PC Packet 08-25-2015CITY OF CUPERTINO
AGENDA
Tuesday, August 25, 2015
10350 Torre Avenue, Council Chamber
PLANNING COMMISSION
6:45 PM
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1.Subject: Draft Minutes of July 28, 2015
Recommended Action: approve or modify draft Minutes of July 28, 2015
Draft Minutes 07-28-15
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Commission
on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. In most
cases, State law will prohibit the Commission from making any decisions with respect to
a matter not on the agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC HEARING
2.Subject: Civic Center Cell Tower - Verizon Wireless
Page 1 CITY OF CUPERTINO
August 25, 2015Planning Commission AGENDA
Recommended Action: Approve the applications per the draft resolutions
Description:
Appliccation No(s): ASA-2014-10, DP-2014-07, EXC-2014-12
Applicant(s): Jenny Blocker (Verizon)
Location: 10300 Torre Ave
Architectural and Site Approval for the design of a personal wireless service facility
consisting of 6 panel antennas mounted on a tree pole designed for collocation and
an enclosed base equipment station and emergency power generator;
Development Permit to allow a personal wireless service facility consisting of 6
panel antennas mounted on an 80-foot tall tree pole designed for collocation and an
enclosed base equipment station and emergency power generator;
Height Exception to allow six panel antennas to be mounted at a height of 66 feet on
an 80-foot tall tree pole, where 55 feet is allowed for a wireless communications
facility at Cupertino City Hall
Staff Report
DP-2014-07 draft resolution
ASA-2014-10 draft resolution
EXC-2014-12 draft resolution
1 - Project Description
2 - Height Justification
3 - Existing & Proposed Coverage Maps
4 - RF Report
5 - Noise Report
6 - 3D Simulation
7 - Tree Pole Photo
8 - Photosimulations
9 - Arborist Report
10 - Alternatives Analysis
11 - TICC Comments
12 - Public Comments
13 - Plan Set
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Environmental Review Committee
Housing Commission
Mayor’s Monthly Meeting with Commissioners
Economic Development Committee Meeting
Page 2 CITY OF CUPERTINO
August 25, 2015Planning Commission AGENDA
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ADJOURNMENT
Page 3 CITY OF CUPERTINO
August 25, 2015Planning Commission AGENDA
If you challenge the action of the Planning Commission in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in
this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Cupertino at, or prior
to, the public hearing. In the event an action taken by the planning Commission is
deemed objectionable, the matter may be officially appealed to the City Council in
writing within fourteen (14) days of the date of the Commission’s decision. Said appeal
is filed with the City Clerk (Ordinance 632).
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning
to attend the next Planning Commission meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or
has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at
408-777-3223, 48 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. Upon
request, in advance, by a person with a disability, Planning Commission meeting
agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made
available in the appropriate alternative format. Also upon request, in advance, an
assistive listening device can be made available for use during the meeting.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission after
publication of the packet will be made available for public inspection in the Community
Development Department located at City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, during normal
business hours and in Planning packet archives linked from the agenda/minutes page
on the Cupertino web site.
Members of the public are entitled to address the Planning Commission concerning any
item that is described in the notice or agenda for this meeting, before or during
consideration of that item. If you wish to address the Planning Commission on any issue
that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located in front of the
Commission, and deliver it to the City Staff prior to discussion of the item. When you
are called, proceed to the podium and the Chair will recognize you. If you wish to
address the Planning Commission on any other item not on the agenda, you may do so
by during the public comment portion of the meeting following the same procedure
described above. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes or less. Please note
that Planning Commission policy is to allow an applicant and groups to speak for 10
minutes and individuals to speak for 3 minutes.
For questions on any items in the agenda, or for documents related to any of the items
on the agenda, contact the Planning Department at (408) 777 3308 or
planning@cupertino.org.
Page 4 CITY OF CUPERTINO
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
6:45 P.M. JULY 28, 2015 TUESDAY
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The regular Planning Commission meeting of July 28, 2015, was called to order at 6:45 p.m. in the
Cupertino Council Chambers, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA. byChairperson Winnie Lee.
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: Chairperson:Winnie Lee
Vice Chairperson:Alan Takahashi
Commissioner: Geoff Paulsen
Commissioner: Margaret Gong
Commissioner:Don Sun
Staff Present:Asst. Dir. Community Development: Gary Chao
AssociatePlanner: Tiffany Brown
Asst. City Attorney: Colleen Winchester
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Minutes of the May 26, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting:
MOTION:Motion by Com. Paulsen, second by Vice Chair Takahashi, and unanimously
carried 5-0-0, to approve the May 26, 2015 Planning Commission minutes as
presented.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None
POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
Lisa Warren, Cupertino resident:
Expressed concernabout the condition of the brown trees during the drought and suggested they be
watered by hand or truck. More water will be needed if the trees die and have to be replaced with
new ones.
Cupertino Planning Commission July 28, 2015
2
Com. Paulsen:
Said he was a forest manager and was on a Parks and Rec Commission. On a recent tour by Public
Works staff, one of the arborists explained that the City was going to be letting some of the grass die,
but they consideredthe trees their greatest investment and will be watching the trees very carefully.
In some cases for the trees such as redwoods with high water needs they will remove the plants from
around the roots that would compete for the water and add mulch to protectthem and retain the water.
CONSENT CALENDAR: None
PUBLIC HEARING:
1.U-2015-03, ASA-2015-16 Use Permit for full service bar withliveentertainment
Lexi Moriarty (Rootstock Wine Bar)and late hours of operation;Architectural and Site
Main Street Cupertino Aggregator LLC Approval to allow enhancements to the exterior patio for
19389 Stevens Creek Boulevard theexisting building
Tiffany Brown, Associate Planner, presented the staff report:
Reviewed the application for a Use Permit for a full servicebar with live entertainment and late hours
of operation; and Architecturaland Site Approval to allow enhancements to the exterior patio to the
existing building, within the Main Street Cupertino project, as outlined in the staff report.
