The URL can be used to link to this page

CC 09-20-05 #7 (2) 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 FAX (408) 777-3333 CITY OF CUPEIQ1NO Commurùty Development Department SUMMARY AGENDA NO. ~ AGENDA DATE September 20,2005 SUBJECT: General Plan update, Application Nos. GP A-2004-01 and EA-2004-17, City of Cupertino, Citywide. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council ~ Discuss the following issues o Development Allocation o Heights o Cohesive Commercial Centers o Hillside Land Use - Lindy Lane area o Any remaining items identified by the City Council ~ Continue the General Plan to the October 4 City Council meeting for Council discussion BACKGROUND: The City Council held four public hearings (including September 14) on the proposed amendments to the General Plan. Public discussion to date has included the following subjects: 1. Development Allocations ~ Major differences among recommendations ~ Office allocation 2. Heights ~ Major differences among recommendations ~ Building heights needed for typical high volume, high quality retail buildings 3. Economic Development ~ Fiscal impacts of all new development 4. Parks/Trails 5. Traffic Irnpacts 6. Environmental Resources and Health and Safety 7. Circulation/Pedestrians Printed on Recycled Paper / -- ( General Plan Update September 20, 2005 Page 2 8. One-Percent for Art DISCUSSION Plannin~ Commission Recommendations (Exhibit A) The Planning Commission recommendations for changes to the Task Force Draft General Plan have been revised to highlight proposed recent changes. The most recent proposed change is at the request of Richard Lowenthal, which is some additional wording on the protection of the Union Pacific trail corridor. Please see Exhibit A, page 15, item 32 Development Allocation Developrnent Allocation (Exhibit A, page 3) was discussed in depth at the August 16 City Council meeting. Recent recommended changes are highlighted in red. The City Council may want to focus on the highlighted changes, urness there are other issues to be discussed. Copies of slides from the August 16 presentation are included (Exhibit B) to compare the development allocation nurnbers from various alternatives. Buildin~ Heights Building heights were discussed on August 16, and the height comparisons are shown in Exhibit B. As stated at the meeting, staff supports the Planning Commission recommendations. However, the City Council questioned the advisability of the Vallco Park South height limitation, linking 60' to mixed use. The City Council may want to focus on that recommendation. Cohesive Commercial Centers As discussed previously, two changes are recommended related to retaining cohesive commercial centers. The first is item 25, Policy 2-42, where new office development exceeding 50,000 square feet will be approved orny if fiscal benefits are provided. The second is a new criterion related to Maintaining Cohesive Commercial Centers and Office Parks, whereby conversion of industrial, office and commercial uses on a site will be evaluated to determine if they are complementary to the overall business park or shopping center. The City Council requested that one of the criteria, prohibiting non-retail uses from exceeding 25% of a shopping center, be specifically noticed so that the community is alerted to the issue for tonight's discussion. A city-wide notice including that point was mailed on Friday, September 16. Hillside Land Use Numerous communications from residents have been received regarding development in the Lindy Lane area. The General Plan issue relates to the land use designation on the land use map. The Administrative Draft recommended a change from Residential Low 1-5 dwelling units/ gross acre to Residential Low 1/2 acre Slope Density Formula (hillside). Please see Exhibit D. The Planning Commission recommends retaining the Residential Low 1-5 designation (see l-;L General Plan Update September 20, 2005 Page 3 Exhibit A, page 17, item 42). The Administrative Draft recommendation for the hillside designation was based on the hillside topography in the area (see page 3 of Exhibit D). Four parcels are estimated to have potential subdivision potential under the current land use designation (page 4); one is estimated to have potential under the hillside designation. One property owner, Knopp, has already received Planning Commission approval for a two-lot subdivision, and another, Sun, is applying for a 3-lot subdivision, which goes to the Planning Commission on October 11. The other issue raised relates to zoning. These properties are currently zoned R1; the differences between R1 and RHS (Residential Hillside) are shown on page 5 of Exhibit D. Currently the Lindy Lane area must meet the R1 and RHS regulations if the average slope is over 15%. If the area is rezoned, they would be regulated by the RHS ordinance. The City Council does not need to address the zoning issue per se; it would follow the General Plan designation. REMAINING SCHEDULE The recommended remaining schedule is: þ> October 4 "Final" decisions - Council should determine all the amendments to the General Plan, subject to preparation of resolutions and the final ElR. Staff recommends that the City Council begin the meeting with these decisions, and take public testimony later. þ> November 1 Approval of final General Plan (with Resolutions) and Certification of EIR. The November 1 date is recommended because staff and the consultants need two weeks from October 4 to prepare the final documents, and November 1 is the next regular meeting. If the City Council sets a special meeting date prior to November 1, for example the week of October 24th, final approval could occur sooner. Enclosures: Task Force Draft General Plan - please bring to meeting Exhibit A - Planning Commission Recommendations, revised September 14, 2005 Exhibit B - Development Allocation Slides Exhibit C - Height Slides Exhibit D - Hillside Designation Slides Exhibit E - Public Communication Î-3 General Plan Update September 20, 2005 Page 4 Prepared by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner Approved by: ~ David W. Knapp City Manager G:planningjpdreportj ccjCCGP A2004-01 sept 20 2005 7-t( EXHIBIT A CUPERTINO PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR CHANGES TO TASK FORCE DRAFT GENERAL PLAN (Also incorporates changes recommended in the Corrections Document and recent staff recommendations) September 14, 2005 RECENT CHANGES ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN RED NOTE CHANGE NEEDED LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN 7~) NO ACTION NEEDED HERE. SEE HEIGHT CHANGES FOR EACH SPECIAL CENTER CONSENT Change Figure 2-D to conform to the height changes recommended for each Special Center (see below). Change as shown below: Actively pursue the annexation of unincorporated islands properties within the City's urban service area, including the MOflÉa Vista and Creston neighborhoods, which will be annexed on a parcel-by-parcel basis with new development. and oOther remaining small unincorporated islands will be annexed as determined bv the Citv Council. Page 2-12 2. Policy 2-12, Page 2-10 The reference to annexation of small unincorporated islands is out of date 1 NOTE APPROVED 6/15/05 MODIFIED 6/23/05 2 CHANGE NEEDED Add Strategies 5 and 6: Strategy 5: Multi-Family Residential Floor Area Ratios Ensure that the floor area ratios of multi- family residential developments are compatible with similar buildings in the surrounding area. Include a mix of unit types and sizes, and avoid a preponderance of excessively large units. Strategy 6: Ordinance Revision Revise the Planned Development and R-3 ordinances to reflect the intent of Strategy APPROVED 6/15/05 MODIFIED 6/23/05 5. Add Strategy 3: Transition Neighborhoods Recognize that some neighborhoods are in transition, and added flexibility for new residences will be considered. 7-0 APPROVED 6/28/05 SEE TABLE 2-A Add Strategy 7: Street Signs: When replacement is required, install new street signs at major intersections that promote Cupertino community identity, such as using the morion logo on the sign. Retain the standard font size of the street name to ensure readability. Change Table 2-A as shown on the following page. LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN 3. Policy 2-13, Page 2-11 Add two strategies. 