an appropriate review period. Said he felt that Whole Foods would address the Thanksgiving and Christmas weeks non-operation of the food truck event rather than include it in a condition. Com. Sun: • Addressed the condition regarding the attendant; if moving the site to the back, the condition disappears automatically. Will Whole Foods take care of their own parking lot so the city and residents don’t need to be concerned? He said he was concerned that it would cause the city problems on the street. Relative to his concern of putting the alternate site on the north side of the parking lot, he questioned how to frame it, to set forth in a condition or put in a motion. 47 Cupertino Planning Commission January 28, 2014 9 Com. Takahashi: • Said he supported deleting Condition 4; the six month review makes sense because it puts it in the peak July timeframe and a good time to review it. If there is an issue they would hear about it before then; some self-correcting will occur. Relative to the parking lot attendant, he concurred with Chair Brophy; don’t need to make it a condition, but if traffic becomes an issue, it would be something they would want to do. Agree with Chair Brophy in terms of the location; optimizing by trial is the best way to cement it in terms of what is the best location that mitigates the parking issue and people coming into the parking lot and improving the flow. Vice Chair Lee: • Said she did not support the application. She expressed her opinion on the conditions if the application passes; because the traffic on Stevens Creek is already very bad, they should have parking attendants; no amplified noise or music; six month review period with consideration to re-agendize it; no events held on Thanksgiving or Christmas weeks; modifications should be directed to the Director of Community Development. Chair Brophy: • Said he felt there was a concern that the north side affected traffic circulation. Com. Sun: • Said he did not support the project; and shared Vice Chair Lee’s concerns. He was not convinced with the traffic consultant’s findings on public traffic. Said he welcomed new businesses to Cupertino as well as increases in business compatibility. Discussion continued regarding the alternative parking space. Com. Gong: • Suggested traffic attendants be used in the parking lot for the first month; early review period of six months; no events during Thanksgiving and Christmas weeks; allow the city the flexibility to optimize the location; supports music at event; delete Condition 4. Gary Chao: • Clarified Condition 11 as the condition that will allow the flexibility for the Director to work with the applicant to make adjustments. He proposed a modification to the language in the condition: “So that the Director of Community Development is empowered to make adjustments to the operation and the location of the food truck setup to address any concerns or issues.” This clarifies that it is not just the operation but also includes their setup location. Chair Brophy: • Said he was not opposed to putting in a condition that stated no alcohol served without coming back to the Commission. It was unanimous to add it as a condition. Motion: Motion by Com. Takahashi, seconded to approve the draft resolution for the conditional use permit Application U-2013-09 with the following revisions: 1. Monitoring period will be changed to six months re-evaluation 2. Parking attendant on premises for the first month 3. Delete Condition 4 4. No food truck events during Thanksgiving and Christmas weeks 5. Modifications to Item 11 per staff suggestion in terms of the Director’s 48 Cupertino Planning Commission January 28, 2014 10 looking at location as well as operation 6. Add condition that application return to the Planning Commission for approval of sale of alcohol, in addition to all other approvals needed Colleen Winchester reviewed the motion for clarity. • Under Section 3, conditions administered by the Community Development Department, it refers to Condition 3 Operations, Subsection C, that the market is approved to operate on Tuesdays between 5 and 9 p.m., that condition would be clarified except for Thanksgiving and Christmas weeks; and an additional condition would be added to that section that a parking attendant be required at all times of the food truck operation. Is there a time an hour before and an hour after; perhaps there is some ambiguity. In that particular condition; and then under Condition 3, an additional requirement that no alcoholic beverages can be purchased or consumed during the event. Turning to Condition 9, a permit review will be 6 months instead of one year and Condition 11, the modification that were previously discussed. Com. Sun: • Said he was not clear on the site alternative; prefer in the beginning to put in the condition it is the first trial period; the site should be on the north of the parking lot, not on the very north one. Com. Gong: • Proposed to Com. Sun that they allow staff to view the optimization of the placement, stipulating that the first month it not be allowed on the frontage of Stevens Creek but at staff’s discretion if moving it to the first row, as a trial would not inhibit the traffic flow, and in fact optimize the traffic flow, that they be given the latitude to test the theory. Colleen Winchester, Asst City Attorney: • Said there was currently a motion pending that the Director of Community Development has the option to work with the site conditions under Subpara. 11; Com. Sun is proposing a friendly amendment to the motion that for the first operation of the market the trucks not be located adjacent to Stevens Creek Blvd. Com. Sun: • Said he was open to the first review period within 6 months. Gary Chao: • During the first six months they will make sure that the setup will not be in the first row and staff can work with the applicant to make adjustments. Com. Takahashi: • Discussed the setup. If it is in the second row and is not good because of traffic flow on that first aisle; even though it is not good and they would look for a more optimum location, would it be held there for 6 months? In other words optimization; there needs to be enough time for it to settle into a steady pattern, but once that is achieved if there is a better solution, the sooner they look for that optimized solution the better. Chair Brophy: • Said he was skeptical of the first row solution, but if the initial iteration is something other than that and during the six month period, let staff see the conditions on the ground as they really are, and make the necessary adjustments. 49 Cupertino Planning Commission January 28, 2014 11 Gary Chao: • Said it was clear and staff was agreeable. Com. Takahashi: • Said he would accept the friendly amendment. He restated the friendly amendment: “The initial location not be on Stevens Creek but we allow for optimization with the staff as time goes on in that first six months.” Chair Brophy: • Said he would prefer Com. Takahashi’s system, but would agree to go with Com. Sun’s language. Motion seconded by Com. Sun, carried 4-1-0, Vice Chair Lee voted No. OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: None REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Environmental Review Committee: No report. Housing Commission: No report. Mayor’s Monthly Meeting With Commissioners: No meeting. Next meeting in February. Economic Development Committee Meeting: No meeting REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Written report submitted. ADJOURNMENT: • The meeting was adjourned to the February 11, 2014 meeting. Respectfully Submitted: ________________________________ Elizabeth Ellis, Recording Secretary 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT      CITY HALL  10    10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014‐3255      TELEPHONE: (408) 777‐3308    www.cupertino.org      CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT  Meeting:  February 25, 2014  Subject  Architectural and Site Approval Application for final refinements to the previously approved Shops 1, 3‐ 5, 7‐8, Pads 1‐3, Town Square, Flex 1 & 2, Office 1 & 2, Parking Garage, and associated site and  landscaping design of the Main Street Cupertino Project.     Recommended Action  1. Consider referrals from the Design Review Committee of (DRC) an Architectural and Site  Approval (ASA‐2012‐15) to:  a. Provide clarification of Resolution 12‐098(M) as to the criteria for Architectural Site  Approval, including Condition 35; and/or  b. Amend Resolution 12‐098(M) as to the role of the DRC for Architectural Site Approval  related to the project; and    2. If Resolution 12‐098 (M) is amended, consideration and/or adoption of a resolution regarding the  Architectural and Site Approval Application (ASA‐2012‐15) pursuant to the attached Draft  Resolution (Attachment A).     Description  Applications: ASA‐2012‐15  Applicant:   Kevin Dare  Property Owner:  Main Street Cupertino Aggregator, LLC  Location: Main Street Cupertino  North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard on both sides of Finch Avenue, west of N.  Tantau Avenue and south of Vallco Parkway  (APN 316‐20‐079, 316‐20‐078 and 316‐20‐085)    Application Summary   Architectural and Site approval for final refinements to the previously approved Shops 1, 3‐5, 7 & 8, Pads  1‐3, Town Square, Flex 1 & 2, Office 1 & 2, Parking Garage, and associated site and landscaping design of  the Main Street Cupertino Project.      Pursuant to the conditions from the City Councilʹs approval in September 2012, the final design of the  public park and entry gateway feature will return to the City Council for review and approval at a later  date.  The applicant is also anticipating submitting architectural plans to the City in the next few months  for the review and approval of the Major Retail building, Shops 2, 6 and 9 (ground floor retail at the Loft  Apartments), and the Loft Apartments.    71   Background  Existing Conditions and Surroundings  The project site is located on the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard on both sides of Finch Avenue, west of  N. Tantau Avenue and south of Vallco Parkway. The site is surrounded by the existing Metropolitan and future  Rosebowl mixed use developments to the west, light industrial office buildings occupied by Apple to the north,  and an office complex occupied by Apple to the east across N. Tantau Avenue.     Prior Council Approval  The Main Street Cupertino project was originally approved by the City Council on January 20, 2009 (U‐2008‐01,  ASA‐2008‐06).  Since then, the City Council has approved several project amendments (May 15, 2012 ‐ M‐2011‐ 09, ASA‐2011‐24 & September 4, 2012 ‐ M‐2012‐03, ASA‐2012‐10) to allow various changes to the land use  options, site designs, and building footprints in order to facilitate the applicantʹs requests.    On September 4,  2012, the Council specified the final architectural and site approval process and criteria for the project.  The  Council specified that the hotel building shall return to the Council for final review and approval.  The rest of  the buildings may be approved by the DRC.  Please see Attachment B, Resolution 12‐098M (Condition 35) for  details.  The final hotel architectural and site permit (ASA‐2012‐11) was approved by the City Council on  January 15, 2013.    The plan set presented in September 2012 did not include updated elevations to represent changes to the  site plan.  The details were to be presented to the DRC by the applicant as part of Condition 35 in the  approved resolution.  The attachments to this staff report include various versions of the approved site  plan and relevant conceptual building elevations presented in the January 20, 2009, May 15, 2012, and  September 4, 2012 Council meetings (Attachments C ‐ E).     Comments Received from the Public  Prior to the DRC hearing, the City received comments from a resident, Lisa Warren, regarding her concerns on  the project (See Attachment F).  Ms. Warren expressed concerns that the project varied from the original  Council approved architectural concept in May 2012.  Ms. Warren suggests that the project should consider  warmer and more vibrant/varying colors, more varying rooflines and/or vertical architectural features to add  interest, and additional work should be done to soften the flex building along the parking garage in order to be  more architecturally consistent with the rest of the project.        The applicantʹs efforts to address Ms. Warrenʹs concerns are outlined later in the staff report.       Discussion  Design Review Committee Referral  On February 6, 2014, the DRC (Lee & Sun) considered the project and public input. The DRC considered  plans that were submitted to the City on January 24, 2014 (Attachment G) and the revised elevations  introduced (Attachment H) at the DRC hearing.  Commissioner Sun commented on the need for  additional changes to the flex building elevation but supported the overall proposed project design.   Commissioner Lee expressed concerns regarding the changes made to the various building roof style  and the overall material and color qualities of the project.      72 The DRC on a 2‐0 vote recommended that the City Council provide clarification and/or amendment to  Resolution 12‐098(M) as to the criteria for Architectural Site Approval (included in Condition 35).  Please  refer to the February 6, 2014 DRC staff report (Attachment I) for a detailed discussion on the applicantʹs  proposal and additional project discussion.      Public Input Received At the DRC Hearing  Several members of the public were in attendance of the DRC hearing, including Ms. Warren.  Ms.  Warren acknowledged that many of the changes made to the project were positive.  However she was  still concerned with the flex building design and the pedestrian entry tower to the garage/flex building.  Three other members of the public expressed their overall support of the project design and encouraged  that the City approve the project and not delay its construction.        Please refer to the attached draft minutes of the February 6, 2014 DRC meeting (Attachment J) for the  details.      Revised Drawings/Additional Suggested Changes  According to the applicant, the architectural drawings in the May 15, 2012 and September 4, 2012 plan  sets were the same as those in the plans approved in January 20, 2009.  These drawings were conceptual  in nature and did not reflect the refinements to the site plan and building footprints approved by the  Council at the May 15, 2012 and September 4, 2012 meetings.  The architectural and site drawings  submitted in January 24, 2014 reflect the buildable elevations related to the final approved site and  building footprints.  The applicant also notes that while there have been some revisions to the elevations,  they have done so in an effort to increase the architectural quality of the buildings as well as to reflect an  organic, downtown building format as opposed to a shopping center project where the architecture of  the buildings is not varied.  They also note that the changes have come at a considerable expense to the  project cost.    In response to comments raised by Ms. Warren and the public, the applicant provided revised elevations  at the February 6, 2014 DRC hearing (Attachment H).  The applicantʹs proposed architectural  enhancements are summarized as follows:    Shops 1  • Enhanced roof cornice to provide a more finished look  • A new entry vertical tower feature to add more vertical interest  • Additional stone siding     Shops 3 & 4:  • A new staggered monitor roof system above the retail shops for added vertical and architectural  interest  • Upgraded slate tile roof  • Enhanced stone entry element    Flex Building  • A new glass system at the second level of the Flex 1 building (farmerʹs market building) to soften  the verticality of building   73 • Upgraded IPE siding replacing aluminum panel sidings at various locations to complement the  wood siding treatments found on the Shop 1 and on the office buildings.      The Cityʹs Architectural Consultant has reviewed the revised elevations and suggests the following  changes for architectural consistency with the rest of the project:    Shops 1  ¾ The stone siding used on Shops 1 should match the stone sidings on buildings 3 & 4 for  continuity and consistency.     Flex Building  ¾ In order to further enhance the flex 1 building (farmerʹs market building immediately to the left  of the garage entry tower), consider providing architectural details and treatments that mirror the  building immediately to the right of the garage entry tower with glass window system,  aluminum projecting awnings, and IPE wood siding to match (Attachment K).      In addition, staff recommends the following additional conditions:  ¾ The final window details on the new monitor roof feature shall reflect design theme of the  building and shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior  to issuance of building permits.       ¾ Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall revise material #18 (Ceramic Tile‐Alta  Vista Daltile or Equivalent) on the Material Board (Sheet MB‐1) to higher quality stone or  equivalent siding material to the satisfaction of the Direct or Community Development.    Council Options  The Council has the following options:    1) Clarify the architectural and site criteria related to the project as part of Condition 35, Resolution  12‐098(M); and/or    2) Amend Condition 35 either as to the role of the Design Review Committee or consider adopting a  resolution approving ASA‐2012‐15 as proposed or with additional changes.      Staff recommends that the Council approve the project with the revised elevations dated February 6,  2014 with the amendments discussed above.  Given the DRC’s recent decision, staff also recommends  that the Council consider approving the Architectural and Site Approval for the remaining buildings  (Major Retail Building, Shops 2, 6 & 9, and the Loft Apartments).   The recommended resolution has been  prepared reflecting the revised drawings and the revisions to the conditions as discussed above.     (Attachment B).                   74 Noticing and Community Outreach:  The following table is a brief summary of the noticing done for this project:  Notice of Public Hearing, Site Notice & Legal Ad Agenda  ƒ Site Signage   (14 days prior to the hearing)    ƒ Legal ad placed in newspaper   (at least 10 days prior to the hearing)  ƒ 124 notices mailed to property owners  adjacent to the project site    ƒ All interested parties (emailed/noticed)  (10 days prior to the hearing)     ƒ Posted on the Cityʹs official notice  bulletin board  (one week prior to the  hearing)     ƒ Posted on the City of Cupertino’s  Website    ƒ Advertised on the City Channel         In addition to the above outreach efforts, staff facilitated a small community meeting with the applicant’s  team and Ms. Warren to go over the proposed project and her concerns on December 3, 2013.  Staff has  also met with Ms. Warren on January 28, 2014 to go over her concerns on the project.  No additional  public comments were received since the February 6, 2014 DRC meeting.     Environmental Assessment  No additional environmental impact assessment is required since the proposed project will not have any  new environmental impacts outside of the certified Environmental Impact Report (2008) and associated  Addendums (2012) as part of the previous Council Approvals.      Permit Streamlining Act:  This matter is adjudicatory and is subject to the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Section  65920 – 65964).  The City has complied with the deadlines found in the Permit Streamlining Act.     Project Received:   January 8, 2014  Deemed Complete: January 21, 2014    The City has 60 days (until March 22, 2014) to make a decision on the project. The City Council’s decision  on this project is final unless appealed within 14 calendar days of the date of the mailing of the decision.   _____________________________________    Prepared by: Stephen Rose, Associate Planner  Reviewed by: Gary Chao, Asst. Director of Community Development; Aarti Shrivastava, Director of  Community Development  Approved for Submission by: David Brandt, City Manager    Attachments:  A. Model Resolution, incorporating the revised plan set submitted on February 6, 2014 and  additional recommended conditions of approval  B. Resolution No. 12‐098(M) – condition 35  C. Site plan with relevant building elevations approved at the January 20, 2009 Council meeting  D. Site plan with relevant building elevations approved at the May 15, 2012 Council meeting  E. Site plan approved at the September 4, 2012 Council meeting   F. Comments from Lisa Warren  75 G. Project plan set, January 24, 2012  H. Revised elevations, February 6, 2014   I. DRC staff report, February 6, 2014  J. Draft DRC minutes, February 6, 2014  K. Recommended changes to the flex 1 building from the City’s Architectural Consultant   L. ASA package descriptions   M. Landscape narrative     N. Material & color board, will be available at Council hearing         76 RESOLUTION NO. 14‐___    RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILOF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO FOR FINAL  REFINEMENTS TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SHOPS 1, SHOPS 3‐8, PADS 1& 2,  TOWN SQUARE, FLEX 1 & 2, OFFICE 1 & 2, PARKING GARAGE, AND ASSOCIATED  SITE AND LANDSCAPING DESIGN OF THE MAIN STREET CUPERTINO (ASA‐2012‐15)      SECTION I:  PROJECT DESCRIPTION    Application No.: ASA‐2012‐15  Applicant:  Kevin Dare   Property Owner: Main Street Cupertino Aggregator, LLC  Location: North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard on both sides of Finch Avenue, west of  N. Tantau Avenue and south of Vallco Parkway  (APN 316‐20‐078, 316‐20‐079, and 316‐20‐085)     SECTION II:  FINDINGS FOR ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL:    WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino received an application for site  modifications to a previously approved Development Permit as described in Section I. of this  Resolution; and    WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given as required by the Procedural  Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the City Council 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    WHEREAS, the City Council finds as follows with regard to this application:    1. The proposal, 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;  The project impacts to the public health, safety, general welfare and surrounding  improvements have been analyzed as part of an Environmental Impact Report under the  California Environmental Quality Act. In response to areas where impacts were anticipated,  a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program had been established to minimize the  impacts to less than significant levels. The project shall be required to continue to abide by  these specified mitigation measures as enforced by City staff.    Furthermore, the project is anticipated to enhance the general public convenience in the area  in that it provides a rich mixture of land uses that accommodate housing, shopping, and  77 Resolution No. 14‐_____ ASA‐2012‐15 February 25, 2014  employment centers. New pedestrian connections to the Rosebowl and Metropolitan  developments to the west shall be made, and the entire sidewalk/streetscape surrounding  the perimeter of the site shall be replaced and enhanced.     2. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of Chapter 19.168, Architectural and Site Review, of the  Cupertino Municipal Code, the General Plan, any specific plan, zoning ordinances, applicable  planned development permit, conditional use permits, variances, subdivision maps or other  entitlements to use which regulate the subject property including, but not limited to, adherence to the  following specific criteria:    a) Abrupt changes in building scale should be avoided.  A gradual transition related to height and  bulk should be achieved between new and existing buildings;  On every edge and frontage, the proposed buildings mirror their surroundings creating a  complementary and logical neighborhood transition. No substantial building mass or  height changes are being proposed from the previous Council approval.       b) In order to preserve design harmony between new and existing buildings and in order to preserve  and enhance property values, the materials, textures and colors of new buildings should  harmonize with adjacent development by being consistent or compatible with design and color  schemes, and with the future character of the neighborhood and purposes of the zone in which they  are situated.  The location, height and materials of walls, fencing, hedges and screen planting  should harmonize with adjacent development.  Unsightly storage areas, utility installations and  unsightly elements of parking lots should be concealed.  The planting of ground cover or various  types of pavements should be used to prevent dust and erosion, and the unnecessary destruction of  existing healthy trees should be avoided.  Lighting for development should be adequate to meet  safety requirements as specified by the engineering and building departments, and provide  shielding to prevent spill‐ over light to adjoining property owners; and  The project present a combination of flat and sloped roof building designs, earth tone  colors, and associated landscaping are harmonious with the adjoining buildings and  streetscape on Stevens Creek Boulevard, Vallco Parkway, and N. Tantau Avenue  streetscapes. The rich palette of materials/textures is compatible with the recently  approved Rosebowl Development and design guidelines contained in the Heart of the  City Specific Plan. All above ground utility installations are required to be screened from  public view through a combination of landscaping and screen walls. As shown in the  project photometric plans, the proposed lighting adequately serves to illuminate  pedestrian paths and vehicular routes, and as conditioned shall be adequately down  shielded to prevent spill‐ over light and glare to adjoining properties.    c) The number, location, color, size, height, lighting and landscaping of outdoor advertising signs  and structures shall minimize traffic hazards and shall positively affect the general appearance of  the neighborhood and harmonize with adjacent development.  78 Resolution No. 14‐_____ ASA‐2012‐15 February 25, 2014  The project signage shall be separately reviewed and approved as part of a Master Sign  Program.     d) With respect to new projects within existing residential neighborhoods, new development should  be designed to protect residents from noise, traffic, light and visually intrusive effects by use of  buffering, setbacks, landscaping, walls and other appropriate design measures  The proposed land use, building height, and building setbacks have been previously  approved by the City Council.  The proposed landscaping features and vegetations will  provide adequate screening and buffering from the streets and adjacent uses.   Please also  refer to 2a.      NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:    That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted  in this matter, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on  Page 2 thereof,:  1. The application for Architectural and Site Approval, Application no. ASA‐2012‐15 is hereby  approved, 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 no. ASA‐2012‐15 as  set forth in the Minutes of City Council Meeting of February 25, 2014, and are incorporated by  reference as though fully set forth herein.    SECTION III:  CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT  DEPT.  Planning Division:    1. APPROVED EXHIBITS   Approval is based on the plan set entitled, “Main Street Cupertino” drawn by Kenneth A.  Rodrigues (Kenneth Rodrigues and Partners) and Gary D. Laymon (Guzzardo Partnership)  stamped as received January 24, 2014 with the new revised elevations received on February  6, 2014, except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution.    2. ACCURACY OF PROJECT PLANS  The applicant/property owner is responsible to verify all pertinent property data including  but not limited to property boundary locations, building setbacks, property size, building  square footage, any relevant easements and/or construction records. Any misrepresentation  of any property data may invalidate this approval and may require additional review.      79 Resolution No. 14‐_____ ASA‐2012‐15 February 25, 2014  3. PREVIOUS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL  All prior Development Permit and Architectural and Site Approval conditions of approval in  Resolution No. 12‐098(M)) and prior conditions of approval through past approvals shall  remain in effect unless superseded by or in conflict with subsequent conditions of approval,  including conditions of approval for ASA‐2012‐15.     4. ADDITIONAL COUNCIL APPROVAL  The remaining buildings (Loft Apartments, Shops 2, 6 & 9, Major Retail Building) shall  return to the City Council for final architectural and site approval.      5. CONSTRUCTION PLAN SET REVISIONS  Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be required to make the necessary  changes to the project (i.e. landscaping features, street/sidewalk design, utilities, and/or  other similar site features) in order to be consistent with the approved plans to the  satisfaction of the Director of Community Development.    6. FINAL TRASH ENCLOSURE / GENERATOR DESIGNS  The final trash enclosure and generator design, including, but not limited to size, colors,  materials, layout and architectural treatments shall be reviewed and approved by the  Director of Community Development and Director of Public Works prior to issuance of  building permits. All trash enclosures shall be property screened by landscaping or  decorative architectural features from public view.  All generators shall be setback a  minimum of four (4) feet from a pedestrian path of travel, or a distance determined to be  appropriate by the Director of Community Development.    7. ONSITE UTILITIES   The final transformer, FDC, water, including, but not limited to size, colors, materials, and  architectural treatments shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community  Development and Director of Public Works prior to issuance of building permits.    8. PEDESTRIAN GATEWAY FEATURES  A pedestrian gateway feature shall be required between Shops 2 and Shops 3, and between  the Flex Retail and Hotel buildings. Final gateway designs shall be reviewed and approved  by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits.    9. RAILINGS, STAIRS, RETAINING WALLS, & FENCING  Prior to issuance of building permits, final design of pedestrian railings, stairs, retaining  walls and fencing shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community  Development.      80 Resolution No. 14‐_____ ASA‐2012‐15 February 25, 2014  10. DEMISING WALLS  Prior to issuance of building permits, the division of retail tenant space shall be consistent  with the Tenanting Plan and subject to review and approval by the Director of Community  Development. The alignment of demising walls between tenant spaces shall correlate to  prominent exterior architectural features unless otherwise approved by the Director.     11. ROOF MATERIALS  Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed  roofing material on buildings 3, 4 and the clock tower shall match the approved roofing  material (slate tile) or other similar quality roofing material as approved by the Council on  May 15, 2012.        12. BUILDING MATERIALS   Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall revise material #18 (Ceramic Tile‐  Alta Vista Daltile or Equivalent) on the Material Board (Sheet MB‐1), and as it occurs  throughout the project plans, with higher quality stone or equivalent side material to the  satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The stone siding used on Shops 1  shall match or be similar to the stone sidings on Buildings 3 & 4 for continuity and  consistency.    13. FLEX BUILDING   The flex building 1 shall be revised to mirror the architectural details and treatments of the  building immediately to the right of the garage entry tower with similar glass window/store  front system, aluminum projecting awnings, and IPE wood siding to match.  The final flex  building elevation shall closely resemble the elevation drawing presented in the February 25,  2014 City Council staff report (Attachment J).    14. WINDOWS DETAILS   Prior to the issuance of building permits, the final window details on the new monitor roof  system on building 3 & 4 shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community  Development.          15. PARKING STRUCTURE  Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall work with staff to submit a final  garage plan to demonstrate additional decorative sidings to the ground floor concrete crash  wall and a more decorative (with custom patterns/details) metal railing design within  openings on the stair tower and along the perimeter of the roof level.     16. LIGHTING  Lighting in the parking lots shall be approved by the Director of Community Development  for compliance with applicable regulations prior to issuance of building permits. All lighting  shall be adequately downshielded to provide no light   81 Resolution No. 14‐_____ ASA‐2012‐15 February 25, 2014    17. SIGNAGE  Signage is not approved with this application. Signage shall conform to the City’s Sign  Ordinance, Heart of the City Specific Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to final  occupancy and approval of any individual signs on site, a detailed master sign program  shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the City’s Sign Ordinance.    18. GATEWAY ENTRY  The applicant shall be required to construct and install a gateway entry feature on the  northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue that will be consistent  with the policies of the General Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. The gateway entry  feature shall be a prominent design that may fulfill the public art requirement and could  include a decorative monument feature that spans over Stevens Creek Boulevard, or vertical  structural elements on both sides of Stevens Creek Boulevard and on the median to  announce entry. Also, this corner shall include a community banner and enhanced  pedestrian crossings that may include crosswalk lighting, special paving materials and/or  prominent art or architectural feature announcing the entry to the City, such as a wrought  iron element, subject to review and approval by the City Council.    19. SCREENING  All mechanical and other equipment on the buildings and site shall be screened so they are  not visible from public street areas or adjoining developments. Screening materials/colors  shall match building features and materials. The height of the screening shall be taller than  the height of the mechanical equipment that it is designed to screen. The location of  equipment and necessary screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of  Community Development prior to issuance of building permits.      