CC 06-19-00AGENDA
CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL ~ REGULAR MEETING
CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - REGULAR MEETING
10300 Torre Avenue, City Hall Council Chamber
Monday, June 19, 2000
6:45 p.m.
Legislative Review Committee - 6:15 p.m. - Conference Room A
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Minutes: June 1 regular adjourned meeting and the June 5 regular meeting.
Accounts payable: June 2 and June 9, Resolution Nos. 00-170 and 00-171
Payroll: June 9, Resolution No. 00-172.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS
1. Proclamation recognizing Marie Moore, retiring emergency services coordinator.
POSTPONEMENTS
Item 24, Appeal of Planning Commission denial of Application 16-U-98, Adzieh
Properties -Continuance requested to July 17.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the council on any matter
not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three minutes. In most cases, State law will prohibit
the council from making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Unless there are separate discussions and/or actions requested by council, staff, or a member of
the public, it is requested that items 2 through 20 be acted on simultaneously.
June 19, 2000 Page 2
Cupertino City Council &
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
o
Authorizing execution of Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for animal control,
sheltering, and licensing services, Resolution No. 00-173.
o
Authorizing execution of Joint Exercise of Powers agreement for Workforce
Development Services pursuant to the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, Resolution
No. 00-174.
o
Review of application for Alcoholic Beverage Control license for Loree Liquors, 19050
Stevens Creek Boulevard.
Change Order No. 3, Cupertino Senior Center Expansion, Project 99-9210, Resolution
No. 00-175.
Making determinations and approving the reorganization of territory designated "San
Femando Avenue 00-05", approximately 0.456 acre located on the north side of San
Femando Avenue between Byme Avenue and Orange Avenue; Wang and Yen (APN
357-15-048), Resolution No. 00-176.
10.
Authorizing execution of agreement of employment between the City of Cupertino and
City Manager David Knapp, Resolution No. 00-177.
11.
Quitclaim deed and authorization for underground water rights:
A. Johan A. Darmawan and Susana T. Darmawan, 22650 Alcalde Road, APN 342-
16-042, Resolution No. 00-178
B. Sanjay Swamy and Tulsi B. Swamy, 10655 Santa Lucia Rd., APN 342-17-007,
Resolution No. 00-179
12.
Grant of easement for roadway purposes:
A. Johan A. Darmawan and Susana T. Darmawan, 22650 Alcalde Road, APN 342-
16-042, Resolution No. 00-180
B. Sanjay Swamy and Tulsi B. Swamy, 10655 Santa Lucia Rd., APN 342-17-007,
Resolution No. 00-181
13. Setting
A.
Bo
date for consideration for reorganizations:
Area designated "Grenola Drive 00-02", property located on the north side of
Grenola Drive between Flora Vista Avenue and Ann Arbor Drive; approximately
0.215 acre, Liou And Chen (APN 326-28-009). Resolution No. 00-182
Area designated "Alcazar Avenue 00-08", property located on the south side of
Alcazar Avenue between Orange Avenue and Imperial Avenue; approximately
0.183 acre, Bruffey and Eastman (APN 357-19-012). Resolution No. 00-195
14. Recommendation from Telecommunications Commission for grant award.
15.
Authorizing execution of agreements with Santa Clara County:
A. Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program, Resolution No. 00-183
B. County wide AB 939 implementation, Resolution No. 00-196
June 19, 2000
Cupertino City Council &
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
Page 3
16.
Authorizing execution of agreement with Nextel of-California, Inc., a Delaware
Corporation, for lease of antenna site, Resolution No. 00-184.
17.
Amending the Unrepresented Employees' Compensation Program, Resolution No. 00-
185.
18.
Acceptance of municipal improvements: Jeff Yang, 21896 Granada Ave., APN 357-16-
023 (no documentation required).
19.
Request from Iranian Federated Women's Club and Payvand Cultural School for waiver
of use fees for the fourth annual Iranian Art and Cultural Event.
20.
Authorizing Execution of First Amendment to Agreement between the City of San Jose
and the city of Cupertino for maintenance of traffic signals under joint jurisdiction,
Resolution No. 00-186.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (above)
JOINT MEETING - CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
ROLL CALL
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
A. Joint public hearing of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency on the proposed
redevelopment plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
B. Minutes of the May 15, 2000 Redevelopment Agency meeting.
NEW BUSINESS
C. Agency certifies and makes findings based upon consideration of the Final
Environmental Impact Report, Resolution No. RA-00-06.
Do
Agency finds that the use of taxes allocated from the Project for the purpose of improving
and increasing the community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing outside the
Project Area will be of benefit to the Project, Resolution No. RA-00-07.
ADJOURNMENT
- Redevelopment Agency adjourns.
June 19, 2000
Cupertino City Council &
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
Page 4
Eo
City Council certifies and makes findings based upon consideration of the final
Environmental Impact Report. Resolution No. 00-187.
City Council finds that the use of taxes allocated from the Project for the purpose of
improving and increasing the community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing
outside the Project Area will be of benefit to the project. Resolution No. 00-188.
Go
City Council approves and adopts the Redevelopment Plan, first reading of Ordinance
No. 1850: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino, California,
Approving and Adopting the Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project. (Second reading and enactment scheduled for August 21, 2000.)
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARINGS
21.
Operating budget for the 2000-01 fiscal year: Public hearing to adopt the 2000-01 fiscal
year operating budget, establish appropriation limit, and approve the granting of a
Negative Declaration.
A. Adopt an operating and construction budget for fiscal year 2000-01 by ratifying
estimates of revenues to be received in each fund and appropriating moneys
therefrom for specified activities and accounts and setting forth conditions of
administering said budget, Resolution No. 00-189
B. Establish an appropriation limit for fiscal year 2000-01, Resolution No. 00-190
22.
mo
Apartments - Cupertino City Center Land (comer of Stevens Creek and De Anza
Boulevards), Lot 1, Tract 7953. Applications 2-GPA-99, 3-EXC-00, 6-U-00, and
9-EA-99. Request to consider a General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed
height of 75 feet and to project into the 1:1 setback ratio from Stevens Creek
Boulevard; a Heart of the City Specific Plan amendment and exception and use
permit to construct a new 206-unit, 206,725 square foot multifamily residential
building and 6,775 square feet of retail space on a vacant parcel. Negative
Declarations are recommended. The General Plan amendment is recommended
for denial. The Heart of the City Specific Plan amendment and exceptions are
recommended for approval.
Actions to be taken:
1. Grant Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment, Use Permit,
Heart of the City amendment and exception
2. Deny General Plan Amendment per Planning Commission Resolution No.
6027, modify or approve; if approved, adopt Resolution No. 00-191
3. Approve Heart of the City exception per Planning Commission Resolution
No. 6028, modify or deny; if approved, adopt Resolution No. 00-192
4. Approve Use Permit per Planning Commission Resolution No. 6029,
modify or deny
June 19, 2000
Cupertino City Council &
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
Page 5
Bo
Hotel - Kimpton Hotel and Restaurant Group, Lot 6, Tract 7953, (comer of
Stevens Creek and De Anza Boulevards), APN 369-01-037. Applications 2-
GPA-99, 4-EXC-00, 5-U-00, and 8-EA-99. Request to consider a General Plan
amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet; a Heart of the City Specific
Plan amendment and exception to exceed the 40 foot height limit and to allow
hotel use; and a use permit to construct a new 224 room, 130,580 square foot
hotel on a vacant parcel. A Negative Declaration recommended, and this item is
recommended for approval. Continued from June 5.
Actions to be taken:
1. Grant Negative Declaration 'for General Plan Amendment, Use Permit,
Heart of the City amendment and exception
2. Approve General Plan Amendment per Planning Commission Resolution
No. 6031, modify or deny; if approved, adopt Resolution No. 00-191
3. Approve Heart of the City exception per Planning Commission Resolution
No. 6032, modify or deny; if approved, adopt Resolution No. 00-193
4. Approve Use Permit per Planning Commission Resolution No. 6033,
modify or deny
23.
Appeal and exception to the Planning Commission's decision of May 8, 2000, regarding
park fees stated in Resolution 6025: approval of Application 1-TM-00, Tentative Map to
subdivide a 8,818 sq. f~. parcel into two lots at 10440 South Blaney Avenue as listed in
Section III item 14 of improvement agreement in the amount of $31,500.00. Appellant:
Ron Bennett.
24.
Appeal of Planning Commission denial of Application 16-U-98, Adzich Properties - Use
permit to demolish an existing house and construct four single-family detached
residences on a net 12,480 square foot lot located at 10216 Pasadena Avenue.
Appellants: Radovan and Helen Adzich. Continuance requested to July 17.
25.
Public hearings regarding permit parking.
· Student parking on Hyannisport Drive, Dolores Avenue, and McClellan Road
· Permit parking on McClellan Road between Byme Avenue and Madrid Road,
Resolution No. 00-194
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
June 19, 2000 Cupertino City Council & Page 6
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
NEW BUSINESS
26.
Johnson Lyman Architects (Andronico's), Applications 2-U-00 and 4-EA-00, use permit
for the demolition of a cinema and retail space and the construction of a new 32,160
square foot market and cooking school at The Oaks shopping center, 21275 Stevens
Creek Boulevard. The application is recommended for approval and a Negative
Declaration is recommended.
Actions to be taken:
1. Grant Negative Declaration.
2. Approve application per Planning Commission Res. No. 6034, modify or deny.
27.
First reading of Ordinance No. 1851: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino Amending Chapter 11.24.150 of the Cupertino Municipal Code Relating to
Establishment of Parking Prohibition on the North Side of Bollinger Road From De Anza
Boulevard West + 546 Feet."
ORDINANCES
28.
Second reading and enactment of Ordinance No. 1849: "An Ordinance of the City
Council of the City of Cupertino Prezoning an Existing Single-Family Residential Lot
Located at 21095 Grenola Drive to Pre RI-10 (single family residential) zoning district."
STAFF REPORTS
COUNCIL REPORTS
Mayor Statton:
Association of Bay Area Governments - Alternate
Legislative Review Committee
Sister City Committee - Toyokawa
West Valley Mayors and City Managers
Vice-Mayor James:
Library Expansion Committee
Cupertino Audit Committee
Economic Development Team
Environmental Review Committee - Alternate
Leadership Cupertino
Northwest Flood Control Zone Advisory Committee
Santa Clara County Cities Association - Alternate
Santa Clara County Emergency Preparedness Commission
Senior Center Expansion Committee
West Valley Mayors and City Managers - Alternate
June 19, 2000 Page 7
Cupertino City Council &
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
Councilmember Burnett:
North Central Flood Control Zone Advisory Committee
Public Dialog Liaison
Santa Clara County Cities Association Representative, ABAG Board of Directors
Santa Clara County Committee on Housing & Community Block Grant Program
Santa Clara County Library District JPA Board of Directors - Alternate
Santa Clara County Transportation Agency Policy Advisory Committee
Santa Clara Valley Water Commission
Senior Center Expansion Committee
Councilmember Chang:
Association of Bay Area Governments
Leadership Cupertino
Legislative Review Committee
Library Expansion Committee
Public Dialog Liaison
Santa Clara County Cities Association
Santa Clara County Committee on Housing & Community Block Grant Program-
Alternate
Santa Clara County Emergency Preparedness Commission - Alternate
Councilmember Lowenthal:
Association of Bay Area Governments - Alternate
Cupertino Audit Committee
Economic Development Team
Environmental Review Committee
Santa Clara County Library District JPA Board of Directors
CLOSED SESSION
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting of July 3 has been canceled. The next regular meeting will be July 17.
DRAFT MINUTES
Cupertino City Council, Regular Adjourned Meeting
City Hall Conference Room C/D, 10300 Tone Avenue
(408) 777-3200
Thursday, June 1, 2000
6:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
At 6:45 p.m. Mayor Statton called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers, 10300 Torre
Avenue, Cupertino, California, and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
City Council members present: Mayor John Statton, Vice-Mayor Sandra James, and Council
members Don Burnett, Michael Chang, and Richard Lowenthal. Council members absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager Don Brown, City Attorney Charles Kilian, Administrative Services
Director Carol Atwood, Community Development Director Steve Piasecki, Human Resources
Manager Bill Woska, Public Information Officer Donna Krey, Public Works Director Bert
Viskovich, and City Clerk Kimberly Smith.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
BUDGET STUDY SESSION
1. Review of the 2000-2001 fiscal year preliminary budget.
City Manager Don Brown reviewed the budget message.
Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood highlighted the budget document, and said that
revenues are anticipated to show a 3% increase across the board, except for the following:
Sales tax revenues are projected at 10% due in part to revenue fi.om Apple Computer and in
anticipation of new revenue fi.om Andronico's Market.
· Transit Occupancy Tax (TOT) will increase by $300,00 fi:om the Adobe Inn. Estimates do
not include revenue fi:om the proposed Kimpton Hotel or any others.
· Property tax revenue is anticipated to increase about 10%, but will be offset by a $200,000
miscalculation in tax equity allocations.
· Salary expenses will be lower than anticipated, since an increase of 5% was budgeted but
actual increases will follow the Consumer Price Index (CPI) at 3.6%.
Atwood reviewed the General Fund revenues shown on page 37 of the budget document. Total
revenue will be $55 million, and General Fund revenue will be $31 million. She noted that sales
tax revenues are now predominantly fi.om the business-to-business sector. Page 38 of the budget
shows that total expenditures are estimated at $59 million and General Fund expenditures will be
$34 million.
June 1, 2000 Cupertino City Council Minutes Page 2
Atwood discussed the fund balance trends on page 57 of the-budget. She said that many cities
consider themselves lucky to have 5% of operating costs in reserve. In contrast, Cupertino has
had 100% in some years. Now that the city has embarked on an aggressive Capital Improvement
Projects (CIP) program, reserves will drop below the limit of Cupertino's reserve policy. For
that reason, several CIP projects were moved to the umprogrammed category, so that council
could review the reserve policy or wait upon new revenue streams, such as the Kimpton Hotel.
Some of the major CIP expenditures have included $6 million to purchase the Stockelmeier
property, which is adjacent to Blackberry Farm Golf Course, $4.4 million for the new Senior
Center, a commitment of up to $22 million for a new library ($10 million through debt service or
Certificates of Participation), and expanded library hours. The city's current policy is to have
75% of the annual operating expenses and debt service in reserve, with a goal of 100%.
Atwood highlighted the new programs in the 2000-2001 budget, and said that council would be
accepting input this evening but final action will be taken on June 19. The new programs
included the following:
· $80,000
· $50,000
· $50,000
· $10,000
· $40,000
· $23,888
Replacement chairs for council chambers audience
Joint venture animal shelter
Revolving fund for dangerous building abatements
Retail analysis
Historical Society operating costs
Part-time recreation coordinator for a new teen program
Atwood said a request has also been received to preserve the Snyder-Hammond House at Rancho
San Antonio County Park, but the cost is not known at this time. Bert Viskovich, Public Works
Director, said he would estimate the cost to be about $125,000-$150,000.
Roberta Holliman, representing the League of Women Voters of Cupertino-Sunnyvale, requested
funding for the SmartVoter program in the amount of $250.00. This is an on-line service that
assists voters in finding their polling places and leaming more about candidates. The City
Manager said this was such a small request, it would be funded out of the City Clerk's Office
current budget.
Council members were given copies of the following correspondence: (1) A letter from Charles
E. Newman, President of the Cupertino Historical Society, requesting $40,000 for general
operating expenses; (2) A letter from Robert and Janet Meyers supporting the request for
funding; and (3) A letter from Patrick and Barbara Rogers supporting the funding.
Charles Newman, President of the Cupertino Historical Society, addressed council and
referenced the letters. He introduced the past and current members of the board and the pm-time
staff that were present in the audience. He thanked the council for the museum space given them
at the Quinlan Center, which was crucial. Newman said that two years ago they were given a
grant of $30,000 and did their best to raise funds by going to corporations, foundations, etc.
They were not able to raise a great deal of money, and grants typically have a lot of strings
attached. He discussed their active volunteer program, including the Traveling Trunk, which
June 1, 2000 Cupertino City Council Minutes Page 3
reaches over 1,500. He said that they had a received a very generous endowment fund gift fi.om
Burrell Leonard in the amount of $100,000, but that could not be used for their operating
expenses.
Bumett said that the Quinlan center has carried a financial lost as a result of providing space to
the Society, and he would like to see the whole financial picture when council votes on this
funding. James said she was not in favor of paying for staff, and would prefer one-time funding.
She thought the Historical Society and the new library might be a good mix.
Sharon Blaine, Cupertino Historical Society, said they were able to get grants for one-time
projects, but the real difficulty is finding operating funds for staff, phone bills, etc. Their budget
is $56,000-$60,000. If the museum must be closed, items will be distributed to other museums
willing to take them, because they cannot be sold. Blaine discussed their efforts to encourage
members and others to build the endowment fund, and if the city can help to cover operating
expenses, the endowment fund would grow that much faster.
Ms. Kathy Nellis, Cupertino Historical Society, said the question is whether the Historical
Museum is a city benefit. If so, how can the city best support it? She said they very much
realize the value of the space at the Quinlan Center. Personally she thought McClellan Ranch
Park would be a good location as well.
Atwood reviewed the list of new employees shown on page 50 of the budget document and
distributed a chart showing the General Fund reserve policy. She recommended that council be
selective about which new projects they desire to fund (trails, traffic calming, etc.), and consider
changing the policy to have a reserve of 50% of General Fund Operating expenditures and debt
service, with a goal of 75%.
Discussion followed regarding the estimated costs of the new library, and the impact of spending
the full $22 million on the CIP program. Other revenue streams are not yet on line, and
Viskovich noted that library construction costs have been increasing over time. The city
estimated costs at $300/sq. ft., and now construction costs are nearing $500/sq. ft.
Department heads highlighted their department and division budgets, noting any changes to last
year's figures. Two items were not included in the Public Works budget when the draft
document was printed. These were: $50,000 for consulting services to replace a plan checker
who had resigned, and $20,000 for a comprehensive bicycle/pedestrian program to educate
elementary and middle school children.
Lowenthal raised questions about the feasibility of putting money into the Cupertino Historical
Society endowment fund, and asked that Internet access via DSL (Digital Subscriber Line) be
made a priority.
June 1, 2000 Cupertino City Council Minutes Page 4
2. Review of the 2000-2005 Capital Improvement Prograha (CIP)
Viskovich highlighted the CIP program, and discussion followed regarding the items on the
council's goals list and how they were reflected in the budget, as well as an offer to take the open
space at the Snyder Hammond house near Rancho San Antonio County Park. The City Manager
noted that the city did not want to take on the responsibility of maintaining that open space.
Lowenthal asked that staff verify that all costs be included in the CIP budget that were identified
in the goals list, including the Stevens Creek Trail Feasibility Study and California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) processes.
Mayor Statton asked Atwood to set up a retreat in July when the new city manager was on board,
and to prepare criteria for ranking capital improvement projects, policy levels, and absolute
minimum reserve levels.
CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Statton referred to the resignation of the Parks and Recreation Director, and said that
Government Code Section 54954.2 allows council to meet in closed session to determine if a
closed session is needed. This can be done if there is a 2/3 vote, if there could be a need to take
immediate action, and if the item came to the council's attention after the agenda was posted.
James moved and Chang seconded to enter into this discussion, and the motion carried 5-0.
At 8:45 p.m. Council recessed into the closed session, and reconvened at 9:15 p.m. The City
Attorney announced there was no need for another closed session and no further action was
taken.
ADJOURNMENT
At 9:16 p.m. the meeting was adjourned to Monday, June 5, at 6:00 p.m. in Conference Room A
for a closed session regarding the recruitment for city manager.
Kimberly Smith, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 00-~70
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS
AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING
JUNE 2, 2000
WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated
representative has certified to accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the
availability of funds for payment hereof; and
WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows
the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds as hereinafter set
forth in Exhibit "A".
CERTIFIED:
4~
Director of Administrative Services
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this day of ., 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
3-/
06/02y00
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "05/29/2000" and "06/02/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 577528 05/30/00 1742 CARL JECH 5506549
1020 577529 05/30/00 1888 PETER GELFAND 1101042
1020 577529 V 05/30/00 1888 PETER GELFAND 1101042
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577530 05/30/00 1888 PETER GELFAND 1101042
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1104510
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1108001
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1104300
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1106100
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 C3%SH 2204011
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 2204010
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 4259314
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1107301
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1101070
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1104000
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1107503
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1108601
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1100000
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1104400
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1106100
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1101000
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1107503
1020 577531 06/01/00 149 CASH 1104510
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577532 06/01/00 1891 ATHENA MILLER 1108101
1020 577533 06/02/00 13
ACME & SONS SANITATION C 5606640
1020 577534 06/02/00 18
1020 577534 06/02/00 18
1020 577534 06/02/00 18
TOTAL CHECK
ADONA OIL CORPORATION 2708405
ADONA OIL CORPORATION 1108005
ADONA OIL CORPORATION 1108005
1020 577535 06/02/00 25
1020 577535 06/02/00 25
TOTAL CHECK
AIR COOLED ENGINES INC 6308540
AIR COOLED ENGINES INC 6308540
1020 577536 06/02/00 M
ALLIANCE FOR COB~4UNITY M 1103500
1020 577537 06/02/00 M
AMERICAN PAYROLL ASSOCIA 1104100
1020 577538 06/02/00 44
AMERICAN RED CROSS 5806449
1020 577539 06/02/00 45
AMERICAN TRAFFIC SUPPLY 2708405
1020 577540 06/02/00 1287
1020 577540 06/02/00 1287
ASTRO JUMP 5806349
ASTRO JI]MP 5806349
..... DESCRIPTION ......
SR CTR PROGRAM
FINE ARTS GRANT
FINE ARTS GRANT
FINE ARTS GRANT
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSENE
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBUREEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSENE
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
ADVANCE OF FUNDS
PORTABLE TOILETS
DISPOSAL FEES
DISPOSAL FEES
DISPOSAL FEES
PARTS
PARTS
MEMBERSHIP/L VALENTINO
MEMBERSHIP/S MACGOWAN
ADMIN.FEES
SUPPLIES
ELEPHANT ASTROJUMP
DINOSAUR ASTROJUMP
SALES TAX
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.83
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.61
7.21
10.82
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.O0
PAGE 1
AMOUNT
800.00
750.00
-750.00
0.00
750.00
3.24
12.24
1.40
70.75
25.85
21.42
34.29
10.00
29.22
15.44
20.00
19.50
83.53
100.65
10.00
2~.97
1.00
527.85
958.00
168.83
2010.31
4787.13
3437.64
10235.08
47.33
94.65
141.98
85.00
155.00
10.00
49.80
100.00
1On qO
RUN DATE 06/02/00 TIME 08:01:47
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
06/02/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 2
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "05/29/2000" and "06/02/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
C.A~H ACCT CHECK NO
TOTAL CHECK
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 577541 06/02/00 67
1020 577541 06/02/00 67
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577542 06/02/00 1860
1020 577543 06/02/00 71
1020 577543 06/02/00 71
1020 577543 06/02/00 71
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577544 06/02/00 993
1020 577545 06/02/00 1250
1020 577546 06/02/00 1557
1020 577547 06/02/00 720
1020 577548 06/02/00 1348
1020 577548 06/02/00 1348
? . CHECK
1020 577549 06/02/00 1273
1020 577549 06/02/00 1273
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577550
1020 577551
1020 577552
1020 577552
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577553
1020 577554
1020 577555
1020 577556
1020 577556
1020 577556
TOTAL C74ECK
1020 577557
1020 577558
06/02/00 122
06/02/00 150
06/02/00 155
06/02/00 155
06/02/00 160
06/02/00 178
06/02/00 1293
06/02/00 1194
06/02/00 1194
06/02/00 1194
06/02/00 184
06/02/00 187
AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108407
AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108407
S/MNDRAAYLSWORTH 1106100
B & R ICE CREAM DIST 5606620
B & R ICE CREAM DIST 5606620
B & R ICE CREAM DIST 5606620
JACKLYN BADDELEY 5506549
THE BALLOON FAMILY 5606620
DAVID BARNES 5806249
BATTERY SYSTEMS 6308540
BAYSHORE FENCE CO INC 1108312
BAYSHORE FENCE CO INC 4209216
BSN/PASSON'S/GSC SPORTS 1106342
BSN/PASSON'S/GSC SPORTS 5606620
JUAN CABRAL 5806449
CCS PLANNING & ENGINEERI 4209530
CE1TI~3tL WHOLESALE NURSER 1108321
CENTRAL WHOLESALE NURSER 1108321
CHILDREN'S ART STUDIO 5806349
COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT 110
COSMOJUMP 5606620
COURTESY TOW 6308540
COUR~q~SY TOW 6308540
COURTESY TOW 6308540
JAI~S COURTNEY 5606620
MARY J CRAWFORD 5806349
..... DESCRIPTION ......