4. Policy 2-16, Page 2-14 Add a strategy. 5. Policy 2-17, Page 2-15 Streetscape Design Add a strategy 6. Page 2-17 T Buildout RES. 2000 Built HOTEL ROOMS) 2000 2005 Built Built 3 - Buildout OFFICE 2000 Built FT.) Buildout Addt Potential 2005 Built I Buildout 902 178 220 17,776 87 o o 200 815 178 220 17,576* 760 178 220 17,376 456.210 417,626 6.557 I 4 99.698 NEIGHBORHOODS - - 88.816 88.816 Monta Vista Oak Valley Fairgrove Other Areas COMMERCIAL CENTERS the t,194,164 TABLE2A 570 6 1 2 354 238 ,987 1 52 1 0,53 I 5 I 510,53 5 11 ,476. 82,456 0,700 Heart of City Vallco Park South 611 911 784 300 600 300 11 3 764 764 CD. A.) 26 708.057 708,057 708,057 ,902,564 I ,652,150 484 484 26 26 I 69,550 69,550 69,550 93,678 I 238,735 238,735 Homestead Road Other EMPLOYMENT CENTERS North De Anza I 44,979 36,505 Blvd. City Center Valko Park North Bubb Road 306 300 6 250,604 268,735 268,735 495,415 496,40 494,576 Areas 46 656 751 951 o 150 100 00 100 200 400 o 150 00 1 46 556 55 219 551 224 315 224 315 315 2.266.206 .050. 227 3,069,676 2.048.02 1,050.227 2.968.144 ** 1 1,032,072 2,843.144 2,048,02 51,372 79,011 33,147 61,308 127,806 29,358 127,806 444.435 428,645 428,645 23.000 23.650 1,903 2,553 21,097 20,032 1.429 1.579 1,429 441 8,836,952 8,344,536 8,325,312 4,431,000 3,895,885 3,317,426 Other Areas Citywide 8.840 000 8,325,000 4.431.000 3,317,000 Citywide (rounded to nearest thousan4L 1-ì REVISED 6/28/05 and committed development through a Development 2005 Bui *Estimate **125,000 square feet committed to the HP campus Agreement was added to this column 6/13/05 G:public folder/ciddyrrABLE2A-2004 6-14-05 includes approved NOTE 4 CHANGE NEEDED LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN 7. Policy 2-20, strategy 2, Page 2-17 Delete this strategy if the intent is not to A strategy to allow floor area ratios to allow floor area ratios to be exceeded: be exceeded may be in conflict with Floor area ratios for non-residential uses other references that do not allow them may be exceeded through the to be exceeded. development review process using established criteria for evaluating projects.. . Major companies. Prioritize expansion of office space for existing major companies in Cupertino. Retain a pool of 150,000 square feet to be drawn down by companies with 1,500+ employees or companies with City corporate headquarters. New office development must demonstrate that the development positively contributes to the fiscal weIl being of the City. Add strategy 3: Merriman-Santa Lucia Neighborhood: Allow legaIly constructed duplexes to remain in the area bounded by Santa Lucia Road, Alcalde Road and Foothill Boulevard. Change "Development Intensity" as shown below: 'Clr ^ Issue. DELETE STRATEGY 2. See Hot Topic Flag LU-2 for additional discussion of this Recommended by staff August 16, 2005 in response to City Council questions regarding the reduction of office square footage and providing assurance that major companies have expansion opportunities. CONSENT This wording is in the current General Plan and was inadvertently left out of the draft General Plan. ') -, strategy 8. Policy 2-21, new strategy 3, Page 2-21 A strategy needs to be added. new Policy 2-20, New 7. Page 2-17 APPROVED 6/13/05 Page 2-22 Monta Vista Policy 2-24, 9. -Ri Hft Development intensity shaIl be determined in conjunction with specific development review. Add Residential: Up to 12 units per acre. Change Building Heights from "two story :.-h -1-1-. _1. 11 tì;-1 t:. _1 _£.c~ 7-ì to .} 30 feet. NOTE APPROVED AS MODIFIED 6/13/05 MODIFIED 6/23/05 APPROVED AS MODIFIED 6/13/05 Change the first paragraph as shown below: .. . .General PIan allocations for other commercial areas Reàes are for 10cal- serving commercial needs. Commercial! residential mixed-use is encouraged in selective commercial areas jJ the residential units provide an incentive for retail development and the resulting development is financially beneficial to Cupertino. Active commercial uses, such as bookstores, coffee shops, restaurants office supply, furniture and electronic stores are encouraged to 10cate in Cupertino. Change "Development Activities" as shown below: 5 CHANGE NEEDED 7-1 [Directed staff to reformat Heart of the City, Crossroads and Stevens Creek Boulevard areas so that it's clearer that the latter two areas are sub-areas of Heart of the City] Mixed commercial and residential development may be allowed if the residential units provide an incentive to develop retail use, if the development is well designed. financially beneficial to Cupertino, provides community amenities and is are-pedestrian-oriented. Change Development Intensity: Residential Buildout: TABLE 2A LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN 10. Page 2-24 Commercial Centers 11. Policy 2-27, Page 2-24 Heart of the City NOTE APPROVED AS MODIFIED 6/13/05 AND 6/28/05 6 CHANGE NEEDED Change Development Activities as shown below: Development along Stevens Creek Boulevard shall have retail uses with storefronts on the ground level. Commercial office uses may be allowed on the second level. Limited residential uses are allowed. Change "Development Intensity" as shown below: . Development intensity shall be determined in conjunction with specific developm Add Residential Units: 2nt review. Up to 25 units per acre. Chan: Change below: APPROVED 6/13/05 as shown Intensity' LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN 12. Policy 2-28, Page 2-25 Crossroads 13. Policy 2-29, Page 2-27 Stevens Creek Boulevard . Development inte)1sity shall be determined in conjunction with specific development review. Mixed commercial and residential development may be allowed if the residential units provide an incentive to develop retail use, if the development is well designed, financiall beneficial to Cupertino, provides communi amenities and is are-pedestrian-oriented. Change Residential to: Up to 25 units per acre. Chan: 1~/O hts to 45 feet. NOTE 7 CHANGE NEEDED LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN APPROVED AS MODIFIED 6/13/05 Change policy as shown below: Retain and enhance Valleo Park South as a large- scale commercial area that is a regional commercial (including hotel), office and entertainment center with su residential development. 14. Policy 2-30, Page 2-27 Vallco Park South are a Master Plan for of mass, scale, of infrastructure and the entire Parkwa Change "Development Intensity' below: Master Plan 1 Strate this area as shown a#iæo-Development intensity shall be determined in conjunction with specific development review. Mixed con cial and residential dev< may be aU units ( 1- MODIFIED 6/23/05 ment is mixed use to amenities and feet if incenti' is well Cupert aæ-vedestr: Residential: Up to 35 units per acre. Residential Buildout: Table 2A Change Building Heights to 60 and 45 feet if not Inixed-use. residential retail use, financiall NOTE 8 CHANGE NEEDED LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN APPROVED 6/13/05 MODIFIED 6/23/05 as shown Intensity' Change "Development below: 15. Policy 2-31, Page 2-28 Homestead Road Development intensity shall be determined in conjunction with specific development review. Mixed commercial and residential development may be allowed if the residential units provide an incentive to develop retail use, if the development is well designed, financiall beneficial to Cupertino, provides communi amenities and is are-pedestrian-oriented. Residential Buildout: See Table 2A Chan~e Buildin~ Hei~hts to 45 feet "Development Intensity" as shown below: CONSENT 16. Policy 2-32, Page 2-29 Remainder of Neighborhood Commercial Areas I-I ,L Development intensity shall be determined in conjunction with specific development review. Mixed commercial and residential development may be allowed if the residential units provide an incentive to develop retail use, if the development is well des ~d, financiall beneficial to Cu 's communi amenities and oriented. NOTE 9 CHANGE NEEDED CONSENT The City Council previously requested that the Development Activities reference be deleted, and it was left in inadvertently. Modify Development Activities: Office, industrial, research and development with supporting commercial and residential uses. LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN 17. Policy 2-33, Page 2-30 North De