20. UTILITY STRUCTURES  All new utility structures, not otherwise provided for on the plans, shall be located  underground. Where utility structures are not capable of being undergrounded, for reasons  other than cost, they shall be screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Director of  Community Development and Public Works.      21. EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS/TREATMENTS  The final building exterior treatment plan (including but not limited to details on exterior  color, material, architectural treatments and/or embellishments) shall be reviewed and  approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits.   The final building exterior plan shall closely resemble the details shown on the original  approved plans, except as otherwise approved by the Director.  The Director of Community  Development has the ability to require additional public review process for changes or  alternations that are deemed to be significant.      82 Resolution No. 14‐_____ ASA‐2012‐15 February 25, 2014  22. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS  The applicant is responsible to consult with other departments and/or agencies with regard  to the proposed project for additional conditions and requirements.  Any misrepresentation  of any submitted data may invalidate an approval by the Community Development  Department.    23. 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.      PASSED AND ADOPTED at a special meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino  on the 25th day of February 2014, by the following vote:    Vote  Members of the City Council    AYES:    NOES:    ABSENT:   ABSTAIN:     ATTEST:      APPROVED:                   Grace Schmidt     Gilbert Wong, Mayor  City Clerk      City of Cupertino          83 1 RESOLUTION NO. 12-098 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A MODIFICATION (M-2012-03) TO A MASTER USE PERMIT (U-2008-01 AND M-2011-09), ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL (ASA-2011-24) AND TENTATIVE MAP (TM-2011-04) FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW A HOTEL WITH 180 ROOMS; 130,500 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE; 260,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE; A 0.80-ACRE TOWN SQUARE; A 120-UNIT LIVE/WORK RENTAL LOFT APARTMENT HOUSING COMPLEX WITH AN ATTACHED 9,146 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL CONDOMINIUM UNIT, AND 216 PARKING SPACES IN THE ATTACHED UNDERGROUND GARAGE DEDICATED FOR RESIDENTIAL USE; A 5-LEVEL PARKING GARAGE WITH TWO LEVELS OF UNDERGROUND PARKING; A 0.75 ACRE PARK INCLUSIVE OF THE PARK AREA AND THE 20-FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG THE WESTERN PERIMETER OF THE SITE ADJACENT TO THE METROPOLITAN MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT; AND A TOTAL OF 1,769 PARKING SPACES FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES (INCLUDING 42 ON-STREE PARKING SPACES ALONG VALLCO PARKWAY AND 1,727 ON-SITE SPACES) ON AN 18.5 ACRE SITE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD BETWEEN FINCH AVENUE (INCLUDING BOTH SIDES OF FINCH AVENUE) AND N. TANTAU AVENUE IDENTIFIED BY APNS 316-20-085, 316-20-078 AND 316-20-079 SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: M-2012-03 Applicant: Kevin Dare Property Owner: 500 Forbes, LLC Location: North of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Finch Avenue (including the both sides of Finch Avenue) and N. Tantau Avenue, south of Vallco Parkway (APNs 316-20-085, 316-20-078 AND 316-20-079) SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino received applications for a Modification to a Master Use Permit, Architectural and Site Approval and Tentative Map, as described in Section I 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 City Council has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, a Second Addendum to the Final Certified 2009 Environmental Impact Report was prepared to adequately address the environmental review of the proposed applications in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has satisfied the following requirements: 84 Resolution No. 12-098 2 1) The proposed project and use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; and 2) The proposed project and use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan, the purpose of the Conditional Use Permits Chapter of the Cupertino Municipal Code, and complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 3) The proposed project and use is consistent with the zoning regulations and the South Vallco Special Center and South Vallco Master Plan; and 4) The proposed project and use is consistent with the Heart of the City Specific Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for a Modification to the Master Use Permit, Architectural and Site Approval and 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 No. M-2012-03 as set forth in the Minutes of the City Council Meeting of September 4, 2012, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is based on Exhibits titled: “Main Street Cupertino, Sand Hill Property Company, Cupertino, California” site plan dated August 15, 2012 and dated received August 28, 2012, Mixed Use Loft plans consisting of pages A1.0, A2.1, A2.2, A2.3, A2.4, A2.5, A2.6, and A3.0, dated received August 28, 2012, and Tentative Map pages TM-1 through TM-8 dated received August 28, 2012, except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 2. PREVIOUS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL All previous conditions of approval from Resolution Nos. 12-054, 12-055 and 12-056, for applications M-2011-09, ASA-2011-24, and TM-2011-04, shall remain in effect unless superseded by or in conflict with subsequent conditions of approval, including the conditions contained herein in this resolution. 3. ACCURACY OF THE PROJECT PLANS The applicant/property owner is responsible to verify all pertinent property data including but not limited to property boundary locations, building setbacks, property size, building square footage, any relevant easements and/or construction records. Any misrepresentation of any property data may invalidate this approval and may require additional review. 4. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL AND PERMIT EXPIRATION Approval of a Modification to the Master Use Permit is granted based upon the site plan identified dated received August 28, 2012 to allow the construction of a hotel with 180 rooms; up to 130,500 85 Resolution No. 12-098 3 square feet of retail space; a 0.80 acre town square; 260,000 square feet of office space; a 120-unit market-rate rental live/work loft apartment housing complex with an attached 9,146 square foot retail condominium unit, and 216 parking spaces (1.8 spaces/unit) in the attached underground garage dedicated for residential use only; a 0.75 acre park inclusive of the park area and the 20- foot wide landscape buffer along the western perimeter of the site adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development, a 5-level parking garage with two levels of underground parking; a total of 1,769 parking spaces for the non-residential uses (based on a credit of 42 on-street parking spaces along Vallco Parkway and 1,727 on-site spaces) ; and a requirement for the ground floor of the office buildings and market-rate live/work loft apartment housing complex to accommodate retail components in each building. The Modification to the Master Use Permit shall expire within three (3) years from the date of this approval. With the exception of the residential units and office square feet, all other uses may be subject to further refinement based on the final approved tenanting and land use plan, provided that there are no additional environmental impacts, such as traffic and parking, as determined by the Community Development Director. Uses Development Approval Housing 120 market-rate live/work housing complex Hotel 180-room hotel Retail 130,500 square feet Office 260,000 square feet Parking 1,985 parking spaces per the City’s Unshared Parking Requirement in the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) , Second Addendum dated August 2012 as follows (assuming a count of 1.8 spaces/unit for the residential units in-lieu of the standard City requirement of 2 spaces/unit): 1. Residential – 216 parking spaces 2. On-street Vallco Parkway – 42 spaces 3. Parking garage and surface parking – 1,727 spaces Parking in the parking garage for the retail, office and hotel uses shall be in accordance with Condition No. 18. Publicly Accessible Open Space (Town Square and Park) 1.55 acres of town square and park area, inclusive of the .20 acres of the 20-foot wide landscape buffer along the western perimeter of the site (adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development site) 5. OFFICE DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION The applicant is permitted to retain the 100,000 square feet of unrestricted office allocation received in 2009 from the N. De Anza Boulevard area in conjunction with the approval for U- 2008-01, and shall additionally receive 160,000 square feet of office allocation from the unrestricted office allocation from other areas in the City, except from the Vallco Park North area, to provide the applicant with a total of 260,000 square feet of unrestricted office allocation. The applicant shall not draw office allocation from the Major Companies pool. 86 Resolution No. 12-098 4 6. HOTEL OPERATIONS The hotel shall be permitted to operate as a 24-hour late night business operation and shall provide a minimum 6,500 square foot restaurant and meeting space area on the ground floor of the hotel along the Town Square. Any additional or revised uses for the hotel will be reviewed at the time specific business operation information is provided about these uses to determine if they are permitted and will require a separate Use Permit application. (Note: This modifies the Condition No. 5 in the approval dated January 20, 2009) to replace the requirement for a 400-person banquet facility with a 6,500 square foot restaurant and meeting space.) 7. LIVE/WORK RENTAL LOFT APARTMENT REQUIREMENTS Prior to issuance of building permits, a covenant, approved by the City Attorney, shall be required to ensure that the live/work rental loft apartment complex shall not be converted to condominium units in the future, and shall adhere to the loft-style studio and one-bedroom units per the approved site and floor plans. The covenant shall contain a provision that it may not be modified without the express written approval of the City. 8. RETAIL CONDOMINIUM OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENTS (PARCEL 5) The developer shall construct no more than one retail condominium adjacent to the rental market rate loft apartments. This retail condominium shall be owned by the same ownership as the rest of the retail on Retail Parcel 1 and not be sold separately. 9. MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE OF RESTAURANTS The maximum square footage of food service uses permitted within the retail space of the mixed- use development shall not be more than 40% of the total retail square footage of 130,500 square feet (or a maximum of 52,600 square feet of restaurant uses) based upon the approved development plan dated August 15, 2012 in accordance with the Main Street Cupertino – Revised Proposed Project Analysis report as Appendix A in the Second Addendum to the Final Certified 2009 EIR prepared by Fehr and Peers. Any future refinements to the restaurant percentage may be approved by the Director of Community Development if a subsequent parking and traffic analysis indicates that there is adequate parking for the various mixtures of uses and there are no additional and/or new significant traffic impacts compared to thresholds studied in the original 2009 Environmental Impact Report and 2012 Addendum. 10. TENTATIVE MAP Approval of a Tentative Map is granted to subdivide the property from three parcels into six parcels per Pages TM-1 through TM-8 as follows: a. Parcel 1 – 11 acres for the retail buildings, park and town square b. Parcel 2 – 1.5 acres for the office building on the corner c. Parcel 3 – 1.5 acres for the office building along Vallco Parkway d. Parcel 4 – 1.5 acres for the hotel e. Parcel 5 –1.5 acres for the live/work loft apartment building with a 9,146 square foot two-unit retail condominium parcel 87 Resolution No. 12-098 5 f. Parcel 6 – 1.5 acres for the Common Area Parcel for the benefit of Parcels 1 through 4. Restrictions and requirements for the shared use of the parking garage to accommodate the retail, hotel and office uses within the development site shall be included within the CC&Rs including but not limited to the requirements in Condition No. 18 and conditions related to this and related project approvals. 11. VACATION OF FINCH AVENUE The vacation of Finch Avenue is necessary to support this development. The vacation will be processed according to procedures set by the Streets and Highways Code and the Municipal Code. A bond will be required prior to issuance of permits for street modifications that will allow Finch Avenue to be reverted back to a standard City street in the case that the construction of the project is not completed. The Developer shall install and complete the street modifications within two (2) years of approval of the Final Map, or such longer period as may be specifically authorized in writing by the City Engineer. Public access easements, for both vehicular and pedestrian travel, will be provided across the improved site, to link Stevens Creek Boulevard with Vallco Parkway, as well as provide public access to the park and the “town center” plaza area. Failure to complete the improvements within the specified time will result in the reversion of Finch Avenue to a standard City street and the ownership of the former Finch Avenue right-of-way s hall revert back to the City. The reversion of Finch Avenue back to a City street shall be subject to approval by the City Attorney and Director of Public Works. 12. COVENANT OF RECIPROCAL INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record a deed restriction for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between each lot created by the new development. The applicant shall also record appropriate deed restrictions for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between the adjacent properties to the west, to be implemented at such time that the City can require the same of adjacent property owners. These reciprocal ingress and egress easements between each lot and between adjacent properties to the west shall also be recorded on the Final Map. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and the Director of Public Works. The covenant of easement shall be recorded prior to final map approval. The deed restrictions shall contain a provision that it may not be modified without the prior express written approval of the City. 13. PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT Public access pedestrian easements through the interior sidewalks, pedestrian paths and plazas, the town square, and park area shall be required and recorded on the final map as noted in the tentative map plans C0.0 – C6.5. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and Director of Public Works prior to recordation of the easement on the project site with the final map approval. The final map will include Public Pedestrian Easements, though the CC&R’s will include additional restrictions/guidelines on the usage of the Public Pedestrian Easements. 14. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS The project CC&Rs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation with the final map approval. The CC&Rs shall incorporate requirements pertaining to the public access easements, reciprocal ingress/egress easements, public pedestrian easements, shared parking, 88 Resolution No. 12-098 6 maintenance and operation of common areas including but not limited to public access to the park and Town Square, and joint use agreements for the town square and park. The CC&Rs shall also incorporate the Maintenance Agreement addressing the maintenance of the park, town square, sidewalks, shared driveways by the property owners of each of the lots, and landscaped park strips along Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard adjacent to the subject site. The conditions of approval for the project shall also be recorded on the properties and incorporated into the CC&Rs. No changes may be made to the CC&Rs without the City Attorney's review and approval. The deed restrictions shall contain a provision that it may not be modified without the prior express written approval of the City. 15. JOINT USE AGREEMENT Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit a joint use agreement between the City and the applicant to be reviewed by the City Attorney and the Director of Parks and Recreation, and approved by the City Council, which permits the City to use the town square and park area for public use for community events or other similar City-approved events or activities, such as, but not be limited to a farmers’ market, holiday activities, and summer events. The joint use agreement shall be recorded and incorporated by reference into the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) of the project site. The Joint Use Agreement shall include provisions for maintenance of the park and town square. The joint use agreement shall govern the public use, programming, public access and percentage of time available for the allowable public activities and events for which the town square and park may be used. The agreement shall also require available publicly identifiable restroom facilities for public use during normal business hours. No structures will be constructed on the town square area without the prior approval of the City of Cupertino, other than the retail pad structure(s) approved in accordance with the Master Use Permit. The programming provisions of the joint use agreement shall be administered between the applicant and the Parks and Recreation Department and the document approved by the City Attorney. The Joint Use Agreement shall contain a provision that it may not be modified without the express written approval of the City. 16. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Applicant shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement that addresses the maintenance of the park, town square, sidewalks, shared driveways by the property owners of each of the lots, and landscaped park strips along Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard directly adjacent to the subject project site. The Maintenance Agreement shall be part of the Covenants, Codes and Restrictions of the project and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to approval of the final map. The Maintenance Agreement shall contain a provision that they may not be modified without the express written approval of the City. 17. GROUND FLOOR RETAIL Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate the ground floor retail functionality for buildings proposed at heights over 45 feet in accordance with the City’s General Plan, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The ground floor retail shall be connected to the building and be of substantial and appropriate size to accommodate the functionality of retail uses. The building frontages of all buildings facing the town square, except for the hotel shall have ground floor retail. However, the hotel must provide active ground floor uses facing the town square. 89 Resolution No. 12-098 7 18. PARKING GARAGE ON THE COMMON AREA PARCEL (OWNERSHIP AND RETAIL PORTION) The five-level above ground parking garage with two levels of below ground parking shall not be sold separately from the other parcels in the project. It shall be held as a common area parcel. Free parking shall be provided in the parking garage and on the surface parking spaces for the retail and office uses. However, the hotel may charge parking fees for its customers to park in the parking garage. The retail incubator buildings on the south side of the parking garage serving Parcels 1 though 4 shall be physically connected to the parking garage in order to satisfy the General Plan height requirement for buildings over 45 feet and under 60 feet. 19. DISCLOSURE CLAUSE TO THE FUTURE PROPERTY OWNERS The applicant/developer shall inform the future owners through the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) as well as other documentation of the surrounding projects and that the development site is under a Cupertino Planned Development zoning. Property purchaser shall check with the City to determine the specific restrictions under the Planned Development zone and related permits. The CC&R language incorporating this requirement shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. 20. BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING PROGRAM For residential units, the applicant shall comply with the requirements in the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing program. For alternatives to these requirements, the applicant may request the Housing Commission to recommend alternatives to the City Council to meet these requirements. For dedication of any housing units at below market rates, the applicant shall record a covenant, which shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney, to be recorded prior to issuance of building permits for the planned senior housing building. BMR fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. 21. HOUSING MITIGATION FEES Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the required housing mitigation fees for the commercial, office and hotel development on the project site. 22. MAXIMUM LENGTH OF HOTEL STAYS Hotel stays shall be limited to a maximum of 30 days per reservation. 23. 2012 ADDENDUM AND SECOND ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED EIR AND THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM The project shall implement all of the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) dated March 2012 as identified in the 2009 Final EIR and as modified by the 2012 Addendum to the Final EIR as updated on May 4, 2012 and the Second Addendum to the Final EIR dated August 2012. 24. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION 90 Resolution No. 12-098 8 Use 2009 Master Use Permit Allocations Granted Approved Modification to the Development Plan Approved 2012 Modified Master Use Permit Additional Allocations Needed Option A(1)-2 Retail Up to 150,000 sf from the Vallco Park South retail commercial allocation Up to 130,500 square feet. No additional allocation is needed Office 100,000 sf from the N. De Anza Boulevard office allocation 260,000 sf 160,000 sf additional from the unrestricted office allocation available per condition no. 4. The applicant may not use any allocation from the Major Companies office allocation. Hotel Up to 250 rooms from the Citywide Hotel allocation 180 rooms No additional allocation needed Housing 160 units from the Vallco Park South residential allocation 120 live/work loft apartment housing units No additional allocation needed The applicant shall receive an allocation of up to 130,500 square feet of retail commercial square footage from the Vallco Park South retail commercial allocation area; 120 live/work loft apartment housing units from the Vallco Park South residential allocation; 180 hotel rooms from the Citywide Hotel allocation; and 260,000 square feet from the unrestricted office allocation available citywide (except from the Vallco Park North office allocation area). 25. CONSTRUCTION PROJECT PHASING AND PARK BOND Prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits, the applicant shall prepare a construction phasing schedule, and shall demonstrate completion of the project based on the project expiration date. The construction phasing schedule shall detail critical milestones of the construction. Critical milestones of the construction shall include but not be limited to the following: The entire project shall be constructed in one phase (Phase I) and the Modification to the Master Use Permit shall expire within three (3) years from the date of this approval. Building permits for all buildings shall be filed and accepted by the City, and the permit shall be used (substantial and continuous activity has taken place) prior to the expiration of the Modification to the Master Use Permit. A performance bond for the park construction (not less than $1.125 million) shall be required in Phase I. The applicant shall work with staff on the appropriate timing for acceptance of the performance bond and completion of the park. If the park is not completed to the satisfaction of the City within three (3) years from the date of approval of the permit, the City shall have the option of calling in the bond and constructing the park. 91 Resolution No. 12-098 9 A. Prior to granting a certificate of occupancy for the first of the hotel or office buildings, the Town Square, street and sidewalk improvements along Finch Avenue loop and the street and sidewalk improvements along the interior roadway connecting Finch Avenue loop to the office parcel shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City. B. Prior to granting a certificate of occupancy for the second of the hotel or office buildings, certificates of completion for shell, core, exterior facades and related landscaping and improvements shall be obtained for at least 50% of the retail approved for the project. C. Prior to granting a certificate of occupancy for the third of the hotel or office buildings, certificates of completion for shell, core, exterior facades and related landscaping and improvements shall be obtained for all the retail buildings. D. Prior to granting a certificate of occupancy for the live/work loft and retail building, the park shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City. 26. GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HOURS All grading activities shall be limited to the dry season (April 15 to October 15) unless otherwise approved by the Director of Public Works. Grading hours shall be limited to Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Grading, street construction, demolition or underground utility work shall not occur on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays, and during the nighttime period as defined in Section 10.48.053(b) of the Municipal Code. Construction activities shall be limited to Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. and Saturday and Sunday, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Construction activities are not allowed on holidays. The developer shall be responsible for educating all contractors and subcontractors of said construction restrictions. Rules and regulation pertaining to all construction activities and limitations identified in this permit, along with the name and telephone number of a developer appointed disturbance coordinator, shall be posted in a prominent location at the entrance to the job site. The applicant shall comply with the above grading and construction hour requirements unless otherwise indicated in the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) dated March 2012 as identified in the 2009 Final EIR and as modified by the 2012 Addendum to the Final EIR. 27. PARKING The applicant shall provide the following number of parking spaces based upon the development plan dated August 15, 2012 (dated received on August 28, 2012), with the following additional requirements: (i) 32 additional parking spaces on site (either in the shared parking garage or surface parking) for a total of 1,727 spaces on-site for the non-residential uses. The applicant shall work with staff to incorporate the additional spaces on site that may include enlarging the parking garage by extending the upper story over the alley east of the garage. (ii) The project would receive credit for 42 on-street parking spaces along Vallco Parkway. However, the project would be allowed to improve Vallco Parkway with 85 angled parking spaces and street improvements on the south side of Vallco Parkway along the project frontage as approved in 2009, until such time in the future that the City decides to modify the parking and street improvements along Vallco Parkway. (iii) 12 additional underground parking spaces in the underground parking garage (increasing parking to 1.8 spaces per unit for a total of 216 parking spaces for the live/work rental loft apartment). Additionally, the applicant shall provide at least one covered parking space for each unit at all times. 92 Resolution No. 12-098 10 The applicant shall also comply with the swales and permeable surfaces requirement of the City’s Parking Regulations. Adjustments to the parking plan may be permitted based on the final approved tenanting and land use program as long as there are no additional parking and traffic impacts as determined by the Director of Community Development and the parking analyses in the Second Addendum. A parking management plan that describes the parking system used by the retail, hotel and office uses shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Director. The applicant shall provide an updated plan for any tenant changes that result in changes to the parking requirements. 28. VALLCO PARKWAY All on-street parking along Vallco Parkway remains public. The parking spaces along Vallco Parkway are public parking spaces which shall always be available to the public. These spaces cannot be limited to use by patrons or tenants of the Main Street Development. The City may eliminate some or all of this parking at any time at its sole discretion. 29. PARKING CONVERSION FUND Prior to issuance of any building permit for the project, the applicant shall be required to provide a “parking conversion” fund that will allow the City to convert the angled parking spaces with one lane of eastbound traffic and a bike lane approved in association with the project along Vallco Parkway to parallel parking spaces with two lanes of eastbound traffic and a bike lane, if and when the City desires. Staff will work with the applicant on the amount to be collected by the applicant. 30. BICYCLE PARKING The applicant shall provide bicycle parking and bike racks for the proposed project in accordance with the City’s Parking Regulations under Chapter 19.124 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 31. PARKING LOT LIGHTING Lighting in the parking lots shall be approved by the Director of Community Development for compliance with applicable regulations prior to issuance of building permits. 32. BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL The Director of Community Development shall review the final building permits for full conformance with the Master Use Permit approval and the Architectural and Site Approval for each building prior to issuance of building permits for each building. 33. SIDEWALKS/CROSSWALKS A. The final sidewalk/street frontage plan shall be required to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the final map, and shall match the guidelines of the South Vallco Master Plan and be consistent with the sidewalk/street frontage plan for the adjacent Rosebowl mixed use development. B. The applicant shall provide decorative crosswalks with colored and/or stamped asphalt pavement across Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The decorative pavement materials shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and the Public Works Department, and shall be consistent with the 93 Resolution No. 12-098 11 recommendation of the traffic analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers in the Transportation Impact Analysis dated September 5, 2008 on p. 48. 34. SIGNAGE Signage is not approved with this application. Signage shall conform to the City’s Sign Ordinance, Heart of the City Specific Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to final occupancy and approval of any individual signs on site, a detailed master sign program shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the City’s Sign Ordinance. 35. ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL A. The buildings, site development and architecture shall substantially conform to the site plan, elevations and details as shown in the approved exhibits, unless otherwise noted below. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of a separate Architectural and Site Approval application for each of the buildings by the Design Review Committee; each Architectural and Site Approval application shall provide a detailed site plan, full elevations (all four sides), floor plans and any other details as required for Architectural and Site Approval applications. Building colors and materials shall be reviewed and approved in conjunction with the Architectural and Site Approval. Minor amendments to approved Architectural and Site Approvals for buildings and/or the site plan, including minor changes to the layout of the site plan, building forms and building sizes, may be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. B. The applicant shall provide the following additional modifications and enhancements to the plan prior to issuance of building permits (including recommendations referenced by the City’s Architectural Advisor on February 20, 2012 in Attachment 11 & 16 or as amended by the Planning Commission): 1. Town Square a. The town square area shall be designed as a “flexible” public space that may be expanded or shifted by the temporary closure of one or more of the surrounding publicly accessible streets. Provide additional landscaping in the square. b. In order to allow for a seamless expansion or shifting of the future pedestrian activities, the town square area will be developed to be flush with the grade of the surrounding street system. The Director of Community Development may approve other similar details deemed to be consistent with the intent of this condition. c. The applicant shall provide decorative semi-pervious pavements or similar treatments in the town square and plaza areas to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. d. Parking on the circular street system shall be delineated by decorative semi-pervious paving or other similar treatments as deemed to be appropriate by the Director of Community Development. e. Final design and landscape of the town square area shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. f. Temporary closure of any portion of the private drive streets, including methods used to temporarily close the street(s), will require approval from the Director of Public Works. 2. Office Buildings Architectural enhancements to the building shall be incorporated including the following: 94 Resolution No. 12-098 12 a. Enhance tower entry features with details and design features (particularly the central tower entry facing Stevens Creek Boulevard) and project the towers out and upward from the main bulk of the building. b. Provide prominent architectural design enhancements to emphasize the importance of this corner as the eastern gateway entry to the City, including identifiable street frontage public entrances along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue, glass store fronts and corner site features. c. Provide horizontal elements to the building design to reduce the verticality of the building frontages along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue. d. Provide deep recessed windows. e. Unify the variety of building forms with more closely related and toned down color tones. f. Add ground floor space as an “arcade-like” element along Stevens Creek Boulevard and around the corners at the easterly Main Street drive entry and a N. Tantau. 