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
COMPUTER TRAINING
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
REIM/SANITARY SUPPLIES
EALLOONARCH
CATERING PROGRAM
PARTS
LABOR & MATERIAL
REPLACE FENCE AND GATE
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
RECREATION PROGP, AM
PROF SVCS 2/1-3/31/00
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
RECREATION PROGRAM
INS.PREM. 6/1-7/1
REPAIR
TOWING
TOWING
TOWING
PERFOP, MER
RECREATION PROGRAM
SALES TAX
0.00
110.18
4.31
114.49
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.93
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
AMOUNT
200.00
1445.68
56.21
1501.89
80.00
312.25
477.39
603.30
1392.94
67.34
238.15
70.00
77.83
622.00
1957.00
2579.00
466.93
90.79
557.72
781.20
2060.00
46.28
48.71
94.99
1732.77
66.75
200.00
125.00
175.00
175.00
475.00
425.00
936.28
RUN DATE 06/02/00 TIME 08:01:48
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
3-3
06/02g00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "05/29/2000" and "06/02/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENEP. AL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUN~/DEPT
1020 577559 06/02/00 1407
1020 577559 06/02/00 1407
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577560 06/02/00 191
1020 577561 06/02/00 197
1020 577562 06/02/00 198
1020 577563 06/02/00 201
1020 577563 06/02/00 201
1020 577563 06/02/00 201
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577564 06/02/00 220
1020 577565 06/02/00 222
1020 577565 06/02/00 222
1020 577565 06/02/00 222
1020 577565 06/02/00 222
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577566 06/02/00 223
1020 577567 06/02/00 246'
1020 577568 06/02/00 1812
1020 577569 06/02/00 250
1020 577570 06/02/00 253
1020 577571 06/02/00 266
1020 577572 06/02/00 1778
1020 577573 06/02/00 277
1020 577574 06/02/00 281
1020 577574 06/02/00 281
1020 577574 06/02/00 281
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577575 06/02/00 1335
1020 577576 06/02/00 296
1020 577577 06/02/00 298
1020 577577 06/02/00 298
CU~4INGS HENDERSON TIRE 6308540
CU~94INGS HENDERSON TIRE 6308540
CUPERTINO CHAMBER OF COM 1104001
CUPERTINO TOWN CENTER 1101500
CUPERTINO UNION SCHL DIS 5806449
DAPPER TIRE CO 6308540
DAPPER TIRE CO 6308540
DAPPER TIRE CO 6308540
DISCOUNT SCHOOL SUPPLY 1106342
DKS ASSOCIATES 2709412
DKS ASSOCIATES 4209526
DKS ASSOCIATES 2709438
DKS ASSOCIATES 4209524
DON & MIKE'S SWEEPING IN 2308004
ENTIRE PRINTING 5606620
ENVIRON SYSTEMS RESEARCH 6104800
EUPHRAT MUSEUM OF ART 5806349
EXCHANGE LINEN SERVICE 5606620
RYAN FORBES 5806449
LEE FRANCIA 56066~0
JOHN FUNG 5806249
GARDENLAND 6308540
GARDENLAND 6308540
GARDENLAND 6308540
DENISE GOSS 5806249
F. AREN GOTTLEIB 5806449
GRAINGER INC 4209216
GRAINGER INC 2708405
..... DESCRIPTION ......
PARTS & LABOR
PARTS & LABOR
TEACHERS PROGRAM
RENT
FACILITY USE FEES
CREDIT 5/10/00
TIRES
TIRES
SUPPLIES
PROP SVCS THRU 3/31/00
PROP SVCS THRU 3/31/00
PROP SVCS THRU 3/31/00
PROP SVCS ~"x{RU 3/31/00
STREET SWEEPING 5/00
SUPPLIES
SOFTWARE LICENSES
RECREATION PROGPJ%M
SUPPLIES
RECREATION PROGRAM
PERFORMER
RECREATION PROGRAM
PARTS
PARTS
PARTS
RECREATION PROGRAM
RECREATION PROGRAM
PARTS & SUPPLIES
PARTS & SUPPLIES
SALES TAX
PAGE 3
AMOUNT
0.00 60.50
0.00 172.94
0.00 233.44
0.00 200.00
0.00 3884.00
0.00 41.96
0.00 -374.25
0.00 319.64
0.00 592.79
0.00 538.18
0.00 540.04
0.00 7155.92
0.00 772.47
0.00 17815.12
0.00 3991.11
0.00 29734.62
0.00 980u.80
145.05 1903.18
581.64 7631.64
0.00 4000.09
0.00 191.96
0.00 2040.60
0.00 135.00
0.00 97.00
2.05 26.95
20.79 272.80
0.51 6.67
23.35 306.42
0.00 50.30
0.00 864.00
0.00 51.71
0.00 30~ 94
RUN DATE 06/02/00 TIME 08:01:49
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
06/02~00 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 4
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "05/29/2000" and "06/02/2000.
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
1020 577577
TOTAL CHECK
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
06/02/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1107503
1020 577578 06/02/00 300 BARBARA GRAVES 5806449
1020 577579 06/02/00 320 KATHI HARK~SS 5806449
1020 577580 06/02/00 1847 THE IDEA BROKERS 5606620
1020 577581 06/02/00 1524 JEFFREY JADRICK 5806249
1020 577582 06/02/00 1742 CARL JECH 5506549
1020 577583 06/02/00 806 WENDELL JAMES JOHNSON JR 5606660
1020 577583 06/02/00 806 WENDELL JAF~S JOHNSON JR 1108314
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577584 06/02/00 1657
1020 577584 06/02/00 1657
1020 577584 06/02/00 1657
1020 577584 06/02/00 1657
1020 577584 06/02/00 1657
1020 577584 06/02/00 1657
~ , CHECK
1020 577585
1020 577586
1020 577586
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577587
1020 577588
1020 577589
1020 577590
1020 577591
1020 577592
1020 577592
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577593
1020 577594
1020 577594
TOTAL CHECK
JOSEPHINE'S PERSONNEL SE 5506549
JOSEPHINE'S PERSOI~L SE 1106265
JOSEPHINE'S PERSONNEL SE 1106265
JOSEPHINE'S PERSONNEL SE 5506549
JOSEPHINE'S PERSONNEL SE 5506549
JOSEPHINE'S PERSONNEL SE 1106265
06/02/00 363
06/02/00 369
06/02/00 369
JUST PLAY SPORTS ACADEMY 5806449
KELLY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 1108502
KELLY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 1108506
06/02/00 371
06/02/00 377
06/02/00 382
06/02/00 390
06/02/00 400
06/02/00 408
06/02/00 408
LISA KING 5806449
PETER KOEHLER 5806249
HNIK-KOPY PRINTING 5506549
LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 2708405
LIFETIME TENNIS INC 5706450
LOS GATOS MEAT & SMOKEH0 5606620
LOS GATOS MEAT & SMOKEHO 5606620
o6/o2/oo M
06/02/00 443
06/02/00 443
METRO MOBILE C0~3NICATI 1108501
MILLENNIUM MECHANICAL IN 1108501
MILLENNIUM MECHANICAL IN 1108502
..... DESCRIPTION ......
PARTS & SUPPLIES
RECREATION PROGRAM
RECREATION PROGRAM
SUPPLIES
CATERING PROGRAM
INSTRUCTION
BACKFLOW REPAIR/RETEST
SERVICE CALL
CATERING TEMP
CATERING TEMP
CATERING TEMP
CATERING TEMP
CATERING TEMP
CATERING TEMP
RECREATION PROGRAM
PARTS & SUPPLIES
PARTS & SUPPLIES
RECREATION PROGRAM
RECREATION PROGRAM
JUNE NNSLTR DELIVRY/PR
SUPPLIES
TENNIS INSTRUCTION
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
PARTS & SUPPLIES
SERVICE CALL
SERVICE CALL
SALES TAX
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
AMOUNT
63.36
416.01
157.20
552.00
953.54
33.75
100.00
185.00
75.00
260.00
304.00
748.60
601.92
304.00
304.00
486.40
2748.92
4594.50
119.78
53.74
173.52
544.50
234.00
308.51
19.79
38209.22
300.71
141.17
441.88
332.29
986.62
1007.17
1993.79
RUN DATE 06/02/00 TIME 08:01:49
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
06/02Y00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans date between "05/29/2000" and "06/02/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 577595 06/02/00 1383
1020 577595 06/02/00 1383
1020 577595 06/02/00 1383
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577596 06/02/00 455
1020 577597 06/02/00 465
1020 577597 06/02/00 465
1020 577597 06/02/00 465
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577598
1020 577599
1020 577600
1020 577601
1020 577601
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577602
1020 577603
1020 577604
1020 577605
1020 577606
1020 577606
1020 577606
1020 577606
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577607
1020 577607
1020 577607
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577608
1020 577608
1020 577608
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577609
1020 577610
1020 577610
TOTAL CHECK
MITCHELL BROS AUTO PARTS 6308540
MITCHELL BROS AUTO PARTS 6308540
MITCHELL BROS AUTO PARTS 6308540
HEATHER MOLL 5806249
MOUNTAIN VIEW GARDEN CEN 1108314
MOUNTAIN VIEW GARDEN CEN 1108321
MOUNTAIN VIEW GARDEN CEN 1108303
06/02/00 1550
06/02/00 485
06/02/00 489
06/02/00 192
06/02/00 192
ADONIS L NECESITO 1103501
NEW~ TRAFFIC SIGNS 2708405
NOTEWORTHY MUSIC SCHOOL 5806349
NOVAC3%RE OCCUPATION;Lb HE 5806449
NOVACARE OCCUPATIONAL HE 5806449
06/02/00 499
06/02/00 494
06/02/00 1190
06/02/00 1896
06/02/00 507
06/02/00 507
06/02/00 507
06/02/O0 5O7
DEBBIE O'NEILL 5606620
OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN 1101500
RONALD OLDS 1103500
GEORGE 0LIVEIEA 4209108
DAN OSBORNE 1108602
DAN OSBORNE 4209216
DAN OSBORNE 1108501
DAN OSBORNE 1108303
06/02/00 508
06/02/00 508
06/02/00 508
P E R S - HF2%LTH 1104510
P E R S - HF2%LTH 1104510
P E R S - HEALTH 110
06/02/00 1894
06/02/00 1894
06/02/00 1894
..... DESCRIPTION ......