Anza Boulevard 5J*'€E'"' Change below: 1~(3 MODIFIED 6/23/05 PC VOTE 3-2 as shown Development Intensity' Table 2A hts to 45 feet NOTE 10 CHANGE NEEDED CONSENT as shown Intensity' Change "Development below: 1:'L ^~ MODIFIED 6/23/05 CONSENT MODIFIED 6/23/05 Commission majority: 60 feet, one if mixed use and one office/ind only 1~{'1 -Rati 'ialf€e .m, Development intensity shall be determined in conjunction with specific development review. Mixed commercial and residential development may be allowed if the residential units provide an incentive to develop retail use, if the development is well designed, financially beneficial to Cupertino, provides community amenities and is are-pedestrian- oriented.Residential Buildout: TABLE 2A Change "Development Intensity" as shown below: Hewlett Packard's development agreement 10cks in the remaining floor area allocated to their property. After the expiration of the development agreement, and for other properties in this area, the development intensity shall be determined in conjunction with specific development review. The Hewlett Packard campus shall not have a residential component. Residential Buildout: Table 2A 0;-1 t::. LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN 18. Policy 2-34, Page 2-31 City Center 19. Policy 2-35, Page 2-32 Vallco Park North Change building heights to 60 feet NOTE APPROVED 4/15/05 Add Commercial to Bubb Road Land Use Map 11 CHANGE NEEDED as shown Intensity' (\;-1 E::. _1 ~.u~ "Development Change below: "C'lr ^ )' 7~1 APPROVED 6/15/05 with additional wording. Development intensity shall be determined in conjunction with specific development review. Buildinp; Heights: 30 feet. Change this policy to read: Use an annual, 5-year revenue projection, forecast by revenue area, to correspond to Cupertino's current revenue analysis. Include a fiscal analysis of development applications comparing the development proposal with the annual economic development plan, including the fiscal impacts of the development on the city's projected 5-year revenue stream. Develop a proactive economic development strategy that links residential development to provision of revenue generating uses such as sales tax offices and retail uses. Create an economic development staff and budget. -R< .1, LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN 20. Policy 2-36, Page 2-32 Bubb Road 21. Policy 2-38, Page 2-35 Economic Development NOTE 12 CONSENT CHANGE NEEDED Conversion of Office/Industrial Uses to Residential: Evaluate the economic impacts of converting office/ industrial uses to residential uses. (to follow Policy 2- LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN 22. New Policy 42) Page 2-35 PC VOTE 3-2 See next page: Maintaining Cohesive Commercial Centers and Office Parks CONSENT Change as shown below: .. . Redevelopment funds will be used to foster the revitalization of this regional shopping center through mall expansion, infrastructure improvements, economic development programs and provision of very low.low and moderate-income housing. 23. New Text and Policy (to follow new policy above) Page 2-35 24. Page 2-36 Commercial Development Text related to Valko Fashion Park. Recommended by staff August 16, 2005 to help ensure the fiscal benefits of new development. Change as shown below: In reviewing office development proposals, encourage office uses and activities that generate significant revenues to the City, such as local sales offices, capturing point of sale internet h'ansactions and business to business tax revenues. New office development exceeding 50,000 square feet shall be approved only if one of these or similar benefits are vrovided. 25. Policy 2-42, Page 2-35 Retail Sales and Office Development ì-/~ CONSENT Change as shown below: Facilitate redevelopment in the Vallco Redevelopment Area as a distinctive regional shopping, residential and entertainment center, with hotel uses. 26. Policy 2-43 Page 2-36 Valko Development Area 13 Centers and Office Parks Cohesive commercial centers and office parks are necessary to maintain a healthy sales tax base for the city and to retain opportunities for existing businesses to expand in response to changing business trends. Cupertino's major retail commercial centers are located at Vallco Fashion Park, The Marketplace and Portal Plaza centers, Cupertino Village, the Oaks and the Crossroads Commercial District; the office parks are located at Vallco (North of Highway 280), North De Anza Boulevard and Bubb Road Maintaining Cohesive Commercial Projects with residential, er quasi-public components or non-retail sales producers that are proposed to replace some or all of the existing industrial, office and commercial uses on a site in these areas will be evaluated on a case by case basis to determine ifthey are complementary to the overall business park or shopping center, or otherwise meet the following criteria: Integrate into the existing land use pattern by: · Continuing established land use patterns (e.g. commercial next to commercial or residential adjacent to residential) · Continuing patterns of building massing, setbacks and height · Establishing logical development patterns bounded by visible natural or man-made features such as a public or private road, creek, rreeways etc. Provide visible pedestrianlbicycle connections to and rrom existing uses. Provide a visible and publicly accessible park/plaza or open space area. Orient active building spaces to the public or private rights of way. Provide superior building design with high quality natural materials and building architecture. Demonstrate there are sufficient existing or supplemental local revenues to support municipal and school services needed to serve the development. Show that the building is functionally obsolete in a market sense and cannot be reasonably redeveloped or marketed into a compatible use within the surrounding area, or show the existing building/use is no longer complementary to the larger 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) commercial center or office par Show that the development can reasonably stand alone as a self-sufficient land use that is otherwise complementary to existing buildings and uses. Show that the residential 8) to incorporate a significant component of commercial or l--{? incentive offices uses on the site Prohibit non-retail uses from exceeding 25% of a shopping center. an or quasi-public use provides 9) 10) NOTE 14 CONSENT CONSENT Big Box Development: Consider approving big box development if it is compatible with the surrounding area in terms of buildin¡>; mass and traffic. Change the last sentence in Strategy 2 as shown below: Actual lot sizes and development areas will be determined through zoning ordinances, clustering, identification of significant natural features and geological constraints CHANGE NEEDED (to follow Policy 2- LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN 27. New Policy 44), Page 2-36 28. Policy 2-45, Strategy 2 Page 2-37 Hillside Development Standards CONSENT The tank house was constructed in the late 1800' s. It is currently located on vacant land that is part of a Byrne Avenue development. The Cupertino Historical Society believes that it has historical significance and should be maintained and preserved. APPROVED 6/15/05 the Add the Nathan Hall Tank House to Historic Resources Map. 29. Figure 2-G, Page 2-43 The Nathan Hall Tank House, adjacent to Blackberry Farm, needs to be added to the map of Historic Resources Change Strategy 1 as shown below: Ordinance. Develop and adopt a One- Percent for Art ordinance, which 1, Page 2-45 30. Policy 2-63, Strategy Public Art {~lt requires public and private development to set aside 1 % of their total project budget for on-site art. Apply to proiects 50,000 SqUare feet and larger. NOTE 5 CHANGE NEEDED LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN CONSENT Requested by Richard Lowenthal 9/12/05 Change the trails section adjacent to "Rancho San Antonio Park" text from "Future" symbol to "Existing or Proposed" symbol The corridor is designated as a proposed trail on the Trail Linkages diagram. Should the railroad corridor use change, provision for a continuous trail through the corridor must be included in the new use 31. Page 2-52, Figure 2-1 Trail Linkages 32. Page 2-54 Union Pacific Railroad CONSENT Add a strategy: Where possible, open and restore covered creeks and riparian habitat. 