3. Hotel a. The Architectural and Site Approval application for the design of the interior and exterior of the hotel must return back to the City Council for review and approval. b. The exterior architectural design of the hotel shall be of the same quality and design standard as the example provided by the applicant of the Marriott Residence Inn in the Gaslamp district of San Diego. c. Provide additional variation in height and wall articulations, such as larger roof eave overhangs with additional façade depth and architectural detail and variety in roof eave heights, to minimize the verticality, bulk and box-like shape of the building. d. Enhance architectural detailing on the building that is in scale with the building. e. Provide deep recessed windows to provide depth to the building façade. f. Increase the horizontal elements of the façade. g. Add patio space (seating) at the corner of Vallco Parkway and Finch Avenue to enliven the streetscape and entry to the site. h. Provide additional architectural pedestrian-scale detailing of the ground floor treatment of the building, including along town square, Vallco Parkway, and the pedestrian area leading to the garage. i. Tone down the contrast in exterior colors and provide colors that will complement the colors used within the development. j. Provide an outdoor dining terrace along the frontages of the restaurant facing town square. 4. Retail Buildings a. Revise the architectural design of the retail pad building(s) in town square from an agrarian look to a park pavilion/kiosk style architecture with greater storefront glazing and sophistication. b. Provide active storefront pedestrian entries on all retail shops facing Stevens Creek Boulevard. c. Provide special design treatments between retail Shops 7 and 8 buildings to lead pedestrians/customers between the park and the town square. d. Bring the Shops 4, 5 and 6 buildings closer to the southeast and southwest corners of the main entryway from Stevens Creek Boulevard. 5. Auto Court/Parking Garage 95 Resolution No. 12-098 13 The parking garage shall provide architectural details and provide features along the ground floor facing Vallco Parkway to promote pedestrian orientation along the street. 6. Street Furniture The applicant shall provide street furniture and pedestrian amenities along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vallco Parkway. Prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the street furniture shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. 7. Rental Live/Work Apartment Loft Building a. Add a distinctive five-story high corner feature that provide a distinctive edge and corner to the southeast corner of the building above the ground floor retail uses; otherwise, there will be an awkward four-story high gap at this corner. b. Provide design articulation on the wall on the southwest corner of the building above the trash enclosure. The ground floor trash enclosure on this corner facing the town square needs to be properly screened and provide architecturally enhanced. c. The hallways appear to be long and narrow and should be enhanced with widened similar to hotel corridors. d. Please clarify if the parking garage and the courtyard will be open or be secured. e. The upper level plans need to clarify if there will be open views to the interior courtyard. f. Plans should clarify where the windows or natural ventilation for the units will be provided on upper floor units. g. Please clarify if the upper floor corridors open or enclosed along the southern side of the building. h. Please provide end cap/corner features to the building. Without these corner end caps, the length and massing of the building is emphasized. i. Provide balcony openings for the units to bring residential presence to the street level. Balconies should be more transparent facing the town square. j. Enhance the ground floor treatment on the southwest corner (where the trash enclosure is proposed) to provide a focal point from the north-south walkway. k. Confirm the height of the building since it may not exceed 60 feet per the City’s General Plan. l. The top of the buildings need to be enhanced with stronger tops. m. Windows should be deep set to enhance the elevations. 8. Site Plan and Surface Parking Lot a. Modify the view to the rear of the parking cars from the loop driveway looking south towards the retail Shop 6 building. b. Modify the site plan to accurately identify the landscaped areas as green and a different color for the hardscaped/non-landscaped areas. c. Provide a single-wide crosswalk between the incubator retail buildings and the retail Pad 3 building in the private roadway. d. Modify the main driveway entrance to fix the awkward and sharp lane transition from Stevens Creek Boulevard. 9. Parking Garage and Attached Retail/Incubator Space 96 Resolution No. 12-098 14 a. Provide left and right turn lanes from the eastern driveway entrance to the parking garage along Vallco Parkway to avoid back-ups onto the street. b. Consider an alternate more convenient hotel valet access to the garage 36. GATEWAY ENTRY The applicant shall be required to construct and install a gateway entry feature on the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue that will be consistent with the policies of the General Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. The gateway entry feature shall be a prominent design that may fulfill the public art requirement and could include a decorative monument feature that spans over Stevens Creek Boulevard, or vertical structural elements on both sides of Stevens Creek Boulevard and on the median to announce entry. Also, this corner shall include a community banner and enhanced pedestrian crossings that may include crosswalk lighting, special paving materials and/or prominent art or architectural feature announcing the entry to the City, such as a wrought iron element, subject to review and approval by the City Council. 37. LANDSCAPE PLAN The applicant shall submit detailed landscape and irrigation plans to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits for the building, portion of development, and/or phase of development for which building permit applications have been submitted. The landscape plan shall provide the following prior to issuance of building permits: A. Water conservation and pesticide reduction measures and requirements in conformance with Chapter 14.15, Landscape Ordinance, and the pesticide control measures referenced in Chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. B. A full landscape project submittal per section 14.15.040 of the Landscaping Ordinance. The Water-Efficient Design Checklist (Appendix A of Chapter 14.15), Landscape and Irrigation Design Plans, and Water Budget Calculations shall be reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. C. Landscaping along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue in accordance with the streetscape design requirements of the Heart of the City Specific Plan. D. Planting of two specimen oak trees flanking the driveway entrances to the development along Stevens Creek Boulevard as replacements for the removal of the existing dead specimen oak tree. E. Existing and Ash trees along Vallco Parkway shall be retained to the maximum possible as determined by the City Arborist. 38. LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION REPORT The project is subject to all provisions delineated in the Landscape Ordinance (CMC, Chapter 14.15). A landscape installation audit shall be conducted by a certified landscape professional after the landscaping and irrigation system have been installed. The findings of the assessment shall be consolidated into a landscape installation report. The landscape installation report shall include, but is not limited to: inspection to confirm that the landscaping and irrigation system are installed as specified in the landscape and irrigation design plan, system tune-up, system test with distribution uniformity, reporting overspray or run-off that causes overland flow, and preparation of an irrigation schedule. 97 Resolution No. 12-098 15 The landscape installation report shall include the following statement: “The landscape and irrigation system have been installed as specified in the landscape and irrigation design plan and complies with the criteria of the ordinance and the permit.” 39. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE Per the Landscape Ordinance (CMC, Chapter 14.15), a maintenance schedule shall be established and submitted to the Director of Community Development or his/her designee, either with the landscape application package, with the landscape installation report, or any time before the landscape installation report is submitted. a) Schedules should take into account water requirements for the plant establishment period and water requirements for established landscapes. b) Maintenance shall include, but not be limited to the following: routine inspection; pressure testing, adjustment and repair of the irrigation system; aerating and de-thatching turf areas; replenishing mulch; fertilizing; pruning; replanting of failed plants; weeding; pest control; and removing obstructions to emission devices. c) Failed plants shall be replaced with the same or functionally equivalent plants that may be size-adjusted as appropriate for the stage of growth of the overall installation. Failing plants shall either be replaced or be revived through appropriate adjustments in water, nutrients, pest control or other factors as recommended by a landscaping professional. 40. SOIL ANALYSIS REPORT A soils analysis report shall document the various characteristics of the soil (e.g. texture, infiltration rate, pH, soluble salt content, percent organic matter, etc) and provide recommendations for amendments as appropriate to optimize the productivity and water efficiency of the soil. The soil analysis report shall be made available to the professionals preparing the landscape and irrigation design plans in a timely manner either before or during the design process. A copy of the soils analysis report shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development as part of the landscape documentation package. 41. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Prior to final inspections and final occupancy, the owner(s) of the property shall enter into a formal written landscape maintenance agreement with the City. The City shall record this agreement, against the property or properties involved, with the County of Santa Clara Recorder's Office and it shall be binding on all subsequent owners of land served by the proposed landscape. The landscape maintenance agreement shall require that modifications and maintenance activities not alter the level of water efficiency of the landscape from its original design, unless approved by the City prior to the commencement of the proposed modification or maintenance activity. 42. TREE REMOVAL A. The applicant is approved to remove a total of 61 trees and relocate 17 trees on site in accordance with the City Arborist’s report prepared by David Babby and dated April 30, 2008. Although the applicant is requesting approval to remove these trees in accordance with the City Arborist’s recommendation, the intent is to retain as many of the existing perimeter street 98 Resolution No. 12-098 16 trees for the remaining life of such trees where they are not considered dead or do not require immediate removal. B. The applicant shall be required to replace the Aleppo Pine tree (Tree No. 113) that was removed in accordance with the City’s Protected Trees Ordinance (Chapter 14.18 of the Cupertino Municipal Code). C. For any trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions, are considered dead, or die as a result of relocation, the applicant shall be required to obtain a tree removal permit and replace these trees in accordance with the City’s Protected Trees Ordinance. D. For any trees that require removal due to construction plan drawing changes and/or construction activity, the applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. E. The Director of Community Development may review and approve further refinements to the tree removal and planting plan based on the approved final land use program for the center provided that there are no significant environmental or visual impacts. 43. TREE REPLACEMENTS Final approval of the required tree replacements shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development in accordance with the City’s Protected Trees Ordinance. The applicant may be able to reduce the number of replacement trees on site, if larger size trees are proposed, in accordance with the tree replacement standards of the ordinance. For any additional trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions or are considered dead, the applicant shall be required to obtain a tree removal permit and replace these trees in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. Species and size of replacement trees shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. 44. TREE PROTECTION As part of the building permit drawings, a tree protection plan shall be prepared by a certified arborist for the trees to be retained. The applicant shall be required to install tree protection measures before and during development in accordance with the City Arborist’s report dated April 30, 2008, and in accordance with requirements of the Public Works Department for the preservation of existing street trees. In addition, the following measures shall be added to the protection plan: A. For trees to be retained, chain link fencing and other root protection shall be installed around the dripline of the tree prior to any project site work. B. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the project arborist. C. No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City Arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. D. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers. E. Retained trees shall be watered to maintain them in good health. 45. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in an amount determined by the City Arborist to ensure protection of trees slated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, subject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. 99 Resolution No. 12-098 17 46. TREE REPLACEMENT IN-LIEU FEE The applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee in accordance with the City’s Protected Trees Ordinance for any trees that cannot be replaced on site. 47. HEART OF THE CITY DESIGN GUIDELINES A. The project shall comply with the Heart of the City Specific Plan development standards and design guidelines in effect at the time of project approval. B. If any portions of the buildings on the Master Use Permit site plan do not meet the minimum setbacks per the Heart of the City Specific Plan, the applicant must either modify the building setback or obtain approval of an Exception application to the Heart of the City Specific Plan. 48. SOUTH VALLCO MASTER PLAN The project shall comply with the South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to release of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the final boulevard plan along Vallco Parkway shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to contact adjacent property owners to show improvement plans including, but not limited to the specific lighting, sidewalk furniture, and landscaping treatments to be consistent with the vision of the South Vallco Master Plan. 49. CREEK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS The applicant shall contribute an amount not to exceed $65,000 to the improvements of a trail connection along Calabazas Creek from Vallco Parkway to I-280. This contribution shall be used by the City to administer a creek trail plan and necessary approvals and improvements. If this fund is not used within five years of the project completion, then it shall be returned to the applicant. 50. PARK AREA ALONG METROPOLITAN A approximately 0.55 acre park area shall be maintained along the western property line adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development. A minimum 20-foot wide landscape buffer shall be provided along the western property line adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development; the landscape buffer shall be included in the acreage of the park. The design of the park area shall include but not be limited to passive recreation apparatuses, such as a tot lot and sitting areas. The Parks and Recreation Commission shall review the park design and shall refer its recommendation to the City Council for review and approval. The linear green space park buffer parallel to the eastern property line of the Metropolitan mixed use development shall be installed prior to issuance of building occupancy of any building constructed adjacent to this property line. 51. SECURITY PLAN FOR PARKING GARAGE The applicant shall develop a comprehensive private security plan for the entire development encompassing patrol hours, manning levels and frequency, closed circuit cameras in the parking garage, and adequate lighting levels. The plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Sheriff’s Department prior to final occupancy. 52. PARKING GARAGE NOISE MITIGATION The parking garage floors shall be treated/coated with materials as deemed appropriate by the City to lessen the noise impacts of vehicle movements. 53. RESTAURANT ODOR ABATEMENT 100 Resolution No. 12-098 18 All restaurants shall install odor abatement systems to be incorporated into the air handling systems to reduce the odor impact from the restaurants to the adjacent community. Detailed plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. 54. SCREENING All mechanical and other equipment on the buildings and site shall be screened so they are not visible from public street areas or adjoining developments. Screening materials/colors shall match building features and materials. The height of the screening shall be taller than the height of the mechanical equipment that it is designed to screen. The location of equipment and necessary screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. 55. TRASH AND DELIVERY ACTIVITIES A detailed refuge and truck delivery plan must be prepared by the applicant. The plan shall specify locations of trash facilities, refuge pick up schedules and truck delivery schedules and routes. All trash facilities must be screened and enclosed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. The final plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. All deliveries shall comply with the mitigation measures provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009, except as may be modified by the 2012 Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR). 56. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MEETING Prior to commencement of construction activities, the applicant shall arrange for a pre- construction meeting with the pertinent departments (Building, Planning, and Public Works) to review the applicant-prepared construction management plan. 57. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN A construction management plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by staff prior to issuance of building permits. During Phase 1 and 2 of the construction, staging of construction and equipment shall occur as far away from any residential property as possible. The applicant shall also provide a construction manager hotline phone number for residents of the adjacent Metropolitan condominium complex to call for construction related activities on the project site. The hotline number shall also be posted on the project site and at the Metropolitan condominium complex. Said construction management plan shall also provide the following: A. Construction Vehicle Access and Routing B. Construction Equipment Staging Area C. Dust Control (Best Management Practices) D. Hours of Operation E. Street Cleaning Schedule and Program 58. DUST CONTROL The following construction practices shall be implemented during all phases of construction for the proposed project to prevent visible dust emissions from leaving the site: a) Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during windy periods to prevent visible dust from leaving the site; active areas adjacent to windy periods; active areas 101 Resolution No. 12-098 19 adjacent to existing land uses shall be kept damp at all times, or shall be treated with non-toxic stabilizers or dust palliatives. b) Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard; c) Pave, apply water at least three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction site. d) Sweep streets daily, or more often if necessary (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. e) The applicant shall incorporate the City’s construction best management practices into the building permit plan set. f) The applicant shall comply with the above dust control requirements unless otherwise indicated in the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) dated March 2012 as identified in the 2009 Final EIR and as modified by the 2012 Addendum to the Final EIR. 59. NOISE MITIGATION The project and retail operations shall comply with the City’s Community Noise Control Ordinance (Chapter 10.48 of the CMC), unless otherwise indicated in the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) dated March 2012 as identified in the 2009 Final EIR and as modified by the 2012 Addendum to the Final EIR. In addition, the following mitigation measures shall be taken in order to reduce noise event impacts to nearby receptor areas: a) Delivery trucks shall be turned off while unloading products at the loading dock. b) Construction equipment shall be have quiet design features, be well-maintained, and have a high quality muffler system. c) Temporary plywood enclosures shall be erected around stationary equipment that produces excessive noise at nearby receptors. d) Unnecessary idling of machines when not in use shall be prohibited. e) Good maintenance and lubrication procedures shall be used to reduce operating noise. 60. GREEN BUILDING The applicant shall obtain LEED certification designation for the hotel, office and loft residential rental housing buildings in accordance with the U.S. Green Building Council standards and the City’s Green Building policies. The applicant shall also design the athletic club (if developed) and retail buildings to LEED certification standards, but will not be required to certify these buildings as LEED certified. The applicant shall also provide solar hot water heating for any pools provided on the project site. 61. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT The applicant shall commit to implementing a transportation demand management (TDM) plan incorporating solutions as indicated in the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) dated March 2012 as identified in the 2009 Final EIR and as modified by the 2012 Addendum to the Final EIR, that may include parking cash-out and eco passes for employees, valet for customers and off-site parking options. The TDM plan including the projected funding shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development Director prior to issuance of building permits. 102 Resolution No. 12-098 20 62. UTILITY STRUCTURES All new utility structures shall be located underground or screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development and Public Works. 63. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS All demolished building and site materials shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible subject to the Building Official and shall meet the mandatory requirements of the Cal Green Building Code. The applicant shall provide evidence that materials will be recycled prior to issuance of final demolition permits. 64. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS The applicant is responsible to consult with other departments and/or agencies with regard to the proposed project for additional conditions and requirements. Any misrepresentation of any submitted data may invalidate an approval by the Community Development Department. 65. 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. 66. PUBLIC ART The applicant shall provide public art in accordance with General Plan policy 2- 66. Public art shall be installed on the project site prior to final occupancy of the last building completed in the first phase. The public art shall be valued at a minimum of one-quarter percent (1/4%) of the total project budget, not to exceed $100,000. The applicant shall submit a public art plan to be reviewed by the Fine Arts Commission prior to installation of the public art. 67. CIRCULATION PLAN Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide an auto, bike and pedestrian circulation plan. 68. SHERIFF SUBSTATION The applicant shall add a Sheriff’s substation on site. The applicant shall work with staff on the appropriate location and size of the substation. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. These conditions are not intended to be exhaustive. Additional conditions may need to be addressed, prior to issuance of a building permit, based on potential modifications to the site’s usage and/or layout. 69. STREET WIDENING Public street widening and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 103 Resolution No. 12-098 21 70. 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. 71. 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. 72. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. 73. 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. 74. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Hydrology and pre- and post- development hydraulic calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be constructed or renovated. The storm drain system may include, but is not limited to, subsurface storage of peak stormwater flows (as needed), low impact development facilities, or other approved means, to reduce the amount of runoff from the site and to improve storm water quality. The storm drain system shall be designed to detain water on-site (e.g., via buried pipes or storage structures) as necessary to avoid an increase of one percent flood water surface elevation of the culvert to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Any storm water overflows or surface sheeting should be directed away from neighboring private properties and to the public right of way as much as reasonably possible. Hydro-modification measures may be required as directed by the Municipal Regional Permit. 75. 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. 76. 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 under grounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits Fees: a. Checking & Inspection Fees: 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $4,101.00 minimum 104 Resolution No. 12-098 22 b. Grading Permit: 6% of Site Improvement Cost or $2,387.00 minimum c. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 3,000.00 d. Storm Drainage Fee: $ TBD e. Power Cost: ** f. Map Checking Fees: $8,052.00 g. Park Fees: $ per Municipal Code (or an equivalent park land dedication) h. Street Tree By Developer ** Based on the latest effective PG&E rate schedule approved by the PUC 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. 77. TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. The transformer shall not be located in the front or side building setback area. 78. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading and street improvement plans. 79. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with California Water Services Company for water service to the subject development. 80. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT The developer must obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) from the State Water Resources Control Board, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), use of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control storm water runoff quality, and BMP inspection and maintenance. 81. C.3 REQUIREMENTS The developer shall reserve a minimum of 4% of developable surface area for the placement of low impact development measures, for storm water treatment, on the tentative map, unless an 105 Resolution No. 12-098 23 alternative storm water treatment plan, that satisfies C.3 requirements, is approved by the City Engineer. The developer must include the use and maintenance of site design, source control and storm water treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs), which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. A Storm Water Management Plan, Storm Water Facilities Easement Agreement, Storm Water Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement, and certification of ongoing operation and maintenance of treatment BMPs are each required. All storm water management plans are required to obtain certification from a City approved third party reviewer. 82. FULL TRASH CAPTURE SYSTEM The developer will be responsible for installing a full trash capture system/device to capture trash from the onsite storm drain before the storm water reaches the City owned storm drain system. A full capture system or device is a single device or series of devices that traps all particles retained by a 5 mm mesh screen and has a design treatment capacity of not less than the peak flow rate Q resulting from a one-year, one-hour storm in the sub-drainage area (see the Municipal Regional Permit section C.10 for further information/requirements). 83. EROSION CONTROL PLAN The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. 84. WORK SCHEDULE Every 6 months, the developer shall submit a work schedule to the City to show the timetable for all grading/erosion control work in conjunction with this project. 85. TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS The developer shall agree to fund up to $300,000 for the purpose of installing a traffic signal at Finch Avenue and Vallco Parkway as well as for making traffic signal improvements at the Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau Ave intersection. The developer shall also submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 86. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT WOLFE ROAD AND VALLCO PARKWAY The developer shall mitigate for traffic impacts at Vallco Parkway and Wolfe Road by implementing one of the options stated in the Environmental Impact Report for Main Street Cupertino per the approval of the City Engineer. 87. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT HOMESTEAD ROAD & LAWRENCE EXPRESSWAY The developer shall agree to submit their fair-share cost of up to $400,000 to improve Homestead Road at Lawrence Expressway according to the direction of the City Engineer. The fair-share contribution to the County will be dependent on the amount of traffic generated by the approved Plan. In the event that a Plan is approved that has reduced traffic impacts, the same formula would be used (calculating the percentage of traffic the project is adding to total growth between background and cumulative conditions). The cost shall be submitted to the County of Santa Clara in the form of a bond or cash deposit prior to the City issuing building permits, with the proviso 106 Resolution No. 12-098 24 that the funds be committed to this specific improvement in accordance of section 66000 et. seq. of the California Government Code. 88. PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT The Developer shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, a public access easement across the site, over the park and over the town center. The easement, including for vehicular and pedestrian travel, shall link Stevens Creek Boulevard with Vallco Parkway, the park and the town center. Public access easements shall include access for both vehicular and pedestrian travel, and shall be shown and recorded on the Final Map. All of the internal roadways shall have a public driving and parking access easement over them. Public access areas may not be closed off without the consent and approval of the Public Works Department, and shall be governed by the Joint Use Agreement recorded within the project’s Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s). The public access easement shall be subject to approval by the City Attorney. The public access easement shall contain a provision that they may not be modified without the express written approval of the City. 89. PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS The developer shall provide pedestrian improvements along the property frontage, including crosswalk improvements at adjoining intersections. Final crosswalk improvement plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 90. BUS STOP LOCATION The developer shall improve bus stops on Stevens Creek Boulevard along the project frontage and the immediate vicinity of the project site to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; this may include consistent shelters for the bus stops, but will not include duck outs or relocation of the bus stops. 91. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The developer must submit a traffic control plan by a Registered Traffic Engineer to be approved by the City. The plan shall include a temporary traffic control plan for work in the right of way as well as a routing plan for all vehicles used during construction. All traffic control signs must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of work. The City has adopted Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards for all signage and striping work throughout the City. 92. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City. 93. TRAFFIC CALMING The developer shall agree to fund up to $100,000 for the purpose of mitigating traffic impacts in the adjacent neighborhoods resulting from the project for a period of 5 years following project occupancy. The developer shall submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 94. EMERGENCY VEHICLE PREEMPTION FUND The Developer is required to pay $15,000.00 to fund three Emergency Vehicle Preemption devices for traffic signals at the adjacent intersections. 95. BICYCLE PARKING 107 Resolution No. 12-098 25 The developer shall provide bicycle parking consistent with the City’s requirements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 96. OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT The developer shall enter into an Operations & Maintenance Agreement with the City prior to final occupancy. The Agreement shall include the operation and maintenance for non-standard appurtenances in the public road right-of-way that may include, but is not limited to, sidewalk, pavers, and street lights. 97. TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Manager. Clearance by the Public Works Department is needed prior to obtaining a building permit. 98. REFUSE TRUCK ACCESS The developer must obtain clearance from the Environmental Programs Manager in regards to refuse truck access for the proposed development. 99. 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. 100. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 101. SANTA CLARA WATER DISTRICT CLEARANCE Provide Santa Clara water district approval before recordation of the final map. The developer shall pay for and obtain Water District permit for activities or modifications within the District easement or fee right of way or affecting District facilities. 102. STREAMSIDE PERMIT Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall provide plans and information that satisfies the requirements of the Stream Side Permit as set forth by the Santa Clara Valley Water Resources Protection Collaborative. These items include, but are not limited to, topographic survey, specific measures to protect streams and/or waterbodies from water quality impacts, coordination with all interested jurisdictional agencies, etc. 103. SANITARY DISTRICT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Cupertino Sanitary District prior to issuance of building permits. 104. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. 105. UTILITY EASEMENTS Clearance approvals from the agencies with easements on the property (including PG&E, PacBell, and California Water Company, and/or equivalent agencies) will be required prior to issuance of building permits. 108 Resolution No. 12-098 26 106. CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY CLEARANCE Provide California Water Service Company approval before recordation of the final map. 107. CALABAZAS CREEK INSPECTION The developer agrees to have all bays of the Calabazas Creek Culvert, from Stevens Creek through Vallco Parkway, inspected and videotaped prior to start of any construction on site. An inspection report and 2 copies of the inspection video are to be provided to the City prior to issuance of a permit to begin any work on site. The developer is responsible for coordinating with and obtaining and permits from the Santa Clara Valley Water District prior to beginning inspection operations. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 4th day of September 2012, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: Santoro, Mahoney, Chang, Sinks, Wong NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/Grace Schmidt /s/Mark Santoro ____________________ _______________________ Grace Schmidt Mark Santoro City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino 109 1 1 r ` - TABULATI N f r--^ w pEDESTRIaOV CavNEC3tON fULL``rAI LOSEfl_`" _ ` -_ - r ono r n E, 1 4 = -,, r--f f" Y r _ r_-- xi-nr c Ex RETA(L 127,9 SF 644 STAlLS 5 11,QQ0 SF FUTU{E se vic:nRFn = Y Y OFFtGE aQ,OQQ SF1? _ a .., - ' M IXED U E i r f \ ri•^ r 4 -- HQTEL 154 RC Oi1 S 891 STALLS SHARED PARKINGR, :, ' PROJECT M U s,y^ . 1j,. ATHLETIC CLUB 145,000 F r' 'as ` TENANT SEN14R HQUSING 16Q U lI S 16Q S CALLS 'i /UNlT 3C},U00 SF ss -a r, 4 AGRr PLAZAS AND E _ 02'(, jtZ_Oo$-I,TIZ 0$8 r;.•'OPEN SPACE t o oS—o rrC— f , , - - %-- C ` PARKING 1,691 STALLS SENIQR HaUSI t 0 — _ T / itk!A1L 4 t t, A' STREET 95 STAIIS DR4P-O— RETnIl. I_.3EICjPS 1 D/R Tn T_%: ti7fi aF f• . ., I 1 y ,Q SURFACE 308 STALLS Srli)PS IJ i qOi'?Fi .AV l.l ` -y : ;_a _ GARAGE 9,288 STALLS 5,5t1"t 5 i i 3 t / .— • If TOTAL 9,691 STALLS V4 ' PL i r ti t. j 12; : , , • s,. l 1- - ;,1 ', 4A, '`, .I' — f t j e`'`1 '.' . ` 1 '' s r.9 -_ N STREET PARKI y I J' ( I`.•f i I 1 a f 1 ti;`h•.F.•' ; l J l,( I_ . ,'",'r .1 1 FAMpT J— ' t i -titi ' 1, 1 ' r s_ 1 .,,f: y PARK1 Nt + r'^ i I a. I `°,' ; I A j t _ ( ' r, ti I1 ,ti e....... BELON :, t'` I +, 4, 1 y c AEa i t Ji `,,y, 1I I I ' r.f ' t''` 1 , 1 I fl 1 1 , J 4 if f.r t i ' ti SENIOf2 F14U51N i 4.Y%11V U t `! .- 0 j r,, r •. 1 ` , , e1 f R'1'V9FA l 1 3C1 1(VITS 1 I U_ . . - 1 i — PU BLIG PLAZA ti' i j I aaa'PCa7o i . E . y r -. aoo s i '• l I d r I 11 4 i7F , `• '' tr, i ` . \ f, `2Q_. .w" v (2.../(:r _b - r ti. _``\'\'.,`` \,` f' r ' l t 4 r m -- — --= 1 - r_ i J n I1 '`,',S iORY OFFICE 10d,000 SF i.. 1. 1if , w j ti i _, ` , ..-- --= C)VER R[AiL SHOF'S 3,17 SF t3-A^1 ,, ._5 7 ip,srN..s . ,. . i r;,.; 1 '.- .I `` 5 I EX(STIN w? ,.3j sr+, -- f, ` SV' E LS :,, 'a i ,sr; ; I t 100 E; t 3, - .r , HOUSI(VG i ' r E _ _- _ _1 PRC}JECT 7 iF> f. I I cit.so- W I l- _ ' j r A53 r.-_' f i i F _. _,.I I i ul ( I i I I,!, i I a p Itioa,F ` :' ,. :L` _ f,•_ I y- _ ,. i , ; t C T. -- ,. i r U ut.r. = f -,_ t_1 z nr - r ' . , iE'EN 9PACE a. . 3_ r ; 'r Q ,TR/1SE I Rf c i1— i. :ca C - 3 i PY c aRIistacYT, rc'8,,oaq 1 ,, I Mr r lli"; `• OULi t tc c.) e t_a-- s ATMLETIG a,rvn zMO 'NG/R TA •r r j .t r _\ a ' '' I. ,(r ' • .. - %-••_y _— r _ , ( LUR ilV)lijv :• ' I r, j r/ a r ' "' ! ,` _' '. s=—_ i : •,,._._ r'J,( F REA J j r i n S I I f r' i S-: v r Ia ni - ; rz r. ' ! i Itb ! j I I`, z iL 3-ST RY QTEL 150 RO MS4; r lI F'., riOPS ' G it S i f ' I I I iu" ' I i,l'c'SF I ,1 5.7B2 S 5.si36 S` `. Nti Ei. 7` . L P u1i i ec3- c r Etv fy W 5' cA={-1 p+.7ti141 U1i,1" AaH tUt M Sf'ACE f '!s 'r(— 1=' 1 ' j_ OU T 70t7 I a 1Q3'X167' INIP G i T'Alt. r 20:<35d,)'_ RE AII. f kT/1if. r_,; ' L ' e PA i1Q 29,2i` :(',",,; FI JPS j SHc i S vH Y'S Q I- 1 .. A. r,. 9:i Q Ei,Oqd F S,f,Rt i Sr- 2 i=;:`.:.;. - 1 ! r i.. r- f' % I r LJ — I ++ u' FJ NEW G Wi1Y/ t'U LIC FLA 1 r.V.`Pl_U. Stl SF E s ra r 7- Y STEV NS GREEK BOUL 1/ARD Y -__ rv rr H `'! f c.. F ' [ f i 4E?9'!` ' 9 r 45, 7 " c-. i ? _l ` i r' '' !'i a, 'U{ Ek i , °'2s TU ui F', y y e i"` '1 q ^ 5' n j_"''=1 i t ° q; 1 c' yyY1"'y y' r} J S 1R'S' ,..N ,,,,'`"`N',:_- _ . A 'p , " T 4%A i!`` '` -n''1_:;''' I r a, '" q n d i,'= 9 tj<s l ija, J,p x' a.,,;;_ u;r a%.fi J u`t 1'S ai•i a,::a''dax d;9 a+,J b rc+'s DB.L.i3S t r ar oad, 2 r t;- k?:9 ct ; c'i 9 a.. h rr q'7 r i=ac , . 0?t i 1;° %' 'r '=J„.M ,r...++ ? i ; s j110 1 'q . ` C o 1 A' R Y O T ON #1 AD 60,811 SF OF RETASL DELETE 54 d'J RKtN STALLS r ' u i a f,,: r C.. xl .L. " a , y a .5 c! I e ',. i_ _ ti r Y - ti a_ y r.L,v rr Rr.vvn r MAJOR r; I 3EQO SF FUI.LY cMC:LCISE(] f PAD L JI QINCd AnF:—/ U.U00 5F M s 4 • r_ _ v'.,'_ r - M GAT UUTCOOR DINING I'AiI 45 9-aoo8 -d o, T t ao$-o,Ti2-g- og u aoc g-Q, P IOi #2 9 ADD 36 Q0 SF+OF RETAIL e;1;. a p_O9 A 962 P eR1 ING STALLS i EtEM_NT AM AiiCHl:TE lJI,AL EA7lJEt t L!! W F4- Z 4 H 8`i ii9l97 9!`Si.O i-5 9 ib2'9A'S 1 I Yr.•P s2 Oai7' 451+1. YVhisman Road, uite 200 i ' R,9?'3i /l;',. !' '..,.+.`3 l. 6. a' v°' . '%'. ?e i? , ,!w . r ' i i i i i KRPPRflJEC7 MO.22bS8 12.19.08 111 fi r s , i y=- d - 3, __ .. °. ` 1 L'I Y i RII473 7r N ' v Y t"-!Y % r 3 i I E x j H pS `' '=; •. n i v ..a c, 7 cl il l:.f'. a: "L' i.. iS tiNC CREEK ADD,OQ SF F E AIL SHOPS D LETE 43 PARKI G S'AI.LS 4. E-r 1i oao s 4SW'o —O o, TNl-o o$-ol, T!Z-8-D8 f C-aoaB-o T ogj''.—r+^.;'u'r-,q . ' . ... .,.. 6 L.LiJ.'::! o—pq I i I t 8''i'f l 1rt"i t i l t'i l, 'V 44!V. isr r E?oac, uit e 2 9; f r? s Fi:1: i<s';,*z' %:l1, ;r.,,,i, a . 6. (' c ' ... e Y;: .i`vl:`` 0.':-' :Iii:r j y i 1 rc pr o.r cr No.n.a 12.71.!?8 112 49'-0" 0'-0" PARKING GARAGE ELEVATION - LOOKING SOUTH 0' 10' 20' 40' 49'_0" 0'-0" PARKING GARAGE ELEVATION - LOOKING WEST o ,o 20 ao PARKING GARAGE ELEVATION - LOOKING NORTH 0' 10' 20' 40' KEYNOTES 1 PRECAST CONCRETE PANELS 3 ARTWORK 5 AUTO ENTRANCE/EXIT a PRECAST PANE SRETE OR ARCHITECTURAL METAL FINS OR GLASS WI DOW WALL MES MAI N STREET CU PERTI NO MASTER SITE PLAN SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA 49'-0" o_o„ A'•oZ d'C' O o Tly o 006 M l T/Z'o'100' "(7 8-01 Fs_. P,:r. ~>~.,'°-- '- 6 -'1ii:::+1i, : F, . .. . . o—vq PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION TOWER 9 METAL CANOPY METAL LATfICE/SCREEN WITH VINES 10 PEDESTRIAN ENTRANCE KENNETH RODR/GUES&PARTNERS, INC BUILDING 13 GARAGE ELEVATIONS 445 N. Whisman Road, Suite 200 Mountain View, CA 94043 Phone 650. 965. 0700 Fax 650. 960. 0707 0' 10' 20' 40' 60' I I I I I 8I KRP PROJECT NO. 22.559 09.05.08 11.05.08 113 f^-'S 7 r' s_22' OVERALL STEVENS CREE K BOULEVARD ELEVATION - LOOKING NORTH 0' 25' S0' 100' m m m p m p m i ullllll nllllltm.. T` er'.7. V r` r F f 5c r!1,11!ifI'!I'II 1''IIIII'll,l:'k1 li I'I 1f ll\ "' • i-'r',\ . r aJ', t' L; ° c:' III1011lli lll iiE' iii / ` P,63i y`j`FC '. R t t ia i:', t% ' t 1 j{j 1' 11 3I y w,. ..,, . - ,._ti a.:L_ .. r. .. ._ 1 • @. s,;e,_e,.""^'..._.:,:...,_ i W z 8 24 2 6 9 20 13 19 40 3D,.. 24'-0' 4` — 28'-0" 30'-0" t J/ u, Iy'! II' I r C ;. i:'f` 16' zl , r .••. , .•+ r-. •RESHV:ORLUFWUS-' BE 600KSftlEl N'h""", ! } 1+L•_ b . Ilctl tt\•vil(11, r__ i :i, '!:i G i =7.,f I. U Q I a-$Iq'p(.-M a00g-01'' 7 Q KEYNOTES 1 1D SLATE TILE ROOF i'Q:tHlIEb'' 2 CLAY TILE ROOF t y ' O O Q 3 STANDWG SEAM METAL ROOF R°t l.,.: N 4 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF a t, EXPOSED TIMBER,STAINED r.: N s MAI N TREET PERTI NU p 1,! a,, K 11r..i..n..iniri rira'g r-••• ry aaer rnnn r;vi i. ii ii / / o.r /i/ i iii. 1-`11T' R'Ir M'II\I t1\i.111Mi11 M1 1 D'f s lt'i' /Unii.c:i/iiiiii.s i.ii iiiiiir.rn4x::U iii -° - S ifa i 3': ' a: b4' y'X81:SBi 4td C tG+3 i RT 1 i i =p ii..... : . iivnrii i. %r I :,+. e ay..kS v Iiii r i l c r j f` z t._ 4-L-. t 1 r a: n - - a iia 1r r1 i. 22•i S„i. ..A S' :f: l. L.f'.;'J'. t Sfi l PARTIAL STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD ELEVATION - LOOKING NORTH 0' 10' 20' 40' 6 CLEAR GLAZING IN METAL/WOOD STOREFRONT SYSTEM 11 PR FABRICATED TRIM 16 GLOBE LIGHTS 21 WOOD AWNING,PAINTED 7 TINTED GLAZING IN METAUWOOD FRAME 12 PREFABRICATED CORNICE 17 METAL CANOPY 22 CANVAS AWNING 8 CLERESTORY WINDOW 13 WOOD BOARD AND BATTEN,PAINTED 18 METAL AND GLASS CANOPY 23 GLASS BLOCK 9 EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM,PAINTED 14 WOOD SHINGLES,PAINTED 19 WOOD TRELLIS,STAINED 24 ACCENT TILE 10 STONE VENEER FIN15H 15 WOOD SIDING,PAINTED 20 WOOD FASCIA,PAINTED 25 LOW STUCCO WALL MASTER SITE PLAN SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA ITI „ I` n-- ., ll u' ~ - t L , ,,_ .'. ' J"` ii'i 1'' i iM,i 1 - KENNETH RODRIGUES &PARTNERS, INC 445 N. Whisman Road, Suite 200 Mountain View, CA 94043 Phone 650. 965. 0700 Fax 650. 960. 0707 wl zIx U 25 I 16 l`>. I u 24'-0 y r'1 '` KRP PROJECT NO. 22.559 09.05.08 11.05.08 114 i OVERALL FINCH AVENUE ELEVATION - LOOKING WEST 0' 25' 50' 100' PARTIAL FINCH AVENUE ELEVATION - LOOKING WEST 0' 10' 20' 40' a PARTIAL FINCH AVENUE ELEVATION - LOOKING WEST 0' 10' 20' 40' r- r-- KEYNOTES SLATE TILE ROOF 2D CLAY TILE ROOF 3 STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF 4 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF 5 EXPOSED TIMBER,STAINED 6 CLEAR GLAZING IN METAUWOOD STOREFRONT SYSTEM 7 TINTED GLAZING IN METAUWOOD FRAME 8 CLERESTORY WINDOW 9 EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM,PAINTED 10 STONE VENEER FINISH MAI N STREE PERTI NT 4U M f'i J 1 C R S I E SAND HILL PROPE CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA ii RTY C MPANY 11 PREFABRICATED TRIM 12 PREFABRICATED CORNICE 13 WOOD BOARD AND BATTEN,PAINTED 14 WOOD SHINGLES,PAINTED 15 WOOD SIDING,PAINTED 16 GLOBE LIGHTS 17 METAL CANOPY 18 METAL AND GLASS CANOPY 19 WOOD TRELLIS,STAINED 20 WOOD FASCIA,PAINTED 1 xlU 2 I 9-o?ot-D, '77 1 D bB-O f, 7 ooB` i t;`.,. GC aon g-o l F r RAN%pj s Alt 4°1:;:; ` `Cj a'-'a- _ °`D O g 1; i bx t c:b:asaa,z — - . 21 WOOD AWNING,PAINTED 22 CANVAS AWNING 23 GLASS BLOCK 24 ACCENT TILE 25 LOW STUCCO WALL KENNETH RODRIGUES &PARTNERS, INC 445 N. Whisman Road, Suite 200 Mountain View, CA 94043 Phone 650. 965. 0700 Fax 650. 960. 0707 KRP PROJECT NO. 22.559 09.05.08 11.05.08 115 i OVERALL FINCH AVENUE ELEVATION - LOOKfNG EAST 0' 25' 50' 100' r-- PARTIAL FINCH AVENUE ELEVATION - LOOKING EAST 0' 10' 20' 40' wl Z PARTIAL FINCH AVENU L VA I IUN - LUUKIN( A5 ! 0' 10' 20' 40' KEYNOTES 1 SLATE TILE ROOF 2 CLAY TILE ROOF 3 STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF 4 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF 5D EXPOSED TIMBER,STAINED MAI N TRE ET P E RT I NU 6 CLEAR GLAZING IN METAUWOOD STOREFRONT SYSTEM 7 TINTED GLAZING IN METAUWOOD FRAME 8 CLERESTORY WINDOW 9 EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM,PAINTED 10 STONE VENEER FINISH MASTER SITE PLAN SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA 11 PREFABRICATED TRIM 12 PREFABRICATEQ CORNICE 13 WOOD BOARD AND BATTEN,PAINTED 14 WOOD SHINGLES,PAINTED 15 WOOD SIDING,PAINTED n\"" yi\ 16 GLOBE LIGHTS 17 METAL CANOPY 18 METAL AND GLASS CANOPY 19 WOOD TRELLIS,STAINED 20 WOOD FASCIA,PAINTED 1 A Sr9-aoo8 06 7 i'a 3'8 7?aa'8-l j,:. Ll ODB-D I 4 A u PJaaai tr'::rrat s p "'g c h _ p _. Aag+-' I o 0 -/ i6',i+iii .__. i. e_. a..-,-y._..... _...- 21 WOOD AWNING,PAINTED 22 CANVAS AWNING 23 GLASS BLOCK 24 ACCENT TILE 25 LOW STUCCO WALL KENNETH RODRIGUES&PARTNERS, INC 445 N. Whisman Road, Suite 200 Mountain View, CA 94043 Phone 650. 965. 0700 Fax 650. 960. 0707 I<RP PROJECT NO. 22,559 09.05.08 11.05.08 116 10 8 1 5 9 b G. s; t1v.aKe: c c. S CN£r_,Ct) Nf_R.R a--rT-r I: i i.,.i t tr 7r fs r . Ia1ri . {Yij1l ( IYFf l ;, ,. :t j ' lt 3,+;- y<t_ iirj L1'`y+ _ " 2-- 1 1;t:i%ka OVERALL MAIN STREET ELEVATI4N - LOOKING NORTH 0' 25' 50' 100' Q Q 0 Iii.7! r+'w rw rw+' g ii` `ti A9"° F .7 w . i/l y/ Jj 1y(!F r qe E' MlT SPY: IY4fiF'•IG'4M`'I II f ' M iF n r ,. ' j v'i ': . t '1 i i uu.....u KE1(NOTES SLATE TILE ROOF 2 CLAY TILE ROOF 3 STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF 4 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF 5 EXPOSED TIMBER,STAINED If" MAI N STREET PERTI NU 7 i m t P't 1 i ii) x!V hi Wirir1 /. Y1!('{{ y .._X c ,r, i ///j'(> i' r. "{{ /j '`i, S l j;.':. il IFfl,; } ..c,r='c.'' rntJf C r Y' T R'7 M f 1-T-NOk G O E:A :,. --- .`' . rC.. t'- Intern_iCofe . d" i - 'i . y=:f -.; x:°A ,t5-I Y r.. iS, r a..r' i. t}. k iril• ir'>J e i t iti t;.i hI ,J i2 i h rircr i1' 1. j Y' f l -!!"' F• w l... MAIN STREET ELEVATION - LOOKING NORTH 0' 10' 20' 40' 6 CLEAR GLAZING IN METAL/WOOD STOREFRONT SYSTEM 7 TINTED GLAZING IN METAUWOOD FRAME 8 CLERESTORY WINDOW 9 EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM,PAINTEQ 10 STONE VENEER FINISH MA iER SIiE PLAN SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA x• i ar''ll ld; nx• 60'-0" II l r; 91 %/ r}.Ij' /. t 4 i3,/l j _ c r t f C r{ . ' . i tf . . fi Y• f ( rc' -i,s--i i.j. i IY nd it- i i l`i SuIFT' _R r'it _ r t.. 7---t,r i SG'- ix 1c,: a f-' i j6J.j':: 3 l 0o8 o C, 7?a og-o, 772 aoo 08 i,:'e'n o1O 8—D/ Plowr,Jn's s r.fs.; l—'i-9 i pl7y. Z.0 ` ' q Y__ 7., 11 PREFABRICATED TRIM 16 GLOBE LIGHTS 21 WOOD AWNING,PAINTED i/J rr/ 12 PREFABRICATED CORNICE 17 METAL CANOPY 22 CANVAS AWNING i' 13 WOOD BOARD AND BATfEN,PAINTED 18 METAL AND GLASS CANOPY 23 GLASS BLOCK r -,1+ce.+S i I t. 14 WOOD SHINGLES,PAINTED 19 WOOD TRELLIS,STAINED 24 ACCENT TILE 15 WOOD SIDING,PAINTED 20 WOOD FASCIA,PAINTED 25 LOW STUCCO WALL LJ I KENNETH RODRIGUES&PARTNERS, INC 445 N. Whisman Road, Suite 200 Mountain View, CA 94043 Phone 650. 965. 0700 Fax 650. 960. 0707 KRP PROJECT NO. 22.559 09.05.08 11.05.08 117 i w I OVERALL MAIN STREET ELEVATION - LOOKfNG SOUTH 0' 25' 50' 100' Z I J I2 U I lAl ZIJ UI6 I 1 24-0 J _ I PARTIAL IVIAIN STREET ELEVATIOIV - LOOKING SOUTH 0' 10' 20' 40' J :i b LU L L4 y o iv i a 36'-0° r 35., P o y a , ti S o o a o 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 v._ I {I1.\- nrrrt u ti-r6ar f fi .-. .- H 1HIi,1A TU e a. I(L i! ' , 3 ., ( I — u _ t .,kf,+ I11 iIr- r i, cr T ).-_ ((1,'-f i f Yy-i i : ' r r i:i - '-1=f i! i 1 1!_v<' 5_t. '—v _5 l'Q`! .---r. -.-_- - n, S =1-_ PARTIAL MAIN STREET ELEVATION - LOOKING SOUTH 0' 10' 20' 40' KEYNOTES 1 SLATE TILE ROOF 2 CLAY TILE ROOF 3 STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF 4 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF 5 EXPOSED TIMBER,STAINED 6 CLEAR GLAZING IN METAUWOOD STOREFRONT SYSTEM 7 TINTED GLAZING IN METAI.JWOOD FRAME 8 CLERESTORY WINDOW 9 EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM,PAINTED 10 STONE VENEER FINISH 11 PREFABRICATED TRIM 12 PREFABRICATED CORNICE 13 WOOD BOARD AND BATTEN,PAINTED 14 WOOD SHINGLES,PAINTED 15 WOOD SIDING,PAINTED 1'-ap(-p j*17'i o 00--01 %Z--o DoB"S c'"aooC'-i l Y, 0 9a#iii oa`/a°is' e.t:.` iilAlJ, _ ~.-!.,_,_ p ti`i' 20'-0" r`•' r k-''. t ,,'v,,' __--. --_-___. 5.,-.. , ,.. ' 16 GLOBE LIGHTS 21 WOOD AWNING,PAINTED 17 METAL CANOPY 22 CANVAS AWNING 18 METAL AND GLASS CANOPY 23 GLASS BLOCK 19 WOOD TRELLIS,STAINED 24 ACCENT TILE 20 WOOD FASCIA,PAINTED 25 LOW STUCCO WALL w I N T 1'', i_!'1 '1 i y i L L,. " '•• - -, r r m... KENNETH RODRIGUES&PARTNERS, INC 445 N, Whisman Road, Suite 200 Mountain View, CA 94043 Phone 650. 965. 0700 Fax 650. 960. 0707 KRP PROJECT NO. 22.559 09.05.08 11.05.08 118 49'-0" t; f e.: :,,(" r.t---° j f f zJ tij' ` , .G z, z J t{ ' I-.,u r'"r.°_" 1 r1. -. i'l.I I:l`;! G: ri4 PARKING GARAGE ELEVATION - LOOKING SOUTH 0' 10' 20' 40' r-- 43'-6a. 49'-0° r , 3llllL. i r c:s lt rk,af ; x {[ i.', ' j- s r }, . .:-„ r ,':; ,,, i .<n'*vkj`';.. ih_,,.J, ; 4L 1 k-5:; \'.`_' .'=„" -.. i i' ,;`^ { ji %.,t' 1 „ `.'_.' L_`' t ;`t , _f 1[' ' f 4 . ';I.f' .`: F j -" i - tt s-°= i 4 s `r j I ; 1 T t---- z l-:. :3{ p; _ , 0'-0"fll ; Y ( 'I :; .. '+2 '` _ x,L ` , f PARKI lG GARAGE ELEVATIO[ - LOOKING WEST 0' 10' 20' 40' r- PARKING GARAGE ELEVATION - LOOKING NORTH 0' 10' 20' 40' 49'-0" 0'-0" x-_ .- __-.. _ S19 oo$-t,t aob-o,.?7?aao s:: u a«s -o s , . , <<.:,, . 3 v/,.+1e?CIIJ.t:j";aA"Fd.._.'.3„.. r.!!._zd cs.co a,:.._ _ !"a .o.t_ 63,;a 3 PI n 1 s, ,. KEYNOTES 1 PRECAST CONCRETE PANELS 3 ARTWORK 5 AUTO ENTRANCE/EXIT 7 PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION TOWER 9 METAL CANOPY PRECAST PANOE SRETE OR 4 ARCHITECTURAL METAL FINS OR GHLASS WI DOW WALL MES METAL LATTICE/SCREEN WITH VINES 1Q PEDESTRIAN ENTRANCE KENNETH RODR/GUES&PARTIVERS, !NC M A I N T R 445 N. Whisman Road, Suite 200EETUPERTINBUILDING13GARAGEELEVATIONS MASTER SITE PLA 1 SAND HILL PROPERTY ONIPANY CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA Mountam View, CA 94043 Phone 650. 965. 0700 Fax 650. 960. 0707 0' 10' 20' 40' 60'80' 3-68 I i KRP PROJECT NO. 22.559 09.05.08 11.05.08 119 w ri: EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM COLOR:BRILLIANT WHITE BENJAMIN MOORE WOOD WINDOW FRAME WOOD SIDING 2 COLOR:TUSCAN GOLD JH80-20 GLASS WITH BRONZE TINT MAI N TRE ET UPERTIN MA TER SITE PLAN SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA BARREL MISSION CLAY ROOF TILE 3 COLOR:OLD SANTA BARBARA BLEND CANVAS AWNING 9 COLOR:FOREST GREEN SUNBRELLA PRECAST CORNICE 4 NATURAL THINSTONE VENEER O COLOR:TUMBLED BAY DE NOC WEBWALL r cl A-a,....-". y.>s awe da^-...,di 3: i F F GLASS BLOCK 5 k PAINTED METAL GUTTER 11 OFFICE UILDIiVG MATERIALS & COLORS Cj,---,4fi`J o - o o ::. ::....::: .: Q pa:: o RECLAIMED TIMBER CLEAR GLASS IN Z ALUMINUM FRAME o.x...__._ -•-...s..-.-_...e..,._ 1{ U?1 o ey 0g i 3 R i jt ol t: a o oy d gp E,.__ - -_.:_ . x -..,...,.-_i KENNETH RODRlGUES&PARTNERS, INC 445 N. Whisman Road, Suite 200 Mountain View, CA 94043 Phone 650. 965. 0700 Fax 650. 960. 0707 0' S' 10'20'30' 40' I I I I I KRP PROJECT NO. 22.559 09.05.08 11.05.08 120 EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM COLOR:SHADY DUNNEDWARDS DEC774 GLASS WITH BRONZE TINT 8 WOOD SIDING 2 COLOR:TUSCAN GOLD J H80-20 RECLAIMED TIMBER 9 MAIN STRE ET UPERTIN MASTER SITE PLAfV SLATE TILE ROOF 3 COLOR:CHINA SEA GREEN EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM 4 COLOR:FINE SAND DUNN EDWARDS DE5324 ti PRECAST CORNICE 5 NATURAL THINSTONE VENEER 6 COLOR:TUMBLED BAY DE NOC WEBWALL STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEN1 CLEAR GLASS IN EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM O COLOR:LEAD COTE 11 COLOR:GOLDEN CHALICE 12 ALUMINUM FRAME 13 COLOR:LIGHT TOPAZ ICI,#641 ICI,#482 SAN D H I L L P RO P E RTY CO I//I PANYI CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA SEN14R HOUSING & RETAIL BUILDI GS MATERIALS & COLORS a, a g a 1; u a.or KE pCJ 44 I 1 u- "°"°! . Pr Fc o .. ..... 4 c ca o 4 T -... f'a, c, i. i7.`" u: K,C.: PAINTED METAL GUTTER 7 GLOBE LIGHTS 14 NNETH RODRIGUES &PARTNERS, INC i N. Whisman Road, Suite 200 untain View, CA 94043 ne 650. 965. 0700 650. 960. 0707 0' S' 10'20'30'40' I I I I 1 I KRP PROJECT NO. 22.559 09.05.08 11.05.08 121 r l:y7 iIt '. tit f` 2 1.:ai 3 3+! a .. BARREL MISSION CLAY ROOF TILE WOOD WINDOW FRAME I COLOR:OLD SANTA BARBARA 2 BLEND EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM 7 COLOR:KRAFT PAPER DUNN EDWARDS DE6109 PRECAST CORNICE MAIN TRE T PERTIN OU MASTER SITE PLAN SA 1D HILL PRaPERTY COMPANY CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA RECLAIMED TIMBER 3 WOOD AWNING 9 EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM 4 COLOR:FARMERS ALMANAC ICI,#555 EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM O COLOR:BRILLIANT WHITE BENJAMIN MOORE CLEAR GLASS IN 5 ALUMINUM FRAME ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF 11 COLOR:CHELSEA GREEN RETAIL BUILDINGS iVIATERIALS & COLORS r "' 1„ 1 _ M i, . J.s,m..r,_.._... .---.---.,._-_..___._.._ i a z w Q '' C r, ' y : Q 5 y a to" e i a. NATURAL THINSTONE VENEER ; S ° O COLOR:TUMBLED BAY DE NOC ; p ; O s WEBWALL S 4 ( W s.S 's g a o t_ r,s._ _.r a EXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM 2 COLOR:EMBERGLO ICI,#268 KENNETH RODRIGUES&PARTNERS, lNC 445 N. Whisman Road, Suite 200 Mountain View, CA 94043 Phone 650. 965. 0700 Fax 650. 960. 0707 0' S' 10' 20'30'40' f I I I I I KRP PROJECT NO. 22.559 09.05.08 11.05.08 122 WOOD SIDING I COLOR:TUSCAN GOLD J H 80-20 CLEAR GLASS IN 5 ALUMINUM FRAME MAi N TRE ET C PER IUTN O MASTER SITE SAND HILL PR PE CUPERTfNO , CALIFORNIA PLAN WOOD SIDING 2 COLOR:AUTUMN TAN JH2O-20 STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF 6 COLOR:COPPER COTE DEXTERIOR PLASTER SYSTEM 3 COLOR:ASH GREY DUNN EDWARDS DEC751 GLASS W TH BRONZE TINT 7 HOTEL MATERIALS & COLORS J O o :: ::....::: :: Q f a a:: o PRECAST CORNICE WOOD AWNING 8 h-. 1 i'o 00 Q v, '0 0'O1, "P-?0-' a r.j 1i I i;+ vV O V ro! 3 Plaifnit,,'i r:r a. 1—!o D q a-09Cij'r yL' -- _.__ k i r. t d i)i `' _ io; _ KENNETH RODRIGUES&PARTNERS, !NC 445 N. Whisman Road, Suite 200 Mountain View, CA 94043 Phone 650. 965. 0700 Fax 650. 960. 0707 0' S' 10'20' 30' 40' i I I I KRP PROJECT NO. 22.559 09.05.08 11.05.08 123 s: ,. ,' ..`2 3 4 5 V._... x jht.;:< < ';.. .-.r.n.':.' . .. . J..a ._. r. .i"., .: -.•w • i' ."f..... .... .^ .,.. . ._•.. .'. .t,r ia s • i .fs t , p! r. ... 4.....1 ... -. . ... . . t. Si." i..... ..v. t. i... .- ..::. .. . -. a ... s . ' .1 , ..... ." ..... f' r ' ... .. .V .. *r. y`i t e........ f• tF_ -.... .... K. t .., _. , : . i e-- A ...."i.,,.w«`..... . -- li1.,_..1. , . . , r ._. j. r _j." ,.. 4, i a::x T"R?"': r,.f . ,. .._. _ .. ,, . , .,.....,, .. . c, 7 a^.. M C. . ... f,2iv'. . i tiE_t ...:i t' . 4 ' . .r-..+.....e..Y.- +. t, r... .t'' ._..: . . .:... . : ... / ''7°_ C..t. ; s, r. , , -, t i _ Z , n-. A a._:__ - ...-..., . - I ..f , ., . . -,.:a, r .. .i ,.... . . ... . .. . . I. i T. i r r .L. ,.: .U. :: o- .... ... ..- . ;, ,..,l.,.. .x. j E Sf,-A . F , . , ... .. .:,. ..,. ."t...:.T"" ;t . S _ ... .. _::, ..._«. tt- r... , ..,. ... . .t. .. ..:.sr. t. J t .. . .;,, , . . .. ,z . ..t . . .... i. ..e r . .,.. „:, i \. ., % , ...,_.,3ro. c4 '. ............. , ., :. ::. _.. t, It ,. .. . ., :. i. .: r .. , i. ...... , .:t ,- . :.,.. ,. ....... 1. t:.s.. , . s ',i € , J .., i.fi .. ._ I . r-T y . , , . a . ,.: . ., r. . 1 ...i- ... r ., __ . k... f. .1:.^x;rv s. v. 11 t.. _ . .. . ., s x.. .. .,t.. ._. L. ._:_.,_....,..3.. L. n •.i. : G :.: .. .. i.'.- :x . . ,t:.- ., . t. .R.. ..., ,'[:. . - Pt , 3 _ . 'c. s . r _ , r-.;F p e i. x i,f.j'.2 ,. .- f.-..... . ..r.. ..:. -cr1. i iia. s..,_ .,.- a, .,I' .n, k1, r ,. : , . .. .?,.. '. : .t , r r . . r ;: -P. ,_j> x . s r.I T` _. ._ . 4. .tA. r,-fF t9 . .. ...! s . . i i a. )i. v i. , :51 . ,ti, ., a # . . a xr,, .,. _,..,i. s r ,f. 1- n . .. F" ., 4 ,,. „ .. , .. . . .. .., . F :. .- .. ..! , . S..t. .,.,..- . .:. :..3 i ,a,_ ..... . :_ S ra3-:C ,; s- , <,.. , . . L.s. w l.. .. i: _ fn ._ u{ w . rf, i.1-:.r 1, I- r .... :. ... t ',ft i t'' i.. `I.i . , b. f . ,_i..- .._ v .,, .., .. ., ... j,tF. r. .. c .ft. , 4. , .. ,.. t%,e .. .. . . . .., t- -c-. i ..,. f ..C ( e t s J i , t 7 ,1.. .. . ;. y!t ., r: ..,_.. ir. ., . ,.' t ., .Yt ... ,. . . i. . i. .§ . ... ...a....",., ,_ .. t ..s. _: f..E r..i a i .• . .__._. a, _ ._. .r:,, , e:, .t..... ... ac.,;. e..13 _. _ E F tr`. 1 ., . ... ...i, t. <. l t r: f ft .. . .. . . . .. .. .. . . .,..::, li, k_.... ..n. ....., .._ -- 1.....a.:.- . ,..........._:'.t,- a:d=.-- .:s.:'__l, i.. .,._ . ,. s d 'f.. .. f k.. ..S"'.fi. , . ._.:._ ..:. ...... ..._.. . `t..-.r. r+M- :'_'.... Sa' rir. 1. : .. F. .. .,:. .. , .,. . t. .,.,....-..... ,....:-..-.A_:. o I.-. t.i. . ., 7..,.Y.r ...l ... .,._. . .. .. ur. .. .. . . ., i'... .... .. ..:.. i.... .,, .: ._., ... '. -'. Il J r . } .,... .,.. . . ._ _. r ., . .--, i .. .. .. t . . .. .9 . . ... .. a . .. v. o ,. r.._ e o ... k Kr.... v . ,, r lt1- ..., r. t. . i i.., .,- . ..S"... Y , ... _ :.. . .. p o ,il ._.. . ,, . .+.. . '.. . ,i .. .... .. ..:.. ... w. .. '..,. t . .... «. , ... i. .. .„ ... Yao . .:. .. > _,. .. . .....V. . .. f l Y4.,..e< . .. . . 1.Y . . t.t..., . t d 'i"—'—'_r.(l l .. _...i.. '.+ ! . ... .t..,. :._...,..ra r .. , I E. . r-... .vt 7 i f.a .. > i.. ........ ., r . i_''.. .'_":'_;_.. rE'.'I. ... .... .s ,._,_.... . ,._ --; ... ai, -_ , _ .. t . t _ ._ F:i.°> V, 1.a.a 4=-e:`.._ 4 r........ .:. :....,:.., a. C _ ,--.; FtN._ w . ...... ...-.. .__...:_. w__..... ...__._.r.t ,. _.. tr ,, k..y x ; iC.. ..r i- a r J y,;~ „tiF . t. ..... . .,:... .::..:, .-.- t :.., . ...,. . ._ _.. ..t;, . 1: .. ; :i.., :;, i :.t Ir,r _ . ,:. , L. I ::; w ::t_. . ..:.; : .: . y; a r ..,..-: .,, :,..,,:..i i _:. .:,_. 1.. ..:. . . n .... . ' .. .;_.w. T'- 1 fi,f.., , ., . ___ J4 lh , ,.,....,. ,__ . . t . s_.., .F ... . ,. _ __. r r,, _ 7 .: s= 3 1 i ... ,..+., .,s`. YI:-•-. ... ,.. .. . i.. ....1 ....:.:.. .1 . il , i-..: t,...__, . _ ..... i a .,.:.'. .: e y-. Ux..`.,.°>.• . . :l : l 'r t r Y , iI , . -:,,.. i, F i. h ..;:._ .l. _ .... ... ,._. i.:.- . .. -. . _ .,. i. s ti ... . t... .i-. ... :,. ..: .. . , .c :: Y _...^ F-.k ... . . . . :....,:,r.._.., ..t. ...,., ..? . :. .,1 ., t .F-t I:. ..e,. C. 1 r,.. . .. . r.. .. Ei. . i.S: i_......,... c. i ..,,r}!Y i..:.y tE, ..,. , . .t a t4i: . ..1cr . i ,. t r t k t } ... Y3., .r . , : 1 F_ • e 4..... i . :r I. { r. , ...,.., i-zr,- . ..,. ',. .k-_-...... .. ,. . <.- a. r. af , :a... ,. .:. ;. S , ,. , .?',... i -., C,4_ +.y; a r: i; METAL CANOPY 1 MAIN TR EET U PERTI N NlASTER SITE PLAN CLEAR GLASS IN 2 ALUMINUM FRAME SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA METAL LOUVERS OR 3 CONCRETE PANELS METAL FINS 4 PARKING STRUCTURE MATERIALS & COLORS GREEN SCREEN METAL LATTICE 5 FOR VINES 14S 1-aob8-G o, -r'1-008-0, '-otoo8 8 ddo8-ol Plannin'-9a-'-' 1-'v--a9 i l,asiPe ve j•.., a.- .n " O- " _.... s I 9 i Sl i UiC ,.._ _. _ _—. wtt;'t Iw ia; E. KENNETH RODRIGUES&PARTNERS, INC 445 N. Whisman Road, Suite 200 Mountain View, CA 94043 Phone 650. 965. 0700 Fax 650. 960. 0707 0' 10' 20' 40' 60' 80' I I I KRP PROJECT — NO. 22.559 09.05.08 11.05.08 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 Attacf :.nt 7 - Comments from Lisa Warren MAIN STREET SUMMARY OF SUGGESTED CHANGES Based on ASA plan set submitted January 8, 2014 (no Shops 2, Lofts, Future, or Park) With a sneak peak at Shops 2 progress as of ineeting date 1/28/14 1. Pad 1/2/3 a. Overall - Ok - Pad 3 is good. 2. Shops 2 (Lazy Do) a. Overall- Good b. Suggest some of the other buildings may introduce similar richer/warmer color tones/palette (more exciting) akin to this building 3. Sho s 3 &4—Comments meant for both South and North elevations a. Vary the architectural treatment between 3 &4 but still be complementary to the clock tower—similar to original'Boomhaus' section of May 15, 2012 plan set South elevation b. Consider more earth tone colors on portions to bring back the more vibrant look c. The color variation/palette may also help add interest and modulation to the otherwise linear building frontage d. Introduce back similar wood siding/dormer treatment (doesn't have to be exact) from the May 15, 2012 plan set ('Boomhaus') e. Board and Batten good—don't lose that 4. Shops 5 Overall - Good 5. Shops 6 a. Consider a more distinct top roof trim/banding for a more refined/finished look. b. Does not need to match Shops 1 c. Ipe treatment good d. Add a slightly taller projecting tower feature (doesn't have to be pitched roof however, best if something other than flat can work to soften the modern/sharp look) at the north/east corner of the building (akin to Lazy Dog) facing the town square. This will help add more vertical interest and help articulate the otherwise boxy building. e. Introduce a third material and/or color on the tower feature so not entirely Ipe and plaster. 6. Shops 7 & 8 136 January 28, 2014 Page 2 a. Add richer/warmer color elements/accents as referred to in Shops 2 comment. b. Consider adding slopes to some roofs to soften the square appearance of these two structures and the mimicking of the neighboring Metropolitan roof tops. 7. Flex 1 &2 a. Farmer's Market facade shouldn't have to mimic the harsh garage look with the vertical colurruls being showcased b. Soften the farmer's market building facade by introducing Ipe and/or similar architectural embellishments from the rest of the project to soften the feel of the building c. Re introduce arched doorways to soften Farmers Market d. Accentuate modulation between tenant spaces through the introduction of warmer colors e. Break up the long building expanse i. Consider more projections/cantilevered/awning elements ii. Consider a cap/trim on majority or all of the square building roofs to break up the otherwise very square assemblage of roof shapes. f. Concerned with color/illumination of tower element i. Need glass description/sample before can comment fully. ii. Do not want to glow like the hotel tower element iii. Concerned with view from Stevens Creek and outdoor dining areas g. Concerned with hotel view of the rear of the farmer's market building. while true, this comment be removed 8. Office 1 & 2 Overall - Good 9. Lofts Note: Viewed one side of this Laft elevation for 30 seconds or less a. Concerned with color palate—warmer colors desired U. Would need to have copy of this ASA, and time to look at it to make further observations. 10. Parking Gara e Overall - NO comment 11. Sha s 1 Overall—NO comment 12. Major Retail 137 January 28, 2014 Page 3 Have seen no images a. Use varied pitched roof lines b. Create both vertical horizontal interest with stepping in and out, up and down. 138 Due to the large volume of this attachment, please use  the link below to view the plan sets:    https://dl‐ web.dropbox.com/get/Public/Council%20Packets/Attach ment%20G%20‐ %20Plan%20Set.pdf?_subject_uid=23136642&w=AADXV J2gIdRT7wkoxI2GcEGME1NtPrlzdMuEjSLZsEFFwg       Or access them via the City Council Packets folder in  Dropbox  139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO,CA 950143255 C U P E RT 1 N O 408)777-3308 • FAX(408)777-3333 • planningQcupertino.org DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. Agenda Date: February 6,2014 Application: ASA-2012-15 Applicant:Kevin Dare (500 Forbes,LLC) Project Location: Main Street Cupertino North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard on both sides of Finch Avenue,west of N. Tantau Avenue and south of Vallco Parkway APN 316-20-085, 316-20-078 and 316-20-079) APPLICATION SUMMARY Architectural and Site approval for final refinements to the previously approved Shops 1, 3-8, Pads 1-3, Town Square, Flex 1 & 2, Office 1 & 2, Parking Garage, and associated landscaping and street system design of the Main Street Cupertino Project. RECCOMENDATION Staff recommends that the Design Review Conunittee: Approve the Architectural and Site Approval Application(ASA-2012-15) per the draft resolution. BACKGROUND Existing Conditions and Surroundings The project site consists of three(3)vacant parcels on the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard on both sides of Finch Avenue, west of N. Tantau Avenue and south of Vallco Parkway. The site is surrounded by the existing Metropolitan and fizture Rosebowl mixed use developments to the west, light industrial office buildings occupied by Apple to the north,and an office complex occupied by Apple to the east across N.Tantau Avenue. Approval History At its January 20, 2009 meeting, the Cupertino City Council approved a Master Use Permit (U-2008-01), Architectural and Site Approval (ASA-2008-06) and associated permits to allow the construction of an interchangeable mixed-use development consisting of senior housing, a hotel, retail shops, an athletic club, a five level parking garage, and four(4) acres of public open space. On May 15,2012,the City Council approved a modification to the original application to allow for changes to the land use options and associated site design. At the request of the applicant, on September 4, 2012 the Council approved the current development plan allowing market rate residential apartrnents and modified the retail building footprints to reflect development options and site/architectural changes that are more in line with the marketing demand. The Council also provided the following directions for the design of the town square, office, hotel, retail buildings, parking/site plan,loft apartment,and flex retail components: 147 ASA-2012-15 vlain Street Architectural and Site Approva. February 6,2014 Shops 1,3-8,Pads 1-3,Town Square,Flex 1-2,Office 1-2,Parking Garage, &Site Design Page 2 Revise Town Square to be a"fle cible"public space Incorporate enhanced architectural features into the Office building Revise the design of the Pad 1 and Pad 2 builclings from an agrarian look to a park pavilion/kiosk style architecture,and other enhancements to promote active storefront entries and walkway treatments Enhance the parking garage architecture and site circulation design Make architectural enhancements to the Live/Work Loft Housing component Refined architectural plans for the project shall return to DRC for final approval with the exception of the Hotel and Park which shall retum to the City Council. Deferred Approvals The applicant requires additional time to work with the prospective tenants to finalize the architectural plans for the Major Retail building, Shops 2 building, the Loft Apartment, and Shop 9 buildings (shown below). A deferred review and approval for these buildings is expected in Summer 2014. i y 1% L 4 y.1 Y O. i` . p-,t.-R' tit, r , 1`"*- k'r c. j V h iLL.r. i. r. c t--.__.._._ t; O a: W_ _ ., w . r '! ! ' , S i ,`;i Y dp• . TJ\ .'/`, IIi ,..._.,...__I ._. d c. t.t ety r . R pt I ' •- ,i•'b r.+r.t` r s• 4 C.' ... 1 rfx.. t' r ... a._.. r ta r Q 4"` . ry, l,/ t. /!K. . " . SwOr n.^ ..' r. n n..e :• YAL1C0 fMKWAY r:..- a !. , w:wr a t u l r r.°,. IT. f.., i• . K[KJ J i 4 i i. ' I`^!!" {. a . N M..,»w...r+t1w.. n s G GE ti'{.1 ti i sr i' P a r Q S a J sN°":.. o+vH I " ';! t- L P ! J KiICE i t 1 _, p 11.i• . . r r J F':. NE'AU.7 i.. t i6I . . /'l C (. . • " `. 7`M .-1'..'_ -...t_ '•'..,..JfFKi 7 E , ` ' , , r M 7 t? y +!At:l i ' r f r_ - A 6.4 4 '"% (,''.- J , r a j 1 ft.. 1. + L; T i I s.,.r, r r.,:. ,`-,y 9 3 i:i p.`« ._.w . ".. T n r r 4 tt ti.r S,., r1.:r;. a . ,L _ 't v..° . . '{ ... V' r. z.,T'.•-,i."'°' , t J ,i SHOr Sr0 i t d......w,.. YJ_..._ r,i I q ; _ r .. .-r ... f I Y`1_ t r 1 i',r`',7;Y`µlr 1 aC — in+w•_-.y ""'Y 5w _.+.7'"—..' W_ ...__ _. — .i f r_..: .__ . - . y . ..; T----_' STEYChKCAEEKBp(iLEYARD u.. ,... _....._._._......,._n r.... ._._.... DISCUSSION Since the last City Council meeting, the applicant has worked with staff to revise the development plans to address directions provided by the City Council and the City's Architectural Advisor. The project also consists of enhancements to the site/landscape features, building design details/materials, and the overall identity of the buildings to reflect the current market demands and the preferences of the prospective tenants. 