PARTS
CREDIT 5/9/00
PARTS
06/02/00 545
06/02/00 913
06/02/00 913
RECREATION PROGRAM
TOPSOIL
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
PROF SVCS
SUPPLIES
RECREATION PROGRAM
PPD TB TEST
PPDTB TEST
PERFORMER
SUPPLIES
PROF SVCS
TIME & MATERIAL
TIME & MATERIALS
TIME & MATERIAL
TIME & MATERIAL
TIME & MATERIAL
HF2%LTH PREMIUM 6/00
HEALTH PREMIUM 6/00
HEALTH PREMIUM 6/00
DAN PERUNKO 5806449 TRAINING
DAN PERUNKO 1106342 TRAINING
DAN PERUNK0 5806349 TRAINING
JEFF PISERCHIO 5606640
PUBLIC BROADCASTING SERV 1103500
PUBLIC BROADCASTING SERV 1103500
PROF SVCS
GREAT DECISIONS 2000
TODAY'S LIFE CHOICES
SALES TAX
PAGE 5
AMOUNT
5.54 72.68
0.00 -57.22
1.26 16.50
6.80 31.96
0.00 1272.00
0.00 28.09
0.00 78.34
0.00 33.07
0.00 139.50
0.00 250.00
0.00 424.70
0.00 4023.06
0.00 30.00
0.00 1S.00
0.00 45.00
0.00 180-00
0.00 60.05
0.00 112.50
0.00 7330.00
0.00 3620.42
0.00 2638.68
0.00 385.00
0.00 1226.67
0.00 7870.77
0.00 19092.06
0.00 710.07
0.00 39935.52
0.00 59737.65
0.00 183.34
0.00 183.33
0.00 183.33
0.00 550.00
0.00 1705.00
0.00 250.00
0.00 200.00
0.00 45" O0
RUN DATE 06/02/00 TIME 08:01:50
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
06/02~00 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 6
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "05/29/2000" and "06/02/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CAS}{ ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
..... DESCRIPTION
SALES TAX
AMOUNT
1020 577611 06/02/00 M
1020 577612 06/02/00 1895
1020 577613 06/02/00 576
1020 S77614 06/02/00 580
1020 577614 06/02/00 580
1020 577614 06/02/00 580
1020 577614 06/02/00 580
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577615 06/02/00 845
1020 577615 06/02/00 845
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577616 06/02/00 1417
1020 577617 06/02/00 M
1020 577618 06/02/00 633
] 577619 06/02/00 1890
1020 577620 06/02/00 1488
1020 577620 06/02/00 1488
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577621 06/02/00 652
1020 577621 06/02/00 652
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577622 06/02/00 658
1020 577622 06/02/00 658
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577623 06/02/00 1523
1020 577624 06/02/00 200
1020 577625 06/02/00 671
1020 577626 06/02/00 1889
1020 577627 06/02/00 695
1020 577627 06/02/00 695
1020 577627 06/02/00 695
1020 577627 06/02/00 695
1020 577627 06/02/00 695
TOXI%L CHECK
PULONE & STROMBERG 1104300
QUALITY SPORTS INC 5606640
TRANSCPTN COUNCIL MTGS
PULL CART WHEELS
REED & GRAHAM INC 2708404 SUPPLIES
RELAX THE BACK STORE
RELAX T~E BACK STORE
RELAX THE BACK STORE
RELAX THE BACK STORE
1103300
1101201
1104100
1104300
KEITH REUTER 5606620
KEITH REUTER 1108506
CHAIR
CHAIR
C~IR
C}{AIR
PEST CONTROL
TIME & MATERIAL
JENNIFER ROZWOOD 5606620 PERFORMER
SAN JOSE GIANTS 5806349 SJ GIANTS TCKT CLUB 20
SANTA C~ COD/FiY SHERI 5806349 JR.HIGH DANCE/OPFCRS 5
SC}{WAAB INC 1104300 RUBBER STAMP
SEARS 6308540 SUPPLIES
SEARS 1107405 SUPPLIES
SIERRA SPRING WATER COMP 1101500
SIERRA SPRING WATER COMP 1106265
SILVEP, ADO SPRINGS BOTTLE 1104510
SILVERADO SPRINGS BOTTLE 1104510
JANA SOKALE 1108601
LESLIE SOKOL 5806349
STANDARD BUSINESS MACHIN 1101500
WATER
WATER 4/5-5/3/00
EMPLOYEE WATER
EMPLOYEE WATER
PROF SVCS 2/24-5/19/00
RECREATION PROGRAM
SERVICE
SUCCESS BUILDERS 1106248 SUPPLIES
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5606620
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
646.60
32.39
19.21
439.38
439.38
734.74
724.68
2338.18
450.00
250.00
700.00
200.00
182.00
266.14
32.00
181.19
92.00
273.19
7.32
192.85
200.17
136.00
145.00
281.00
698.60
243.50
263.98
230.77
1624.93
38.91
4913.50
1332.85
2545.59
10455.78
RUN DATE 06/02/00 TIME 08:01:51
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
3-7
06/02~00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "05/29/2000" and "06/02/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 577628
1020 577629
1020 577630
1020 577630
TOTAL CHECK
06/02/00 698 TALLY'S ENTERPRISES 2709435
06/02/00 1885 GARRETT TAYLOR 5606620
06/02/00 710 KAREN TOOMBS 5806249
06/02/00 710 KAREN TOOMBS 5806249
1020 577631 06/02/00 742
1020 577632 06/02/00 761
1020 577633 06/02/00 768
1020 577634 06/02/00 773
1020 577635 06/02/00 775
1020 577635 06/02/00 775
1020 577635 06/02/00 775
1020 577635 06/02/00 775
1020 577635 06/02/00 775
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577636
1020 577637
1020 577638
1020 577639
1020 577640
1020 577641
1020 577642
1020 577643
1020 577643
1020 577643
1020 577643
1020 577643
1020 577643
1020 577643
TOTAL CHECK
TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT
06/02/00 782
06/02/00 1859
06/02/00 1212
06/02/00 951
06/02/00 793
06/02/00 794
06/02/00 962
06/02/00 805
06/02/00 805
06/02/00 805
06/02/00 805
06/02/00 805
06/02/00 805
06/02/00 805
COSETTE VIAUD 5806349
WEDEMEYER BAKERY 5606620
WEST GROUP 1101500
THE WESTERLEYS 1106248
WESTERN PACIFIC SIGNAL L 4209524
WESTERN PACIFIC SIGNAL L 4209524
WESTERN PACIFIC SIGNAL L 1108602
WESTERN PACIFIC SIGNAL L 4209524
WESTERN PACIFIC SIGNAL L 1108602
TRAVICE WHITTEN 4249210
WILLIAMS SCOTSMAN INC 4209216
DAVID M WILLIAMS 1108314
WOOLWORTH NURSERY 1108321
NANCY WULFF 5806249
XEROX CORPORATION 1104310
LINDA YELAVICH 5506549
ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209529
ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 2709437
ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 2709440
ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 2709438
ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 2709436
ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209530
ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 2709413
TOTAL FUND
..... DESCRIPTION ......
TIME & MATERIALS
LIFEGUARD
RECREATION PROGRAM
RECREATION PROGRAM
PAGE 7
SALES TAX AMOUNT
0.00 10000.00
0.00 57.50
0.00 239.40
0.00 2359.80
0.00 2599.20
RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 880.00
SUPPLIES 0.00 118.19
SERVICES 0.00 267.06
PERFORMER 0.00 600.00
DELL WORKSTATION MONIT 0.00 4992.49
TIME & MATERIAL 0.00 7880.00
NETWORK CARD, PWR SUPPL 0.00 4109.85
CONTROLLER TESTBOX INT 0.00 8475.98
PED SIGNAL MODULE 673.20 8833.20
673.20 34291-52
PROF SVCS 5/2-5/26/00
MOBILE OFFICE & OPTION
SERVICE CALL & LABOR
0.00 3780.58
572.71 9155.71
0.00 87.00
0.00 131.86
SUPPLIES
RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 726.40
60.71 796..61
SUPPLIES
REIMBURSE 6/12 LUAU 0.00 37.20
0.00 255.00
0.00 419.00
0.00 360.00
0.00 771.00
0.00 282.00
0.00 716.00
0.00 102.00
0.00 2905.00
2195.53 309364.58
2195.53 309364.58
PROF SVCS 4/00
PROF SVCS 4/00
PROF SVCS 4/00
PROF SVCS 4/00
PROF SVCS 4/00
PROF SVCS 4/00
PROF SVCS 4/00
RUN DATE 06/02/00 TIME 08:01:51
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
06/02/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "05/29/2000" and "06/02/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENEPJ%L FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT
TOTAL REPORT
..... DESCRIPTION ......
PAGE 8
SALES TAX AMOUNT
2195.53 309364.58
RUN DATE 06/02/00 TIME 08:01:51
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
RESOLUTION NO. oo- 171
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS
AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND
· MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING
JUNE 9, 2000
WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated
representative has certified to accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the
availability of funds for payment hereof; and
WHEREAS, the Said claims and demands have been audited as required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows
the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds as hereinafter set
forth in Exhibit "A".
CERTIFIED:
Director of Administrative Services
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this day of ,2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
3--?°
06/08/0o
ACCOUNTIN~ PERIOD: 12/00
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/05/2000" and "06/09/2000,,
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT
1020 577644
06/07/00 1090 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 1104300
1020 577645 06/09/00 1902 2TREES INTERACTIVE 1104510
1020 577646 06/09/00 859 A CATERED AFFAIR 1103300
1020 577647 06/09/00 7
ABAG PLAN CORPORATION 1104540
1020 577648
06/09/00 1680 ADVANTAGE GRAFIX 5806449
1020 577649 06/09/00 M
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION 1101500
1020 577650 06/09/00 44 AMERICAN RED CROSS 1104400
1020 577650 06/09/00 44 AMERICAN RED CROSS 1104400
1020 577650 06/09/00 44 AMERICAN RED CROSS 1104400
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577651 06/09/00 M
1020 577651 06/09/00 M
1020 557651 06/09/00 M
1020 577651 06/09/00 M
TOTAL CHECK
577652 06/09/00
AMERICAN SOCIETY ON AGIN 1106529
AMERICAN SOCIETY ON AGIN 1106500
AMERICAN SOCIETY ON AGIN 1106500
AMERICAN SOCIETY ON AGIN 1106529
AMERICAN SOCIETY ON AGIN 1106500
1020 577653
06/09/00 45 AMERICAN TRAFFIC SUPPLY 2708405
1020 577654
06/09/00 57 ARAMARK 1104510
1020 577655
1020 577655
TOTAL CHECK
06/09/00 1903 ARCHCO 6104800
06/09/00 1903 ARCHCO 6104800
1020 577656
1020 577656
1020 577656
TOTAL CHECK
06/09/00 61
06/09/00 61
06/09/00 61
ARTISTIC PLANT CREATIONS 1108501
ARTISTIC PLANT CREATIONS 1108503
ARTISTIC PLANT CREATIONS 1108504
1020 577657
1020 577657
1020 577657
1020 577657
1020 577657
1020 577657
1020 577657
1020 577657
1020 577657
1020 577657
TOT~J~ CHECK
06/09/00 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108314
06/09/00 65 AUTCR4ATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108312
06/09/00 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108314
06/09/00 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108314
06/09/00 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108303
06/09/00 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108303
06/09/00 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108314
06/09/00 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108312
06/09/00 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108303
06/09/00 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108314
1020 577658
06/09/00 1348
BAYSHORE FENCE CO INC 1108407
..... DESCRIPTION ......
ANNEXATION RES 00-156
SOFTWARE
CATERING/CREST AWARDS
DONALD BEARDEN CLAIM
SUPPLIES
ABA DUES
VIDEO RENTAL
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
7/12/00 J JORDAN
7/12/00 D SNOW
CBC
7/11/00 J BADDELEY
MEMBERSHIP/D SNOW
SUPPLIES
EMPLOYEE COFFEE
RANDALL CHUN 5/22-5/28
RANDALL CHUN 5/15-5/21
MONTHLY PLANT CARE 6/0
MONTHLY PLAlqT CARE 6/0
MONTHLY PLANT CARE 6/0
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
TIME & MATERIAL
SALES TAX
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
7.15
19.13
8.90
6.80
14.00
4.12
7.00
6.07
4.81
10.61
88.59
0.00
PAGE 1
AMOUNT
300.00
111.18
1947.76
25000.00
187.49
136.75
5.00
312.S0
472.50
790.00
130.00
110.00
10.00
130.00
360.00
135.00
232.20
161.81
3400.00
1360.00
4760.00
200.00
65.00
81.00
346.00
93.78
251.17
136.77
89.24
183.78
54.10
91.90
79.55
63.21
139.40
1182.90
720.00
RUN DATE 06/08/00 TIME 17:33:19
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
06/05/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/05/2000" and "06/09/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
..... DESCRIPTION ......