33. Policy 2-75, Page 2-55 Park Design 7~(1 Changes recommended by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission are shown in red. 9/6/05 Change as shown: A comprehensive trail plan for Regnart Creek, as well as one for the west foothills, would be advantageous, to provide consistent trail designs for future development. Foothills Creek and West 34. Regnart Trails NOTE 16 CHANGE NEEDED CONSENT APPROVED AND MODIFIED 6(15/05 and 6/23/05 Change Strategy 2 as shown below: Trail Projects. Implement the trail projects described in tills Evalu element. and A motion to require 66% neighborhood approval for urban trails was defeated 2-3. Changes recommended by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission are shown in red. 9/6/05 CONSENT Suggested by the Park and Recreation Commission. locating trails Add a policy to follow Policy 2-72: Park Variety: Plan for park uses that provide for a variety of recreational activities. 1 ~ 2{) CONSENT Recommended by Community Congress. Modify as shown below: Design parks to utilize the natural features and topography of the site and to keep 10ng-term_maintenance costs 10w. Strategy: Native Plants Maximize the use of native lants and minimize water use. LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN 35. Policy 2-70, Page 2-54 Strategy 2 36. Page 2-55 A new policy is needed to promote a variety of park uses. 37. Policy 2-75, Page 2-55 on Park Design needs to be modified. impacts and measures associated with trail development. Work with affected neighborhoods in locating urban creek trails, and locate creek trails on the opposite side of the creek from residential dev ment. Evaluate any safety, security and privacy impacts and mitigations associated with trail development. Work with affected neighborhoods in NOTE 17 CHANGE NEEDED LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN CONSENT Don't count toward meeting the 3 acres/1000 population ratio. Only include areas that have public access. CONSENT CONSENT Add areas as shown below: Cali Park plaza, library plaza, City Center amphitheater, 3 apt. .5 acre areas, private open space in planned development such as De Anza Oaks. Change as shown below: Policy 2-77: Acquisition or Dedication of Additional Parklands: Additional parklands are identified and shall be acquired or dedicated in the Rancho Rinconada area, in the Vallco Park area, and in the area north of 1-280 near Stelling. Require dedication when significant new housing units are identified to meet State requirements. Delete Policy 2-82. Change as shown below: Provide park and recreational space and facilities for new residential development in the urban core. The need.... 38. Table 2-C, Page 2-61 This table should be amended to incorporate private parks and open space areas 39. Policies 2-79 and 2-82, Pages 2-62 and 2-63 These policies are similar and should be combined. 40. Policy 2-81, Page 2-62 Some words were omitted from this policy CONSENT 7-21 CONSENT See Draft Land Use Map Change as shown below~ . tennis courts and will work Revert the proposed hillside land use designation for the Lindy Lane area properties to Residential Low 1-5 du/ acre 41. Policy 2-83, Page 2-63 One word needs to be deleted. 42. LAND USE MAP 18 NOTE APPROVED AND MODIFIED 6/15/05 CHANGE NEEDED Change as shown below: .. . After adjusting for housing units already provided between 1999-2001, the revised estimate is that adequate sites are needed for 2,325 units from 2001-2006 or 465 units per year. Ar 'Re jobs/Rousing balar fl& _t...~.c.._à¡- l-1...~~-ge~ 1 T'T~l1 t.. ,1~ ~; HOUSING 43. Page 3-4, Program 1, New Construction. CONSENT The Household Income Categories originate with the State Department of Housing and Community Development and ABAG, and are essential to the certification of Cupertino's Housing element. CONSENT Restore this policy and Household Income Categories: 378 units 188 units 626 units Very Low Low 44. Policy 3-1, Page 3-5 Sufficiently Zoned Land for New Construction Need CONSENT Moderate Above Mod TOTAL Update these numbers when Planning Commission determines the number of housing units for special centers, and also Residential Potential Outside of Planning Districts, Program 3 Change this program to conform to current state law. 1,133 units 2,325 units 45. Page 3-6, Program 1 Housing Units by Planning District 46. Policy 3-4, Page 3-10 Implementation Program 13 Density Bonus Program 7~ 2 2.... Change as shown below if other requests to add back mixed-use are reinstated: ... the City will evaluate the possibility of allowing residential development above existing parking areas except where mixed use is herein excluded. 47. Program 15, Page 3-10 Residential and Mixed Use Opportunities In or Near Employment Centers 7-2J NOTE APPROVED 6/15/05 The Task Force draft eliminated Implementation Program 17 related to Policy 3-6, Conversion of Commercial Lands to Residential. The Planning Commission approved new language related to conversion; the new language will be associated with the same policy. PC VOTE 3-2 APPROVED AND MODIFIED 6/15/05 19 CHANGE NEEDED New Implementation Program for Policy 3-6: See attached page. The deleted Implementation Program is: lmplementation Program 18: Residential Development Exceeding Maximums Allow residential developments to exceed planned density maximums if they provide special needs housing and the increase in density will not overburden neighborhood streets or hurt neighborhood character. Time Frame: 2001-2006 Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planrring Department HOUSING 48. Policy 3-6, Page 3-11 Housing Densities 49. Policy 3-6, Page 3-11 The Task Force deleted an Implementation Program from the Administrative Draft. NOTE APPROVED AND MODIFIED 6/15/05 7-2Lf APPROVED AND MODIFIED 6/15/05 CHANGE NEEDED Add a strategy: Evaluate providing incentives, such as reduced permit costs, for homes that exceed Title 24 requirements. Change as shown: The City will evaluate and implement the potential to provide incentives, such as waiving or reducing fees, for energy conservation improvements to residential units (existing or new). 20 HOUSING 50. Policy 3-9, Page 3-14 Energy Conservation for Energy Program 28, Page 3-14 Waivers or Reduction Conservation 51 Fee in NOTE New wording added 9/6/05 response to a request for an ordinance amendment. 21 CHANGE NEEDED Modify text as shown below: Strategy 2: TSM Programs. Encourage TSM programs for employees in both the public and private sectors by including preferred parking for carpools, providing bus passes, encouraging compressed workweeks and offerin arkin, 7-2) APPROVED AND MODIFIED 6/15/05 AND 6/23/05 ts. To enhance walkin, improvements to roadways to make them more pedestrian friendly and less auto- centric. Where a median is provided, it should be wide enough to safely accommodate pedestrians. Streets such as Homestead, Bollinger, Rainbow, Prospect or Stelling should be evaluated for potential improvements for pedestrians. Working with the neighborhood, consider reducing residential street widths to promote slower traffic and less pervious surface. CIRCULATION 52. Policy 4-2, Page 4-6 TSM Programs 53. Policy 4-3, Strategy 5, Page 4-7 Pedestrian Improvements NOTE CONSENT Recommended by the Bicycle/Ped Commission (is same as Policy 4-9 in the existing General Plan) 22 CHANGE NEEDED Add a new policy: Continue to pIan and provide for a comprehensive system of trails and pathways consistent with regional systems, including the Bay Trail, Stevens Creek Corridor and Ridge Trail. The General Alignment of the Bay Trail, as shown in the Association of Bay Area Governments' Bay Trail planning document, is incorporated in the General PIan bv reference. CIRCULATION 54. New Policy (to follow Policy 4-3), Page 4-8 Regional Trail Development CONSENT 6/23/05 This strategy needs to be modified because floor areas ratios were eliminated. Modify strategy as shown below: 3. Allocation of N on-residential Development. In order to maintain a desired level of transportation system capacity, the city's remaining non- residential development potential shall be pooled and reallocated according to the city's development priority tables as shown in the Land Use Element of this PIan, 55. Policy 4-5, Page 4-13 Modify a strategy j-z.. ~ NOTE CONSENT The Commission added another strategy on 6/15/05 23 CHANGE NEEDED Add a new strategy: 6. Intersection Capacity Improvements. Make capacity improvements as needed to maintain Level of Service policies. (DeAnza Boulevard and Homestead Road and Stelling Road at McClellan Road.) 7. Enhanced Level of Service Strive to enhance the intersection Levels of Service where feasible. CIRCULATION 56. Policy 4-5, Page 4-13 A new strategy is needed to make the capacity improvements at the two intersections where needed to maintain the Level of Service policy standard. Planning Commission asked that pedestrian policies deleted from the Administrative Draft by the Task Force be brought back 4/15/05 Add to first paragraph: It is the intent of this Plan that most streets should operate with no more than a tolerable level of congestion, LOS D. Exceptions to this standard in the Crossroads and at other 10cations to ensure pedestrians are well served at intersections are discussed below. 