148 ASA-2012-15 Main Street Architectural and Site Approva February 6,2014 Shops 1,3-8,Pads 1-3,Town Square,Flex 1-2,Office 1-2,Parking Garage, &Site Design Page 3 Generally the project attempts to keep the original architectural theme by preserving the agrarian style building finishes and materials but with a more modern design implementation in order to reflect the Council approved building footprints and the more modern pavilion styled town square buildings. The City's Architectural Consultant is supportive of the overall design of the project. Project Design Summan Retail Sho s 1 &6 Shops 1 & 6 are bookend retail buildings that mirror each other in design and effectively help frame the two vehicular entrances to the project along Stevens Creek Boulevard. Both of these buildings consist of a flat roof design with high quality cement plaster walls and decorative ipe sidings that draw from the building design and materials on the office buildings and from the rest of the center. Shops 1 r, s'c i' i r;, ;Ei' M: bo''J t,' 0.' M 9 -.. M^ F ti .... _.. _. ._.. _. ._. '_.. r. i] .. f` t' ! M '. :4 . 1 i r. . 1. w-. .}S .5 M!7 . . r 1" .' ! t1. . ? t -- y i... a r -r r.^ i '"' y _ _ i r---• r r a'r -y l r l.,! i'{ t t"`{ '. a;. If .,.a° . ` .'! a`° "'?' r, j ;`y: R9 .. r yi"h '°2"s ° r' x x.+'. y {, y8 _ -"yb's 'k .. . H Y . i....,.i's+,y n._. ..` ... ?. ` .b' r. n r y4 a r: ..°' ._... ;_... ., r . ' . , y L rwC P ,. '+ i--. . 1 t t :4 r.,_...__._......_._.._.__._'___""_""___"'""'........__..._............."""'-„"""".-_.."""""'._..__.._"""'_..."_,..._.._.._.."'...,._._."'.......""'._,_.."_"'..."'._._._.._..__.._."__""'_.'__'y__'..".1 WEST ELEVATION •• 3 SOUFH ELEVATION • ; 1 Shops 6 ip C: p A; 3 F'? t'c, pi 1. n+J% _1i .L' .11 N .^J ..1i ,'S` { Y: '3 n W' r:t 1.. L...•.( i. .r...., ' r ... ., ir. t ti k n , r,C..r y.1r .. :,:. .MF 7 _r i,ar. M" w E y,; y+4 f , :: I.cjo` I 9 w r!G i'JIWAiWi Pi'«[b/ EAST EIEVATtpN: s : t ! Retail Sho s 3,4, &5; Pad 3;Clock-tower Shops 3, 4, 5, Pad 3, and the Clock-tower resemble agrarian style building design. Shops 3, 4 and the clock-tower have a more traditional pitched roofs and Shops 5 & pad 3 present a flat roof design. Quality architectural siding materials such as stone, board and batten, metal grillwork, decorative woodwork, wood trellis & beam system are found throughout these buildings. According to the applicant, the design of these buildings have been simplified from the original approved concept to be more viable for the prospective tenants and to also reflect the revised retail footprints approved by the Council on September 4,2012. 149 ASA-2012-15 Main Street Architectural and Site Approva February 6,2014 Shops 1,3-8,Pads 1-3,Town Square,Flex 1-2,Office 1-2,Parking Garage,&Site Design Page 4 Shops 3 4 and Clock-tozver r......,. ...._.,.. wEt R`" rq 6' i....k': .. . y , a s, , ,w , , . I m, { l.;s ,t:'w..t:"(:l i 1 cr,. c 4^-Mt. - a '°-:* `a" ' ,' , Ec'`'n t M r J Lg F: __.+1'.33 i: y tw,a,.:3. . ..d„ _...__.ti .i a,r. ._ ` -y; r'/"^"'^°" t s..a.. _ 1r'r.""'IM', ","• '.` Y I r y,$ . a° i _ > * NP` . 7 r k'±":. . ;,. t :c. .... { .. " .... '..,ak. f { 1 t r y: . d Rr ,.M. r.. ...... . . -. .... a,,- .sw..as. _>.:...:c:a:. Shops 5 c.—r._.{r^- r.:' k•'M.I+y (1 > l . 1 .a t. ` .. Y i J, , Y....+:' - 4- [' i,e: e ;.. d ;: x;"}. . y t, __ e. j . . ... . . . 'R, - e.. .. < gr',--" r k f i -l. t J.`1, A+i R' ' L ...i y, J• p C r 1 XIy u.:e IunJ. " ....i+S.. _" _..A r'L.»+ 3 a { n..._. ..... 1 I tia#e usa F.w.en ' „,. .v,. o 3.. _... SOUTH EIEVATION,°'i_2..__ EAST EIEVATION ,,.;_1 Pad 3 7=r—.-:_ s c ,, ra r . (s e ,I r- •r- , i;.» ro ( +-: T . . + 4 ' I , . 1 ~ i . p ' t1I,{t.<)L. . 7.. l . . . i f` . lfS r i' r y. r . r ' y,., Yt'( vu.+ti_ r'.) ' q . T.. r 7.jrV .;: , . U p.-i a ' w t . l! .f-_.....-.. _. r: . c-'., s' R , j i A_A ... + .., ..,,. j. !?. r.r L ._ .._. ._ , 4. . dJ ti"ii'._ .T . iP..i" . . . . __ S. ,a SOUTH ELEVATIQf t s : 3 i NORTH ELEVATtON: ' ; i Shops 7&8 Shops 7 & 8 are located immediately west of the town square and serve as the primary link between the park and the rest of the project. To emphasize this pedestrian connection, (See Attachment 2, Condition 35.B.4.c.) a cedar trellis covered with vines/flowering plants to serve as a connective gateway between the two buildings is provided. The architectural design of these two buildings helps to create a more upscale downtown atmosphere that is well suited for the town square area. x r ri.ra...W r_ I 1 z"-v'i r . . 3 t .1 Y.' 1 p. . ......... M a 1 I s. ._.+—......-... .• J' ..... ,..... Z _.._. .._.' ..,_..+:r— ..... zv... .. np ^+ i4Wi"t'~, .` P* 4!' d •<F"#„, yk'" j, a.._ 1` i'r ~y r `i f` .l ,tA'. 4 a L . _, . s}. r . l . i YC..e.t R( t• K p,Q t. +(,_ 1.: ..." ._' '1 _ -. . " ' . t.:, .. 4` ... -. "d.—_..3.!7tl.-+, i il 1 FAST ELEvATtpiV Pads 1 &2 The relatively small Pad 1 (2,203 square feet) and Pad 2 (1,583 square feet) buildings are located at the northern and southern ends of Town Square. In response to comments received from the City's Architectural advisor (See Attachment 2, Condition 35.B.4.a.), the design of these two small Pad 150 ASA-2012-15 Main Street Architectural and Site Approval February 6,2014 Shops 1,3-8,Pads 1-3,Town Square,Flex 1-2,Office 1-2,Parking Garage,&Site Design Page 5 buildings has been revised from an agrarian look to a more simple, open and modern pavilion, with an emphasis on transparency. Pad 1 i p i I r q t i ,R y_.'f.., ;''' y y-`+' ' 1`N x d 0.—j y a 1 .:. . a1 „ t y `` ~` . • . L{..':'. ..A`" i 1 i .}....t.__. -,x.- -.v;,. 1 y..s" ,f: S'i i .i/;/S/11 1`;"'"s+e`•,y.{ n.T 1' 1 Y t C'; -; ,. h ° ku:::d v x yf "•; . Z Y"':* s.,M __e '•y",; .x,,,, '.r k;,,,°` T'11Fs e`ttr °,".1 r,' ,h. " 4 r `-. y4 *r''.+ t . 4 4,..y r . _. d j*.r ''. p y tl , .r '41 7F. r',° + 1 star . IT.. - I p ` p . I , r 1! r i f.-`iro:r'.wuriai:.i ow.[ r... .4 1, rw.. i ,! . ,_ ; f{I. r7r j..'"...A . i y dya. ..e:;...,s.. rw...` e.+a.a.,arr..,.rar._. 7 NORTH ELEVATION S UTH ELEVATiON Pad 2 1 r ... Ia,. I ia , I c. , t r-xa . r , ; j j ). y y 1 3•..i i r r jfJ[i i .. "i`- i.L n ' yt.s . . rw'r'"q 4 .T _f, j,. Te. Y' f y 7k' P..+ w k r.... ....n a I" l., A .m,,. *. j ., ,,,,+"7. 1 ya'.:f M1-I « y+ a g 1 , 1 4 y ), i - . j `, i z T /. ij . ._....................... .. ........... ..... ,.. ......... , ....___ 4.0 .'^ X 1 '... _ .•-.. w.r C' 3+.}7`;" i. 3 r r r w`+r j a Y g"t' i k' t 6 i Y e w' " j I I 1I ' f T. •. j{ p.^ b y m j'.1 . J!.A! h '. i . NORTH E EVATION SOUTH ELEVATION Flex" Buildin s 1 &2 The Art Deco styled "Flex" buildings are proposed to accommodate an interchangeable mixture of office and retail uses based on market demand. Originally proposed as a one-story concept, the height of the buildings has been raised to two-stories (38+ feet) as part of the Council's approval in September 2012 to help screen the parking garage to the north and to accommodate additional office/flex space. Flex 1 2 I H'.a 7 .. . 1 i .w I1. i d r. _ f s r. .__ ._._.. i rti ' ` r..~ -YJ,ty T 9 SOUTH ELEVATION Office 1 &2 The proposed two office buildings located at the northeast corner of the site are designed to mimic the look and feel of the highly acclaimed Netflix campus in Los Gatos. A summary of the key building enhancements are outlined as follows: Enlarged entry tower features to better delineate building entrances and to add additional visual interest 151 ASA-2012-15 Main Street Architectural and Site Approvu. February 6,2014 Shops 1,3-8,Pads 1-3,Town Square,Flex 1-2,Office 1-2,Parking Garage,&Site Design Page 6 New hip roof and arcade transitions are introduced to the 3rd and 4 floor, effectively reducing the apparent height of the office buildings Activated the southeast corner of Office 2 by shifting a primary pedestrian entry to this corner Deeper recessed windows throughout Revised color pallet more in line with the rest of the project Office 1 rt, Ki4p fM ,:"J .,. I o:.. gv..,,)r h q.My. a 1 +* t".7+; rot`", c^Q'"9 z M, f,r+ ,,Y° F "is t N Qr+ f+." 3' { i.«.w;.w.;°w»,., ` y.n,, .; . ,. Q-0' 2`"/^-. S: . .p p.y i:. 6 a ....+3.':. . . b •' w .... i .: py p q p j''} S1t1 itY . a..... 4.` A J t .. w S 1 ... ... . iT i'a.`i3i:.s..:8'.... t _,,.....,_...... _ w y, r.... 4, E . x ':,[.', . e ' D"; " `V;+, ` rr 1T1r 4 i i zi ' .k fl. h 'r 1:..'# y i: j p • t J* i r . i'. 's• x lfJ'1fq, d+1; ; ,°'i ¢ w ._... , w L.1 r; j` c. '"ro.'"a'r'_ ^ 1 .,a} .. Z.. p j t ". a i „....,' .'. ,:...... ::r.' I ` .._.. ! •_- -- -- F--. Caa,.,_—_4..tirowYOi. OFFICE 1 NORTH ELEVATION Office 2 a a ro 3>n.,, r 4 i j g , z.`. ts.., ,, i , k ae.v a. x eoa o I, e .._. .. . . n Q . ±. J rr v.; M1 '" w wi . ; : 7q t' ': .e, " .i t:'# v • ...., .. R a. ry-, , en . .. . . -- St'SSS_ y: t t eFr 9' 1MM Ar+4"a e 6 y S h ' 7 t Y s-. i 4TK TwZ t F". p..,, . .' _ '. w M ... ,.,,,. _ b , a' ' i+r•+r ,,i"""r'{ 3r_". Jt . : h.'i.. t'7" . S".t 'A',+T'1`f-+"` '''}'r i +a ,:' y e "; •..}, 6 e.I ` 5.J i,'",'; r•° ayf s' '' ' f '; p` Y' . y t t i l F '.,r, j S- P .. .'+c. j ' . ; a OFFlCE 2 WEST ELEVAT(ON To satisfy the General Plan requirement to provide a retail component for 60' tall buildings, a 1,614 square foot retail space has been added to the ground floor of both office buildings (Sheet 8A.30 and Sheet 9A.30). The placement of these two retail spaces on the ground floor of the office buildings will promote more pedestrian activities and help connect the office buildings to the retail uses to the west. Parking Structure The original design provided parking through two separate three (3) and four (4) story structures, with one (1) level of underground parking. The revised design consolidates the parking from both structures into a single five (5) story structure with two (2) levels of underground parking - dramatically reducing the exposure of the building where fronting Vallco Parkway. The following list provides a summary of key changes: Exposed the stairs, creating a more open and airy feel and added visual interest Entrance tower was revised to be more distinct and prominent Added levels of detailing on the perimeter fa ade columns to create scale and eliminate bulkiness Added large format tile at the base of the columns for variety Added wrought iron decorative railings to the staircases and to serve as the crash rail on the top level of the garage to reduce the apparent height of the structure Added column features to the ground level to reduce the apparent scale of the structure 152 ASA-2012-15 Main Street Architectural and Site Approva February 6,2014 Shops 1,3-8,Pads 1-3,Town Square,Flex 1-2,Office 1-2,Parking Garage, &Site Design Page 7 Painted stair towers, and columns lighter than the basic structure to create rhythm and break up long facades. Parking Structure ss.cru,ir» ----.—.........,r- j - 3 r :: : . _ :__ . . i u r` i:,_ I p M iF' 7KC 1 i yrl'} k t i".' i t _!_ .F. .. ik r l Y 91t i i . i a.M"'±. • rk , l~p ,. i r. . .__...._ i .J4 f , f 1(,...... 1r i''. ` ', i .I I I. .., j& w_ i! y P t-'A!@'fl!L.i' y+ I; i Z * M _ :++ c c, Eikv'rNtlf.S EAST ELEVATION 7 2 I f_..._.._..-------__._._--.------ .,. _..._.,..._..._. ` J i Yf:lµ(7 11 nl[.f'fiiFMi1Y.. 1F..LJM',n I ..__., e / 1/1k>N f[r._. E'ER M i 4 i,attt. , r , i Til""-_.. 1_ I 0.a. l wa+ry' ws ewsrry vsrs a9 " :'.».'.:...:: ...._»::. ....,_.. . t. .r__._.Frf lni}Nwflrr_. q a E y a" ' i,IT., l .. .__—. M . ...._. S ... . ro Y C y' k`- `_ _' ' _.,..' ' S a aJ a ^- y`r._ - ,'3 r, , r y t.,,.. .. 'T r""_ r.:. T C Y`TI°,," ~ x, __ i ... ' -.. sx3 j . , a-..J_.._. ', r. i '_... 1 x . a ' y 4 1 a L.__.. L, ' `z {" .. ' ._. v. _.. , r ' r1: t E .._ :_._ ____ va.:rtr COt.:NE`t_IA.M111.1 ...ItF i t C'E1 v:n NORTH ELEVATION Additional Recommended Ch nges: A condition has been added to require the applicant to work with staff to submit a final garage plan to demonstrate additional decorative sidings to the ground floor concrete crash wall and a more decorative with custom patterns/details) metal railing design within openings on the stair tower and along the perimeter of the roof level. Landscape Plans Detailed imagery of the proposed trees, shrubs, groundcover, grasses, ferns, perennials, lawn, vines with their associated location reference codes on the planting plans) have been provided on Sheets L- 4.1b and L-41.c of the plans. The intent behind the planting design is to provide visual interest throughout the year, with spring flowers, summer shade, fall leaf color, and interesting textures and f oliage prevailing in the winter. Plantings are drought tolerant, and are to be irrigated with high efficiency drip and bubbler irrigation systems and spray heads with sophisticated controllers allowing the project to exceed the City water use efficiency standards for the project. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, as well as a landscape installation report shall be required to demonstrate water efficiency. Town Square In response to direction from the City's Architectural Advisor (35.B.1.a-c), the town square has been redesigned to be a "flexible" public space that may be expanded or shifted by the temporary closure of the surrounding streets (Attachment 3). In order to allow for the seamless transition/shifting of pedestrian activities, the applicant has proposed the Town Square to have softly rounded curbs - which are shown in detail on the civil plans. 153 ASA-2012-15 vlain Street Architectural and Site Approva February 6,2014 Shops 1,3-8,Pads 1-3,Town Square,Flex 1-2,Office 1-2,Parking Garage,&Site Design Page 8 Lighting Overall, the lights proposed provide a mixture of diffused and direct light throughout the site, with modern styles and variations of slate grey and black housing. With over twenty different lighting fixtures, the project has provided enough variation to provide visual interest and appropriate scale for pedestrians and vehicles, while also creating a unified style that does not detract from the buildings, landscaping, and hardscape features that the lights serve to illuminate. In addition to the light fixtures shown on Sheet E0.0 and E0.1, festive strand lights accenting branches, loosely looped around branches will be utilized on trees throughout the project as shown on the Landscaping Plans (Sheet L-6.3). The photometric study demonstrates adequate lighting levels throughout the publicly accessible parts of the project, and as conditioned, shall provide sufficient down-shielding measures to preclude glare and other forms of visual interference from spilling onto adjoining properties. As part of the Security Plan for the Parking Garage, lighting details for this component shall be required to be reviewed by the County Sheriff's Department to ensure adequate lighting levels to support a safety and a closed circuit camera system. Onsite Utilities and Trash Management Domestic backflow preventers, for individual tenant metering, are covered by decorative ipe benches providing an attractive pedestrian amenity along the Stevens Creek frontage. In contrast, transformers have been tucked away in areas less accessible to pedestrians and heavily screened from public view. All Fire Department Connections features have been integrated into polished concrete walls that are designed to blend into the natural landscaping. Streetscape Desi n &Offsite Improvements As conditioned, the perimeter of the entire site will be enhanced with a new public sidewalk with decorative banding and a double row of street trees. New crosswalks will connect the site to the neighboring properties on Stevens Creek Boulevard, Tantau Avenue, and across Vallco Parkway - enhancing the pedestrian experience in the area. Along Vallco Parkway, the applicant is proposing a new traffic light on at the northern terminus of Finch Avenue and a realignment of the median island. Specimen Oak trees are proposed to frame the project entrances on Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vallco to Main Street and the Town Square, and at the main entrance to the Office Plaza. Special landscape planting and a wood seating deck/art pedestal create a Gateway Plaza at the corner of Stevens Creek and Tantau, providing a rich seiting for a gateway sign feature that will be placed at this corner. New median island landscape will further enhance the existing median landscape on Stevens Creek and Vallco Parkway. In keeping with"New Street Tree Planting" guidelines of the South Vallco Master Plan, at points where the existing tree canopy is extended or filled along Stevens Creek Blvd., Tantau Avenue, and Vallco Parkway, Americana Ash (to complement the existing Evergreen Ash trees) and flowering Callery pear 'aristocrat' trees shall be planted which draw upon Cupertino's history as an agrarian community with orchards and wineries. At the time of the DRC's review, the applicant is finalizing their utility designs and trenching locations along the public right-of-way. Further, there may be some existing project trees that have declined in health from the time of the original Council approval. Therefore the applicant may come back at a later date to request for additional tree removal to account for the final location of the utilities and tree conditions throughout the project. 154 ASA-2012-15 Main Street Architectural and Site Appro___ February 6,2014 Shops 1,3-8,Pads 1-3,Town Square,Flex 1-2,Office 1-2,Parking Garage,&Site Design Page 9 Outreach/Noticing Notice of Public Hearin Site Notice&Le al Ad A enda Site Signage Posted on the City's official notice 14 days prior to the hearing) bulletin board (one week prior to the Legal ad placed in newspaper hearing) at least 10 days prior to the hearing) Posted on the City of Cupertino's 128 notices mailed to property owners Website and Project Page adjacent to the project site (300 foot) 14 days prior to the hearing) All interested parties(emailed/noticed) Advertised on the City Channel 10 da s rior to the hearin ) The City held a small community meeting on December 3, 2013 to discuss the latest plan review and designs. The meeting was attended by Ms. Warren (a member of the public), staff inembers, the applicant's architeciural team, Councilmen Chang and Commissioners Sun&Gong. Comments received from the public at the meeting, and during the notice period, are summarized below staff response is in italics): Community Cornments Overall, the feedback pertaining to the project at large had been positive, with concerns focusing on some of the proposed building design changes compared to the original building concepts/themes approved by the Council on May 15, 2012. Staff did receive additional detailed comments from Ms. Warren on January 30,2014 and a summary of her specific comments are outlined below: Shops 3 &41ook different in terms of color and architectural modulations. The applicant should consider introducing varying architectural treatments to add interest. Consider using warmer color pallet to bring back the vibrant look. Also, consider bring back wood siding found in the original approval. Shops 6 could be further enhanced with a more finished roof cornice (top roof trim). Consider introducing a tower feature at the northeast corner (facing the town square) to add more architectural interest to the building. Lastly, consider varying materials and colors to enhance interest. Shops 7 & S should have more rich and warm elements/color accents. Consider adding slopes roofs to soften the boxy appearance to be more in line with the neighboring Metropolitan project. Flex 1 (farmer's market fa ade) should be softened and not mimic the garage design. Consider introducing Ipe or other similar architectural embellishments to help soften the mass of the building. Also consider introducing warmer colors, accent arches to further add interest, and further architectural interest to the north elevation(facing the hotel). Concerned with the night time view of the Art Deco tower feature between flex 1 & 2. Would like to see the glass details or consider thicker class to reduce the intensity of the glow from the tower element. Would like to see pitched roof lines with vertical architectural interest and wall articulations on the future major tenant building located to the west of Shops 6 building. The applicant has been made aware of Ms. Warreri s comments and will be prepared to respond and address her concerns at the DRC hearing. 155 ASA-2012-15 Main Street Architechzral and Site Approv«. February 6,2014 Shops 1,3-8,Pads 1-3,Town Square,Flex 1-2,Office 1-2,Parking Gara;e,&Site Desi n Pa e 10 Permit Streamlining Act The project is subject to the Permit Streamlining Act. The most recent plan set was received on January 8, 2014 and deemed complete on January 21,2014.The City has an additional sixty calendar days (March 22, 2014)to make a decision on the project. A proval Findings Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the project based on the following Architectural and Site Approval findings (Section 19.168.030): 1. The proposal, at the proposed location, zvill not be detrimental or injurious to properiy or improvements in the vicinity, and zvill not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general zvelfare, or convenience; The project impacts to the public health, safety, general welfare and surrounding improvements have been analyzed as part of an Environmental Impact Report under the California Environmental Quality Act. In response to areas where impacts were anticipated, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program had been established to minimize the impacts to less than significant levels. The project shall be required to continue to abide by these specified mitigation measures as enforced by City staff. Furthermore, the project is anticipated enhance the general public convenience in the area in that it provides a rich mixture of land uses that accommodate housing, shopping, and employment centers. Bus stops serving the site shall be maintained, new pedestrian connections to the Rosebowl and Metropolitan developments to the west shall be made, and the entire sidewalk/streetscape surrounding the perimeter of the site shall be replaced and enhanced. 2. The proposal is consistent zuith the purposes of Chapter 19.168, Architectural and Site Reviezv, of the Cupertino Municipal Code, the General Plan, any specific plan, zoning ordinances, applicable planned development permit, conditional use permits, variances, subdivision maps or other entitlements to use zuhich regulate the subject property including, but not limited to, adherence to the follozving specific criteria: a) Abrupt changes in building scale should be avoided. A gradual transition related to heigl2t and bulk should be achieved bet veen nezu and existing buildings; On every edge and frontage, the proposed buildings mirror their surroundings creating a complementary and logical neighborhood transition. No substantial building mass or height changes are being proposed from the previous Council approval. b) In order to preserve design harmon betzueen nezu c nd existing buildings and in order to preserr e and enhance propert values, the materials, textures and colors of nezu buildings should harmonize zvith adjacent development b being consistent or compc tible zvith design and color schemes, and zvith the fi.cture charc cter of the neighborhood and purposes of the zone in zuhich the are situated. Tlie location, height and materials of zualls, fencing, Izedges and screen planting should harmonize zvith c djacent development. Unsiglitl storage areas, utilift installations and unsiglitl elements of parking lots should be concealed. The planting of ground cover or various h pes of pavements should be used to prevent dust and erosion, and t11e unnecessan destruction of existing henith trees should be avoided. Ltghting for development 156 ASA-2012-15 Main Street Architectural and Site Approva. February 6,2014 Shops 1,3-8,Pads 1-3,Town Square,Flex 1-2,Office 1-2,Parking Garage,&Site Design Page 11 should be adequate to meet safety requirements as specified b the engineering and building departments, and provide shielding to prevent spill-over light fo adjoining properhj ozuners;and The project present a combination of flat and sloped roof building designs, earth tone colors, and associated landscaping are harmonious with the adjoining buildings and streetscape on Stevens Creek Boulevard, Vallco Parkway, and N. Tantau Avenue streetscapes. The rich palette of materials/textures is compatible with the recently approved Rosebowl Development and design guidelines contained in the Heart of the City Specific Plan. All above ground utility installations are required to be screened from public view through a combination of landscaping and screen walls. As shown in the project photometric plans, the proposed lighting adequately serves to illuminate pedestrian paths and vehicular routes, and as conditioned shall be adequately down shielded to prevent spill-over light and glare to adjoining prope.rties. c) The number, location, color, size, height, lighting and landscaping of outdoor advertising signs and structures shall minimize traffic hazards and shall positivel affect the general appearance of the neighborhood and harmonize zvith adjacent development. The project signage shall be separately reviewed and approved as part of a Master Sign Program. d) With respect to nezv projects zuithin existing residential neighborhoods, nezu development should be designed to protect residents from noise, traffic, light and visuall intrusive effects b use of buffering, setbacks, landscaping, zvalls and other appropriate design measures The proposed land use, building height, and building setbacks have been previously approved by the City Council. The proposed landscaping features and vegetation will provide adequate screening and buffering from the streets and adjacent uses. Please also refer to staff response in 2a. Prepared by: Stephen Rose,Associate Planner Approved by: Gary Chao,Assistant Director of Community Development Attachments Attachment 1: Plan Set Attachment 2: Draft Resolution Attachment 3: Resolution 12-098(M) Attachment 4: ASA Package Descriptions Attachment 5: Landscape Narrative Attachment 6: Architeciural Plan Set from May 15,2012 City Council Meeting Attachment 7: Comments from Lisa Warren Attachment 8: Material Board to be made available at DRC for review 157 Design Review Committee February 6, 2014 Cupertino, CA  95014  (408) 777‐3308          ACTION MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF   THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE HELD ON February 6, 2014    ROLL CALL    Committee Members present:   Winnie Lee, Chairperson                                                                      Don Sun, Commissioner    Committee Members absent                  Alan Takahashi, Commissioner    Staff present:                                             Stephen Rose, Staff Planner          Gary Chao, Assist. Dir. of Community Development          Colleen Winchester, Assist. City Attorney          Winnie Pagan, Associate Civil Engineer            Staff absent:                                               None          APPROVAL OF MINUTES:  July 18, 2013  Minutes of the July 18, 2013 Design Review Committee meeting were deferred to another meeting for  approval after being able to confer with the prior Committee members    WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:    Staff received a presentation from Kenneth Rodrigues & Partners (applicant)    POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR:   None    ORAL COMMUNICATION:   None                                     CONSENT CALENDAR:   None                 PUBLIC HEARING:    1. Application No.(s): ASA‐2012‐15   Applicant:  Ken Rodrigues (500 Forbes, LLC)   Location:  Main Street – southeast corner of Vallco Pkwy and Finch Ave    Architectural and Site approval for final refinements to the previously approved Shops 1‐5, 7 & 8,  Pads 1 – 3 & 6, Town Square, incubator flex space, park & street system, Office space 1 & 2 and  the parking garage for the Main Street project     Design Review Committee decision final unless appealed.    Staff Member Rose explained that the application for the Main Street project was originally approved by  the City Council in January 2009 and has gone through several site and design revisions during the last  158 2 Design Review Committee February 6, 2014 three years. In September 2012, in Condition #35 of the approved Resolution, the City Council deferred  the final approval decision for the overall Architectural and Site elements of the project to the Design  Review Committee. The applicants were asked to make revisions to the final design; Revise the Town  Square; enhance the architectural and site features for the Office buildings; revise the design of Pads 1  and 2 and make enhancements to the parking garage and overall site. The Design Review Committee  will be evaluating and reviewing these revisions at this meeting per Council’s direction. It should be  noted that the design of Building Pad 6, the public art and tree removals will be discussed at future  meetings. The applicant has a presentation for the Committee outlining the changes they made to the  design of the project in order to satisfy the Council’s requests. They have created unique Commercial  Districts with greater storefront glazing to promote a more active and vibrant downtown, modernized  the feel of the buildings, created tenant spaces with more floor area and flow to make it easier for  prospective businesses and they have varied the architectural and material elements to vary in theme.  Additionally, Staff has requested that the applicant revise some of the roofing materials and add  decorative elements to the parking garage and stair towers. With these revisions, Staff supports the  application.     Commissioner Sun asked for clarification of the Design Review Committee’s approval role per Condition  #35 of the Resolution.   Staff Member Chao explained that the Council’s Resolution had been included in the informational  agenda packet, but that the Design Review Committee was to make sure that the project revisions meet  the specific directives of the Council’s approval from 2012.   Commissioner Sun reiterated that some of the design changes were because the applicant studied the  market demand and trends.   Staff Member Chao said that one of the delays in getting this project through the approval process was  that the applicant was researching what kinds of building changes they would need to make in order to  accommodate the needs of their future tenants and the current market trends.     The applicant, Kevin Dare (Sandhill Properties) addressed the Committee.  He said that the plan changes  from the original 2012 approval were done to incorporate the comments they have received from the  Council, the public, marketplace studies and from the Planning Staff. He addressed Commissioner Sun’s  comment regarding the market research they had done. He said that there were two main comments  they heard from the public, tenant groups and the Council. People wanted a project that created a  “downtown” feel – that is different kinds of uses. So they have the retail, office, resident lofts and open  space. Additionally, the “downtown” needed to have a variation on design and architectural style to  make it feel as though the downtown had grown and evolved over time even though the construction  will all be happening at the same time. Also the agrarian history of Cupertino should be reflected in the  design of the site through the use of natural materials. With these ideas in mind, the applicant has  designed the space to include several different architectural styles and landscaping elements to provide  unique experiences and opportunities for the future tenants and their patrons.   Kevin Jones with Kenneth Rodrigues and Partners Architects and Gary Layman with Guzzardo  Partnership gave a Power Point presentation to the Committee.  Kevin Jones let the Committee know  that they have been working diligently on the re‐design of the project over the past year to incorporate  all of the design elements and features. He went over each of the distinctive Commercial Districts,  explaining the different architectural features and proposed building material finishes.  Gary Layman  explained the different landscaping plans and scope for each of the building sites/districts. The overall  landscape site plan allows for lots of outdoor seating, gathering areas, open space areas with gardens,  pathways, lighting elements, trellises, trees and planter boxes. The presentation demonstrated how they  have addressed the specific comments they’ve received throughout the evolution of the project.   159 3 Design Review Committee February 6, 2014   Commissioner Sun asked how the applicant was able to address all the different Community desires  regarding architectural styles. He asked for an explanation of the comparisons between the original  architectural concepts for Buildings 1, 3 and 4 with the current submittals.   The Applicant explained that Building 1 was not part of the original submittal. A lot of things changed at  that City Council meeting. The idea for the future inspiration for Building 1 was, in that design district,  from the office buildings. This corner is the ‘Gateway to the City’. People coming into the City see the  Spanish‐style architecture. They then created juxtaposition to the office spaces with the retail district. The  same materials were used, but in a different style in keeping with the mass of the building. There will be  different users to the site so the Applicant wanted to design the space so that different people (users to  the site) would have different experiences within the same spaces. For Buildings 3 and 4, they received a  lot of feedback. The original design was modified to allow for more indoor/outdoor feel, a more  sophisticated style with less of a strip mall visual effect. So the new design has variations in roof  elevations and materials, outdoor spaces and natural materials. The Planning Staff also asked for more  glass transparency so that people can see the interior of the site from Stevens Creek Boulevard so to be  able to draw people into the shops and restaurants.     Commissioner Sun asked about the garage. He wanted to know what architectural features will be on  the garage wall facing Stevens Creek Boulevard. The applicants said that the ‘flex buildings’ would be  visually in the way of most of the garage face and from the ground in front of that space, you wouldnʹt  be able to see over the building to see the exposed wall above.     Commissioner Sun asked about the intended use of the flex space building. The Applicant said that they  would prefer a farmer’s market or some other similar open concept use, but it has not really been  decided. The open concept look was in response to a request to simplify the space and tie it into the glass  elements from the hotel. If there are other options available, changing the design of this building by  extending the façade, would not be that difficult.     Chair Lee asked about the landscaping plan. Staff Member Chao explained that the landscape site plan  was being presented to the Committee for the larger the site features; the walls, planters and plazas. The  Director has the authority to approve the specific plant species. The Director will make sure the  plantings are drought tolerant, pest resistant and meet the water efficiency usage requirements. Staff  Member Chao said the Committee’s focus should be on the larger features; such as the architectural  features, decorative features, plaza designs, trellises and paving materials.   