SALES TAX
PAGE 2
AMOUNT
1020 577659 06/09/00 1057 BENEFITAMERICA 110
1020 577659 06/09/00 1057 BENEFITAMERICA 110
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577660 06/09/00 M
1020 577661 06/09/00 1305
1020 577662 06/09/00 1160
1020 577663 06/09/00 105
1020 577664 06/09/00 1904
1020 577665 06/09/00 M
1020 577666 06/09/00 821
1020 577667 06/09/00 125
1020 577667 06/09/00 125
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577668 06/09/00 130
1020 577669 06/09/00 144
1020 577669 06/09/00 144
1020 577669 06/09/00 144
1020 577669 06/09/00 144
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577670 06/09/00 149
1020 577670 06/09/00 149
1020 577670 06/09/00 149
1020 577670 06/09/00 149
1020 577670 06/09/00 149
1020 577670 06/09/00 149
1020 577670 06/09/00 149
1020 577670 06/09/00 149
1020 577670 06/09/00 149
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577671 06/09/00 1156
1020 577672 06/09/00 M
1020 577673 06/09/00 169
1020 577674 06/09/00 985
1020 577674 06/09/00 985
1020 577674 06/09/00 985
BERTRAND, CINDY 110
BETTERPLY BUSINESS FORMS 1107501
DAVID BRADY 1101200
ELY M BRANDES 5506549
DON BROWN 4209217
BUILDER MAGAZINE 1107501
BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY IN 1104510
CALIF STATE COMPUTER STO 6104800
CALIF STATE COMPUTER STO 6104800
CALIFORNIA PARK ~ RECR 1101060
C3%SH 1106647
CASH 5606620
CASH 5606620
CASH 5606680
CASH 1104510
CASH 1104510
CASH 1101000
CASH 1104100
CASH 1104400
C.~H 1108201
CASH 1108001
CASH 6308540
CASH 1100000
CHA 110
CITY CLERKS' ASSOCIATION 1104300
CLEARY CONSULTANTS INC
4209430
CUPERTINO FLORIST INC 1104001
CUPERTINO FLORIST INC 1104000
CUPERTINO FLORIST INC 2204011
FLEX DEPENDENT CARE
FLEX HEALTH
REFUND/BOND R5420
SUPPLIES
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARD
INSTRUCTION
REIMBURSEMENT
RENEWAL
NUTRITION & WELLNESS
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
DUES/5 COP~4ISS IONERS
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMB
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMB
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMB
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY C;~H REIMBURSEMB
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMB
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMB
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBBURSEMB
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMB
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
EMPLOYEE DEDUCTION
REGISTRATION/M PRESTON
GEOTECHNICAL SVCS
FLOWERS/CHELL
FLOWERS/STEENFOTT
FLOWERS/MCNEIL
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
769.24
118.65
887.89
13800.00
1377.10
182.18
500.00
2071.63
74.32
700.00
2575.11
57.30
2632.41
3O
41.08
73.18
89.78
38.68
242.72
17.50
11.34
234.49
17.50
60.45
75.00
10.00
10.00
-0.03
436.25
145.50
175.00
8798.30
51.42
56.83
~.42
RUN DATE 06/08/00 TIME 17:33:19
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
06/08/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 3
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/05/2000" and "06/09/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577675 06/09/00 211
1020 577676 06/09/00 1313
1020 577676 06/09/00 1313
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577677 06/09/00 M
1020 577678 06/09/00 1104
1020 577679 06/09/00 225
1020 577680 06/09/00 M
1020 577681 06/09/00 228
1020 577682 06/09/00 855
1020 577682 06/09/00 855
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577683 06/09/00 242
i 577684 06/09/00 243
1020 577685 06/09/00 234
1020 577686 06/09/00 246
1020 577687 06/09/00 251
1020 577688 06/09/00 253
1020 577689 06/09/00 264
1020 577690 06/09/00 268
1020 577690 06/09/00 268
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577691 06/09/00 1526
1020 577692 06/09/00 1609
1020 577693 06/09/00 1268
1020 577694 06/09/00 776
1020 577695 06/09/00 1276
1020 577696 06/09/00 298
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF CA 110
DELTA SAFETY SUPPLY CO 1108530
DELTA SAFETY SUPPLY CO 1108530
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA 1108601
DIVERSIFIED RISK 1104540
DONE RIGHT ROOFING & GUT 4209206
DTSC 1108005
DUBAY'S TIRE SERVICE INC 6308540
DULIN ADVERTISING INC 1104510
DULIN ADVERTISING INC 1104510
EMPLOYMENT DEVEL DEPT 110
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT 110
ENGINEERING DATA SERVICE 1104300
ENTIRE PRINTING 5606620
EVANS WEST VALLEY SPRAY 1108315
EXCHANGE LINEN SERVICE 5806249
FITZPATRICK BARRICADE & 2708404
FOSTER BROS SECURITY SYS 1108501
FOSTER BROS SECURITY SYS 4209216
MIRIAM FRANK 5506549
FREEWAY ELECTRIC INC 4209524
GALLI PRODUCE 5806249
GCS WESTERN POWER & EQUI 6308540
GOURMET EXPRESS 5806249
GRAINGER INC 4209216
..... DESCRIPTION ......
DENTAL INSURANCE
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
STD PLANS/SPECIFICATIO
BLOCK PARTY INSURANCE
TIME & MATERIALS
EPA ID & MANIFEST FEE
TIRE ROTATION
AD/IT MANAGER
ADS
STATE WITHHOLDING
STATE DISABILITY
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES
PRINTING
TREE SPRAYING
SUPPLIES
TEMP SIGNS
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
INSTRUCTION
TIME & MATERIAL
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
PARTS & SUPPLIES
SALES TAX
0.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
155.93
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
AMOUNT
159.67
12270.88
65.75
128.24
193.99
155.00
277.04
S980.00
270.50
25.00
1019.96
1834.82
2854.78
14158.22
625.32
187.24
81.27
2500.00
62.83
2045.93
62.14
268.46
330.60
320.00
27108.00
45.00
400.90
108.65
25.85
RUN DATE 06/08/00 TIME 17:33:20
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
3-/5
06/08/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 C/4ECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/05/2000" and "06/09/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 577696 06/09/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1108312
1020 577696 06/09/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1108315
1020 577696 06/09/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1108315
1020 577696 06/09/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1108315
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577697
1020 577698
1020 577699
1020 577699
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577700
1020 577701
1020 577701
1020 577701
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577702
1020 577703
1020 577704
1020 577705
1020 577706
1020 577707
1020 577708
1020 577709
1020 577710
1020 577711
1020 577712
1020 577713
1020 577714
1020 577714
1020 577714
1020 577714
1020 577714
1020 577714
06/09/00 1158
06/09/00 1535
06/09/00 1235
06/09/00 1235
GUNGOR PROD/NARRATOR TRA 1103500
HAINES & COMPANY INC 1104530
HIG~4ARK LIFE INSURANCE 6414570
HIG~D4ARK LIFE INSURANCE 110
06/09/00 M
HO, KOK Y 110
06/09/00 1898 NORIZON 1108321
06/09/00 1898 HORIZON 1108321
06/09/00 1898 HORIZON 5606640
06/09/00 343
06/09/00 1892
06/09/00 995
06/09/00 1760
06/09/00 349
06/09/00 353
06/09/00 1645
06/09/00 1257
06/09/00 M
06/09/00 M
06/09/00 1599
06/09/00 1602
06/09/00 431
06/09/00 431
06/09/00 431
06/09/00 431
06/09/00 431
06/09/00 431
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-45 110
IMATION 1108101
INSERV COMPANY 1108502
INSPECTION CONSULTANTS I 4249210
INTERIM PERSONNEL 1107301
IRON MOUNTAIN 1104300
MARIA JIMENEZ 1104510
JOE'S ROTOTILLING 1108302
KITCHEN WORK~ 1100000
M & H PLUMBING INC 1100000
MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK I 1104510
MEIA MUNISERVICES COMPAN 1100000
MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1104000
MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1104400
MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1108101
MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 5806349
MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1104510
MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 5606620
..... DESCRIPTION ......
60 G~ SAFETY CABINET
SUPPLIES
CREDIT 5/26/00
SUPPLIES
NARRATOR TRACKS VOIA0
HAINS DIRECTORY
LTD
LIFE & AD&D
REFUND/BOND R3473
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
DEFERRED COMPENSATION
LABOR
TIME & MATERIALS
PROF SVCS
TEMP/EVELYN WOLF
RECORD STORAGE
REIMBURSEMENT
LABOR
REFUND/DUPLICATE LICEN
REFUND/DUPLICATE BL
gAP 6/00
SALES TAX AUDIT
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SALES TAX
128.12
0.00
0.00
0.00
128.12
PAGE 4
AMOUNT
1681.08
27.84
-27.84
268.70
1975.63
0.00 104.95
0.00 385.05
0.00 4837.44
0.00 7053.80
0.00 11891.24
0.00 25786.38
0.00 653.50
0.00 149.72
0.00 454.65
0.00 1257.87
0.00 6972.29
0.00 : '0
0.00 195.33
0.00 821.50
0.00 458.25
0.00 120.96
0.00 64.89
0.00 1900.00
0.00 90.00
0.00 90.00
0.00 725.20
0.00 5842.41
0.00 115.08
0.00 45.08
0.00 49.65
0.00 19.03
0.00 16.04
0.00 ~n.75
RUN DATE 06/08/00 TIME 17:33:21
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
06/08/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 5
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transaet.trans_date between "06/05/2000" and "06/09/2000.
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 577714 06/09/00 431
1020 577714 06/09/00 431
1020 577714 06/09/00 431
1020 577714 06/09/00 431
TOTAL CHECK
MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 2708405
MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1104510
MC W~ORTEE'S OFFICE PROD 1104510
MC W~ORTER'S OFFICE PROD 5706450
1020 577715 06/09/00 1868
1020 577715 06/09/00 1868
TOTAL CHECK
METRO MOBILE CO~K3NICATI 1108501
METRO MOBILE COP~K3NICATi 1108501
1020 577716
06/09/00 1238 MICRO CENTER 6104800
1020 577717
06/09/00 443 MILLENNIUM MECHANICAL IN 1108507
1020 577718
1020 577718
TOTAL CHECK
06/09/00 447
06/09/00 447
MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 1108201
MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 1108201
1020 577719
1020 577719
1020 577719
TOTAL CHECK
577720
06/09/00 1023 MASSOUD MODJTENEDI 1108505
06/09/00 1023 5tl%SSOUD MODJTEHEDI 5708510
06/09/00 1023 MASSOUD MODJTEHEDI 1107502
06/09/00 M NCOA 1106500
1020 577721
1020 577722
1020 577722
TOTAL CHECK
06/09/00 1162
06/09/00 487
06/09/00 487
NICKELL FIRE EQUIPMENT 1104400
NORTHAIRE SUPPLY CO 1108502
NORTHAIRE SUPPLY CO 5708510
1020 577723
06/09/00 495 OFFICE HELPER 1104300
1020 577724
1020 577724
TOTAL CHECK
06/09/00 500 OPERATING ENGINEERS 1104510
06/09/00 500 OPERATING ENGINEERS 110
1020 577725
06/09/00 501 OPERATING ENGI~TEERS #3 110
1020 577726
1020 577726
1020 577726
1020 577726
1020 577726
1020 577726
1020 577726
1020 577726
1020 577726
TOTAL CHECK
06/09/00 833 P E R S 110
06/09/00 833 P E R S 110
06/09/00 833 P E R S 110
06/09/00 833 P E R S 110
06/09/00 833 m E R S 110
06/09/00 833 P E R S 110
06/09/00 833 P E R S 110
06/09/00 833 P E R S 110
06/09/00 833 P E R S 110
577727
06/09/00 509 P W SUPEPdWARKETS INC 5806349
..... DESCRIPTION ......