57. Page 4-12 New text PC VOTE: 3-1 CONSENT This change is consistent with the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program practices as implemented by the Public Works Dept. PC VOTE 4-1 CONSENT Change the requirement to 66% 58. Policy 4-11, Strategy 1, Page 4-16 Requiring 60% approval by residents on the streets affected by traffic calming measures is not consistent with existing City practices. 7~2...7 The change is requested by Cupertino's transportation consultant. Change as shown below: De Anza Boulevard at McClellan Road, Existing 2000, Morning ß, Ç±, Afternoon G, C-Projected 2020, Morning ß C, Afternoon P D+. Stevens Creek Boulevard at SR 85 Southbound Ramps, Projected 2020, Morrrin~ ß-Ç. of Service is 59. Table 4-2, Page 4-18 A correction to the Level needed. CHANGE NEEDED Restore this policy and strategies: Balance the needs of pedestrians with desired traffic service. Where necessary and appropriate, allow a 10wered LOS standard to better accommodate pedestrians on major streets and at specific intersections. Strategy: Traffic Signal Walk Times. This strategy is described in Policy 4-3. Added time on walk signs would be most appropriate near shopping districts, schools and senior citizen developments. Change as shown below: 'a#i - L ~ NOTE APPROVED 6(15/05 Recommended by the Bicycle/Ped Commission PC VOTE 4-1 24 CIRCULATION 60. Page 4-13 Restore Adm. Draft Policy 4-6 Traffic Service and Pedestrians Needs CONSENT 61. Policy 4-11, Page 4-16 Traffic Calming .1 L Î- 2.-Y CONSENT The change is requested by Cupertino's transportation consultant. 'b' ighborh¡ -by 19 rraffi Imffig ffi Install traffic calming measures where appropriate to reduce traffic impacts and enhance walkability. Add Strategy 4: Use VTA Pedestrian Technical guidelines in street design, traffic calming and pedestrian crossin¡>;s. Change as shown below: .. ..However, assuming roadway capacity improvements were provided at the intersections of De Anza Boulevard at Homestead Road and Stelling Road at McClellan Road, the 2020 LOS for major intersections 62. Page 4-18 A change is needed to the description of "Future Year Traffic Conditions." District Plan place NOTE requested that the General CONSENT The Santa Clara Water 7~ z '7 more emphasis on water use efficiency. CONSENT A City Council member requested that community gardens be mentioned in this element. MODIFIED 6/28/05 CHANGE NEEDED Add a strategy to Policy 5-1: Strategy 4: Conservation and Efficient Water Usage. Adopt and implement programs that promote conservation and efficient water usage. Add a strategy to Policy 5-1: Strategy 5: Community Gardens. Encourage community gardens, which provide a more livable environment by controlling physical factors such as temperature, noise, and pollution. Modify Policy 5-3 and Strategy 1 as shown below: Green Building Design Encouragc Set standards for the design and construction_of energy and resource converving/ efficient buildings (Green Building Design). Strategy 1: Green Buildir E':alaution Program. Prepare and in ~ment "G B ·ld·" ¡ reen Ul lng eva ua· , standards for all major pl te and public projects that ensur ~duction in energy consumption Í( ~w development throu2:h sit, d building design. 25 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES 63. Policy 5-1, Page 5-2 An additional strategy is needed to stress water use efficiency 64. Policy 5-1, Page 5-2 A reference to the environmental is 65. Policy 5-3, Page 5-6 Strategy 1 Modify strategy benefits of community gardens requested. NOTE APPROVED 6/28/05 26 CHANGE NEEDED Amend policy and add a strategy as shown below: Minimize the air quality impacts of new development projects and the impacts affecting new development. Strategy 4 Environmental Review. Evaluate the relationship of sensitive receptors, such as convalescent hospitals and residential uses, to pollution sources through the environmental assessment of new 7~JÓ for to allow certified woodstoves CONSENT This needs to be clarified EPA development. Change as shown below: Prohibit the use of wood-burning fireplaces in new construction, except for Environmental Protection Agency Certified Woodstoves. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES 66. Policy 5-4, Page 5-8 Air Pollution Effects of New Development New Strategy 67. Policy 5-7, Strategy 2, Page 5-9 A strategy regarding prohibition of wood-burning fireplaces needs to be clarified. NOTE CONSENT The Santa Clara Valley Water District requests this change. CONSENT The Santa Clara Valley Water District reguests this change. 7-31 27 CHANGE NEEDED Change as shown below: The Santa Clara Valley Groundwater sub- basin provides approximately half of the total water demands in Santa Clara County, with an estimated operating capacity of approximately 350,000 acre-feet. The Santa Clara Valley Water District is the groundwater management agency in Santa Clara County. The District conjunctively manages the basins to maximize water supply, protect the basins from contamination and ensure that groundwater supply is sustained. The District manages the groundwater resources, including groundwater recharge, through percolation ponds and in-stream recharge of the creeks. The McClellan Ponds recharge facility is 10cated in Cupertino. Please see next page for changes ENVIRONMÉNT AL RESOURCES 68. Page 5-17 The paragraph under "Ground Water Recharge Facilities" needs to be replaced. 69. Page 5-18 A revised description of Urban Conservation is proposed. of the rest of the State 28 is located reflect the climatic conditions typical Changes to Urban Conservation: Climatic conditions of the region within which Cupertino of California. These conditions are characterized by periods of hot and dry seasons and seasons of heavy rainfall during the wet winter months. Weather conditions, however, can vary from year to year. In recent times, the region experienced periods of multi- year droughts in 1976-1977 and again in 1987-1992. Given the cyclical nature of the climatic conditions, it may be assumed that the region may again experience periods of drought in the future. Water conservation is of great economic, social and environmental importance. During these past periods of drought, the two retailers serving the City imposed water restrictions on their customers in response to the Santa Clara Valley Water District's calls for water use reduction. The reduction targets were periodically adjusted during the drought based upon water reserves, water usage and projected water supplies from both local and imported sources. Through the water management programs of both the District and the retailers, groundwater levels remained healthy and land subsidence was avoided. The District is currently updating its Integrated Water Resource Plan (IWRP), the purpose of which is to develop a flexible and incremental water supply plan for Santa Clara County through the year 2040. According to the District, flexibility is a key aspect of the IWRP 2002, which calls for periodic reassessments to respond to ever-changing water demand and water supply conditions. The District strives to meet the needs of its water retailers, but unpredictable eventualities necessitate continual monitoring and revisions to the District's water management