She reviewed the slide presentation which included the project site, operational details, patio
enhancements and security plans.The applicant has revised the application requesting to amend the
hours of operation previously proposed as 8 a.m. to 2 a.m. Monday through Sunday to 8 a.m. to 1
a.m. Monday through Saturday; closing from 8 a.m. to midnight on Sunday; which is consistent with
other restaurants approved in the project.
Project is categorically exempt from CEQA; has been reviewed by theSheriff’s Department andthey
support the project; there is a Sheriff’s substation within the Main Street project and Main Street also
has its own security plan as well as the Sheriff’s substation.
Staff recommends adoption of resolutions to approve the Use Permit for the separate full service bar,
live entertainment, and the late hours of operation reflecting the revised hours stated and also the site
and architectural enhancements for the patio area.
Staff answered questions about the application.
Jim Foley, representing Rootstock Wine Bar:
Said they were pleased to be a part of the Main Street project.Said that the facility would offer
outdoor dining, an acoustic guitar player or a jazz trio at various times compared to the Los Gatos
location.
Relative to the operating hours he said they requested a 1:00 a.m. closing rather than 2:00 a.m. He
said either of the closing times would work well, but they wanted to work with the neighbors and
landlords. Said theentertainment is lively but the people can still maintain the ability to have
conversations. They anticipate it as being a supplement or replacement to the backgroundambient
music there. Said that their vision for Main Street is having a wide variety of offerings at different
restaurants to complement each other, not necessarily compete with each other. He said they are an
activepart of the communities they are located in, and areinvolved in giving back to the community
in the form of donations and educational events.
Chair Lee opened the public hearing.
Cupertino Planning Commission July 28, 2015
3
Jennifer Griffin, Rancho Rinconada resident:
Said she felt the new wine bar would be centrally located and would be a welcome addition to the city
for places to go; a tasteful placein a goodlocation. She questioned if dogs would be allowed on the
premises; and what the shutdown time was for serving alcohol. Also asked if staff were trained to
deal with controlling the service of alcohol when people were drinking. She said she felt the Sheriff’s
office should be manned 24 hours becauseof the rise in crime.
Leslie Warren:
Said she was concerned about a potential Battle of the Bands between the bars and restaurants in
close proximity to one another if there was indoor/outdoor music on premises. She noted there was
no breakfast menu; what would they be doing at 8a.m.?
She felt the parking structure was getting bigger and bigger, and is a problem when lit up all night
long in several neighboring areas. Said she was not comfortable with everything being illuminated
when so close to residential. She asked if there was a way to limit parking to lower levels of the
parkingstructureso thatonly light in those levels couldbe on.
Chair Lee closed the public hearing.
Chair Lee:
Said one of the questionsfrom a speaker related to the entertainment; on the Use Permit on 6A it
defines daytime to be 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. and it says outdoor live entertainment should not produce noise
levels above 70 decibels. She suggested language “70 decibels on any residential propertyfor a
period longer than 3 hours during the daytime.”
Com. Gong:
Relative to 6Cit says continuous or repeated peak noise levels above95 decibels shall not be
produced at any location. She suggested deleting “where persons may be continuously exposed”. She
said she felt it should not be over 95 decibels
Com. Paulsen:
Relative to outdoor music, he said he felt that it depends on the type of music; he said he could like
the flexibility of inside and outside provided everyone gets along with it and enjoys it.
Gary Chao:
Said that the property owners would have rules which they would hold the restaurants accountable to.
Colleen Winchester, Asst. City Attorney:
Said the dog issue would be regulated by the Dept. of Health and State regulations. Service animals
are always permitted inside and outside of any establishment. State and countyregulates dogs.
Gary Chao:
Lighting and parking were assessed in tradition as part of the master use permit. Staff understands
the concern and the sensitivity of those issues but it has no bearing on Commission’s decision and if
they would be able to address throughthe entitlement. None of the buildings are occupied.
There is a process to go through; the developers would have to go through showingthe citylighting
plan, which has been done already so they should be all specced out and constructed accordingly.
In the future after things are inoperation, the city will have the ability for review; if there are
complaints or concerns, staff can talk to the shopping center owner aboutmaking the appropriate
adjustments.
Cupertino Planning Commission July 28, 2015
4
Colleen Winchester:
Reported that as of January 1, 2014,dogs can be allowed in an outdoor dining establishment area, but
it is up to the discretion of the restaurant.
Com. Gong:
Suggested the premises have two unisex restrooms. All concurred.
Applicant:
Said they were consideringoffering a brunch, but the concept has not been fully developed yet.
Motion:Motion by Vice Chair Takahashi, second byCom. Gong,and carried4-1-0; Chair Lee
voted No, to approve Application U-2015-04 as written with the findings as listed in the
draft resolution.
Chair Lee said she voted No as she preferred that the applicant make the request once
all the other tenant spaces are used up.
Motion:Motion by Com. Gong, second by Com.Paulsen, and unanimously carried 5-0-0, to
approve the draft resolution U-2015-03; modified as stated earlier including
typographical errors.
Motion:Motion by Com. Gong, second by Vice Chair Takahashi, and unanimously carried 5-0-
0, to approve resolution ASA-2015-16 as written with typographical errors corrected.
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS: None
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Environmental Review Committee:
Com. Gong reported that the environmental review of the Civic Center Master Plan was reviewed;
recommended Mitigated Negative Declaration, with one dissenting vote Chang. Sent to City Council.
Housing Commission: No meeting.
Economic Development Committee Meeting: Meeting in August.
Mayor’s MonthlyMeeting With Commissioners:
Com. Paulsen reportedhe attended July 1st meeting. Mayor discussed his concept for project
proposal and review.
Com. Paulsen commended staff for their excellent work.
Bicycle/Pedestrian Commission approved a $50K consultant contract to look at the big picture. The
mayor feels the BP Commission should have a rep on the Stevens Creek Trail Comm. to get the trail
connecting Cupertino to Mtn. View through Sunnyvale and LosAltos.
Parks and Rec Commission: Various summer activities include movies, summer program; August 4th
National Night Out; summer concerts; online reservation system pending; work on Parks Master Plan.