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
CREDIT 5/16/00
SUPPLIES
TIME & MATERIAL
PARTS & SERVICE
SUPPLIES
SERVICE WORK
UNIFORM SERVICE
UNIFORM SERVICE
PLAN REVIEW
PLAN REVIEW
PLAN REVIEW SERVICES
MEMBERSHIP DUES
FIRE EXT DEMO & TRAINI
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
}{LTH/WELFARE RETIRED
HLTH/WELFARE PW EMP
UNION DUES
RETIREMENT
RETIREMENT
SURVIVORS 1959
RETIREMENT
RETIREMENT
RETIREMENT
RETIREMENT
RETIREMENT
RETIREMENT
SUPPLIES
SALES TAX
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.15
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
AMOUNT
35.85
21.10
-5.41
120.99
448.16
853.41
349.13
1202.54
886.37
1149.87
84.32
84.32
168.64
1550.00
500.00
49699.00
51749.00
75.00
403.46
226.51
178.56
405.07
17.05
3576.00
5515.00
9091.00
415.50
26.55
196.90
74.40
742.45
67.68
65.29
305.65
21147.84
2860.73
25487.49
38.86
RUN DATE 06/08/00 TIME 17:33:21
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
06/08/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/05/2000" and "06/09/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
1020 577727 06/09/00 509
1020 577727 06/09/00 509
1020 577727 06/09/00 509
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577728 06/09/00 M
1020 577729 06/09/00 531
1020 577729 06/09/00 531
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577730 06/09/00 533
1020 577731 06/09/00 1406
1020 577732 06/09/00 575
1020 577733 06/09/00 1071
1020 577734 06/09/00 590
1020 577735 06/09/00 617
1020 577736 06/09/00 628
1020 577737 06/09/00 640
1020 577737 06/09/00 640'
1020 577737 06/09/00 640
1020 577737 06/09/00 640
1020 577737 06/09/00 640
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577738 06/09/00 1488
1020 577739 06/09/00 1897
1020 577740 06/09/00 1837
1020 577741 06/09/00 658
1020 577741 06/09/00 658
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577742 06/09/00 1871
1020 577743 06/09/00 677
1020 577744 06/09/00 686
1020 577745 06/09/00 295
1020 577746 06/09/00 M
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
P W SUPEP. MARKETS INC
P W SUPERMARKETS INC
P W SUPERMARKETS INC
1106343
1106343
1106343
PENINSULA CHAPTER ICBO 1107503
PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 5806349
PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 5806249
PERS LONG TERM CARE PROG 110
RAINES CHEVORLET 6308540
RECYCAL SUPPLY 5208003
REPUBLIC ELECTRIC 1108602
RICH VOSS TRUCKING INC 5208003
SAN JOSE BLUE 110
SANTA CLARA COUNTY SHERI 1102100
SCA HYGIENE PAPER INC 1108303
SCA HYGIENE PAPER INC 1108315
SCA HYGIENE PAPER INC 1108302
SCA HYGIENE PAPER INC 1108314
SCA HYGIENE PAPER INC 1108312
SEARS 6104800
SETON NAME PLATE COMPANY 1108511
SILICON VALLEY PAVING CO 1108314
SILVERADO SPRINGS BOTTLE 1104510
SILVERADO SPRINGS BOTTLE 1104510
SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT 6104800
STATE STREET BANK & TRUS 110
DARRYL STOW 2204010
GORDY STROUD 1108314
SUNG, SABRINA 1100000
PAGE 6
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT
SUPPLIES 0.00 7.47
SUPPLIES 0.00 12.33
SUPPLIES 0.00 28.10
0.00 86.76
J ANTONUCCI & G CASTEE 0.00 60.00
SUPPLIES 0.00 134.70
SUPPLIES 0.00 298.35
0.00 433.05
LONG TERM CARE 0.00 343.38
PARTS 16.32 214.12
SUPPLIES 53.71 792.86
TIME & MATERIALS 0.00 2296.00
COMPOSE TRUCKING 0.00 700.00
BLUELINE PRINTS R7405 0.00 181.38
LAW ENFORCEMENT SVCS 0.00 429 ~7
SUPPLIES 0.00 121.66
SUPPLIES 0.00 121.68
SUPPLIES 0.00 121.66
SUPPLIES 0.00 121.66
SUPPLIES 0.00 121.66
0.00 608.32
SUPPLIES 0.00 69.45
PARTS & SUPPLIES 0.00 57.86
ASPHALT REPAIR 0.00 4052.00
EMPLOYEE WATER 0.00 59.00
EMPLOYEE WATER 0.00 66.00
0.00 125.00
EXCHANGE/MAIL/ROUTER 0.00 380.00
DEFERRED COMPENSATION 0.00 949.72
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 0.00 750.00
TIME & MATERIAL 0.00 21510.00
REFUND/BUSINESS LICENS 0.00 1~.39
RUN DATE 06/08/00 TIME 17:33:22
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
06/08/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 CHECK REGISTER ' DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between #06/05/2000. an(] "06/09/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASE ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 577747 06/09/00 M
1020 577748 06/09/00 695
1020 577748 06/09/00 695
1020 577748 06/09/00 695
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577749 06/09/00 700
1020 577749 06/09/00 700
1020 577749 06/09/00 700
1020 577749 06/09/00 700
1020 577749 06/09/00 700
TOTAL C~ECK
1020 577750
1020 577751
1020 577751
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577752
577753
1020 577754
1020 577754
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577755
1020 577755
TOTAL CHECK
1020 577756
1020 577757
1020 577758
1020 577759
1020 577760
1020 577761
1020 577762
1020 577762
TOTAL CHECK
TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT
06/09/00 M
06/09/00 1794
06/09/00 1794
06/09/00 19o5
06/09/00 1154
06/09/00 732
06/09/00 732
06/09/00 738
06/09/00 738
06/09/00 746
06/09/00 750
06/09/00 840
06/09/00 302
06/09/00 990
06/09/00 779
06/09/00 799
06/09/00 799
SUNNYVALE-CUPERTINO BAR 1101500
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5806249
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5506549
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5806349
TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108314
TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108303
TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108314
TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108303
TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108314
THOMSON, FRAN 110
TMT-PATHWAY LLC 6308540
T~-PATHWAY LLC 6308540
TRAFFIC SAFETY CORP 1108602
UNITED WAY OF SANTA CLAR 110
UNIVERSAL TRUCK EQUIP IN 6308540
UNIVE~,SAL TRUCK EQUIP IN 1108407
VALLEY OIL COMPA~ 6308540
V~r~Y OIL COMPJtNY 6308540
VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS 1101500
VISION SERVICE PLAN 110
BERT VISKOVICH 1108001
WASHINGTON MUTUAL 110
WEST GROUP 1101500
WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO INC 1108530
ZANKER ROAD LANDFILL 5208003
ZANKER ROAD LANDFILL 5208003
..... DESCRIPTION
LUNCH MTG 6/12/00
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
REFUND OF FEE R7473
PARTS
PARTS
SUPPLIES
EMPLOYEE DEDUCTION
TIME & MATERIAL
TIME & MATERIAL
FUEL
SUPPLIES
VISION INSURANCE
REIMBURSEMENT'
DEFERRED COMPENSATION
MCQUILLIN MUNICIPAL
PARTS & SUPPLIES
CATCHUP 10/97-4/2000
COMPOST DELIVERY 4/00
SALES TAX
0.00
0.00
o.oo
0.00
0.00
25.09
39.29
39.88
28.74
2.45
135.45
0.00
10.13
125.13
135.26
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
714.53
PAGE 7
AMOUNT
25.00
116.48
247.38
· 45.74
409.60
329.16
515.49
523.30
377.06
32.14
1777.15
200.00
151.83
1656.40
1808.23
259.80
136.75
1076.22
2000.00
3076.22
4627.53
244.36
4871.89
207.48
1932.10
215.00
17521.01
173.39
1428.12
19725.18
200.00
19925.18
807365.99
RUN DATE 06/08/00 TIME 17:33:23
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
06/08/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 12/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "06/05/2000" and "06/09/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT 'CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
TOTAL FUND
TOTAL REPORT
PAGE 8
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT
714.53 807365.99
714.53 807365.99
RUN DATE 06/08/00 TIME 17:33:23
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
RESOLUTION NUMBER 00-17 ~
A R~SOLUTIO~ OF THE CITY COt~C~L OV ZHE C~T¥ OV CUVERTINO
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAY~kBLE IN THE AMOUNTS
AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR SALARIES
AND WAGES PAID ON
JUNE 09, 2000
WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services, or their designated representative
has certified to the accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds
for payment hereof; and
WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law;
NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby allows the
following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds set forth:
GROSS PAYROLL $365,039.84
Less Employee Deductions $(116,459.41)
NET PAYROLL $248,580.43
Payroll check numbers issued 47732 through 47971
Void check numbers 47972 through 47973
CERTIFIED:
Director of Administrative Services
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June ,2000, by the following vote:
Vote
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Members of the City Council
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
CITY OF
CUPEI INO
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
- Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408) 777-3213
FAX: (408) 777-3109
HU;viAN RESOURCES DiViglON
SUMMARY
Agenda Item No. ~
Meeting Date: June 19, 2000
SUBJECT:
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement creating the Silicon Valley Animal Control
Authority.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Cupertino and the cities of Campbell, Monte Sereno, Santa Clara, Saratoga,
Sunnyvale, and the Town of Los Gatos, are forming a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) for
animal control, sheltering, and licensing services. These services are presently being
performed by the Humane Society of Santa Clara Valley (HSSCV). The HSSCV has
notified the several agencies that they will discontinue animal control services effective
July 1, 2001, and sheltering services as soon as the several agencies have a facility.
The JPA provides for the allocation of costs pro-rated in accordance to population,
licensed animals, and days in the shelter as determined on an annual basis. Cupertino's
composite cost will be 10.19 percent for expenses incurred by the JPA for the 2000 -
2001 fiscal year.
The attached agreement will be effective July 1, 2000.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolution.
~~~Su mi Id by:
~am J. Woska
Human Resources Manager
Approved for Submission:
D~0.p(~ ~rown
City Manager
Printed on Recycled Paoer ~'~'~ /
RESOLUTION NO. 00-173
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CUPERTINO AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A JOINT
EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL
CONTROL, SHELTERING, AND LICENSING SERVICES
WHEREAS, the cities of Cupertino, Campbell, Monte Sereno, Santa Clara,
Saratoga, Sunnyvale, and the Town of Los Gatos, have a common interest in forming a
Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) for animal control, sheltering, and licensing services;
WHEREAS, the aforementioned Cities and the Town of Los Gatos have had a
series of meetings to establish a method of identifying costs as related to the several
services to be performed under the JPA;
WHEREAS, it will mutually benefit the Cities to enter into a JPA whereby the
Cities may avail themselves of the benefits and advantages of services and a facility for
the residents within their respective jurisdictional areas;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Cupertino hereby approves the aforementioned agreement and authorizes the Mayor and
the City Clerk to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Cupertino.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
VOTE
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT CREATING
THE SILICON VALLEY ANIMAL CONTROL AUTHORITY
THIS AGREE1VIENT is made and entered into as of the Effective Date (set forth in Section
2.3) by and'among the Member Agencies (defined in Section 1.14 below) signatory hereto, each of
which is a public entity duly organized and existing under the Constitution and other laws of the
State of California.
The Fc, llc~w:a~g following Recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement:
1. WHEREAS, Chapter 5 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of
California (commencing at Section 6500) authorizes the Member Agencies to enter into an
agreement for the joint exercise of any power common to them and, by that agreement, create an
entity that is separate from each of the Member Agencies; and
2. WHEREAS, each of the Member Agencies possess the power to provide for the Animal
Control Services (defined in Section 1.3), including animal field services, animal shelter services,
and dead animal services within their respective Jurisdictional Area (defined in Section 1.4
hereinbelow); and ~
3. WHEREAS, the Member Agencies possess the authority to issue bonds, expend bond
proceeds, and borrow and loan money for certain public purposes pursuant to the Government Code
of the State of California; and
4. WHEREAS, this Agreement is an appropriate means through which the Member Agencies
may provide the Animal Control Services because the Jurisdictional Areas of the Member Agencies
are in close proximity to one another and are susceptible of being served by the Animal Control
Services and related Joint Facilities (defined in Section 1.12) under common administration and
management and with the same equipment, resources and personnel; and
5. WHEREAS, the Member Agencies desire to share their animal control expertise and to
optimize their expenditures in connection with the provision of the Animal Control Services and
related Joint Facilities;
6. WHEREAS, the separate provision, management and administration of the Animal Control
Sen, ices and related Joint Facilities in each Jurisdictional Area by each of the respective Member
Agencies and using separate facilities, resources and personnel may result in duplication of effort,
inefficiencies in administration and excessive costs, all of which, in the judgment of the Member
Agencies, can be eliminated or substantially reduced, all to the substantial advantage and benefit of
the citizens and taxpayers of all of the Member Agencies, if the provision of the Animal Control
Services and the administration and management of the related Joint Facilities employing common
equipment, resources and personnel, were to be performed by and through a single public entity and
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:~ATA\WPkAGR.EEMNT.A-IVlkANIMALJ.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 1 of 20
the creation of such a single public entity is the purpose of this Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION OF ~ FACTS STATED ABOVE,
THE MUTUAL ADVANTAGES TO BE DERIVED, AND THE MUTUAL COVENANTS
CONTAINED HEREIN, IT IS AGREED BY AND AMONG THE MEMBER AGENCIES
HERETO AS FOLLOWS:
ARTICLE I
DEFINITIONS
Section 1. Unless the context otherwise requires, the words and terms defined in this Article shall
have the meanings specified.
Section 1.1. Act. "Act" means Article 1, Article 2, Article 3, and Article 4 (commencing
with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the California Government Code,
as it may be amended fi.om time to time.
Section 1.2. A_m'eement. "Agreement" means this joint exercise of powers agreement as it
now exists or as it may fi.om time to time be amended, supplemented or as it may be
modified by the addition of signatory parties or by any other supplemental agreement or
amendment entered into pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.
Section 1.3. Animal Control Services. "Animal Control Services" means those services
enumerated on "Exhibit A," entitled "Animal Control Services," attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 1.4. Area. "Area" and "Jurisdictional Area" mean that area within the respective
jurisdictions of the Member Agencies.
Section 1.5. Authority_. "Authority" means the Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
created pursuant to this Agreement.
Section 1.6. Board of Directors. '"Board of Directors" means the governing board of the
Authority referred to in Section 1.5 and more particularly described in Section 2.5
hereinbelow. "Director" means an individual member of the Board of Directors.
Section 1.7. Bond Law. "Bond Law" means Article 4 of Chapter 5 of Division 7 of Title
1 of the California Government Code, as the same may have been or may hereinafter be
amended fi.om time to time, or any other law hereafter legally available for use by the
Authority in the authorization and issuance of bonds to finance needed public facilities.
"Bonds" means any bonds issued pursuant to Bond Law.