activities In the 2001 session, the State Legislature and Governor enacted Senate Bills 221 and 610, which requires jurisdictions to secure a water supply assessment from suppliers of water systems, for projects subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. The water supply assessment must be incorporated into the environmental documents and considered when determining if projected water supplies are sufficient to satisfy the demands of the project, in addition to the existing and planned future demands. Î- '3 2- NOTE CONSENT The Santa Clara Valley Water District CONSENT The Santa Clara Valley Water District requests this change. requests this change. CONSENT The Santa Clara Valley Water District requests this change. CHANGE NEEDED Change as shown below: Other Water Resources. Cupertino has two major water suppliers: the California Water Company and the San Jose Water Company. Both of these retailers purchase their water supply from the Santa Clara Valley Water District. Change as shown below: Prior to making land use decisions, estimate increases in pollutant loads and flows resulting from projected future development to avoid surface and groundwater quality impacts. Change as shown below: Coordination of Local Conservation Policies with Region-wide Conservation 29 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES 70. Page 5-18 A reference is needed to the Santa Clara Valley Water District. 71. Policy 5-21, Page 5-17 The policy related to Pollution and Flow Impacts needs to be revised. 72. Policy 5-29, Page 5-19 This policy needs to be revised. , Policies: Coordinate city-wide water conservation efforts with the Santa Clara Valley Water District efforts being conducted on a regional scale. ., - . .# 1.. =T >iJ,- t&cL .1 .1~ '7-73 '5 Many of ~ .. ~- these NOTE CONSENT The Santa Clara Valley Water District requests this change. 30 CHANGE NEEDED Change as shown below: Water Use Efficiency: Promote efficient use of water throughout the City Strategy 1: Landscaping Plans. Require water-efficient landscaping plans that incor e of recycled water of the for ation a; development review process. Strategy 2: Water Conservation Programs. Work with the Santa Clara Valley Water District to undertake ams th romote water use CONSENT The Santa Clara Valley Water District requests this change. Maintain Change as shown below: Flooding resulting from dam failure is yet another hydrological hazard. The largest body of water within the area is the Stevens Creek Reservoir. Stevens customers. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES 73. Policy 5-31, Page 5-20 This policy needs to be revised. 74. Page 5-34 A reference to the Stevens Creek Reservoir is needed. Creek Dam meets current dam standards and the probability ( failure is minimal. Causes for dam failure are numerous. They include inadequate design, construction deficiencies and sometimes poor unci foundation conditions. 7-3i.( CONSENT Change is requested by Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey Seismic Hazard Mapping Program Act. 31 Change as shown below: Require all developers to provide geotechnical analyses per the requirements of the California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act and the California Environmental Quality £ .l-1..~ C.l-......l-f .! r.....l~'r Analysis HEALTH AND SAFETY 75. Policy 6-1, Strategy 2 Geotechnical and Structural CONSENT Recommended by the Public Safety Commission (slightly revised by staff). Change Policy as shown below: Consider adopting a residential fire sprinkler ordinance. This will reduce Þe#t fire flow reauirements and thc '"' ¡:r >;, C .1 aRà 76. Policy 6-11, Page 6-15 Residential Fire Sprinklers Ordinance CONSENT This information General Plan. Starting with the sentences in both policies that begin with "Specifically, require ," strike the remaining text. 77. Policy 6-64 and Policy 6-45, Page 6-44 is too detailed for a The technical description of interior and exterior noise requirements needs to be deleted. 7-3b APPROVED 6/28/05 PC VOTE 3-2 Modify as shown below: Strengthen the energy performance of existing housing. The City will considcr adopting encourage a residential energy conservation ordinance requiring residential units to meet minimum energy efficiency requirements at the time of rc sale or maior renovation, G:public folder/ ciddy / preliminary recommendations public folder 2 78. TECHNICAL APPENDIX B Page B-66 Modify text. Recommended Changes · Increase hotel rooms - 150 · Increase residential units in 3 subareas - 650 · Add a policy that prioritizes expansion for . . major companies EXHIBIT B 7 - '3fo Î-]í Recommended Changes = AREA 2005 PC PC RECO- RECO- BUILT POTENTIAL TOTAL MENDED MENDED POTENTIAL TOTAL Valleo 311 300 611 600 911 Park S. Va I Ico 551 200 751 400 951 Park N. Bubb 0 0 0 150 150 Road TOTAL 862 500 1362 1150 2012 subareas TOTAL 21097 1903 23000 2553 23650 citywide Development Allocation () 2005 Task Existing Adm. Plan. built Force Gen. Draft Comm. (inc. Plan com- mitted) Res 21,097 22,369 22,369 24,647 23,000 23,650 units Camm. 3,895,885 4,431,000 4,431,000 4,174,136 4,431,000 Office 8,344,536 9,320,005 9,428,000 9,320,005 8,836,952 Hotel 1,429 1,429 1,578 1,578 1,429 1,579 rooms = EXHIBIT C Height Task Foree Existing Gen. Adm. Plan. Plan Draft Comm. Manta Vista 2-3 stories 2-3 stories 2-3 stories 30' Valleo Park S. 35' 30-60' 30-60' + 60' m ¡xed use, 45' Heart of City 30-45' 30-45' 30-45' 45' Home-stead 35' 30-45' 60' 45' City Ctr. 45' 30-60' 60'+ 45' N. DeAnza 30' 45-60' 60'+ 45' Va II eo Park 30' 45' 45-60' 60' N. 7-3~ EXHIBIT D Hillside Designation " -Proposed hillside land use designation for 27 parcels (Change from Valley Floor 1-5 dujgr ac to 112 acre hillside slope density) -4 parcels estimated to have potential subdivision potential under current land use designation o -1 parcel estimated to have potential subdivision potential under proposed hillside designation , I' 1\~ /./ ,....- . '.-" " ,..... .._} I'~, ì ; (~ ....-;;*- _ _ ,,- I '-....~......- . t Ii'" -''-- ~-_.- - ~,-' l-·-....- ", .' ,\ I -~'::-" ;,1 . ,<' yl! l:{ -.;."~..-._. - 1 - ~I ¡ t , ! ,i'i ~= _. - 1--,- - -,- . \ ". .1. i ," -'~. r-"l"-'~ ¡;~ [:.::.~~::~=~~ ~ ~_-;:-~_.~. ,-~_' - '-ry_,,,r--- _ ~ u,~ , I;,' t!, í ~ ~ I __ : ¡- -.\ \ , I:~! ,J !.Jii I _, __, ¡ \\ 1 , I...· . ~' . 1 ~ r-- '~--! /J/ .......... ......._J :~:) I' '-----'" U ...._- , ,'_'_' ,'. ' .' ,,I I, ___ _ __,/ _'. "- -'--'--, " I '1 "':' ; ':-:- ~':'''' II ¡~I :~¡ ~~'l I; (\ \ \ -.- I....~........... " : t¡ ',: ¡ . J I ) \ \ '. '..I~~. ....___........_.......J t ,-,. , "--.,.. "-'-. \.' ," ':~~'."IIi., ~ . '"'..... ,--.~;;-....~ - ..,.J /..... ....- ", \ ,Of:\ c' ". ~.-- '9· If -- /"- 1,'\ 'I \:.~. )- - - '1i .,---:-{ /', \ \;\ \ \ ,- -.,. " . \, ,,// \i ,\\ ;,' : ¡ # ~.. \ " - " ~1. . ~ _" "C;' .... '- . ,/,/ >.\ \ '. \ ' ,',I. , .',-'ì--·'· ".'. 1 //\\ \" ,I.... r¡1 - ~.. II ':: :! I· /../ \ \ \ --- - ... -..:< .." <f! .,j , ì':1 '" ,/ ......'. \ I,. ~ Ii;,) ,Ij" ti'; ,!.! !" . t.-' 1.\ I I. \.:... .......J "-.< '-. ,j I ~ \ .f ... '\ (ì,' oil. ii, _...~ '~'~.,_..:;_,/i ;' \, \ "..\) . -i ..........;,\) t> "-)""'. ¡ " I ~~, ,'~'~ ~'i'" //' ',,\ '. \ .:\ ,..,., \ \ \', ---"_'''~'''-.f....... ." , \ /.// I' '. \ \ ,,~ ..'~~ ....- '" r'" > .....----.. .~..., '.. ...~. ?, \ .' / I . '~ . '..- C ... . .. ...\' '. .. - .,/. ' ',,- \ \, ~ (,<, ". . -.' .~. \ \ ._,....~"- -" -__ ,. ~ i .-.' , \ \ ~~...... '9)\··./0_/ II', I ,~" "._<~_. > > " ..........~...................". .. ...~...-. .~, '" I". '.. . ....._...,..-.-. .' , ~'f' ...... ~,,< .,". "~7" (.... ,>¡ I' 1. '''-'''J./ -, ." _..-~- ..... - , .-,> " ' ·1" I . .' . -. .. " "~ ..;-:::;,......-., \ ! " . ! I. ~ _Q'ì ..~ __.~ " ',~ -.,.-' I 1"'....- ~" I ·,',1 ,J'. \. ~p'":.-......::~ ......,,_ --. '-- - - -':~ r..-........ "-' I, >1 '-1' .....~ ¡t :1' T1:--~'~ . --G~" J (L:= . .A. it''' '::1.' zQ'ProPQ:~'1land Use Chan~e ff '\ ""'"11 - -. 'elI' '\ ·.·········.1 l ~~.,I.t ·0.··(.··..·_''''"~\.-.- "Ió r t - \1 I ] ...,,',.nlu. II,'^, 1·'I1l'.·'J,," /Æ. . '.--..ß.' . / if, .. ~jðcnlial Low >,.... ..............,....... 'r".. IJ 51 "'-'" F ..h l(;....i.I<'III&.I1 '1.'1""; J~4t-../n . '. ' i .... '...... ope ""....ty orR\..... ' ~ "--.' -- ~... II R(sjd.oll!lall.