From the packet, Chair Lee asked for clarification of page 14 of the model resolution to Council,  Attachment 3, Number 37 (C), (D) and (E). Does the proposed landscaping along Stevens Creek  Boulevard and N Tantau Avenue meet the streetscape design requirements of the Heart of the City  Specific Plan? Staff Member Chao said it does. The trees proposed “orchard” inspired and are  appropriate for the climate. She asked if (part D) the requirement to plant two specimen Oak trees  flanking the driveway along Stevens Creek Boulevard was still included in the design.  The Applicants  said it was. They would be also doing similar plantings along the other site entrances as well. She asked  if the existing Ash trees (part E) would be being saved as well, per the Resolution. The Applicant stated  that they were saving a number of existing Ash tree and would be planting additional Ash trees per the  Arborists recommendations. Staff member Chao added that the site is currently being assessed for  trenching and utility upgrades so some of the trees may be compromised. If that occurs, the applicant  will be required to come back and obtain City approval to remove replace those trees.     Chair Lee opened the floor for Public Comments:  160 4 Design Review Committee February 6, 2014 Lisa Warren, resident– She said her comments from last week are only a portion of her feelings and that  there is more going on. She wanted there to be a spirit of compromise, to soften the look and to get it  closer to the look of what people think the project should be and what she understood they were  surprised about. Her list of suggestions does not represent everything she thinks could be improved. She  appreciates that the latest design does reflect some of the changes she suggested, however, the comments  on the flex space have not been met. She commented on the harsh look of the colonnades and that was  addressed, but not the other things. She doesn’t feel like the Art Deco design goes with anything else on  the site. She is very concerned about the treatment of the tower element that houses the elevator and  stairs on the garage along the south elevation . She also didn’t see that much change occurred with the  roof elevations. Something more is needed to break up the visual. Building 1 looks good. She thinks her  comments regarding Building 6 were applied to Building 1. Shops 3 and 4 show an improvement, but  the entryways need more variety. Shops 7 and 8 look more like what the Retail 1 and 2 should look like.  The darker terra cotta color is a concern. She would like to see more color brought in, everything is too  neutral in color. She thinks that Shops 3 and 4 should have more of a delineation to provide the interest  and look like separate buildings since that’s what tenants want.   Ruby Elgen, resident‐ she feels like the applicant has been doing a great job. She would like for the  project to be wrapped up. She said that people forget that this is a downtown, not a shopping center. In a  downtown, the buildings are not supposed to be matchy‐matchy. She said that the building should be  different from each other and it looks like they are. She likes the plantings and feels that the applicants  have done everything they have been asked to and more. She would like to see the project get moving  along.  Jennifer Griffin, resident‐ her concern was Building 6, so will be interested in seeing what that design  looks like. She asked if canopies or trellises could be added to the flex buildings to break up their  verticality and soften the look.  She likes the improvements to 3 and 4 in terms of trying to break up the  frontage along Stevens Creek. She asked if the signage and art could be elegant and refined, like a  fountain. She didn’t want a very large and ultra modern structure.   Staff Member Chao said that a resident, Al, needed to leave the meeting early but wanted to express his  support for the project.  He also mentioned that Al was concerned with revised Flex 1’s glass design. He  didn’t like the lack of articulation with the glass on a blank wall.   Chair Lee closed the public hearing.    Staff Member Chao said that the site signage requires the approval of a Master Sign Program. Any signs  shown in the plan set were for conceptual purposes only. A Sign Program is a separate application, with  a separate review and approval process. This application does not include any sign approvals. Any  public art has to go through a separate approval process as well. The Fine Arts Commission will review  any proposed art with final approval by the City Council.   Chair Lee asked about the street system. She didn’t see where it was in the presentation.  Staff Member Chao said that the Design Review Committee should only be reviewing the aesthetics  (color and material) of the site features for the project. The City Council had already decided on the  circulation, street framework geometry of the project at their approval in September 2012. It would be  appropriate for the Committee wanted to discuss pedestrian circulation and crosswalk paving materials  or enhancements.   Staff Member Chao spoke about the flex building design. He understands from comments from the  public that here is a desire is to soften the verticality of the building. The revised elevation provided by  the applicant now for the Flex Building has enhanced siding material (from aluminum to a wood finish).  He also acknowledged that the revised plans were only received today for the Flex building, and that  there are other potential design options to address the concerns from the colonnades to the glass  elements. For example, perhaps the plaster siding portion of the building could be changed to IPE to  161 5 Design Review Committee February 6, 2014 help soften the look. Or awnings may be introduced to break up the verticality of the building. The  applicant pointed out that the elevation plan did not show the trees that would be in front of the  building and that would help visually break up the mass of the building. He indicated where the trees  would be.   Staff Member Chao reiterated that the Design Review Committee was meeting at this time to approve  the designs of Shops 1 including the architecture and treatments to Office 1 and 2, the refinements for  Shops 3 and 4 including 6, the Clock Tower, 5 and Pads 1 and 2 within the Square as well as 7 and 8  adjacent to the park. Additionally, discussions on the materials and palettes of color, the site plaza and  pavements of the street are within the purview of the Design Review Committee. The applicant is here to  discuss options. The applicant would like a decision at this meeting, but if the Committee s not  comfortable with making a decision, Staff member Chao could provide them with other options as well.      Commissioner Sun commented that in general he is okay with the project. He shared the original  concerns about spaces 1 through 4, the garage, the flex buildings and the roof line. But with the changes  to the plan, the street side along Stevens Creek Boulevard has improved. He still doesn’t like the look of  the Flex 1 building. He wanted to know if the applicant could do anything different with that space  within their budget and timeline. He acknowledged that this was his opinion and that he was not asking  the applicant to go over their construction budget for this building.   Chair Lee thanks everyone for their time and work on the project. She said that architectural approval is  very subjective to individual tastes. She would like to see stone veneer on Shop 1. It looks very different  now that with the prior plan submittal. She is glad to see the slate back on Shops 3 and 4, but wondered  if the stone veneers match the green tile. She asked if the board battens could be different colors so they  wouldn’t match – maybe paint them red. She thanked the applicant for providing the revised plan sets in  such a short notice. She feels the revised plans sets are very different from the original submittal. She  likes that Building 5 doesn’t have a lot of plaster, but she prefers the pitch roof to the flat. She also  prefers the original stone veneers from the original plan set as opposed to the current examples. She likes  the Newport Cobblestone and Roman Travertine. She would like to see less plaster and more stone  veneer. On Pads 1 and 2, Chair Lee again mentioned stone veneers. That it was hard to really see the  detail in the exhibits. One of the pad buildings had a lot of plaster painted red. She would like to see  more warm colors rather than the proposed taupe palette. Office 1 and 2 she liked the curved window  treatments that were on the prior plan set as well as the Roman Travertine siding features. The flex 1 and  2 spaces have been talked about a lot, but she thinks it has a very linear look. She would like to see more  curved features and stone veneer. She didn’t care for the revised plans for these spaces at all. She isn’t an  architect, so she doesn’t know what to suggest. As for the parking garage, the previous plan set showed  4 different wall areas for artwork or decorative features. She was disappointed that the revised plan  shows only two areas for such features. She doesn’t know if the open air requirement has something to  do with it, but she would like to see more screening options. The most difficult thing for the Committee  is that the design plans in front of them today are very different from what was approved by the City  Council. The model resolution asks for the Design Review Committee to approve the final refinements.  She said she was very uncomfortable with approving something that is so very different from the  approved plans. She asked Staff Member Winchester for clarification regarding Condition 35 of the City  Council’s approved resolution:   ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL  A. The buildings, site development and architecture shall substantially conform to the site plan,  elevations and details as shown in the approved exhibits, unless otherwise noted below. Prior  to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of a  separate Architectural and Site Approval application for each of the buildings by the Design  Review Committee; each Architectural and Site Approval application shall provide a detailed  162 6 Design Review Committee February 6, 2014 site plan, full elevations (all four sides), floor plans and any other details as required for  Architectural and Site Approval applications. Building colors and materials shall be reviewed  and approved in conjunction with the Architectural and Site Approval. Minor amendments to  approved Architectural and Site Approvals for buildings and/or the site plan, including  minor changes to the layout of the site plan, building forms and building sizes, may be  reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development.  Staff Member Winchester explained what options were available for the Design Review Committee. She  reminded the Committee that it has the power under that Condition to: 1) Vote on the plans and  specifications that have been presented to determine whether or not they substantially conform to the  designs and plans as submitted to Council as modified with Condition 35, 2) Continue the hearing to  another meeting date to receive further revised plans, 3) Refer a question to the City Council to ask for  more guidance on what it means to “substantially conform to site plans and specifications”. Staff  Member Winchester said the options the Committee wanted to take at this point were up to the  Committee depending on what they were comfortable with. Chair Lee said her inclination is to refer to  Council provide more clarity. She feels that the new designs don’t conform to what was previously  approved. Staff Member Winchester reiterated that Chair Lee was looking for clarity on “What is the  Design Review Committee’s role under Condition 35?” That the Committee was looking for direction on  Condition 35 as opposed to not believing that the plans don’t conform. If that is the case, the Committee  should continue the application. Staff Member Chao also stated that if the Committee wanted to get  clarification on Council’s intent, they could refer the item to the Council to see if some of the specific  changes proposed, for example if a pitch roof changed to a flat roof was within the intent of the Council.   If the Chair desires, you could ask the applicant to make some changes at the meeting to help make you  more comfortable with Condition 35. If Chair Lee and Commissioner Sun are uncomfortable in  navigating the changes on the plans and specifications, they can refer the final design decision back to  the City Council. Chair Lee confirmed that she could refer the whole application to the Council for final  decision. Commissioner Sun consented. Staff Member Winchester said procedurally, the Council would  have to amend their Resolution to reflect that the final decision was theirs to make. Commissioner Sun  asked Staff Member Winchester that if they referred the issue back to the Council, would the applicant  have to go through the whole procedure with the Design Review Committee again? And then the City  Council would vote on the amended plans? Staff Member Chao explained the noticing and agendizing  process to the Committee and clarified that if the Committee is not able to make a decision, it is the  applicant’s desire to get the application heard by the Council as soon as possible. Staff Member  Winchester again went over the Design Review’s option to continue the meeting if they felt the applicant  could make design changes that would satisfy their concerns about approving the application. She  encouraged the Committee to ask the applicant how they wanted to proceed.  Commissioner Sun stated  that if Chair Lee was uncomfortable making a decision, then he felt the best option would be to refer the  project to the Council.  Staff Member Winchester clarified that the Committee was not making the  decision to deny the project, but was making the decision to ask for additional guidance and input on  Condition 35 or referring to Council to amend Condition 35.  Staff Member Chao stated that the next  regular City Council meeting was March 4th, but the Mayor could call for a special meeting and the item  could, potentially, be heard at the end of February. Staff Member Chao suggested that the Committee  ask the applicant what they would like to do. The applicant stated that they would prefer it if the  application were referred to the Council for final decision as soon as possible and not come back to the  Design Review Committee. Staff Member Winchester stated that it is up to the Council to decide the  review and approval process. The Council would either provide direction and clarification or amend  their resolution to become the final decision makers on the project. The applicant said that they have  listened to all the comments and have tried to do the best they can to be sensitive to everyone’s concerns.  163 7 Design Review Committee February 6, 2014 They would like the project to move forward. He asked if they could come to some agreement with the  Design Review Committee concerning the colors and awnings and other building treatments. They want  to make these changes to get an approval now from this Committee. They are willing work through and  discuss design changes to the flex buildings.     Staff Member Winchester suggested taking a break in the proceedings so each group could confer.   Chair Lee re‐stated that the design changes she is looking for could not be achieved at this meeting. She  has more concerns than just colors and design elements. The applicant said that they wanted to reach a  consensus and obtain a decision at this meeting or be referred to the Council for the final decision.     Chair Lee called a 5 minute break.    Staff Member Winchester re‐capped the meeting.    Chair Lee made a motion to refer the application (ASA‐2012‐15) and the Resolution Number 12‐098 to  the Council to review. Commissioner Sun asked if the proper term should be “forwarding” rather than  “referred”. Staff Member Winchester clarified that motion Chair Lee was making was to defer making a  decision on this application and referring the matter to Council. Council can then make the decision on  whether or not to amend the Resolution or to clarify the Resolution. Chair Lee agreed that that was her  motion. Commissioner Sun seconded the motion.     MOTION: Chair Lee moved to defer ASA-2012-15 and Resolution 12-098 to the City Council for clarifications and/or amendment SECOND: Commissioner Sun ABSENT: none ABSTAIN: none VOTE: 2-0-0 OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: None Respectfully submitted: /s/Beth Ebben Beth Ebben Administrative Clerk 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 K – Hard Copy Material Board to be made available at CC Hearing for Review 179     COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT      CITY HALL  10    10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014‐3255      TELEPHONE: (408) 777‐3308    www.cupertino.org      CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT  Meeting:  February 25, 2014    Subject  Tree removal permit to allow the removal and replacement of additional trees that are unhealthy or in  conflict with the utilities/infrastructure for the Main Street Project.    Recommended Action  Staff recommends that the City Council:  1. Approve the removal and replacement of an additional 28 trees for the Main Street Project, pursuant  to the attached draft resolution (Attachment A).    Description  Applications: TR‐2013‐39  Applicant:   Kevin Dare  Property Owner:  Main Street Cupertino Aggregator, LLC  Location: Main Street Cupertino  North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard on both sides of Finch Avenue, west of N.  Tantau Avenue and south of Vallco Parkway  (APN 316‐20‐079, 316‐20‐078 and 316‐20‐085)    Application Summary   The applicant is proposing the removal and replacement of 28 non‐specimen trees on the project site (27 Ash  and one (1) Elm) ranging in size from 10 to 23 inches in diameter as part of the Main Street Cupertino project.  According to the applicantʹs arborist and civil engineer, all of the trees proposed for removal are in poor  condition and/or are in conflict with the proposed utilities and public improvement infrastructures.    Background  At its September 4, 2012 meeting, the Cupertino City Council approved the current development plan and  authorized the removal of 61 trees and relocation of 17 trees on the project site.  Since then, the applicant’s  arborist and civil engineer has determined that an additional 28 trees are required to be removed due to  declining health and infrastructural demands of the project.  While amendments to Council‐approved projects  are typically approved by the Planning Commission, staff is forwarding this request along with the other items  relating to the Main Street project for Councilʹs consideration on February 25, 2014.        180 Discussion:    Tree Removal Analysis  During the recent refinement of the on and off‐site project improvement/grading plans, the project  arborist and civil engineer identified additional 28 trees on the project site that either have died,  continued to decline in health, and/or are located in conflict with proposed utilities or infrastructure (i.e.,  public sidewalk, utility trenching/location, site drainage facilities).  Additionally, according to the  applicantʹs civil engineer, substantial topographic changes between the soil currently around some of the  existing trees and the new public sidewalk/frontage improvements along Stevens Boulevard and Vallco  Parkway necessitate removal of the trees.  Please refer to Attachments B & C for the tree removal plan  and the detailed removal justification from the project arborist.       The City’s Consulting Arborist and the Public Works Department have reviewed the applicant’s Tree  Removal Plan, and support the conclusions to remove the 28 private trees.      Mitigations and Replacement  The trees that are removed will be replaced with new trees of varying species at a ratio of approximately  three (3) new trees to one (1) removed tree.  The replacement trees on the project site include  approximately 21 species and are visually illustrated in Attachment D.     The City Arborist supports the proposed tree removals and confirms that the opportunity to plant  replacement trees of varying species that are more immune to disease is a benefit to the project and will  minimize massive tree deaths due to the spreading of disease to one particular species.        Street Tree Removals Not Included in Application  In addition to the private trees proposed for removal, the applicant has requested removal of street trees  within the public right‐of‐way (along Vallco Parkway and Tantau Avenue) and the street median  (Stevens Creek Boulevard).  The removal of trees in the public right‐of‐way is subject to a separate  process pursuant to CMC 14.12.030, and shall be administered by the Public Works Department. The  Public Works Department will review the replacements for disease resistance and compatibility with  sidewalk and related infrastructure.     Environmental Review:  The supplemental EIR prepared for the project approved in May 2012 studied tree removals and  replacements on the project site, including removal of the majority of street trees along the Vallco  Parkway and Tantau Avenue project frontage. The environmental review listed the mitigation for the  removed trees consistent with the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 14.18.  Street tree replacements were to  be reviewed by the Public Works Department.  The mitigations proposed for the removals in this request  are consistent with and actually exceed these requirements.  Therefore, the project is consistent with the  environmental review and no additional review is needed.             181 Noticing and Community Outreach:  The following table is a brief summary of the noticing conducted for this project:    Notice of Public Hearing, Site Notice & Legal Ad Agenda  ƒ Site Signage   (14 days prior to the hearing)    ƒ Legal ad placed in newspaper   (at least 10 days prior to the hearing)  ƒ 124 notices mailed to property owners  adjacent to the project site   ƒ All interested parties (emailed/noticed)  (10 days prior to the hearing)     ƒ Posted on the Cityʹs official notice  bulletin board  (one week prior to the  hearing)     ƒ Posted on the City of Cupertino’s  Website    ƒ Advertised on the City Channel         The City sent out notices to adjacent property owners. No public comments were received at the time of  staff report production.    Permit Streamlining Act:  This matter is adjudicatory and is subject to the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Section  65920 – 65964).  The City has complied with the deadlines found in the Permit Streamlining Act.     The City has 60 days (until March 8, 2014) to make a decision on the project. The City Council’s decision  on this project is final unless appealed within 14 calendar days of the date of the mailing of the decision.   _____________________________________    Prepared by: Stephen Rose Associate Planner  Reviewed by: Gary Chao, Assistant Director of Community Development; Aarti Shrivastava, Director of  Community Development  Approved for Submission by: David Brandt, City Manager    Attachments:  A ‐ Draft Resolution   B ‐ Tree removal plan (Sheet L‐8.1 & L‐8.2)  C – Project arborist letter   D – Sheet L‐4.1b planting imagery       182 TR‐2013‐39            CITY OF CUPERTINO  10300 Torre Avenue  Cupertino, California  95014    RESOLUTION NO. 13‐___    OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF  THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR THE REMOVAL AND  REPLACEMENT OF APPROXIMATELY 28 TREES FOR THE MAIN STREET CUPERTINO PROJECT,  LOCATED NORTH OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD ON BOTH SIDES OF FINCH AVENUE, WEST  OF N. TANTAU AVENUE AND SOUTH OF VALLCO PARKWAY      SECTION I:  PROJECT DESCRIPTION    Application No.: TR‐2013‐39  Applicant:  Kevin Dare  Property Owner: Main Street Cupertino Aggregator, LLC  Location: North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard on both sides of Finch Avenue, west of N.  Tantau Avenue and south of Vallco Parkway  (APN 316‐20‐078, 316‐20‐079, and 316‐20‐085)    SECTION II:  FINDINGS FOR A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT:    WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino received an application a Tree Removal Permit as  described in Section I. of this Resolution; and    WHEREAS, the City Council has previously certified an Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the  Main Street Cupertino project (SCH#2008082058) that evaluated the environmental effects of the  development of the subject site, including the removal and replacement of the project trees; and    WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given as required by the Procedural Ordinance of the  City of Cupertino, and the City Council 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    WHEREAS, the City Council finds as follows with regard to this application:    a) That the trees are irreversibly diseased, are in danger of falling, can cause potential damage to  existing or proposed essential structures, or interferes with private on‐site utility services and cannot  be controlled or remedied through reasonable relocation or modification of the structure or utility  services;   The Applicantʹs project arborist and civil engineer (confirmed by the City Arborist) have determined that the  trees proposed for removal are all in poor condition and/or are in conflict with the proposed ultilities and public  improvement infrastructures that are not suitable for preservation or relocation.    183 Resolution No. 13‐___ TR‐2013‐39 February 25, 2013  b) That the location of the trees restricts the economic enjoyment of the property by severely limiting  the use of property in a manner not typically experienced by owners of similarly zoned and situated  property, and the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the approval authority that there  are no reasonable alternatives to preserve the tree(s).   The Applicantʹs project arborist  and civil engineer (confirmed by the City Arborist) have determined that the  trees proposed for removal are all in poor condition and/or in conflict with the necessary ultilities and  site/public improvements, and there are no reasonable alternatives to preserve or relocate.     NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:    That after careful consideration of the maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in  this matter, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on PAGE 2  thereof,:    The Tree Removal Permit, Application no. TR‐2013‐39 are hereby approved, 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 no. TR‐2013‐39 as set forth in the Minutes of the City Council  Meeting of February 25, 2014, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.    SECTION III:  CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.    1. APPROVED EXHIBITS   Approval is based on the Tree Removal Plan consisting of two (2) sheets labeled L8‐1 & L8‐2  (stamped received February 7, 2014), and Project arborist letter prepared by Gary D. Laymon,  California Registered Landscape Architect #2397, except as may be amended by conditions in this  resolution.    2. CONCURRENT APPROVAL CONDITIONS  All previous conditions of approval from Resolution Nos. 12‐054, 12‐055, 12‐055, and 12‐098(M) shall  remain in effect unless superceded by or in conflict with subsequent conditions of approval,  including the conditions contained herein in this resolution.    3. TREE REPLACEMENTS AND FINAL PLANTING PLAN  At least one tree shall be planted for each one removed in the general location where the trees are proposed  to be removed.  The replacement size and number shall be consistent with tree replacement requirements  per Chapter 14.18 of the Municipal Code.      The final planting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development  prior to issuance of building permits. The Director of Community Development may review and  approve further refinements to the tree removal and planting plan as necessary.  The City Arborist  shall confirm that the replacement trees were planted properly and according to plan prior to final  occupancy. Any pertinant in‐lieu fees shall be paid prior to final occupancy of site permits.  4. PLAN OF PROTECTION  A plan of protection indicating a minimum protection zone of 15 feet from the trunks of trees #18 and  #19, as indicated on approved Tree Removal Plan, shall be implemented within thirty (30) days of the  date of this action letter.   184 Resolution No. 13‐___ TR‐2013‐39 February 25, 2013  5. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS  The applicant is responsible to consult with other departments and/or agencies with regard to the  proposed project for additional conditions and requirements.  Any misrepresentation of any  submitted data may invalidate an approval by the Community Development Department.    6. INDEMNIFICATION  To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City  Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim,  action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to  attack, set aside, or void this ordinance or any permit or approval authorized hereby for the project,  including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in  defense of the litigation.  The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with  attorneys of its choice.  7. 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.      PASSED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of February, 2014, Regular Meeting of the City Council of the  City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:    AYES:  CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS:   NOES:  CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS:   ABSTAIN: CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS:   ABSENT: CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS:     ATTEST:      APPROVED:                   Grace Schmidt      Gilbert Wong, Mayor  City Clerk      City of Cupertino          G:\Planning\PDREPORT\CC Res\2013\TR‐2013‐39 CC res draft 2‐25‐14.doc  185 186 187 188 189 190 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT      CITY HALL  10    10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014‐3255      TELEPHONE: (408) 777‐3308    www.cupertino.org      CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT  Meeting:  February 25, 2014    Subject  Joint Use Agreement for the Park and Town Square of Main Street Cupertino    Recommended Action  Staff recommends that the City Council:  1. Approve the Joint Use Agreement.    Description  Applications: Joint Use Agreement  Applicant:   Kevin Dare  Property Owner:  Main Street Cupertino Aggregator, LLC  Location: Main Street Cupertino  North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard on both sides of Finch Avenue, west of N.  Tantau Avenue and south of Vallco Parkway  (APN 316‐20‐079, 316‐20‐078 and 316‐20‐085)    Discussion  Pursuant to Condition 15, of Resolution No. 12‐098M (Attachment A), prior to recordation of the final  map, the Joint Use Agreement (JUA) for the project shall be approved by the City Council. The purpose  of the JUA is to set forth the terms and conditions for the use and operation of the Town Square and the  Public Park.     The proposed JUA (Attachment B) has been developed in consultation with Public Works, Parks and  Recreation and the City Attorneyʹs Office to address the programming needs of the City and to satisfy  the requirements of Condition 15 of Resolution 12‐098(M).     The JUA primarily covers topics associated with the use and operation of the Main Street Park and the  Town Square.  In addition, the JUA also lays out parameters including, but not limited to the following  topics:  • Use of public restroom facilities  • Cityʹs rights of access  • Insurance standards  • Indemnity clause     191 Key highlights of the JUA that pertain to the Main Street Park and the Town Square are summarized  below:    Main Street Park  • The Owner shall install all of the improvements of the Park in accordance with the approvals.  • The City shall be entitled up to six (6) dates per calendar year to make use of the Park for City  activities open to the general public.    • The Retail Owner and Center Association shall have the right to conduct special events by and  through the restaurant tenants of the Retail Owner on weekdays and up to 50% of the weekends  during each year by making arrangements with the Director of Park and Recreation.  o The Retail Owner and Center Association shall provide a monthly list of special events to the  City a month before each event.    o The Retail Owner and Center Association shall obtain City approval (Fire, Building, and  Planning) for each event.   • Other than the events discussed above, the Park shall be available to the general public for passive  park use.  • The Park shall be maintained by the Owner (including general clean up and maintenance of  landscaping/hardscape within the Park).  However, during special events, the party that conducts  the special events in the Park shall be responsible for cleaning up after the events and repairing  related damage.      Town Square  • The Town Square shall be available for the use as part of the retail component of the development.  • The City shall be entitled up to four (4) dates per calendar year to make use of the Town Square for  City activities open to the general public.    • Other than the City events discussed above, the Town Square shall be available for use and  programming by the Owner and Center Association for special functions, occasions, and events per  the approvals.   • The Town Square shall be maintained by the Owner.  Except during special events, the party that  conducts the special events in the Town Square shall be responsible for cleaning up after the events  and be responsible to repair any damage caused by the conduct of the special events.      Upon City Council approval of the Joint Use Agreement, the Director of Public Works will accept and  record on behalf of the City the Easement Agreement for Public Park Purposes – Main Street Park; and  Easement Agreement for Public Event Purposes – Cupertino Main Street Town Square.  _____________________________________    Prepared by: Stephen Rose, Associate Planner  Reviewed by: Gary Chao, Assistant Director of Community Development; Aarti Shrivastava, Director of  Community Development  Approved for Submission by: David Brandt, City Manager    Attachments:  A – Resolution 12‐098(M) ‐ Condition 15  B ‐ Joint Use Agreement  192 1 RESOLUTION NO. 12-098 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A MODIFICATION (M-2012-03) TO A MASTER USE PERMIT (U-2008-01 AND M-2011-09), ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL (ASA-2011-24) AND TENTATIVE MAP (TM-2011-04) FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW A HOTEL WITH 180 ROOMS; 130,500 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE; 260,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE; A 0.80-ACRE TOWN SQUARE; A 120-UNIT LIVE/WORK RENTAL LOFT APARTMENT HOUSING COMPLEX WITH AN ATTACHED 9,146 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL CONDOMINIUM UNIT, AND 216 PARKING SPACES IN THE ATTACHED UNDERGROUND GARAGE DEDICATED FOR RESIDENTIAL USE; A 5-LEVEL PARKING GARAGE WITH TWO LEVELS OF UNDERGROUND PARKING; A 0.75 ACRE PARK INCLUSIVE OF THE PARK AREA AND THE 20-FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG THE WESTERN PERIMETER OF THE SITE ADJACENT TO THE METROPOLITAN MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT; AND A TOTAL OF 1,769 PARKING SPACES FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES (INCLUDING 42 ON-STREE PARKING SPACES ALONG VALLCO PARKWAY AND 1,727 ON-SITE SPACES) ON AN 18.5 ACRE SITE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD BETWEEN FINCH AVENUE (INCLUDING BOTH SIDES OF FINCH AVENUE) AND N. TANTAU AVENUE IDENTIFIED BY APNS 316-20-085, 316-20-078 AND 316-20-079 SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: M-2012-03 Applicant: Kevin Dare Property Owner: 500 Forbes, LLC Location: North of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Finch Avenue (including the both sides of Finch Avenue) and N. Tantau Avenue, south of Vallco Parkway (APNs 316-20-085, 316-20-078 AND 316-20-079) SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino received applications for a Modification to a Master Use Permit, Architectural and Site Approval and Tentative Map, as described in Section I 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 City Council has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, a Second Addendum to the Final Certified 2009 Environmental Impact Report was prepared to adequately address the environmental review of the proposed applications in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has satisfied the following requirements: 193 Resolution No. 12-098 2 1) The proposed project and use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; and 2) The proposed project and use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan, the purpose of the Conditional Use Permits Chapter of the Cupertino Municipal Code, and complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 3) The proposed project and use is consistent with the zoning regulations and the South Vallco Special Center and South Vallco Master Plan; and 4) The proposed project and use is consistent with the Heart of the City Specific Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for a Modification to the Master Use Permit, Architectural and Site Approval and 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 No. M-2012-03 as set forth in the Minutes of the City Council Meeting of September 4, 2012, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is based on Exhibits titled: “Main Street Cupertino, Sand Hill Property Company, Cupertino, California” site plan dated August 15, 2012 and dated received August 28, 2012, Mixed Use Loft plans consisting of pages A1.0, A2.1, A2.2, A2.3, A2.4, A2.5, A2.6, and A3.0, dated received August 28, 2012, and Tentative Map pages TM-1 through TM-8 dated received August 28, 2012, except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 2. PREVIOUS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL All previous conditions of approval from Resolution Nos. 12-054, 12-055 and 12-056, for applications M-2011-09, ASA-2011-24, and TM-2011-04, shall remain in effect unless superseded by or in conflict with subsequent conditions of approval, including the conditions contained herein in this resolution. 3. ACCURACY OF THE PROJECT PLANS The applicant/property owner is responsible to verify all pertinent property data including but not limited to property boundary locations, building setbacks, property size, building square footage, any relevant easements and/or construction records. Any misrepresentation of any property data may invalidate this approval and may require additional review. 4. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL AND PERMIT EXPIRATION Approval of a Modification to the Master Use Permit is granted based upon the site plan identified dated received August 28, 2012 to allow the construction of a hotel with 180 rooms; up to 130,500 194 Resolution No. 12-098 3 square feet of retail space; a 0.80 acre town square; 260,000 square feet of office space; a 120-unit market-rate rental live/work loft apartment housing complex with an attached 9,146 square foot retail condominium unit, and 216 parking spaces (1.8 spaces/unit) in the attached underground garage dedicated for residential use only; a 0.75 acre park inclusive of the park area and the 20- foot wide landscape buffer along the western perimeter of the site adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development, a 5-level parking garage with two levels of underground parking; a total of 1,769 parking spaces for the non-residential uses (based on a credit of 42 on-street parking spaces along Vallco Parkway and 1,727 on-site spaces) ; and a requirement for the ground floor of the office buildings and market-rate live/work loft apartment housing complex to accommodate retail components in each building. The Modification to the Master Use Permit shall expire within three (3) years from the date of this approval. With the exception of the residential units and office square feet, all other uses may be subject to further refinement based on the final approved tenanting and land use plan, provided that there are no additional environmental impacts, such as traffic and parking, as determined by the Community Development Director. Uses Development Approval Housing 120 market-rate live/work housing complex Hotel 180-room hotel Retail 130,500 square feet Office 260,000 square feet Parking 1,985 parking spaces per the City’s Unshared Parking Requirement in the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) , Second Addendum dated August 2012 as follows (assuming a count of 1.8 spaces/unit for the residential units in-lieu of the standard City requirement of 2 spaces/unit): 1. Residential – 216 parking spaces 2. On-street Vallco Parkway – 42 spaces 3. Parking garage and surface parking – 1,727 spaces Parking in the parking garage for the retail, office and hotel uses shall be in accordance with Condition No. 18. Publicly Accessible Open Space (Town Square and Park) 1.55 acres of town square and park area, inclusive of the .20 acres of the 20-foot wide landscape buffer along the western perimeter of the site (adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development site) 5. OFFICE DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION The applicant is permitted to retain the 100,000 square feet of unrestricted office allocation received in 2009 from the N. De Anza Boulevard area in conjunction with the approval for U- 2008-01, and shall additionally receive 160,000 square feet of office allocation from the unrestricted office allocation from other areas in the City, except from the Vallco Park North area, to provide the applicant with a total of 260,000 square feet of unrestricted office allocation. The applicant shall not draw office allocation from the Major Companies pool. 195 Resolution No. 12-098 4 6. HOTEL OPERATIONS The hotel shall be permitted to operate as a 24-hour late night business operation and shall provide a minimum 6,500 square foot restaurant and meeting space area on the ground floor of the hotel along the Town Square. Any additional or revised uses for the hotel will be reviewed at the time specific business operation information is provided about these uses to determine if they are permitted and will require a separate Use Permit application. (Note: This modifies the Condition No. 5 in the approval dated January 20, 2009) to replace the requirement for a 400-person banquet facility with a 6,500 square foot restaurant and meeting space.) 7. LIVE/WORK RENTAL LOFT APARTMENT REQUIREMENTS Prior to issuance of building permits, a covenant, approved by the City Attorney, shall be required to ensure that the live/work rental loft apartment complex shall not be converted to condominium units in the future, and shall adhere to the loft-style studio and one-bedroom units per the approved site and floor plans. The covenant shall contain a provision that it may not be modified without the express written approval of the City. 8. RETAIL CONDOMINIUM OWNERSHIP REQUIREMENTS (PARCEL 5) The developer shall construct no more than one retail condominium adjacent to the rental market rate loft apartments. This retail condominium shall be owned by the same ownership as the rest of the retail on Retail Parcel 1 and not be sold separately. 9. MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE OF RESTAURANTS The maximum square footage of food service uses permitted within the retail space of the mixed- use development shall not be more than 40% of the total retail square footage of 130,500 square feet (or a maximum of 52,600 square feet of restaurant uses) based upon the approved development plan dated August 15, 2012 in accordance with the Main Street Cupertino – Revised Proposed Project Analysis report as Appendix A in the Second Addendum to the Final Certified 2009 EIR prepared by Fehr and Peers. Any future refinements to the restaurant percentage may be approved by the Director of Community Development if a subsequent parking and traffic analysis indicates that there is adequate parking for the various mixtures of uses and there are no additional and/or new significant traffic impacts compared to thresholds studied in the original 2009 Environmental Impact Report and 2012 Addendum. 10. TENTATIVE MAP Approval of a Tentative Map is granted to subdivide the property from three parcels into six parcels per Pages TM-1 through TM-8 as follows: a. Parcel 1 – 11 acres for the retail buildings, park and town square b. Parcel 2 – 1.5 acres for the office building on the corner c. Parcel 3 – 1.5 acres for the office building along Vallco Parkway d. Parcel 4 – 1.5 acres for the hotel e. Parcel 5 –1.5 acres for the live/work loft apartment building with a 9,146 square foot two-unit retail condominium parcel 196 Resolution No. 12-098 5 f. Parcel 6 – 1.5 acres for the Common Area Parcel for the benefit of Parcels 1 through 4. Restrictions and requirements for the shared use of the parking garage to accommodate the retail, hotel and office uses within the development site shall be included within the CC&Rs including but not limited to the requirements in Condition No. 18 and conditions related to this and related project approvals. 11. VACATION OF FINCH AVENUE The vacation of Finch Avenue is necessary to support this development. The vacation will be processed according to procedures set by the Streets and Highways Code and the Municipal Code. A bond will be required prior to issuance of permits for street modifications that will allow Finch Avenue to be reverted back to a standard City street in the case that the construction of the project is not completed. The Developer shall install and complete the street modifications within two (2) years of approval of the Final Map, or such longer period as may be specifically authorized in writing by the City Engineer. Public access easements, for both vehicular and pedestrian travel, will be provided across the improved site, to link Stevens Creek Boulevard with Vallco Parkway, as well as provide public access to the park and the “town center” plaza area. Failure to complete the improvements within the specified time will result in the reversion of Finch Avenue to a standard City street and the ownership of the former Finch Avenue right-of-way s hall revert back to the City. The reversion of Finch Avenue back to a City street shall be subject to approval by the City Attorney and Director of Public Works. 12. COVENANT OF RECIPROCAL INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record a deed restriction for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between each lot created by the new development. The applicant shall also record appropriate deed restrictions for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between the adjacent properties to the west, to be implemented at such time that the City can require the same of adjacent property owners. These reciprocal ingress and egress easements between each lot and between adjacent properties to the west shall also be recorded on the Final Map. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and the Director of Public Works. The covenant of easement shall be recorded prior to final map approval. The deed restrictions shall contain a provision that it may not be modified without the prior express written approval of the City. 13. PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT Public access pedestrian easements through the interior sidewalks, pedestrian paths and plazas, the town square, and park area shall be required and recorded on the final map as noted in the tentative map plans C0.0 – C6.5. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and Director of Public Works prior to recordation of the easement on the project site with the final map approval. The final map will include Public Pedestrian Easements, though the CC&R’s will include additional restrictions/guidelines on the usage of the Public Pedestrian Easements. 14. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS The project CC&Rs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation with the final map approval. The CC&Rs shall incorporate requirements pertaining to the public access easements, reciprocal ingress/egress easements, public pedestrian easements, shared parking, 197 Resolution No. 12-098 6 maintenance and operation of common areas including but not limited to public access to the park and Town Square, and joint use agreements for the town square and park. The CC&Rs shall also incorporate the Maintenance Agreement addressing the maintenance of the park, town square, sidewalks, shared driveways by the property owners of each of the lots, and landscaped park strips along Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard adjacent to the subject site. The conditions of approval for the project shall also be recorded on the properties and incorporated into the CC&Rs. No changes may be made to the CC&Rs without the City Attorney's review and approval. The deed restrictions shall contain a provision that it may not be modified without the prior express written approval of the City. 15. JOINT USE AGREEMENT Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit a joint use agreement between the City and the applicant to be reviewed by the City Attorney and the Director of Parks and Recreation, and approved by the City Council, which permits the City to use the town square and park area for public use for community events or other similar City-approved events or activities, such as, but not be limited to a farmers’ market, holiday activities, and summer events. The joint use agreement shall be recorded and incorporated by reference into the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) of the project site. The Joint Use Agreement shall include provisions for maintenance of the park and town square. The joint use agreement shall govern the public use, programming, public access and percentage of time available for the allowable public activities and events for which the town square and park may be used. The agreement shall also require available publicly identifiable restroom facilities for public use during normal business hours. No structures will be constructed on the town square area without the prior approval of the City of Cupertino, other than the retail pad structure(s) approved in accordance with the Master Use Permit. The programming provisions of the joint use agreement shall be administered between the applicant and the Parks and Recreation Department and the document approved by the City Attorney. The Joint Use Agreement shall contain a provision that it may not be modified without the express written approval of the City. 16. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Applicant shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement that addresses the maintenance of the park, town square, sidewalks, shared driveways by the property owners of each of the lots, and landscaped park strips along Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard directly adjacent to the subject project site. The Maintenance Agreement shall be part of the Covenants, Codes and Restrictions of the project and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to approval of the final map. The Maintenance Agreement shall contain a provision that they may not be modified without the express written approval of the City. 17. GROUND FLOOR RETAIL Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate the ground floor retail functionality for buildings proposed at heights over 45 feet in accordance with the City’s General Plan, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The ground floor retail shall be connected to the building and be of substantial and appropriate size to accommodate the functionality of retail uses. The building frontages of all buildings facing the town square, except for the hotel shall have ground floor retail. However, the hotel must provide active ground floor uses facing the town square. 198 Resolution No. 12-098 7 18. PARKING GARAGE ON THE COMMON AREA PARCEL (OWNERSHIP AND RETAIL PORTION) The five-level above ground parking garage with two levels of below ground parking shall not be sold separately from the other parcels in the project. It shall be held as a common area parcel. Free parking shall be provided in the parking garage and on the surface parking spaces for the retail and office uses. However, the hotel may charge parking fees for its customers to park in the parking garage. The retail incubator buildings on the south side of the parking garage serving Parcels 1 though 4 shall be physically connected to the parking garage in order to satisfy the General Plan height requirement for buildings over 45 feet and under 60 feet. 19. DISCLOSURE CLAUSE TO THE FUTURE PROPERTY OWNERS The applicant/developer shall inform the future owners through the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) as well as other documentation of the surrounding projects and that the development site is under a Cupertino Planned Development zoning. Property purchaser shall check with the City to determine the specific restrictions under the Planned Development zone and related permits. The CC&R language incorporating this requirement shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. 20. BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING PROGRAM For residential units, the applicant shall comply with the requirements in the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing program. For alternatives to these requirements, the applicant may request the Housing Commission to recommend alternatives to the City Council to meet these requirements. For dedication of any housing units at below market rates, the applicant shall record a covenant, which shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney, to be recorded prior to issuance of building permits for the planned senior housing building. BMR fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. 21. HOUSING MITIGATION FEES Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the required housing mitigation fees for the commercial, office and hotel development on the project site. 22. MAXIMUM LENGTH OF HOTEL STAYS Hotel stays shall be limited to a maximum of 30 days per reservation. 23. 2012 ADDENDUM AND SECOND ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED EIR AND THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM The project shall implement all of the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) dated March 2012 as identified in the 2009 Final EIR and as modified by the 2012 Addendum to the Final EIR as updated on May 4, 2012 and the Second Addendum to the Final EIR dated August 2012. 24. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION 199 Resolution No. 12-098 8 Use 2009 Master Use Permit Allocations Granted Approved Modification to the Development Plan Approved 2012 Modified Master Use Permit Additional Allocations Needed Option A(1)-2 Retail Up to 150,000 sf from the Vallco Park South retail commercial allocation Up to 130,500 square feet. No additional allocation is needed Office 100,000 sf from the N. De Anza Boulevard office allocation 260,000 sf 160,000 sf additional from the unrestricted office allocation available per condition no. 4. The applicant may not use any allocation from the Major Companies office allocation. Hotel Up to 250 rooms from the Citywide Hotel allocation 180 rooms No additional allocation needed Housing 160 units from the Vallco Park South residential allocation 120 live/work loft apartment housing units No additional allocation needed The applicant shall receive an allocation of up to 130,500 square feet of retail commercial square footage from the Vallco Park South retail commercial allocation area; 120 live/work loft apartment housing units from the Vallco Park South residential allocation; 180 hotel rooms from the Citywide Hotel allocation; and 260,000 square feet from the unrestricted office allocation available citywide (except from the Vallco Park North office allocation area). 25. CONSTRUCTION PROJECT PHASING AND PARK BOND Prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits, the applicant shall prepare a construction phasing schedule, and shall demonstrate completion of the project based on the project expiration date. The construction phasing schedule shall detail critical milestones of the construction. Critical milestones of the construction shall include but not be limited to the following: The entire project shall be constructed in one phase (Phase I) and the Modification to the Master Use Permit shall expire within three (3) years from the date of this approval. Building permits for all buildings shall be filed and accepted by the City, and the permit shall be used (substantial and continuous activity has taken place) prior to the expiration of the Modification to the Master Use Permit. A performance bond for the park construction (not less than $1.125 million) shall be required in Phase I. The applicant shall work with staff on the appropriate timing for acceptance of the performance bond and completion of the park. If the park is not completed to the satisfaction of the City within three (3) years from the date of approval of the permit, the City shall have the option of calling in the bond and constructing the park. 200 Resolution No. 12-098 9 A. Prior to granting a certificate of occupancy for the first of the hotel or office buildings, the Town Square, street and sidewalk improvements along Finch Avenue loop and the street and sidewalk improvements along the interior roadway connecting Finch Avenue loop to the office parcel shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City. B. Prior to granting a certificate of occupancy for the second of the hotel or office buildings, certificates of completion for shell, core, exterior facades and related landscaping and improvements shall be obtained for at least 50% of the retail approved for the project. C. Prior to granting a certificate of occupancy for the third of the hotel or office buildings, certificates of completion for shell, core, exterior facades and related landscaping and improvements shall be obtained for all the retail buildings. D. Prior to granting a certificate of occupancy for the live/work loft and retail building, the park shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City. 26. GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HOURS All grading activities shall be limited to the dry season (April 15 to October 15) unless otherwise approved by the Director of Public Works. Grading hours shall be limited to Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Grading, street construction, demolition or underground utility work shall not occur on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays, and during the nighttime period as defined in Section 10.48.053(b) of the Municipal Code. Construction activities shall be limited to Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. and Saturday and Sunday, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Construction activities are not allowed on holidays. The developer shall be responsible for educating all contractors and subcontractors of said construction restrictions. Rules and regulation pertaining to all construction activities and limitations identified in this permit, along with the name and telephone number of a developer appointed disturbance coordinator, shall be posted in a prominent location at the entrance to the job site. The applicant shall comply with the above grading and construction hour requirements unless otherwise indicated in the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) dated March 2012 as identified in the 2009 Final EIR and as modified by the 2012 Addendum to the Final EIR. 27. PARKING The applicant shall provide the following number of parking spaces based upon the development plan dated August 15, 2012 (dated received on August 28, 2012), with the following additional requirements: (i) 32 additional parking spaces on site (either in the shared parking garage or surface parking) for a total of 1,727 spaces on-site for the non-residential uses. The applicant shall work with staff to incorporate the additional spaces on site that may include enlarging the parking garage by extending the upper story over the alley east of the garage. (ii) The project would receive credit for 42 on-street parking spaces along Vallco Parkway. However, the project would be allowed to improve Vallco Parkway with 85 angled parking spaces and street improvements on the south side of Vallco Parkway along the project frontage as approved in 2009, until such time in the future that the City decides to modify the parking and street improvements along Vallco Parkway. (iii) 12 additional underground parking spaces in the underground parking garage (increasing parking to 1.8 spaces per unit for a total of 216 parking spaces for the live/work rental loft apartment). Additionally, the applicant shall provide at least one covered parking space for each unit at all times. 201 Resolution No. 12-098 10 The applicant shall also comply with the swales and permeable surfaces requirement of the City’s Parking Regulations. Adjustments to the parking plan may be permitted based on the final approved tenanting and land use program as long as there are no additional parking and traffic impacts as determined by the Director of Community Development and the parking analyses in the Second Addendum. A parking management plan that describes the parking system used by the retail, hotel and office uses shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Director. The applicant shall provide an updated plan for any tenant changes that result in changes to the parking requirements. 28. VALLCO PARKWAY All on-street parking along Vallco Parkway remains public. The parking spaces along Vallco Parkway are public parking spaces which shall always be available to the public. These spaces cannot be limited to use by patrons or tenants of the Main Street Development. The City may eliminate some or all of this parking at any time at its sole discretion. 29. PARKING CONVERSION FUND Prior to issuance of any building permit for the project, the applicant shall be required to provide a “parking conversion” fund that will allow the City to convert the angled parking spaces with one lane of eastbound traffic and a bike lane approved in association with the project along Vallco Parkway to parallel parking spaces with two lanes of eastbound traffic and a bike lane, if and when the City desires. Staff will work with the applicant on the amount to be collected by the applicant. 30. BICYCLE PARKING The applicant shall provide bicycle parking and bike racks for the proposed project in accordance with the City’s Parking Regulations under Chapter 19.124 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 31. PARKING LOT LIGHTING Lighting in the parking lots shall be approved by the Director of Community Development for compliance with applicable regulations prior to issuance of building permits. 32. BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL The Director of Community Development shall review the final building permits for full conformance with the Master Use Permit approval and the Architectural and Site Approval for each building prior to issuance of building permits for each building. 33. SIDEWALKS/CROSSWALKS A. The final sidewalk/street frontage plan shall be required to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the final map, and shall match the guidelines of the South Vallco Master Plan and be consistent with the sidewalk/street frontage plan for the adjacent Rosebowl mixed use development. B. The applicant shall provide decorative crosswalks with colored and/or stamped asphalt pavement across Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The decorative pavement materials shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and the Public Works Department, and shall be consistent with the 202 Resolution No. 12-098 11 recommendation of the traffic analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers in the Transportation Impact Analysis dated September 5, 2008 on p. 48. 34. SIGNAGE Signage is not approved with this application. Signage shall conform to the City’s Sign Ordinance, Heart of the City Specific Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to final occupancy and approval of any individual signs on site, a detailed master sign program shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the City’s Sign Ordinance. 35. ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL A. The buildings, site development and architecture shall substantially conform to the site plan, elevations and details as shown in the approved exhibits, unless otherwise noted below. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of a separate Architectural and Site Approval application for each of the buildings by the Design Review Committee; each Architectural and Site Approval application shall provide a detailed site plan, full elevations (all four sides), floor plans and any other details as required for Architectural and Site Approval applications. Building colors and materials shall be reviewed and approved in conjunction with the Architectural and Site Approval. Minor amendments to approved Architectural and Site Approvals for buildings and/or the site plan, including minor changes to the layout of the site plan, building forms and building sizes, may be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. B. The applicant shall provide the following additional modifications and enhancements to the plan prior to issuance of building permits (including recommendations referenced by the City’s Architectural Advisor on February 20, 2012 in Attachment 11 & 16 or as amended by the Planning Commission): 1. Town Square a. The town square area shall be designed as a “flexible” public space that may be expanded or shifted by the temporary closure of one or more of the surrounding publicly accessible streets. Provide additional landscaping in the square. b. In order to allow for a seamless expansion or shifting of the future pedestrian activities, the town square area will be developed to be flush with the grade of the surrounding street system. The Director of Community Development may approve other similar details deemed to be consistent with the intent of this condition. c. The applicant shall provide decorative semi-pervious pavements or similar treatments in the town square and plaza areas to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. d. Parking on the circular street system shall be delineated by decorative semi-pervious paving or other similar treatments as deemed to be appropriate by the Director of Community Development. e. Final design and landscape of the town square area shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. f. Temporary closure of any portion of the private drive streets, including methods used to temporarily close the street(s), will require approval from the Director of Public Works. 2. Office Buildings Architectural enhancements to the building shall be incorporated including the following: 203 Resolution No. 12-098 12 a. Enhance tower entry features with details and design features (particularly the central tower entry facing Stevens Creek Boulevard) and project the towers out and upward from the main bulk of the building. b. Provide prominent architectural design enhancements to emphasize the importance of this corner as the eastern gateway entry to the City, including identifiable street frontage public entrances along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue, glass store fronts and corner site features. c. Provide horizontal elements to the building design to reduce the verticality of the building frontages along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue. d. Provide deep recessed windows. e. Unify the variety of building forms with more closely related and toned down color tones. f. Add ground floor space as an “arcade-like” element along Stevens Creek Boulevard and around the corners at the easterly Main Street drive entry and a N. Tantau. 3. Hotel a. The Architectural and Site Approval application for the design of the interior and exterior of the hotel must return back to the City Council for review and approval. b. The exterior architectural design of the hotel shall be of the same quality and design standard as the example provided by the applicant of the Marriott Residence Inn in the Gaslamp district of San Diego. c. Provide additional variation in height and wall articulations, such as larger roof eave overhangs with additional façade depth and architectural detail and variety in roof eave heights, to minimize the verticality, bulk and box-like shape of the building. d. Enhance architectural detailing on the building that is in scale with the building. e. Provide deep recessed windows to provide depth to the building façade. f. Increase the horizontal elements of the façade. g. Add patio space (seating) at the corner of Vallco Parkway and Finch Avenue to enliven the streetscape and entry to the site. h. Provide additional architectural pedestrian-scale detailing of the ground floor treatment of the building, including along town square, Vallco Parkway, and the pedestrian area leading to the garage. i. Tone down the contrast in exterior colors and provide colors that will complement the colors used within the development. j. Provide an outdoor dining terrace along the frontages of the restaurant facing town square. 4. Retail Buildings a. Revise the architectural design of the retail pad building(s) in town square from an agrarian look to a park pavilion/kiosk style architecture with greater storefront glazing and sophistication. b. Provide active storefront pedestrian entries on all retail shops facing Stevens Creek Boulevard. c. Provide special design treatments between retail Shops 7 and 8 buildings to lead pedestrians/customers between the park and the town square. d. Bring the Shops 4, 5 and 6 buildings closer to the southeast and southwest corners of the main entryway from Stevens Creek Boulevard. 