Discussion on Transit; August 3rd Transit Forum 7-9.
Cupertino Planning Commission July 28, 2015
5
Public Safety Commission: Released report on bike lane safety; accident map pending; also looking
at concern about teen suicide.
Library Commission: Shakespeare in the Park; an all-night coding was recently held; science project
will be held as well.
Fine Arts Commission: Will be judging the utility box art project “Energized By Art”; also
distinguished and emerging artist awards; new sculpture at Homestead Safeway store.
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: No written report.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned to the Planning Commission meeting at 6:45 p.m.on August 11, 2015.
Respectfully Submitted: /s/Elizabeth Ellis
Elizabeth Ellis, Recording Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. Agenda Date:August 25, 2015
Application:DP-2014-07, ASA-2014-10, & EXC-2014-12
Applicant: CompleteWireless/Verizon Wireless
Application Summary:
Development Permit (DP-2014-07) and Architectural &Site Approval(ASA-2014-10)to allow the
construction ofa personal wireless service facility consisting of 6 panel antennas mounted on anew 80-
foot talltreepole designed for collocation and an enclosed base equipment station and emergency power
generator;
Height Exception (EXC-2014-12) to allow six panel antennas to be mounted at a height of 66 feet on a
new80-foot tall tree pole, where 55 feet is allowed for a personal wireless service facilityat Cupertino
City Hall
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of DP-2014-07, ASA-2014-10, andEXC-2014-12 in accordance with the
attached model resolutions
BACKGROUND:
The applicant, Jenny Blocker of CompleteWireless, representing Verizon Wireless, has proposed the
construction of a personal wireless service facility, consisting of six panel antennas mounted on anew
80-foot tall treepole, a base equipment station and an emergency power generator located in an
enclosure in an existing landscape area of theCupertino City Hall parking lot along Rodrigues Avenue
(Attachment 1). The treepole and enclosure havebeen sized and designed for collocation of another
wireless carrierin the near future.
The Verizon panel antennas will be mounted at amaximum height of 66’,which requires a height
exception approval toexceed theordinancemaximum 55’ antenna height requirement.
The proposed wireless facility is sited on the northeast corner of the Civic Centerproperty with
detached single-family residential uses located to the eastacross from an existing Santa Clara Valley
Water District drainagechannel;a parking lot to thesouth; City Hall building to the west;and attached
single-family residences to the northacross Rodrigues Avenue.
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE •CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3308 • FAX (408) 777-3333 • planning@cupertino.org
DP-2014-07, ASA-2014-10,Verizon Wireless Communications Facility August 25, 2015
& EXC-2014-12 At Civic Center Page 2
DISCUSSION:
Conformance with the Wireless Facilities Master Plan
The project is consistent with the Wireless Facilities Master Planwith respect to its location at Civic
Center and the design of the free-standing facility within a landscaped area.
Conformance with the Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance
Cell Facility Feature Project Ordinance Requirement
Setback from residential property line 80 and 106 feet Minimum of 80 feet
Height of antennas 66 feet 55 feet, without a height
exception.
Project is consistent with all aspects of the Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance except for the
height of the mounted antennas, which requires a height exception to achieve desired coverage and to
facilitate a planned collocation of another wireless carrier on the treepole.
20222
20320
10271
20
1
4
7
20
1
5
7
20
1
6
7
20
1
7
7
20
1
8
7
20
1
9
7
20
1
5
3
20
1
6
3
20
1
7
3
20
1
8
3
20
2
1
9
20380 20370
20
3
2
4
20
3
2
2
20
3
2
0
20
3
1
8
20
3
1
6
20
3
1
4
20328
20326
20
3
3
0
20
3
3
2
20
3
0
6
20
3
0
8
20
3
2
9
20
3
3
1
1
0
2
3
7
1
0
2
3
9
102551025710259
10261
10
2
7
0
10
2
7
2
10
2
6
6
10
2
6
8
10
2
6
2
10
2
6
4
10
2
5
8
10
2
6
0
1
0
2
5
0
1
0
2
5
2
1
0
2
4
6
1
0
2
4
8
1
0
2
4
2
1
0
2
4
4
1
0
2
3
8
1
0
2
4
0
1
0
2
3
0
1
0
2
3
2
1
0
2
2
6
1
0
2
2
8
1
0
2
2
2
1
0
2
2
4
1
0
2
1
8
1
0
2
2
0
10201
10251
10300
20232
2 0 2 1 2
20202 2
0
1
9
2
20182
20172
20162
20217
10265
10275
10280 10289
10299
10309
1 0 3 1 9
1 0 3 2 9 1
03
28
1
03
18
10308
10298
10288
10330
10320
10300
10290
10285
10295
10305
10325
10335
10345
10281
10280
10350
10800
20
3
0
2
20304
20
3
0
0
20
2
9
8
20
2
9
6
20
2
9
4
20310
20312
20
2
7
6
20
2
7
4
20
2
7
2
20
2
7
0
20
2
7
8
20
2
8
0
20
2
6
7
20
2
7
3
20
2
7
1
20
2
7
5
20
2
7
7
20290
20292
20
2
8
8
20
2
8
6
20
2
6
9
846
200
208
200
100
108
118
850849 848 847
843 844
845
851
828
100200250 300350
834
835836
841840
839
820
838837
821823
822
808
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
801
827826825842
829830 831 832
833
802803
804
805
806 807
809
824
819 818
295
172
195118
R
160
158
138
130220
228
238
G
100
105
107
110
120
122
135
165
167
168
169
170
175
200
205210
212
215
218
219
225
230
240
250
260
270
290
100
137
168
122
120
242252
140245
240
139
205
202
235
250
255
110258
260
211
256
128
100
105
155
153
150
BRITTANY CT
BRITTANY CT
BRITTANY CT
BRITTANY CT
BRITTANY CT
PARK GREEN LN
PARK GREEN LN
PARK GREEN LN
PARK GREEN LN
PARK GREEN LN
FARALLONE DR
FARALLONE DR
FARALLONE DR
FARALLONE DR
FARALLONE DR
CENTERCENTERCENTERCENTERCENTER LNLNLNLNLN
PINNTAGEPINNTAGEPINNTAGEPINNTAGEPINNTAGE
PKWY
PKWY
PKWY
PKWY
PKWY
AVE
AVE
AVE
AVE
AVE
TORRE
TORRE
TORRE
TORRE
TORRE
LASLASLASLASLAS
Proposed Verizon Wireless Facility
80’Rodrigues Avenue
Torre Avenue
106’
DP-2014-07, ASA-2014-10,Verizon Wireless Communications Facility August 25, 2015
& EXC-2014-12 At Civic Center Page 3
Height Exception Justification
The applicant is requesting a height exception for the mounting height of the panel antennas at
approximately 66 feet, where 55 feet is the ordinance maximum. The proposed height of the treepole is 80
feet to accommodate a collocation of future panel antennas from another wireless carrier above the
proposed Verizon installation. The Commission has granted antenna height exception requests before to
facilitate collocation of other wireless carriers on a single monopole. Staff recommends that the Planning
Commissiongrant the height exception bymakingthe following three findings. Staff explanation(in
italics) follow each finding:
1.That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this chapter (19.136) will result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this chapter.