ðWl/2 "CI"e .' '.. , SII1¡>cI.QI!Q!lRyfC>Pßula '" .. , \ -. -', L , ~ l G-, '.,j - ,,.J "-"1 ~ \\ -. \ ~ '-- \ "-, '\ \ ( ¡ \f\ '--" ;-: :: _: -",5'\;> .,.-;~-, \ \ ,,~.J.~._F/ '\ '. \ ,I,f \,,-;;;,g:::'./'1í - Ie e I I J l (';::;" It \,~ ~-, ,. \ , r·,=, .- .-~' j / > , .' j ',..... J \ I ¡.>-'.., , . >..:::./~~ I. ,.\ , \'" ,¡ \\ . ,\ ~,~- --::) Pn.>~ !.¡too Us. Do.'Sìg.naUol'í Ch~"ß~: &,>skl,.nU.ù Low 1/2 À£n! Slo~ Do.'llSiI)' FOl'lnulA !.ow 10 Rf..kI~11o!i~1 RI...¡.klll'-ll v''ry 1~".' 1/:: ,>..,.....,.f) ill ~ld~'nwl\'l·ry·J...;:.wS.~!^'·~../ ~I·~..LI, "1'rí\'..1o/'RI-''1'¥',Hí..n.ll1 ~'tI.....·t.l'lMj"", .. ,-~"¡"'I·uNÞ:l~L¡IkILh,.'t.l1 .- .. Blm "- ',,",,,,,__~~, ¡....."t'i",....,. n,t-1'~".::' ~ ''''''!'f'hJ.r1: ,.",..",,~_.",.. - a ..'5. 7-Ý ( ~1r...U.. 1-.!..!.lJ·JÎŒ~1 "- r-, .. ']T "Q I ~:.:. , ' -' ~ E::....^ , ~ :¡ro, r:-t:. '}--:.¡..:,... :..Ll...L.LLL :J:I.ú:: ;: _ , ,I ¡g, i:::tf ¡ -:- . r-, f'.hJ.. . _ _ ;: . I .J ,;. , ' , ~O¡t:- 'ct 'fR, -r- c-_¡EBffiEEHfB C = ,~ ! 9 C);0 , ' ·71"",1...J' ..,. C::... :0:3 m '- 'r:: ." ~. ~ " ,/~.l..I.-.LL> "" "';:"-', C::1', .;: U--'>--l.:ç...\, ~ _ ~,~ ~i2P'ttß'ffif1i "¡'¡fHW/IJ ,"t'T11-L^ ;',~ ,8'"";'-" ....~ m-··-,~,,.....,.--,-r::t:::¡~·"EfEIffiEG..)\\~ ' ' - ~ . W --¡: + ._, 'n. ......i(~ E ' ;';¡b: -- - . .' I-r .....,? " ...LL ..' J " ~ ,~ ;:r.: mm;¡;'[I§¡ -~ ,f ~.. j 1. k':- ;.1J'cT =r-= º .....;i æC¡- C...... _ rJ. ~_ F.... 1 ,i-;-,.' L4 ::.L.~y--:; .\~\\8 .. Cc: rc:: - ..,;" C::, , -F '--4 ' ,. ,I \c:~ r...:.::: ~f-C i.wJ, ~'''''''''"'''' "" nI ' c ~~ ~ ~~ 2 ~ __t~, E Ë E E ~ ~ ~~ ¥It\..\œ'C. ""uu c ~""w."r-r:- ""T"ffi'.Iv-. '1.....,j,,-,'-.L ,..t,,/r!=c,cc,- ~ ,::::::: ¡ ,:- r - . 'G '\. I .r: '. '" ;r íh--- 'c·. þ:i C 7'-=.; .<'f.:3'C I.r 1=.- ¡Fe' -1.,.., . 't..-'::I\::' II,.... '--.., r:::: .o{, '. . . ~ '. . -:::: ~ ~~ he . '{: '''', .I' ",' ~:h \\¿\\.LLL ~ b ~0(0. ,\ v, /- ~~"I' . i s:D \\1 v LLLlJ.....I+-J. _I T :' IV/' . .' _l.. <lB, 'r: ' r ~"".. ^.~ '...\'!...... ----;;..<.. X".. Ir.. =-C.... .... ....'..(.!'L. 'L.Ul!.'."J..l..1...J. U. ..il v..,.X ".,g Lµ. LJ..1;:j ~ ,.~~<--~~;,±, =c . ," . ...,-=- u.' I '. .C':\.. ~. '. ....1:.M\\-......--' ·'."""r' "~""'.,::::: "d .~'.','. .. .. .'L.. U,..L --L t' eJ.U.,. ~ ."/ ::-< .U'\o 4-+ "d EE j ). '::::¡.. , ~~J",[ r- . ..:c~'<.:U1.1,¡:.: .~,.,_ ... ". , ,," . '-';:(\\? . .c, . "'" 'H-' ~" . !.::;: l '. ....Ll: '-I4L\¡r: .J.LL1J..J. , '. " \ ", 'D... Jb..~ :.L~'.. '..1', "..J' i.Lf¿----LIJ,..,.... .. ,.,.., 1 J-+..i '-k'= - . , .= '.., ·ID··" ,L:.,., ",""" :'. ' . LL W __ . . .."~,,...... ...... ... 1 . ',,- '" '.':;¡;¡:. ' IC··· , ,.~.. '...1 m;i~. '" " '.., ~\ 1 2:íI9 . ...... ill t::ð~ I, 1 ~\ ~ \ :'¡'" 121." ;:'"~1 ",-,\\~t "-41 . :¡;'" '. '. . "Sk';:'~J' \\~' ,E ". ---.. ~~ '. . ." r . . ·:e ' \.--.... ~'- ~ ~TOPugfil,PhY . ,~... - I!!Ii 1\..f"'......lþ~ d.. . '-. I! I!It-, A ',^\No",,',.r~'.4,i"':""'I"1~"""""""~ ;¡....'r"!".-.k,"'.......",.~::q,~ , G. l~Lf L c '. - -..... ~~1~ j~, ,,,v.. ¥'} ~ ,'*: c" An>. T (' ( , .1 ~ ;J\ _ m Iõ Z!! 7~l(3 \ ~ b . . , 1 I , -~ Topography . a ~ EXHIBIT E Dear Mr. Mayor, Patrick Kwok and Cupertino City Council, members; Sandra James, Richard Lowenthal, Dolly Sandorval, Kris Wang and Director of Community Development, Steve Piasecki Sept. 8, 2005 My name is John James. I reside at 21852 Lindy Lane. This week north side Lindy Lane residences, John Knopp, Frank Sun and Mark Santora were walking up and down Lindy Lane collecting signatures on a petition requesting that the City change the R-l zoning laws removing the 15% slope formula added to protect hillsides that are zoned R -1. I saw about 10 to 12 signatures already on their petition sign up sheet. These gentlemen told my wife and I the reason we should be for the petition was that "the 15% slope formula would reduce our home values $100,000.00." We could not add on to our homes or do any extensive remodeling. Not passing this petition would hurt us financially. My wife and I felt coerced. I later checked with some of my other neighbors and essitentually got the same story. Some signed. My interpretation of the direction of this petition, if passed, will allow the petitioners to build multiple monster homes on their relatively small-subdivided lots. This sounds like preferential spot zoning to a small group oflandowners on Lindy Lane and may be illegal. In my opinion, changing this part of the law would be of great economic benefit for the petitioners. It will allow them to build a monster house on a lot that has a slope GREATER then 15%. 7~ Lf J This could be a huge SAFETY issue. Our Lindy Lane home was completely destroyed during the 1982-1983 heavy rains because of a mudslide. The Lindy Lane hillsides should be zoned correctly to RHS in the general plan is currently considering. In this area no monster homes should be allowed or excessive building coverage could cause mudslides. I will fax to any of you a copy of this petition if you request one. Please send me your fax number. Please respond, John E. James 21852 Lindy Lane Cupertino CA 95014 E-mail: tahoejej@comcast.net Ph/fax: 408-725-0280 l~ vCt Page lof3 Ciddy Wordell From: Mohammed Hossain [sharminsalim@sbcglobaLnet] Sent: Monday, September 12, 200511:42 PM To: Ciddy Wordell; Steve Piasecki; Patrick Kwok2 Cc: City Council; gief@sbcglobaLnet; Bob Rodert; tahoejej@comcast.net; taysi3@aoLcom; Mohammed Hossain Subject: RE: Lindy Lane Petition - Possibly signed based on mis-information - No response from City Planning - PLEASE READ & RESPOND Dear Members of the City Council, Planning Commission, and Mr. Kilian - My name is Mohammed Hossain. I reside at 21882 Lindy lane. I like to point out that I completely agree with Sara Arzeno, John E. James and other concern citizen at Lindy Lane regarding the Hillside development. So, I strongly disagree with the planning Commission's recommendation to keep the Lindy Lane area zoned as residential. Because, it is Hillside, and there is history of mudslides in the area. The Lindy Lane hillsides should be zoned correctly to RHS in the general plan is currently considering. In this area, no monster homes should be allowed or excessive building coverage could cause mudslides. Regards, Mohammed Hossain 21882 Lindy Lane Cupertino, CA 95014 E-mail: sharminsalim@sbcQlobaLnet Phone: 408-725-1448 Ciddy Wordell <CynthiaW@Cupertino.org> wrote: Hello Sara. I received your email today, and will respond to as many of the points as I am able. 1. Why has this piece of hillside escaped the appropriate hillside zoning? My understanding is that a couple of decades ago the City Council considered this area for the hillside designation in the General Plan, but did not take action to change it. In the 1993 General Plan, it was not brought up. In the current General Plan review, it was brought up, but the Planning Commission is recommending that there not be any change. They added wording to an existing policy on Hillside Development Standards (Policy 2-45, Strategy 2) that now states: Actual lot sizes and development areas will be determined through zoning ordinances, clustering, identification of significant natural features and QeoloQical constraints. 2. Can the City clarify the information ...is accurate or not? I think it's too difficult to respond to information Mr. Knopp said or might have said. Perhaps the best thing is for people to read the R-1 ordinance as it relates to slopes and let us know if you have any specific questions about the effect of the ordinance on your properties. 3. Oak tree removal - I responded to that earlier today. 4. City Council agendas - the City Council probably has three General Plan meetings left: September 14. 20.and October 4. At this writing. the hillside issue has not been specifically scheduled for a discussion item. However, September 20 is the best date for you to make any request you have related to General Plan hillside policies or land use designations. 