Section 1.8. t~..~.. "Bylaws" means the bylaws, rules, regulations and other operational
and organizational directives of the Board of Directors for the conduct of its meetings and
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:~DATA\WP~AGREEMNT.A-MkANIMALJ.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 2 of 20
other affairs as further described in Section 2.9.
Section 1.9. Controller/Treasurer. "Controller/Treasurer" means the financial director and
finance manager of the Authority having the responsibility and accountability for the
Authority's funds as further described in Section 3.3.
Section 1.10. Fiscal Year. "Fiscal Year" means the period from July 1st to and including
the following June 30th.
Section 1.11. General Manager. "General Manager" means the employee of the Authority
directly responsible to the Board of Directors and primarily responsible for the managerial
oversight of the operations of the Authority as further described in Section 3.6.
Section 1.12. Joint Facilities. "Joint Facilities" means the animal control facilities,
equipment, resources, and property to be owned, managed and operated by the Authority
pursuant to Article V and Section 7.1, and, if and when acquired or constructed, any
improvements and additions thereto.
Section 1.13. Le~slative Bodies. "Legislative Bodies" means the city or town councils of
the Member Agencies of the Authority. "Legislative Body" means any such individual city
or town council.
Section 1.14. Member Agencies or Member Agenc3'. "Member Agencies" means all of the
public agencies signatory to this Agreement, which, as of the initial Effective Date of this
Agreement, are the City of Campbell, the City of Cupertino, the City of Milpitas, the City
of Monte Sereno, the City of Santa Clara, the City of Saratoga, the City of Sunnyvale, and
the Town of Los Gatos. "Member Agency" means any such individual public entity.
Section 1,15. Quorum. "Quorum" means a simple majority of the Board of Directors,
except where a greater majority is otherwise specifically required hereunder or by law.
Section 1.16. Secretary_. "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Board of Directors as
further described in Section 3.2.
ARTICLE H
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 2.1. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to create the Authority to provide for the
joint exercise of powers by the Member Agencies to own, manage, operate and maintain the Joint
Facilities and to implement the financing, acquisition and construction of additions and
improvements thereto and any additional facilities and property later acquired, owned or managed
by the Authority and included in the Joint Facilities and thereafter to manage, operate and maintain
the Joint Facilities, as so added to and improved, all to the end that the residents of the Area are'
provided with a more efficient and economical provision of the Animal Control Services and related
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:XDATA\WPkAOREEIVINT.A-IvlXANIMALJ.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 3 of 20
services consistent with the purposes of this Agreement, and, if necessary, to issue and repay
revenue bonds of the Authority pursuant to the Bond Law. Each of the Member Agencies is
authorized to exercise all powers (except the power to issue andtrepay revenue bonds of the
Authority) pursuant to its organic law and the Authority is authorized to issue and provide for the
repayment of revenue bonds pursuant to the provisions of the Bond Law.
Section 2.2. (~reation of Authority_. Pursuant to the Act, there is hereby created a public entity to
be known as the "Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority," to be called the "Authority" pursuant
to Section 1.5. The Authority, which shall administer this Agreement, is a public entity separate and
apart from the Member Agencies and each of them.
Section 2.3. Effective Date of A?eement. This Agreement shall become effective when signed
and executed by all Member Agencies listed in Section 1.14 (the "Effective Date").
Section 2.4. Term. This Agreement shall become effective on the Effective Date set forth in
Section 2.3 and shall continue in effect until such time as all Bonds (if any) and the interest thereon
issued by the Authority under the Bond Law or the Act shall have been paid in full or provision for
such full payment shall have been made, and thereafter until such time as the Authority and the
Member Agencies shall have paid all sums due and owing pursuant to this Agreement or pursuant
to any contract executed pursuant to this Agreement, and thereafter until terminated pursuant to
Article VIII.
Section 2.5. Governing Board. The Authority shall be administered by a Board of Directors
consisting offtve-~ seven (7) Directors, as follows: on~-Oc)q~xq~ two (2) Directors appointed
by the Legislative Body of the City of Santa Clara, ~ two (2) Directors appointed
by gi dy City --- "' "': .......... :-'--~ '---"-- · ~--'~'--:-
the Le slative Bo of the of Sunnyvalc ..... ~,~ ......... ~,v ........ : ..... ~ ...... v,..
~A~.. A",~.A ,~:,.. ~",':'--: ..... ~ .... "' and three (3) Directors collectively int d by the
Legislative Bodies of the cities of Campbell, Cupertino, Monte Sereno and Saratoga and the Town
of Los Gatos (collectively, the "West Valley Cities").
Section 2.5.1. All voting power of the Authority shall reside with the Board of Directors.
Section 2.5.2. The Board of Directors shall be called the "Board of Directors of the Silicon
Valley Animal Control Authority."
Section 2.5.3. Each Director shall be a member of the Legislative Body of the Member
Agency, or one of the Member Agencies in the case of the West Valley Cities, that
appointed that Director.
Section 2.5.4. Each Legislative Body shall appoint an alternate Director from that Member
Agency, or from one of the Member Agencies in the case of the appointment of the West
Valley Cities, who may act as the Director(s) in the absence of the Director (s) appointed by
that Legislative Body or Legislative Bodies. The alternate Director shall not be required to
be a member of a Legislative Body that appointed that alternate Director, but shall be
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:XDATA\WPkAGREEMNT.A-~.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 4 of 20
required to be either a member of the Legislative Body or an employee of the Member
Agency, or one of the Member Agencies in the case of the West Valley Cities, that
appointed that alternate Director. ~
Section 2.5.5. All Directors and their alternates shall serve at the pleasure of the Member
Agency or Member Agencies that appointed such member.
Section 2.5.6. All vacancies on the Board of Directors shall be filled by the respective
Legislative Body or Legislative Bodies within thirty (30) days of the effective date of the
vacancy or as soon thereafter as the Legislative Body or Legislative Bodies may legally act.
Any Director shall cease to be a Director when such person ceases to hold office as a
~ council member of the respective appointing Legislative Body. Any
alternate Director shall cease to be an alternate Director when such person ceases to hold
office as a eoui~-tmemt~-r council member or otherwise ceases to be employed by the
respective Member Agency that appointed or participated in appointing him or her.
Section 2.5.7. Each Director shall receive reimbursement for the reasonable and necessary
expenses incurred in the performance of their duties, as provided in the Bylaws.
Section 2.5.8. Santa Clara and Sunnyvale shall each have two votes at each meeting of
Board regardless of whether both their representatives are present.
Section 2.6. Meetings of the Board of Direct0r~. All meetings of the Board of Directors shall be
public meetings unless a specified closed session is held in accordance with the California
Government Code.
Section 2.6.1. Regular Meetings. The Board of Directors shall provide for regular meetings
at a date, time, and place fixed by resolution of the Board of Directors.
Section 2.6.2. Special Meetings. Special meetings and emergency meetings of the Board
of Directors may be called in accordance with "-- o__,..__ ~c,~ Ac
,,,,~ pfc, visions of o ........... ,, ,~, the.
~,,,,l,,,,~,,,~'-':r---:- Cc~v¢,,--~,-ncnt Code,. State law.
Section 2.6.3. Call. Notice. and Conduct of Meetings. All meetings of the Board of
Directors, including without limitation, regular, adjourned regular, and special meetings,
shall be called, noticed, held, and conducted in accordance with the provisions of Section
54950, et seq., of the California Government Code, as may be amended from time to time.
Section 2.7. Required Votes: Approvals.
Section 2.7.1. Subject to Sections 2.7.2 and 2.7.3 below, 'the affirmative votes of it-eec
members four of the Board of Directors shall be required for the Board of Directors to take
any action.
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:XDATA\WPXAGREEMNT.A-~.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 5 of 20
Section 2.7.2. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2.7.1 above, the affirmative votes
of at least f~a'-ft~a~-(4b~ five-sevenths (fi/T) of the Board of Directors, shall be required
for the Board of Directors to a,,-ucn~a Propose an amendment-to this Agreement; to approve
the addition of new Member Agencies to this Agreement; to approve the issuance of any
Bonds or the restructuring of any Bonds financing; to approve any budget actions, and to
modify the Member Agencies' contributions to Operating Cc, dc~ Costs pursuant to Section
6.3.2 below.
Section 2.8. Voting. Each Director shall have one (1) vote.
Section 2.9. Bylaws. The Board of Directors shall from time to time adopt Bylaws as are necessary
or convenient in the determination of the Board of Directors to achieve or facilitate the purposes
hereof.
ARTICLE HI
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES
Section 3.1. Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson. The Board of Directors shall elect a Chairperson
and Vice-Chairperson from among its members. The Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson shall each
serve a one year term. The positions of Chairperson and Vice Chairperson shall rotate among
each of the Director positions c~ncc ---~-
permanent inability of the Chairperson to serve as the Chairperson during their term, the
Vice-Chairperson shall assume the duties of the Chairperson for the remainder of that term and the
Board of Directors shall elect a new Vice-Chairperson for the remainder of that term.
Section 3.1.1. The Chairperson shall be authorized to sign all resolutions of the Board of
Directors and all contracts on behalf of the Authority and shall perform such other duties as
may be imposed by the Board of Directors, consistent with the terms and provisions of this
Agreement and the Bylaws.
Section 3.1.2. The Vice-Chairperson shall be authorized to act as the Chairperson, exercise
all of the powers of the Chairperson, and perform all of the duties of the Chairperson in the
temporary absence of the Chairperson.
Section 3.1.3. The Board of Directors, as a part of its approval of any contract, may
authorize the General Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the Authority.
Section 3.2. Secretary_. The General Manager shall be the Secretary to the Board of Directors,
perform such other duties as may be imposed upon the Secretary by the Board of Directors, and
cause a copy of this Agreement to be filed with the California Secretary of State and the State of
California pursuant to Section 6503.5 of the Act.
Section 3.3. Controller/Treasurer. The Controller/Treasurer shall be appointed by the Board of
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:~DATA\WP~,GREEMNT.A-lvI~A~.CO7~ay 25, 2000
Page 6 of 20
Directors. The Controller/Treasurer shall be the depository and shall have custody of all of the
accounts, funds and money of the Authority from whatever source. The Controller/Treasurer shall
have the duties and obligations set forth in Section 6505 and 6505.5-of the Act, and shall assure that
there shall be strict accountability of all funds and reporting of all receipts and disbursements of the
Authority. '
Section 3.4. Officers in Charge of Property_. Pursuant to Section 6505 of the California
Government Code, the Controller/Treasurer shall have charge of, handle, and have access to all
accounts, funds, and money of the Authority and all records of the Authority relating to such
accounts, funds and money; and the Secretary shall have charge of, handle, and have access to all
other records of the Authority, and the General Manager shall have charge of, handle, and have
access to all physical properties of the Authority.
Section 3.5. Bonding Persons Having Access to Property_. From time to time, the Board of
Directors may designate persons, such as the Secretary, Controller/Treasurer, or General Manager,
as the Authority officer(s) who shall have charge of, handle, or have access to any property of the
Authority. The Board of Directors shall also fix the respective amounts of the official bonds of the
Secretary, Controller/Treasurer, General Manager or such other designated persons pursuant to
Section 6505.1 of the Act, which bonds shall be filed with the Secretary of the Authority. The
actual cost of such bonds shall be a proper charge against the Authority.
Section 3.6. Management. The regular management of the operations and activities of the
Authority shall be vested in the General Manager. The General Manager shall be designated by the
Board of Directors. Unless otherwise provided by the'Bylaws or resolution of the Board of
Directors, the General Manager shall have the following powers:
Section 3.6.1. To provide for the planning, design, and construction of any additions or
improvements to the Joint Facilities; leasing or remodeling of any existing facilities, or any
new facilities to be operated by the Authority as authorized by'the Board of Directors;
Section 3.6.2. Except as otherwise provided in Section 3.6.8, to execute any contracts for
capital costs, costs of special services, equipment, materials, supplies, maintenance, or repair
that involve an expenditure by the Authority within the limits and in accordance with
procedures to be established by the Authority in the manner provided for local agencies
pursuant to Article 7, commencing with Section 54201 of Chapter 5 of Part 1 of Division
2 of Title 5 of the California Government Code;
Section 3.6.3. To appoint and employ all personnel of the Authority required for
maintenance and operation of the Joint Facilities, and all other employees authorized by the
Authority's budget and by the Board of Directors;
Section 3.6.4. To retain any consultants, including labor relations consultants or certified
public accountants, as authorized in the Authority's budget and by the Board of Directors;
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:~DATA\WP~AGREEMNT.A-M~NIMALJ.COT/May 25, 2000
Page 7 of 20
Section 3.6.5. Subject to approval of the Board of Directors, to appoint and employ all
personnel of the Authority or consultants required to be employed or retained in connection
with the design of any additions or improvements of the Joim Facilities or construction of
new facilities;
Section 3.6.6. To expend funds of the Authority and enter into contracts, whenever
required, or for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, subject to
the subsequent ratification of the Board of Directors;
Section 3.6.7. To sell any personal property of the Authority as may be provided in the
Bylaws or otherwise authorized by the Board of Directors;
Section'3.6.8. To approve and pay demands for payments by the Authority of Ten
Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00), or less, which are authorized in the Authority's budget;
Section 3.6.9. To prepare and submit to the Board of Directors in time for revision and
adoption by the Authority prior to March 1 of each year, the annual preliminary budget for
the next succeeding Fiscal Year referred to in Section 6.1;
Section 3.6.10. Generally, to supervise the acquisition, construction, management,
maintenance, and operation of the Joint Facilities and personnel of the Authority;
Section 3.6.11. To perform such other duties as directed by the Board of Directors and
report to the Board of Directors at such times and on such matters as the Board of Directors
may direct.