The purposes of this chapter are to facilitate the development of a wireless communications infrastructure in the
City for commercial, public and emergency uses, and to protect the health, safety, welfare and aesthetic concerns
of the public. Verizon desires to improve wireless voice and data communications service and capacity in this
area where indoor coverage is considered unsatisfactory for the library, city hall, surrounding businesses and
residential neighborhoods. Verizon’s statement expressing its coverage objectives are attached (Attachment 2).
In general, the extent of the wireless coverage is expected to increase with the height of the antennas. More
extensive radio coverage from a single facility is desirable near large residential areas like the Civic Center
neighborhood where there arefew good alternatives for siting wireless communication facilities. Lower panel
antenna heights would reduce coverage area and capacity of this site location.
2.That granting of an exception will not result in a condition that will be detrimental or injurious to
property or improvements in the vicinity and will not be materially detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare.
Radio frequency energy emissions and noise have been studied and found to be far below federal safety standards
and city standards respectively. The wireless facility enhances the general welfare of the community by
providing more communications infrastructure and alternatives for emergency communications.
3.That the exception to be granted will not result in a hazardous condition for pedestrian and vehicular
traffic.
The project is not sited within the travel ways or sight lines of existing pedestrian and motorist routes.
Wireless Communications Coverage
Attachment 3depictsand explainsexisting Verizon coverage and proposed Verizon coverage with the
proposed Civic Center wireless facility. Present Verizon servicein the area(primarily the yellow areas on
the map)is characterized by the company as satisfactory for outdoor and in-vehicle cell phone usage, but
unsatisfactorywhen the user is located in any building. Unsatisfactory service is described by Verizon as
“interrupted and/or unclear voice service. Slow and/or interrupted data and/or internet service.” The
greatest improvementin wireless service, that is, satisfactory service in all indoor and outdoor
environmentsis expected to occur in the geographic area generally bounded by Stevens Creek Boulevard,
South De Anza Boulevard, Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue. A personal wireless service facility at
Civic Center is expected to provide significant improvements in wireless communications coverage for
city employees, library patrons, the emergency operations center and to the surrounding residential
neighborhoods where there are very limited alternatives for siting wireless infrastructure. Other site
alternatives to the project are discussed later in this report.
DP-2014-07, ASA-2014-10,Verizon Wireless Communications Facility August 25, 2015
& EXC-2014-12 At Civic Center Page 4
Radio Frequency Energy (RFE) Exposure Study
Hammett & Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers was commissioned by the applicantto evaluate the
cumulative RFE exposure of the project and the planned, future, collocated AT&T Wirelessfacility against
established federal safety limits for RFE exposure. The federal limits apply for continuous exposure and
providea prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size or health. The report
dated June12, 2014 (Attachment 4) indicates the following project and cumulative exposures at various
locations around the facility.
RFE Exposure as a Percentage of MPE (Maximum Permissible Exposure)
FortheGeneral Public
Analyzed Location Project
(Verizon)
Max. Exposure as a % of MPE
Cumulative
(Verizon + AT&T)
Max. Exposure as a % of MPE
Ground Level 2.1%3.9%
Nearest Residence-assume
2nd Story
3.2%
Nearest Residence-3 stories,
across Rodrigues Ave.
2.4%
The Radio Frequency Energy (“RFE”) is substantially below the federalRFEexposure standard. It should
be noted that the Federal standards for Maximum Permissible Exposure also include a significant safety
factor so the total RFE exposure near the site is quite low. Lastly, federal law prohibitsthe City from
basing their decisions on the perceived health effects of the RFEgenerated. Thus, the City may not deny
this project on grounds of theperceivedhealth risks of exposure to RFE.
Noise Study
Bollard Acoustical Consultantswas commissioned to evaluate the cumulative noise exposure from the
project’s noise sources, which were the air conditioning units for the enclosed base equipment station and
theemergency power generator(Attachment5). Since the report was prepared, the project has been
modifiedto eliminate the equipment shelter, which eliminates the need for the air conditioning units and
one source of project noise. The remaining noise source, the emergency power generator, will only be
tested during the day time and only used at night in the event of an emergency (power outage). The
applicable, most restrictive, daytime noise standard is 65dBA. The attenuating effects of distance from
the noise source is calculated to reduce noise levels at the residential property lineto 53-56dBA, below
the most restrictive noise standard of 65dBA. To achieve the desired level of noise mitigation, the
consultant recommendsthe generator be installed with the Level 2 Acoustic Enclosure. Staff has added a
condition to the Development Permitrequiring the installment of the acoustic enclosure.