7-11.7 9113/05 Page 2 of3 Ciddy Wordell -----Original Message--m From: Arzeno, Sara [mailto:Sara.Arzeno@cvt.com] Sent: Monday, September 12, 200S 9:23 AM To: Bob Rodert; tahoejej@comcast.net; taysi3@aol.com; sharminsalim@sbcglobal.net; LACORRE@COMCAST.NET; Arzeno, Sara Cc: gief@sbcgloba1.net; Ciddy Wordeli; Patrick Kwok2; Charles Kilian; Steve Piasecki Subject: Lindy Lane Petition - Possibly signed based on mis-information - No response from City Planning - PLEASE READ & RESPOND Importance: High Dear Members of the City Council, Planning Commission, and Mr. Kilian - The situation on Lindy Lane continues to be difficult - once again - after silence from our city planning department and council members, I am writing to request some answers. Last Monday evening at dinner time, Mr. Knopp and Mr. Sun rang our doorbeli to suggest that we sign a petition regarding a zoning change on Lindy Lane (i believe Mr. James has provided you with a copy of this petition.) '1 let Mr. Knopp and Mr. Sun know that we do not approve such a petition and that we want Hiliside zoning to be put in effect - as it should have been all along. After discussing our views with these gentlemen - Mr. Knopp told me that if hillside zoning were approved, no one on our side of the street would be allowed to remodel/add on to our homes - and that if some sort of damage occurred in the future, structures such as swimming pools, etc. could not be rebuilt because the Hillside zoning would forbid such activities. He went on say that our properties would be de-valued if hillside zoning were to be approved. At this part of the conversation. I must say - I simply stared at Mr. Knopp because I did not believe any of these statements were true - in fact, I checked with a Planning Commissioner to confirm that Mr. Knopp had been most definitely mis-representing the facts. A number of us are now extremely concerned because _ after talking to several neighbors - apparently these gentlemen had told everyone the same mis-information - and more importantly - a number of people signed the petition based on this mis-information. Can the City please clarify why this small piece of hillside - unlike other areas similar to it's topography/geography - has escaped the appropriate hillside zoning? Can the City please clarify whether or not the information that Mr. Knopp and Mr. Sun have been telling people is accurate - or not? The City Council and Planning Commission need to consider our rights on this issue. We have been trying to get the Planning Commission to hear & respond to our concerns since May- and we were told to put our concerns in writing. Our first Lindy Lane Neighborhood Group email went out to Ciddy W. on June 1 st. Our first meeting with the City wasn't until the beginning of July at which point Ciddy was in Italy for a month and Mr. Piasecki was only able to attend our meeting for 10 minutes because he had a previous engagement (this was shocking since a number of us had left work early and driven back to Cupertino specifically for this meeting). In the meantime, we have kept letters and concerns coming in - but no one in the Planning Department has even bothered to respond. We still have not received an answer about who/why have oak trees been removed and what has or - what will the City do about it? We still have no response concerning our very real worries about hillside stability (pis refer to city records to see mud slide history and building problems over the years) will the City please respond? Now - we have a petition that may have been signed under false pretenses - to further develop this area. For those of us uninitiated into City Government - when we see "The General Plan" on the City /-L(( 9/13/05 Council Agenda - many of us do not realize that "Hillside Development" is part of this. I request that you please itemize the City Agendas so that Citizens will know what is really being discussed - so that we will be prepared to attend meetings that impact us and not let the hidden agenda unfold in our absence. A final note - many of us in this neighborhood voted for the current city administration the basis of it's purported "Hillside Protection" stance - this was apparently a mis- representation as well Although this does not represent the complete emaillist of the Lindy Lane Neighborhood Group, pis reply to all so we can forward to others in our group. Thank you. Sara Arzeno Manager, Medical Writing CV Therapeutics, Inc. (650) 384-8816 9113/05 Page 3 of3 l-l{j // RECEIVED S[P 1 2 2005 June 4, 2005 Dear Cupertino City Council, Planning Commission, and Planning Staff, We the residents of Lindy Lane and Mt Crest object to the recent change in building requirements in our area. Specifically, we object to the change in the R I ordinance section 19.28.050 paragraph C whereby both the RI and RSH rules are applied to buildings in our area with slope densities greater that 15%. According to the planning office, there are 27 homes affected by this change. We object to the change for two reasons, lack of proper notification, and lack of evidence that the proposed change is reasonable or required. In a Cupertino Planning Commission meeting held on January 26, 2005 there were II members from the affected group attending a meeting to discuss a proposed rezoning of our area from Rl to RSH. During that meeting the 15% slope change was mentioned by Peter Gilli from planning. None of the residents in that meeting had heard of the slope change, which had already been passed. We feel this change amounts to a rezoning under another name. Because the change is effectively a rezoning, and because the residents were not properly notified we feel it should be repealed. In addition, we have seen no credible evidence that such a change is warranted in our area. There are already rules in effect to ensure that structures built on slopped lots are safe. The January 26 meeting was called by the city planners to discuss a possible rezoning of the area around Lindy Lane and Mt Crest. We were told that the proposed changes would have "no negative effects". This is simply NOT true. Both the 15% slope change and the proposed rezoning have tremendous adverse effects on our property val ues. We the residents of those areas are strongly against this proposed rezoning. Such a rezoning was proposed by the city 10 years ago. During that time the city decided NOT to rezone the area. The city had reasons for the decision back then, and we see NO reason to change the zoning now. In summary, we the owners of the properties around Lindy Lane and Mt Crest strongly object to the change in the building rules requiring both Rl and RSH restrictions on lots with 15% slope densities. We are also against the proposed rezoning. We request that the city council repeal the change in the Rl ordinance section 19.28.050 paragraph C whereby both the Rl and RSH rules are applied to buildings with slope densities greater than 15% and reinstate the previous rule. We also request that the proposed rezoning of our area from Rl to RSH be dropped from the general plan. Thank you for your attention in this matter. l-fò S'¡rv\mJ ~ ~¡ B61lAf\J<)'( Gw'; ,. ~;.-- /)11 Ill) M )/} l::;) 1:¡~1< (I)/J/ ~ / gq 2 Lz:,\/D/¿ßX¿ . Ç/V(À \/vfwtO /.' ,----.'1 J _ / i .-/ I 7/ r iii' . . ~ I. I :'j(;ltr'Y¡!¡;111/(C -". /L.!¿'!' ie '/ J y:::~:~~~ ':~r ::~: ~~=::~;~:~ì~~~T ])Ji;t"~ ~þ-::; :::r ......J. ~ ./ j~ 11:26! Ss.µ!", Te~.y.)).r,~ ~ C¡f/ ~ 2.17J-o I~r)--,,> <J/. ctlr J';7~. 2-/8tf'1 ¿. ¡V) 6'f L-"'YJc-:J3 . Zz,r)22 ¿, ''''bVl LI0 ~ cJ Print Name .:,} _ if- l GV~~,ø""L~ 'X i-"I S, LA. ~\ 41q"þ:. '!;",,,IJro f} -/ ¿/J .::7" '. 1"' _ ,- -1_. .., _ '-,/ /¡; ./1~/7/,' J/ . ...., ,f C 4. q rv¡ (It ,,",M 7 ct ¡!¡feu·,J ·:¡~'5··- . .- = Ct'h -~./~/~..JL.'~~¿Ä S~ N./iTA-L ¡AV¡Ü eM( . LVC/I'J.vð ý'D-1r¿OC .:J; h VI J<\Aff .~ ~ / ./" ),. ...... I_\,:....!,-;¡\':./\) \ /\Jr1:i...-Lc::. /~I ¡1í V'+ 5/.N21 i 50.((1 ~Y\3('!L ffi"h.\\. ;:s;:""~ 7j~/ /'/¿,/>c:, / .. L/ 1/2-0 { MI-. (~~,,¡)// / L1 ~c:- lL~ / / ¿ (J (¡. 11(. {.'f' e;.r L')r v/;:2I{~~(l?:.,' ,-,---,.,,/ 2, Zc' 2. > ,0'/",6:></ /A//~¥' ~ 2.\ '\ l.\"1 vv: ~ \-N Wl'~1.. àk2' ~~ li 'liO ~.I Ç../t.'1 6RE" j (D¡< ¡)c...../d ~£.{ Address , , ~ 2--/7<,9' .L........,..I¡ LIr . 2-i or S' ~ L ",.J.'( L~ 2.- 1 q)' 1 ¿ ,n A'-.' ¿ ~ . ~ d" /~ / d II Z¿,'Z: ///¡: c ?~,£.- þ'--:- 22/D/ ¿jNt?.7 ~/ 2 ,c¡Z~ L ,'nol,! L",-. r(~-: -ìj1¡ -, i' .--..¡ )' ,..-. !.... :_ . i'.J ) ~( ',_ I....~ ,., I '. 'II -. i ..,<... .>5 -"/L- , 1'(\ U \ ,1.tì , Signature /'...ð'~ jA P -¿¿¿ ~~ /'1"..8. /,,\~ .'V· 11// - ./ V· , /F/t'J;';}~~:"i¿r:'_ -~~.,~£(.,i ·---r·-:~!7~._."---~_::::- I - Q ,//"'T / / ( / I ~Þ~;ß~' // / ¿/ / / 7-rl Jun 05 05 02:50p p.l ---- ..- -_.-._~.- --- Address Signa~ //2Ç'1( ú1<T ~(\r ~ Q ('/~ l ~25S ~ c~esl f L J".L -S~ C... ~ ,>'-0 Print Name II ~[] J 'ì~j2