5. Auto Court/Parking Garage 204 Resolution No. 12-098 13 The parking garage shall provide architectural details and provide features along the ground floor facing Vallco Parkway to promote pedestrian orientation along the street. 6. Street Furniture The applicant shall provide street furniture and pedestrian amenities along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vallco Parkway. Prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the street furniture shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. 7. Rental Live/Work Apartment Loft Building a. Add a distinctive five-story high corner feature that provide a distinctive edge and corner to the southeast corner of the building above the ground floor retail uses; otherwise, there will be an awkward four-story high gap at this corner. b. Provide design articulation on the wall on the southwest corner of the building above the trash enclosure. The ground floor trash enclosure on this corner facing the town square needs to be properly screened and provide architecturally enhanced. c. The hallways appear to be long and narrow and should be enhanced with widened similar to hotel corridors. d. Please clarify if the parking garage and the courtyard will be open or be secured. e. The upper level plans need to clarify if there will be open views to the interior courtyard. f. Plans should clarify where the windows or natural ventilation for the units will be provided on upper floor units. g. Please clarify if the upper floor corridors open or enclosed along the southern side of the building. h. Please provide end cap/corner features to the building. Without these corner end caps, the length and massing of the building is emphasized. i. Provide balcony openings for the units to bring residential presence to the street level. Balconies should be more transparent facing the town square. j. Enhance the ground floor treatment on the southwest corner (where the trash enclosure is proposed) to provide a focal point from the north-south walkway. k. Confirm the height of the building since it may not exceed 60 feet per the City’s General Plan. l. The top of the buildings need to be enhanced with stronger tops. m. Windows should be deep set to enhance the elevations. 8. Site Plan and Surface Parking Lot a. Modify the view to the rear of the parking cars from the loop driveway looking south towards the retail Shop 6 building. b. Modify the site plan to accurately identify the landscaped areas as green and a different color for the hardscaped/non-landscaped areas. c. Provide a single-wide crosswalk between the incubator retail buildings and the retail Pad 3 building in the private roadway. d. Modify the main driveway entrance to fix the awkward and sharp lane transition from Stevens Creek Boulevard. 9. Parking Garage and Attached Retail/Incubator Space 205 Resolution No. 12-098 14 a. Provide left and right turn lanes from the eastern driveway entrance to the parking garage along Vallco Parkway to avoid back-ups onto the street. b. Consider an alternate more convenient hotel valet access to the garage 36. GATEWAY ENTRY The applicant shall be required to construct and install a gateway entry feature on the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue that will be consistent with the policies of the General Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. The gateway entry feature shall be a prominent design that may fulfill the public art requirement and could include a decorative monument feature that spans over Stevens Creek Boulevard, or vertical structural elements on both sides of Stevens Creek Boulevard and on the median to announce entry. Also, this corner shall include a community banner and enhanced pedestrian crossings that may include crosswalk lighting, special paving materials and/or prominent art or architectural feature announcing the entry to the City, such as a wrought iron element, subject to review and approval by the City Council. 37. LANDSCAPE PLAN The applicant shall submit detailed landscape and irrigation plans to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits for the building, portion of development, and/or phase of development for which building permit applications have been submitted. The landscape plan shall provide the following prior to issuance of building permits: A. Water conservation and pesticide reduction measures and requirements in conformance with Chapter 14.15, Landscape Ordinance, and the pesticide control measures referenced in Chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. B. A full landscape project submittal per section 14.15.040 of the Landscaping Ordinance. The Water-Efficient Design Checklist (Appendix A of Chapter 14.15), Landscape and Irrigation Design Plans, and Water Budget Calculations shall be reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. C. Landscaping along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue in accordance with the streetscape design requirements of the Heart of the City Specific Plan. D. Planting of two specimen oak trees flanking the driveway entrances to the development along Stevens Creek Boulevard as replacements for the removal of the existing dead specimen oak tree. E. Existing and Ash trees along Vallco Parkway shall be retained to the maximum possible as determined by the City Arborist. 38. LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION REPORT The project is subject to all provisions delineated in the Landscape Ordinance (CMC, Chapter 14.15). A landscape installation audit shall be conducted by a certified landscape professional after the landscaping and irrigation system have been installed. The findings of the assessment shall be consolidated into a landscape installation report. The landscape installation report shall include, but is not limited to: inspection to confirm that the landscaping and irrigation system are installed as specified in the landscape and irrigation design plan, system tune-up, system test with distribution uniformity, reporting overspray or run-off that causes overland flow, and preparation of an irrigation schedule. 206 Resolution No. 12-098 15 The landscape installation report shall include the following statement: “The landscape and irrigation system have been installed as specified in the landscape and irrigation design plan and complies with the criteria of the ordinance and the permit.” 39. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE Per the Landscape Ordinance (CMC, Chapter 14.15), a maintenance schedule shall be established and submitted to the Director of Community Development or his/her designee, either with the landscape application package, with the landscape installation report, or any time before the landscape installation report is submitted. a) Schedules should take into account water requirements for the plant establishment period and water requirements for established landscapes. b) Maintenance shall include, but not be limited to the following: routine inspection; pressure testing, adjustment and repair of the irrigation system; aerating and de-thatching turf areas; replenishing mulch; fertilizing; pruning; replanting of failed plants; weeding; pest control; and removing obstructions to emission devices. c) Failed plants shall be replaced with the same or functionally equivalent plants that may be size-adjusted as appropriate for the stage of growth of the overall installation. Failing plants shall either be replaced or be revived through appropriate adjustments in water, nutrients, pest control or other factors as recommended by a landscaping professional. 40. SOIL ANALYSIS REPORT A soils analysis report shall document the various characteristics of the soil (e.g. texture, infiltration rate, pH, soluble salt content, percent organic matter, etc) and provide recommendations for amendments as appropriate to optimize the productivity and water efficiency of the soil. The soil analysis report shall be made available to the professionals preparing the landscape and irrigation design plans in a timely manner either before or during the design process. A copy of the soils analysis report shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development as part of the landscape documentation package. 41. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Prior to final inspections and final occupancy, the owner(s) of the property shall enter into a formal written landscape maintenance agreement with the City. The City shall record this agreement, against the property or properties involved, with the County of Santa Clara Recorder's Office and it shall be binding on all subsequent owners of land served by the proposed landscape. The landscape maintenance agreement shall require that modifications and maintenance activities not alter the level of water efficiency of the landscape from its original design, unless approved by the City prior to the commencement of the proposed modification or maintenance activity. 42. TREE REMOVAL A. The applicant is approved to remove a total of 61 trees and relocate 17 trees on site in accordance with the City Arborist’s report prepared by David Babby and dated April 30, 2008. Although the applicant is requesting approval to remove these trees in accordance with the City Arborist’s recommendation, the intent is to retain as many of the existing perimeter street 207 Resolution No. 12-098 16 trees for the remaining life of such trees where they are not considered dead or do not require immediate removal. B. The applicant shall be required to replace the Aleppo Pine tree (Tree No. 113) that was removed in accordance with the City’s Protected Trees Ordinance (Chapter 14.18 of the Cupertino Municipal Code). C. For any trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions, are considered dead, or die as a result of relocation, the applicant shall be required to obtain a tree removal permit and replace these trees in accordance with the City’s Protected Trees Ordinance. D. For any trees that require removal due to construction plan drawing changes and/or construction activity, the applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. E. The Director of Community Development may review and approve further refinements to the tree removal and planting plan based on the approved final land use program for the center provided that there are no significant environmental or visual impacts. 43. TREE REPLACEMENTS Final approval of the required tree replacements shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development in accordance with the City’s Protected Trees Ordinance. The applicant may be able to reduce the number of replacement trees on site, if larger size trees are proposed, in accordance with the tree replacement standards of the ordinance. For any additional trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions or are considered dead, the applicant shall be required to obtain a tree removal permit and replace these trees in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. Species and size of replacement trees shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. 44. TREE PROTECTION As part of the building permit drawings, a tree protection plan shall be prepared by a certified arborist for the trees to be retained. The applicant shall be required to install tree protection measures before and during development in accordance with the City Arborist’s report dated April 30, 2008, and in accordance with requirements of the Public Works Department for the preservation of existing street trees. In addition, the following measures shall be added to the protection plan: A. For trees to be retained, chain link fencing and other root protection shall be installed around the dripline of the tree prior to any project site work. B. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the project arborist. C. No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City Arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. D. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers. E. Retained trees shall be watered to maintain them in good health. 45. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in an amount determined by the City Arborist to ensure protection of trees slated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, subject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. 208 Resolution No. 12-098 17 46. TREE REPLACEMENT IN-LIEU FEE The applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee in accordance with the City’s Protected Trees Ordinance for any trees that cannot be replaced on site. 47. HEART OF THE CITY DESIGN GUIDELINES A. The project shall comply with the Heart of the City Specific Plan development standards and design guidelines in effect at the time of project approval. B. If any portions of the buildings on the Master Use Permit site plan do not meet the minimum setbacks per the Heart of the City Specific Plan, the applicant must either modify the building setback or obtain approval of an Exception application to the Heart of the City Specific Plan. 48. SOUTH VALLCO MASTER PLAN The project shall comply with the South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to release of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the final boulevard plan along Vallco Parkway shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to contact adjacent property owners to show improvement plans including, but not limited to the specific lighting, sidewalk furniture, and landscaping treatments to be consistent with the vision of the South Vallco Master Plan. 49. CREEK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS The applicant shall contribute an amount not to exceed $65,000 to the improvements of a trail connection along Calabazas Creek from Vallco Parkway to I-280. This contribution shall be used by the City to administer a creek trail plan and necessary approvals and improvements. If this fund is not used within five years of the project completion, then it shall be returned to the applicant. 50. PARK AREA ALONG METROPOLITAN A approximately 0.55 acre park area shall be maintained along the western property line adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development. A minimum 20-foot wide landscape buffer shall be provided along the western property line adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development; the landscape buffer shall be included in the acreage of the park. The design of the park area shall include but not be limited to passive recreation apparatuses, such as a tot lot and sitting areas. The Parks and Recreation Commission shall review the park design and shall refer its recommendation to the City Council for review and approval. The linear green space park buffer parallel to the eastern property line of the Metropolitan mixed use development shall be installed prior to issuance of building occupancy of any building constructed adjacent to this property line. 51. SECURITY PLAN FOR PARKING GARAGE The applicant shall develop a comprehensive private security plan for the entire development encompassing patrol hours, manning levels and frequency, closed circuit cameras in the parking garage, and adequate lighting levels. The plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Sheriff’s Department prior to final occupancy. 52. PARKING GARAGE NOISE MITIGATION The parking garage floors shall be treated/coated with materials as deemed appropriate by the City to lessen the noise impacts of vehicle movements. 53. RESTAURANT ODOR ABATEMENT 209 Resolution No. 12-098 18 All restaurants shall install odor abatement systems to be incorporated into the air handling systems to reduce the odor impact from the restaurants to the adjacent community. Detailed plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. 54. SCREENING All mechanical and other equipment on the buildings and site shall be screened so they are not visible from public street areas or adjoining developments. Screening materials/colors shall match building features and materials. The height of the screening shall be taller than the height of the mechanical equipment that it is designed to screen. The location of equipment and necessary screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. 55. TRASH AND DELIVERY ACTIVITIES A detailed refuge and truck delivery plan must be prepared by the applicant. The plan shall specify locations of trash facilities, refuge pick up schedules and truck delivery schedules and routes. All trash facilities must be screened and enclosed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. The final plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. All deliveries shall comply with the mitigation measures provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009, except as may be modified by the 2012 Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR). 56. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT MEETING Prior to commencement of construction activities, the applicant shall arrange for a pre- construction meeting with the pertinent departments (Building, Planning, and Public Works) to review the applicant-prepared construction management plan. 57. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN A construction management plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by staff prior to issuance of building permits. During Phase 1 and 2 of the construction, staging of construction and equipment shall occur as far away from any residential property as possible. The applicant shall also provide a construction manager hotline phone number for residents of the adjacent Metropolitan condominium complex to call for construction related activities on the project site. The hotline number shall also be posted on the project site and at the Metropolitan condominium complex. Said construction management plan shall also provide the following: A. Construction Vehicle Access and Routing B. Construction Equipment Staging Area C. Dust Control (Best Management Practices) D. Hours of Operation E. Street Cleaning Schedule and Program 58. DUST CONTROL The following construction practices shall be implemented during all phases of construction for the proposed project to prevent visible dust emissions from leaving the site: a) Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during windy periods to prevent visible dust from leaving the site; active areas adjacent to windy periods; active areas 210 Resolution No. 12-098 19 adjacent to existing land uses shall be kept damp at all times, or shall be treated with non-toxic stabilizers or dust palliatives. b) Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard; c) Pave, apply water at least three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction site. d) Sweep streets daily, or more often if necessary (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. e) The applicant shall incorporate the City’s construction best management practices into the building permit plan set. f) The applicant shall comply with the above dust control requirements unless otherwise indicated in the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) dated March 2012 as identified in the 2009 Final EIR and as modified by the 2012 Addendum to the Final EIR. 59. NOISE MITIGATION The project and retail operations shall comply with the City’s Community Noise Control Ordinance (Chapter 10.48 of the CMC), unless otherwise indicated in the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) dated March 2012 as identified in the 2009 Final EIR and as modified by the 2012 Addendum to the Final EIR. In addition, the following mitigation measures shall be taken in order to reduce noise event impacts to nearby receptor areas: a) Delivery trucks shall be turned off while unloading products at the loading dock. b) Construction equipment shall be have quiet design features, be well-maintained, and have a high quality muffler system. c) Temporary plywood enclosures shall be erected around stationary equipment that produces excessive noise at nearby receptors. d) Unnecessary idling of machines when not in use shall be prohibited. e) Good maintenance and lubrication procedures shall be used to reduce operating noise. 60. GREEN BUILDING The applicant shall obtain LEED certification designation for the hotel, office and loft residential rental housing buildings in accordance with the U.S. Green Building Council standards and the City’s Green Building policies. The applicant shall also design the athletic club (if developed) and retail buildings to LEED certification standards, but will not be required to certify these buildings as LEED certified. The applicant shall also provide solar hot water heating for any pools provided on the project site. 61. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT The applicant shall commit to implementing a transportation demand management (TDM) plan incorporating solutions as indicated in the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) dated March 2012 as identified in the 2009 Final EIR and as modified by the 2012 Addendum to the Final EIR, that may include parking cash-out and eco passes for employees, valet for customers and off-site parking options. The TDM plan including the projected funding shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development Director prior to issuance of building permits. 211 Resolution No. 12-098 20 62. UTILITY STRUCTURES All new utility structures shall be located underground or screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development and Public Works. 63. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS All demolished building and site materials shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible subject to the Building Official and shall meet the mandatory requirements of the Cal Green Building Code. The applicant shall provide evidence that materials will be recycled prior to issuance of final demolition permits. 64. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS The applicant is responsible to consult with other departments and/or agencies with regard to the proposed project for additional conditions and requirements. Any misrepresentation of any submitted data may invalidate an approval by the Community Development Department. 65. 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. 66. PUBLIC ART The applicant shall provide public art in accordance with General Plan policy 2- 66. Public art shall be installed on the project site prior to final occupancy of the last building completed in the first phase. The public art shall be valued at a minimum of one-quarter percent (1/4%) of the total project budget, not to exceed $100,000. The applicant shall submit a public art plan to be reviewed by the Fine Arts Commission prior to installation of the public art. 67. CIRCULATION PLAN Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide an auto, bike and pedestrian circulation plan. 68. SHERIFF SUBSTATION The applicant shall add a Sheriff’s substation on site. The applicant shall work with staff on the appropriate location and size of the substation. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. These conditions are not intended to be exhaustive. Additional conditions may need to be addressed, prior to issuance of a building permit, based on potential modifications to the site’s usage and/or layout. 69. STREET WIDENING Public street widening and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 212 Resolution No. 12-098 21 70. 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. 71. 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. 72. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. 73. 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. 74. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Hydrology and pre- and post- development hydraulic calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be constructed or renovated. The storm drain system may include, but is not limited to, subsurface storage of peak stormwater flows (as needed), low impact development facilities, or other approved means, to reduce the amount of runoff from the site and to improve storm water quality. The storm drain system shall be designed to detain water on-site (e.g., via buried pipes or storage structures) as necessary to avoid an increase of one percent flood water surface elevation of the culvert to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Any storm water overflows or surface sheeting should be directed away from neighboring private properties and to the public right of way as much as reasonably possible. Hydro-modification measures may be required as directed by the Municipal Regional Permit. 75. 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. 76. 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 under grounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits Fees: a. Checking & Inspection Fees: 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $4,101.00 minimum 213 Resolution No. 12-098 22 b. Grading Permit: 6% of Site Improvement Cost or $2,387.00 minimum c. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 3,000.00 d. Storm Drainage Fee: $ TBD e. Power Cost: ** f. Map Checking Fees: $8,052.00 g. Park Fees: $ per Municipal Code (or an equivalent park land dedication) h. Street Tree By Developer ** Based on the latest effective PG&E rate schedule approved by the PUC 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. 77. TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. The transformer shall not be located in the front or side building setback area. 78. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading and street improvement plans. 79. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with California Water Services Company for water service to the subject development. 80. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT The developer must obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) from the State Water Resources Control Board, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), use of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control storm water runoff quality, and BMP inspection and maintenance. 81. C.3 REQUIREMENTS The developer shall reserve a minimum of 4% of developable surface area for the placement of low impact development measures, for storm water treatment, on the tentative map, unless an 214 Resolution No. 12-098 23 alternative storm water treatment plan, that satisfies C.3 requirements, is approved by the City Engineer. The developer must include the use and maintenance of site design, source control and storm water treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs), which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. A Storm Water Management Plan, Storm Water Facilities Easement Agreement, Storm Water Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement, and certification of ongoing operation and maintenance of treatment BMPs are each required. All storm water management plans are required to obtain certification from a City approved third party reviewer. 82. FULL TRASH CAPTURE SYSTEM The developer will be responsible for installing a full trash capture system/device to capture trash from the onsite storm drain before the storm water reaches the City owned storm drain system. A full capture system or device is a single device or series of devices that traps all particles retained by a 5 mm mesh screen and has a design treatment capacity of not less than the peak flow rate Q resulting from a one-year, one-hour storm in the sub-drainage area (see the Municipal Regional Permit section C.10 for further information/requirements). 83. EROSION CONTROL PLAN The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. 84. WORK SCHEDULE Every 6 months, the developer shall submit a work schedule to the City to show the timetable for all grading/erosion control work in conjunction with this project. 85. TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS The developer shall agree to fund up to $300,000 for the purpose of installing a traffic signal at Finch Avenue and Vallco Parkway as well as for making traffic signal improvements at the Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau Ave intersection. The developer shall also submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 86. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT WOLFE ROAD AND VALLCO PARKWAY The developer shall mitigate for traffic impacts at Vallco Parkway and Wolfe Road by implementing one of the options stated in the Environmental Impact Report for Main Street Cupertino per the approval of the City Engineer. 87. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT HOMESTEAD ROAD & LAWRENCE EXPRESSWAY The developer shall agree to submit their fair-share cost of up to $400,000 to improve Homestead Road at Lawrence Expressway according to the direction of the City Engineer. The fair-share contribution to the County will be dependent on the amount of traffic generated by the approved Plan. In the event that a Plan is approved that has reduced traffic impacts, the same formula would be used (calculating the percentage of traffic the project is adding to total growth between background and cumulative conditions). The cost shall be submitted to the County of Santa Clara in the form of a bond or cash deposit prior to the City issuing building permits, with the proviso 215 Resolution No. 12-098 24 that the funds be committed to this specific improvement in accordance of section 66000 et. seq. of the California Government Code. 88. PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT The Developer shall provide, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, a public access easement across the site, over the park and over the town center. The easement, including for vehicular and pedestrian travel, shall link Stevens Creek Boulevard with Vallco Parkway, the park and the town center. Public access easements shall include access for both vehicular and pedestrian travel, and shall be shown and recorded on the Final Map. All of the internal roadways shall have a public driving and parking access easement over them. Public access areas may not be closed off without the consent and approval of the Public Works Department, and shall be governed by the Joint Use Agreement recorded within the project’s Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s). The public access easement shall be subject to approval by the City Attorney. The public access easement shall contain a provision that they may not be modified without the express written approval of the City. 89. PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS The developer shall provide pedestrian improvements along the property frontage, including crosswalk improvements at adjoining intersections. Final crosswalk improvement plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 90. BUS STOP LOCATION The developer shall improve bus stops on Stevens Creek Boulevard along the project frontage and the immediate vicinity of the project site to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; this may include consistent shelters for the bus stops, but will not include duck outs or relocation of the bus stops. 91. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The developer must submit a traffic control plan by a Registered Traffic Engineer to be approved by the City. The plan shall include a temporary traffic control plan for work in the right of way as well as a routing plan for all vehicles used during construction. All traffic control signs must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of work. The City has adopted Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards for all signage and striping work throughout the City. 92. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City. 93. TRAFFIC CALMING The developer shall agree to fund up to $100,000 for the purpose of mitigating traffic impacts in the adjacent neighborhoods resulting from the project for a period of 5 years following project occupancy. The developer shall submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 94. EMERGENCY VEHICLE PREEMPTION FUND The Developer is required to pay $15,000.00 to fund three Emergency Vehicle Preemption devices for traffic signals at the adjacent intersections. 95. BICYCLE PARKING 216 Resolution No. 12-098 25 The developer shall provide bicycle parking consistent with the City’s requirements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 96. OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT The developer shall enter into an Operations & Maintenance Agreement with the City prior to final occupancy. The Agreement shall include the operation and maintenance for non-standard appurtenances in the public road right-of-way that may include, but is not limited to, sidewalk, pavers, and street lights. 97. TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Manager. Clearance by the Public Works Department is needed prior to obtaining a building permit. 98. REFUSE TRUCK ACCESS The developer must obtain clearance from the Environmental Programs Manager in regards to refuse truck access for the proposed development. 99. 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. 100. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 101. SANTA CLARA WATER DISTRICT CLEARANCE Provide Santa Clara water district approval before recordation of the final map. The developer shall pay for and obtain Water District permit for activities or modifications within the District easement or fee right of way or affecting District facilities. 102. STREAMSIDE PERMIT Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall provide plans and information that satisfies the requirements of the Stream Side Permit as set forth by the Santa Clara Valley Water Resources Protection Collaborative. These items include, but are not limited to, topographic survey, specific measures to protect streams and/or waterbodies from water quality impacts, coordination with all interested jurisdictional agencies, etc. 103. SANITARY DISTRICT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Cupertino Sanitary District prior to issuance of building permits. 104. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. 105. UTILITY EASEMENTS Clearance approvals from the agencies with easements on the property (including PG&E, PacBell, and California Water Company, and/or equivalent agencies) will be required prior to issuance of building permits. 217 Resolution No. 12-098 26 106. CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY CLEARANCE Provide California Water Service Company approval before recordation of the final map. 107. CALABAZAS CREEK INSPECTION The developer agrees to have all bays of the Calabazas Creek Culvert, from Stevens Creek through Vallco Parkway, inspected and videotaped prior to start of any construction on site. An inspection report and 2 copies of the inspection video are to be provided to the City prior to issuance of a permit to begin any work on site. The developer is responsible for coordinating with and obtaining and permits from the Santa Clara Valley Water District prior to beginning inspection operations. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 4th day of September 2012, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: Santoro, Mahoney, Chang, Sinks, Wong NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/Grace Schmidt /s/Mark Santoro ____________________ _______________________ Grace Schmidt Mark Santoro City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232