Design
The proposed design of the pole is depictedin the photosimulation (Attachment 6). This is a second
generation, faux eucalyptus treethat has a greater resemblance to a eucalyptus and will provide greater
camouflage coverage of the antennas. Attachment 7is a photoof an existing faux eucalyptus erected in
San Luis Obispo, CA. The cables will behoused in the poles and the six 8-foot tall panel antennas will be
concealed in the foliage. The antennas will be painted to match the foliage and coveredin leaf socks to
DP-2014-07, ASA-2014-10,Verizon Wireless Communications Facility August 25, 2015
& EXC-2014-12 At Civic Center Page 5
further aid in the concealment. Photosimulations of the treepole are provided (Attachment 8) from three
views: the intersection of Torre & Rodrigues Avenues, the Community Hall, and the parking lot near the
library.
The base equipment station and emergency power generator will be concealed behind a 10.5-foot tall Ipe
wood panel fenceenclosure. The tall fence is needed to effectively screen the equipment and the planned
equipment shelterfor an eventual collocation. Ipe wood panelenclosureshave been used to screen trash
facilitiesat the Biltmore Adjacency project and Main Street. A Rodrigues Avenue street view of the
enclosure is simulated in Attachment 8.
The enclosure fence abuts a couple of trees, the trash enclosure and the parking lot, which will make the
construction and maintenance of the enclosure fencing difficult. Staff has added a condition to the
development permit and architectural and site approval resolution to require at the building permit stage,
that the enclosure fencing be shifted or adjusted to provide a minimum 2 -foot setback of the enclosure
fence from the parking lot curbing anda 3-foot setback of the enclosure fence from thetrash enclosure.
Tree Removal and Re-landscaping
Proposed project construction includes clearance of vegetation to allow for the pouring of a concrete
equipment pad and fencing ofan enclosure, construction of a short concrete walkway, and trenching for
underground power and telephone utilities. This work will cause the removal of a number of trees that
are directly in the construction zone and probably other trees whose critical root zones will be
significantly impacted by construction. The affected trees are described below and the attached arborist
report (Attachment 9):
Tree #Species DBH*
(Inches)
Health Structure Notes
23 Blackwood Acacia 16 Fair Fair Construction in critical
root zone.
82 Brazilian Pepper 11 Good Fair-Good Construction in critical
root zone.
83 Brazilian Pepper 7 Fair Fair Construction in critical
root zone. Tree wound
85 Blackwood Acacia 3,4,6 Good Fair Construction in critical
root zone.
86 Blackwood Acacia 2,3,4,4,8 Good Fair Construction in critical
root zone.
87 Blackwood Acacia 17 Fair-Good Fair Remove. 100% in
construction zone.
88 Blackwood Acacia 12, 14 Fair-Good Fair-Poor Remove. 100% in
construction zone.
The trees noted above are citytrees and are subject to the sole discretion and disposition by the City
Tree/Right of Way Supervisor. Public review of proposed tree removal through Cupertino Municipal
DP-2014-07, ASA-2014-10,Verizon Wireless Communications Facility August 25, 2015
& EXC-2014-12 At Civic Center Page 6
Code Section 14.18 does not apply to this project. A copy of the plans and thearborist report, have been
forwarded to the City Tree/Right of Way Supervisor for his review.
Standard planning conditions require trees to be replaced and construction sites to be re-landscaped.
Recently, in response to Governor Brown’s mandatory directive to cut back on water use during the
drought, the City Council directed that certain landscaped areas around City Hall, including the project
area, should not be irrigated until state mandatory restrictions on water use are lifted.
Planning staff is requesting that the Planning Commissiondefer review and approval of the landscape
plan to the City Council and the Public Works Department who is responsible for the planting and
maintenance of the Civic Center landscaping.
AlternativeSite Analysis
CompleteWireless/Verizon Wireless considered other sites in the area before selecting the project site. To
address the inadequate, existing coverage issue and imminent capacity issue, the Applicant identified a
“search ring”,which is simply a circle on a map that represents the geographic location within which a
new facility must be located in order to resolve the network issues. Sixteen sites inside and outside of the
search ring were evaluated over the past four years,including threealternative Civic Center locations that
were reviewed by the City Council in a study session on July 17, 2013. The sites reviewedand the
analysis aredescribed in Attachment 10. Thirteen alternative sites were rejected by the applicant and
two alternative civic center sites were rejected by the City Council for the following reasons:
Reason for Rejecting Alternative Site # of sites
Site does not meet coverage objective due to shadowing from adjacent buildings.2
Site does not meet coverage objective due to geographic location (distance from search ring)4
Site is too close to an existing Verizon cell facility.1
Acceptable site. Could not reach amenable leasing terms.1
Acceptable site. Unresolved building security concerns.1
Acceptable site. Non-responsive property owner.1
Acceptable site. Lack of property owner interest in a lease.3
Alternative Civic Center locations are more visually prominent than project site 2
Total Number of Alternative Sites Considered 15
The project site became the preferred site as the geographic location was located in the search ring, met
Verizon’s coverage/capacity objectives and there was a willing property owner.
Comments from the Technology, Information & Communications Commission (TICC)
Plans and other supporting project documentation were referred to the TICC subcommittee for review.
The TICC subcommittee member supports the proposed tree-type monopole that masks all of the
antennas and blendsin with the existing foliage. Other comments from the TICC subcommittee are
summarized as follows(Staff comments are in italics):
DP-2014-07, ASA-2014-10,Verizon Wireless Communications Facility August 25, 2015
& EXC-2014-12 At Civic Center Page 7
A clock tower typedesignalternative seems obtrusive and its designproblematic given that new
Civic Center architecture has not been approved.
City Hall redesign plans could bring the antennas in closer proximity to City Hall in both vertical
and horizontal separation.
Need to make sure the cell tower does not impact any potential designs for City Hall with respect
to safe levels of radio frequency emissions.
(Initial designs for City Hall depict a building of not more than 2-3 stories height which represents a height
range of 30to 45feet, which will be well below the lowest array of antennas at 58 feet. Since most of the RF
energy is projected horizontally, there should be no issue with unsafe RF exposure. The City should
commission an RF safety report during the design phase for City Hall.)
Determine whether utilityconnections to offsite locations for fiber, telco and powerwould be
above or below ground.
(The revised plans depict underground connections to existing vaults for electrical power and telephone
(Attachment 13).
Please refer to Attachment 11 for the detailed comments from TICC.
Comments from the public and neighborhood meeting
The applicant coordinated a neighborhood meeting held onJuly22nd. Three neighbors attended the
meeting, which was also attended by the applicant’s RF safety engineer and City staff. One resident
asked why the project was being proposed and if it was a “done deal” since it was being proposed on
City property. The same resident had specific questions about RF emission strength and the federal
safety standards, which were answeredby the RF safety engineer. Notices of Public Hearing were mailed
on August 6, 2015. All emailed and written responses received to date are attached (Attachment 12).
Environmental Assessment
The Minor Development Permit, Architectural & Site Approvaland Height Exception applications are
categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per section 15303 (New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines because the project involves
accessory structuresof not more than 10,000 square in area in an urbanized area with full utilities. The
proposed facility will also not generate significant noise or RFE emissions, which are estimated to be
significantly below city and federal safety standards respectively.
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
Site Signage (14 days prior to the hearing)
Legal ad placed in newspaper
(at least 10 daysprior to the hearing)
Notices mailed to property owners
adjacent to the project site (300 foot
radius)
(10 days prior to the hearing)
Posted on the City's official notice bulletin
board (one week prior to the hearing)
Posted on the City of Cupertino’s Web site
(one week prior to the hearing)
DP-2014-07, ASA-2014-10,Verizon Wireless Communications Facility August 25, 2015
& EXC-2014-12 At Civic Center Page 8
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: September 8,2014
Deemed Incomplete:September 18, 2014
Deemed Complete:June 11,2015
Since this project is Categorically Exempt, the City has 60 days (until October 25, 2015) 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.
Prepared by: Colin Jung, Associate Planner
Reviewed by:Approved by:
/s/Gary Chao /s/Aarti Shrivastava
Gary Chao Aarti Shrivastava
Assistant Community Development Director Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution for DP-2014-07
Resolution for ASA-2014-10
Resolution for EXC-2014-12
1-Project Description
2–Complete Wireless Height Justification Statement
3-Existing& ProposedCoverage Maps
4-RFE Exposure Study for Verizonand AT&Tproject proposal at 10800Torre Avenue, prepared by
Hammett &Edison, Consulting Engineers dated June 12, 2014.
5–Environmental Noise Analysis of De Anza Stevens Creek Cellular Facility, Cupertino, CA, prepared
by Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc., dated May 26, 2015.
6–3-D computer simulation of proposed wireless facility with second generation eucalyptus treepole
7–Photograph of a second generation eucalyptus treepole erected in San Luis Obispo, CA.
8–Photosimulations of treepole from three viewpoints; Photosimulation of enclosure fencing
9- Arborist Report for DeAnza Stevens Creek Verizon Site by Foothill Associates dated April 9, 2015
10-Alternative SitesAnalysis
11-TICC Comments
12-Public Comments
13-Plan Set
G:planning/PDREPORT/pc DPreports/2015dpreports/DP-2014-07, ASA-2014-10, EXC-2014-12.docx
DP-2014-07
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
DRAFT RESOLUTION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
APPROVNG A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITY, CONSISTING OF A 80-FOOT TALL TREEPOLE
WITH SIXPANEL ANTENNAS AND ASSOCIATEDBASEEQUIPMENTSTATION AND
EMERGENCY POWER GENERATORAT CIVIC CENTER, 10300 TORRE AVENUE
SECTION I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a
Development Permit, as described in Section II. of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural
Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public
hearings on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and
has satisfied the following requirements:
1)The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property
or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
general welfare, or convenience. The project will utilize an unused corner of the Civic
Center property and generate radio frequencyenergy emissions and noise in quantities that
will be below Federal safety standards and City standards respectively. The antenna mast
will be designed to mimic a tree to blend into the existing landscaping. Other constructed
features will utilize high quality materials and not block sight lines for vehicles or
pedestrians;
2)The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino
Comprehensive General Plan, the Wireless Facilities Master Plan, the Wireless
CommunicationsFacilities Ordinanceand the purpose of this title.
3) That the operation of the facility will comply with federal safety standards for radio
frequency energyemissions.
Draft Resolution DP-2014-07 August 25,2015
Page 2
==================================================================================
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted
in this matter, the application for DevelopmentPermit is hereby approved with the landscaping
and irrigation plan deferred for City Council approval,subject to the conditions which are
enumerated in thisResolution 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. DP-2014-07as set
forth in the Minutesof the Planning Commission Meeting of August 25,2015and are
incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:DP-2014-07
Applicant:Jenny Blocker(for Verizon Wireless)
Property Owner:City of Cupertino
Location:10300 Torre Avenue
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
1.APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on Exhibits titled: “Verizon Wireless/DEANZA STEVENS CREEK/ 10800
TORRE AVENUE/CUPERTINO, CA 95014/ APN: 369-31-033/ LOCATION #: 249535”
prepared by MST ARCHITECTSdated 05/26/15and consisting of tensheets labeled T1.1, C-
1, C-2, A1.1, A2.1, A2.2, A3.1, A3.2, A3.3, L1.1,except as may be amended by the conditions
contained in this resolution.
2. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication
requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government
Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the
amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions.
You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest
thesefees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code
Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying
with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later
challenging such exactions.
3. COLOCATION OF ANTENNAE
The treepole shall bestructurallydesigned to accommodate the collocation of additional
antennae from other wireless carriers. The co-location agreement shall be at market rates
with reasonable compensation to the mast owner.
Draft Resolution DP-2014-07 August 25,2015
Page 3
==================================================================================
4. ABANDONMENT
If after installation, the aerial is not used for its permitted purpose for a continuous period
of 18 months, said aerial and associated facilities shall be removed. The applicant shall bear
the entirecost of demolitionand removal.
5. EXPIRATION DATE
This development permitshall expire ten(10) years after the effective date of the permit. The
applicant may apply for a renewal of the developmentpermit at which time the Planning
Commission may review the state of wireless communication technologies, camouflage
techniques and maintenanceto determine if the visual impact of the aerial facility can be
reduced.
6. TREE POLE APPEARANCE AND MAINTENANCE
The applicant shall construct a eucalyptus style treepole to raise the height of the antennas
and shall meet the following design criteria:
a)Use a sufficient number of artificial branches to obscure the appearance of the panel
antennasand any associated mounting framework.
b)Panel antennasmounted away from the mast shall be covered in leaf socksto blend with
the green foliage of the artificial branches.
c)The mast shall be wrapped with a faux bark and any antenna mounted close to the mast
shall be painted brown to mimic a tree trunk.
d)The foliage shall have a mottled green coloration.
The building permit shall be reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director to ensure the above condition is met. The applicant shall perform
regular maintenance of the tree pole to maintain its appearance and obscure the panel
antennas from public view.
7. EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE
The base equipment enclosure shall be constructed of high quality materials and/or be
screened by appropriate landscaping as determined by the City Council. The final enclosure
design shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to
issuance of building permits.
8. TREE REMOVAL
The applicant shall apply to the City Streets and Trees Supervisor for permission to remove
any Park trees associated with the construction of this wireless facility.
9. ACOUSTICAL ENCLOSURE FOR EMERGENCY POWER GENERATOR
To meet City Noise standards, the power generator shall be enclosed with a Level 2 Acoustic
Enclosure. The addition of the acoustic enclosure shall be noted on the building plans.
Draft Resolution DP-2014-07 August 25,2015
Page 4
==================================================================================
10. SETBACK OF ENCLOSURE FENCING FROM TRASH ENCLOSURE & PARKING LOT
CURBING
At the building permit stage, the applicant shall provide revised drawings of the equipment
enclosure demonstrating a minimum 2-foot setback of the enclosure fencing from the parking
lot curbing and a minimum 3-foot setback of the enclosure fencing from the trash enclosure
fencing.
11. CONCURRENT APPROVAL CONDITIONS
The conditions of approval contained in file nos. ASA-2014-10 andEXC-2014-12 shall be
applicable to this approval.
SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DEPT.
12. WIRE CLEARANCE EASEMENT
Prior to building permit approval, Applicant shall coordinate with Public Works staff to
vacate or otherwise address the wire clearance easement that affects the project.
13. LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION APPROVAL
Prior to building permit approval, Applicant shall coordinate with Public Works staff to
obtain City approval for new/replacement landscaping and irrigation for the project.
14. CONSTRUCTION STAGING PLAN
Prior to building permit approval, Applicant shall provide a construction management plan
that identifies the timing/duration of construction activities, and construction stagingand
temporary construction improvementlocations that shall be reviewed and approved by the
Director ofPublic Works.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of August2015, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:APPROVED:
Gary Chao Winnie Lee
Asst. Community Development DirectorChair, Planning Commission
ASA-2014-10
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
DRAFT RESOLUTION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINOAPPROVINGAN
ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL FOR A NEW PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE
FACILITY CONSISTING OF SIX PANEL ANTENNAS MOUNTED ON A COLLOCATABLE,
80-FOOT TALL TREEPOLEAND AN ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE AT
CIVIC CENTER, 10300 TORRE AVENUE
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:ASA-2014-10
Applicant:Jenny Blocker(for Verizon Wireless)
Property Owner:City of Cupertino
Location:10300 Torre Avenue
SECTION II: FINDINGSFOR ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL:
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for an
Architectural and Site Approval 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 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 Planning Commission 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;
2.The proposal is consistent with the purposes of Chapter 19.134, Architectural and Site Review, of the
Cupertino Municipal Code, the General Plan, the wireless facilities masterplan, 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 scale have been minimized. The new treepolehas been sited in an area with
existing tall trees.
b)Design harmony between the new treepoleand existing treeshasbeen preserved and the
materials, textures and colors of the newtreepoleharmonize with adjacent landscaping and
preservethe future character of the neighborhood and purposes of the zone in which it is
situated. The location, height and materials of walls, fencing, hedges and screen planting
harmonize with adjacent development. Unsightly utility installations have been concealed.
Draft Resolution ASA-2014-10 August25, 2015
Page 2
===================================================================================
Ground cover or various types of pavements have beenused to prevent dust and erosion, and the
unnecessary destruction of existing healthy trees havebeenavoidedto the extent practical.
c)Thisnew development, abuttingan existing residential development, has been designed to
protect residents from noise, traffic, light and visually intrusive effects by use of buffering,
setbacks, landscaping, fencesand other appropriate design measures.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
That after careful consideration ofmaps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this
matter, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2thereof,:
The application for an Architectural and Site Approval, Application no. ASA-2014-10is hereby approved,
and;
That the subconclusionsupon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based
and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application no. ASA-2014-10as set forth in the
Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting of August 25, 2015and 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 Exhibits titled: “Verizon Wireless/DEANZA STEVENS CREEK/ 10800 TORRE
AVENUE/CUPERTINO, CA 95014/ APN: 369-31-033/ LOCATION #: 249535” prepared by MST
ARCHITECTSdated 05/26/15and consisting of tensheets labeled T1.1, C-1, C-2, A1.1, A2.1, A2.2,
A3.1, A3.2, A3.3, L1.1,except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution.
2. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication
requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section
66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and
a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified
that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and
other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a
protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will
be legally barred from later challenging such exactions.
3. COLOCATION OF ANTENNAE
The treepole shall be structurally designed to accommodate the collocation of additional antennae
from other wireless carriers. The co-location agreement shall be at market rates with reasonable
compensation to the mast owner.
4. ABANDONMENT
If after installation, the aerial is not used for its permitted purpose for a continuous period of 18
months, said aerial and associated facilities shall be removed. The applicant shall bear the entire cost
of demolitionand removal.
5. EXPIRATION DATE
This architectural and site approvalshall expire ten (10) years after the effective date of the approval.
The applicant may apply for a renewal of the approvalat which time the Planning Commission may
Draft Resolution ASA-2014-10 August25, 2015
Page 3
===================================================================================
review the state of wireless communication technologies, camouflage techniques and maintenance to
determine if the visual impact of the aerial facility can be reduced.
6. TREE POLE APPEARANCE AND MAINTENANCE
The applicant shall construct a eucalyptus style treepole to raise the height of the antennas and shall
meet the following design criteria:
a)Use a sufficient number of artificial branches to obscure the appearance of the panel antennasand
any associated mounting framework.
b)Panel antennasmounted away from the mast shall be covered in leaf socksto blend with the green
foliage of the artificial branches.
c)The mast shall be wrapped with a faux bark and any antenna mounted close to the mast shall be
painted brown to mimic a tree trunk.
d)The foliage shall have a mottled green coloration.
The building permit shall be reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director to ensure the above condition is met. The applicant shall perform regular
maintenance of the tree pole to maintain its appearance and obscure the panel antennas from public
view.
7. EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE
The base equipment enclosure shall be constructed of high quality materials and/or be screened by
appropriate landscaping as determined by the City Council. The final enclosure design shall be
reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Developmentprior to issuance of building
permits.
8. TREE REMOVAL
The applicant shall apply to the City Streets and Trees Supervisor for permission to remove any Park
trees associated with the construction of this wireless facility.
9. ACOUSTICAL ENCLOSURE FOR EMERGENCY POWER GENERATOR
To meet City Noise standards, the power generator shall be enclosed with a Level 2 Acoustic
Enclosure. The addition of the acoustic enclosure shall be noted on the building plans.
10. SETBACK OF ENCLOSURE FENCING FROM TRASH ENCLOSURE & PARKING LOT CURBING
At the building permit stage, the applicant shall provide revised drawings of the equipment enclosure
demonstrating a minimum 2-foot setback of the enclosure fencing from the parking lot curbing and a
minimum 3-foot setback of the enclosure fencing from the trash enclosure fencing.
11. CONCURRENT APPROVAL CONDITIONS
The conditions of approval contained in file nos. DP-2014-07 and EXC-2014-12 shall be applicable to
this approval.
SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTDEPT.
12. WIRE CLEARANCE EASEMENT
Prior to building permit approval, Applicant shall coordinate with Public Works staff to vacate or
otherwise address the wire clearance easement that affects the project.
Draft Resolution ASA-2014-10 August25, 2015
Page 4
===================================================================================
13. LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION APPROVAL
Prior to building permit approval, Applicant shall coordinate with Public Works staff to obtain City
approval for new/replacement landscaping and irrigation for the project.
14. CONSTRUCTION STAGING PLAN
Prior to building permit approval, Applicant shall provide a construction management plan that
identifies the timing/duration of construction activities, and construction staging and temporary
construction improvement locations that shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Public
Works.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 25th day ofAugust, 2015,at a regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:APPROVED:
Gary Chao Winnie Lee
Asst. Community Development DirectorChair, Planning Commission
G:Planning/PDREPORT/RES/2014/ASA-2014-10 res.doc
EXC-2014-12
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
DRAFT RESOLUTION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINOAPPROVING A HEIGHT
EXCEPTION TO ALLOW ANTENNASOF A PROPOSED PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITY
TO BE MOUNTED AT A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 66FEETOR LESSON A PLANNED 80-FOOT TALL
TREEPOLEAT CIVIC CENTERLOCATED AT 10300TORREAVENUE
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:EXC-2014-12
Applicant:Jenny Blocker(for Verizon Wireless)
Location:10300TorreAvenue
SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR EXCEPTION
WHEREAS, in order to provide height flexibility in situations where practical difficulties, unnecessary
hardships or results inconsistent with the purpose and intent of Chapter 19.136occurs, an applicant for
development may file an exception request to seek approval to deviate from the standards; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds the following with regards to the Height Exception for this
application:
1.That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this chapter (19.136) will result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this chapter, in that, the purposes of this chapter are to
facilitate the development of a wireless communications infrastructure in the City for commercial,
public and emergency uses, and to protect the health, safety, welfare and aesthetic concerns of the
public. Verizon desires to improve wireless voice and data communications service and capacity in
this area where indoor coverage is considered unsatisfactory for the library, city hall, surrounding
businesses and residential neighborhoods. In general, the extent of the wireless coverage is expected
to increase with the height of the antennas. More extensive radio coverage from a single facility is
desirable near large residential areas like the Civic Center neighborhood where there are few good
alternatives for siting wireless communication facilities. Lower panel antenna heights would reduce
coverage area and potentially capacity of this site location.
2.That granting of an exception will not result in a condition that will be detrimental or injurious to
property or improvements in the vicinity and will not be materially detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare. Radio frequency energy emissions and noise have been studied and found to be far
below federal safety standards and city standards respectively. The wireless facility enhances the
general welfare of the community by providing more communications infrastructure and alternatives
for emergency communications.
3.That the exception to be granted will not result in a hazardous condition for pedestrian and vehicular
traffic. The project is not sited within the travel ways or sight lines of existing pedestrian and motorist
routes.
Draft Resolution EXC-2014-12 August 25, 2015
Page 2
===========================================================================
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted inthis
matter, application no. EXC-2014-12is 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 EXC-2014-12, as set forth in the
Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of August 25,2015, and are incorporated by reference
herein.
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
1.APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on Exhibits titled: “Verizon Wireless/DEANZA STEVENS CREEK/ 10800 TORRE
AVENUE/CUPERTINO, CA 95014/ APN: 369-31-033/ LOCATION #: 249535” prepared by MST
ARCHITECTSdated 05/26/15and consisting of tensheets labeled T1.1, C-1, C-2, A1.1, A2.1, A2.2,
A3.1, A3.2, A3.3, L1.1,except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution.
2. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication
requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section
66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and
a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified
that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and
other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a
protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will
be legally barred from later challenging such exactions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of August2015, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:APPROVED:
Gary Chao Winnie Lee
Assist. Director of Community Development Chair, Planning Commission
G/planning/pdreport/res/2014/EXC-2014-12res.doc