Section 3.7. Legal Advisor. The legal advisor of and provider of legal advice and services to the
Authority shall be designated by the Board of Directors.
Section 3.8. Other Services. The Board of Directors shall have the power to appoint and employ
such other consultants and independent contractors as may be necessary for the purposes of and
pursuant to this Agreement.
Section 3.9. Non-Liabili_ty of Agencies. None of the officers, agents, or employees directly
employed by the Authority shall be deemed, solely by reason of their employment by the Authority,
to be employed by any Member Agency or, by reason of their employment by the Authority, to be
subject to any of the requirements of any Member Agency. All of the privileges and immunities
from liability, exemption fi.om laws, ordinances and rules, all pension, relief, disability, workers'
compensation, and other benefits which apply to the activities of the officers, agents, or employees
of Member Agencies when performing their respective functions shall apply to them to the same
degree and extent while engaged in the performance of any of the functions and other duties under
this Agreement. Except as expressly provided for in this Agreement, nothing contained in this
Article III is intended to nor shall restrict or limit the rights or abilities otherwise available to the
Authority to enter into agreements or other arrangements with any Member Agency in accordance
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:~DATA\WP~AGREEMIqT.A-M~ANIMALJ.CO7fMay 25, 2000
Page 8 of 20
with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the Bylaws regarding the use of employees of
the Member Agency in the operations and activities of the Authority.
Section 3.10. Insurance. The Authority shall obtain and keep in force policies of insurance with
coverages and limits sufficient to protect it and its Member Agencies from claims for damages
arising from the activities of the Authority, its Board of Directors, officers and employees, and from
the activities of any director, officer or employee of any Member Agency while on Authority
business. It is the intent of this Section 3.10 that the policies of insurance described herein include
coverages for automobile liability, comprehensive general liability, public officials errors and
omissions, workers compensation, and excess liability and other perils as the Board of Directors
shall, from time to time, direct; and that the coverage limits of these policies be maintained at levels
as the Board of Directors shall direct. Each Member Agency shall be named an "additional insured"
on each such policy.
Section 3.11. Agreement Not for Benefit of Third Parties. This Agreement shall not be construed
as or deemed to be an agreement for the benefit of any third party or parties, and no third party or
parties shall have any right of action hereunder for any cause whatsoever. Any services performed
or expenditures made in connection with this Agreement by any Member Agency shall be deemed
conclusively to be for the direct protection and benefit of the inhabitants and property in the
respective Area of such Member Agency.
ARTICLE IV
POWERS OF THE AUTHORITY
Section 4.1. C~lgI~LP..9._~..q~. The Authority shall exercise in the manner herein provided the
powers common to each of the Member Agencies, as provided by the Constitution and laws of the
State of California, and all incidental, implied, expressed, or necessary powers for the
accomplishment of the purposes of this Agreement, subject to the restrictions set forth in Section
4.4. As provided in the Act, the Authority shall be a public entity separate from the Member
Agencies. The Authority shall have the power to finance, acquire, construct, manage, maintain, and
operate the Joint Facilities. The Authority shall have all of the powers provided in Article 2 and
Article 4 of the Act, unless specifically prohibited or restricted by this Agreement.
Section 4.2. Specific Powers. The Authority is hereby authorized, in its own name, to do all acts
necessary for the exercise of the foregoing powers, including but not limited to, any of the
following:
Section 4.2.1. To make and enter into contracts;
Section 4.2.2. To employ agents or employees;
Section 4.2.3. To acquire, construct, manage, maintain, or operate any buildings, works or
improvements;
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:~DATA\WPEa, GREEMNT.A-IVlXANIMALJ.COT/May 25, 2000
Page 9 of 20
Section 4.2.4. To acquire, hold, or dispose of property;
Section 4.2.5. To sue and be sued in its own name;
Section 4.2.6. To incur debts, liabilities or obligations, subject to the provisions of this
Agreement, provided that no debt, liability or obligation shall constitute a debt, liability or
obligation upon any Member Agency;
Section 4.2.7. To apply for, accept, receive, and disburse grants, loans, and other aids from
any agency for the United States of America or of the State of California;
Section 4.2.8. To invest any money in the treasury pursuant to Section 6505.5 of the Act
that is not required for the immediate necessities of the Authority, as the Authority
determines is advisable, in the same manner and upon the same conditions as local agencies,
pursuant to Section 53601 of the California Government Code;
Section 4.2.9. To carry out and enforce all the provisions of this Agreement.
Section 4.3. Bonds. The Authority shall have all of the powers provided in Article 4 of the Act,
including the power to issue Bonds under the Bond Law.
Section 4.4. Restrictions on Exercise of Powers. In accordance with Section 6509 of the Act, the
power of the Authority shall be exercised in the manner provided by the charter and general laws
of the City of Santa Clara in the exercise of similar powers subject to any restrictions imposed by
state or federal law. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Authority shall have any additional powers
that may be necessary to accomplish the purposes set forth herein to the fullest extent allowed by
applicable laws, this Agreement and the Bylaws.
Section 4.5. Obhgations ofAuthori _ty. The debts, liabilities, and obligations of the Authority shall
not be the debts, liabilities, and obligations of any Member Agency.
ARTICLE V
METHODS OF PROCEDURE
Section 5.1. Assumption of Responsibilities by the Authori _ry. As soon as practical after the
Effective Date, each of the respective Member Agencies shall appoint members to the Board of
Directors and alternates, and the City Managers or designees of each of the Member Agencies shall
give notice (in the manner required by Section 2.6) of the organizational meeting of the Board of
Directors. At said meeting, the Board of Directors shall provide for its regular meetings as required
by Section 2.6 and elect a Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson, both of whom shall serve until the
first regular meeting of the Board of Directors following the end of the first Fiscal Year.
Section 5.2. Delegation of Powers: Transfer of Records. Accounts. Funds. and Property_.
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Conlrol Authority
I:~,DATA\WP~GREEMNT.A-MLMqlMAI J.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 10 of 20
Section 5.2.1. Each Member Agency hereby delegates to the Authority the power to
purchase from a Member Agency and the power and duty to maintain, operate, and manage
any animal control equipment, resources, and real property acquired and identified by each
of the respective Member Agencies in contemplation of the formation of the Authority,
including the future site of the Authority's animal control facility, and to employ the
necessary personnel to do any and all other things necessary or desirable to provide efficient,
economical and lawful Animal Control Services to the Member Agencies. The proper
officers and employees of each of the Member Agencies shall transfer to the Secretary,
Controller/Treasurer, or General Manager of the Authority, as appropriate, physical
management and storage of, all records, accounts, funds, and property, if any, of each of the
Member Agencies which relate to the provision of the Animal Control Services and which,
in the determination of the Member Agency, are necessary or desirable to be held or stored
by the Authority to allow the Authority to function as contemplated in this Agreement.
Section 5.2.2. The records, accounts, funds, and property so transferred to the Authority
hereunder shall be further identified and defined in an inventory to be developed by the
General Manager within one hundred twenty (I20) days of the Effective Date of this
Agreement. The General Manager shall submit this inventory to the Board of Directors for
review and approval prior to the transfer of any such records, accounts, funds, and property.
Each Member Agency agrees to execute or authorize the execution of all legal documents
necessary to accomplish such said transfer.
Section 5.3. Joint Mair~tenance and Operation Fund.
Section 5.3.1. The Board of Directors shall create a joint maintenance and operation fund
(herein called the "Operating Fund"). Upon the organization of the Board of Directors, the
Authority shall assume responsibility for the maintenance and operation of the Operating
Fund and shall pay the administrative and operational expenses of the Authority and ail
maintenance and operation costs of the Joint Facilities from said Operating Fund. Each of
the Member Agencies shall pay into said Operating Fund its proportionate share of the
maintenance and operation costs of the Joint Facilities, computed on the bases set forth in
Section 6.3 of this Agreement.
Section 5.3.2. Upon the establishment of the Board of Directors and the creation of the
Operating Fund, the City of Santa Clara shall transfer to the Authority all unexpended and
unencumbered funds that have been paid to the City of Santa Clara by other Member
Agencies, and funds of the City of Santa Clara that have been contributed by the City of
Santa Clara, for the purposes set forth in and pursuant to the anticipated "Cost Sharing
Agreement Among the City of Campbell, the City of Cupertino, the Town of Los Gatos, the
City of Milpitas, the City of Monte Sereno, the City of Santa Clara, the City of Saratoga and
the City of Sunnyvale For the Construction and Operation of An Animal Shelter" ("Cost
Sharing Agreement") presently contemplated to be entered into by and among the Member
Agencies if the Member Agencies in fact enter into that Cost Sharing Agreement.
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
ISDATA\WPXAGREEMNT.A-M~ANIMALLCO7/May 25, 2000
Page 11 of 20
Section 5.4. Capital Acquisition, Improvement and Replacement Fund. The Board of Directors
may create a capital acquisition and replacement fund ("Capital Fund") for the purpose of creating
a fund for the acquisition and conslxuction of the Joint Facilities and any other capital improvements
owned or conlxolled by the Authority, and the replacement and acquisition of capital equipment and
property of the Authority. Each Member Agency shall annually pay into said Capital Fund its
proportionate share of capital costs, including principal and interest payments on outstanding Bonds,
if any, as provided in Section 6.3.
ARTICLE VI
BUDGET/COSTS, MAINTENANCE AND
OPERATION COSTS AND OTHER COSTS
Section 6.1. ~l!~B_~iggI. The Board of Directors shall adopt a preliminary' budget for
maintenance and operation costs, capital costs, costs of special services, and debt service payments
or redemption expenses on Bonds (if any)~ annually prior to February 1 of each year and shall adopt
a final budget prior to June 30 of each year.
Section 6.2. Records and Accounts. The Authority shall cause to be kept accurate and correct
books of account, showing in detail the capital costs, costs of special services and maintenance,
operation costs of the Joint Facilities and the provision of the Animal Control Services, and all
financial transactions of the Member Agencies relating to the Joint Facilities and the provision of
the Animal Control Services, which books of account shall correctly show any receipts and also any
costs, expenses, or charges paid or to be paid by each of the Member Agencies. Said books and
records shall be open to inspection at all times during normal business hours by any representative
of a Member Agency, or by any accountant or other person authorized by a Member Agency to
inspect said books or records. The ~ontroller/Treasurer shall, in accordance with Sections 6505 and
6505.6 of the Act, cause the books of account and other financial records of the Authority to be
audited annually by an independent public accountant or certified public accountant.
Section 6.3. Allocation of Costs and Expenses: Generally.
Section 6.3.1. Annual Estimate. After adoption of the preliminary budget and prior to
March 1 of each year, the Authority shall promptly furnish to each of the Member Agencies
an estimate of the total annual maintenance and operation costs, capital costs, costs of special
services, and debt service payments or redemption expenses on Bonds (if any).
Section 6.3.2. Operating Costs. The proportion of annual maintenance and operation costs
of the Authority (the "Operating Costs") to be borne by each Member Agency during the
tn'st two (2) full Fiscal Years mediately following the first meeting of the Board of
Directors shall be based on the variables and the formula set forth in detail in Exhibit B,
entitled "Contributions For Operating Costs - First Two Fiscal Years," attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference. For the first two (2) Fiscal Years immediately
following the first meeting of the Board of Directors, the Member Agencies hereby agree
that each Member Agency's proportion shall be as set forth in greater detail in Exhibit B.
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:XDATA\WP~GREEMNI.A-M~MqIMAI.J.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 12 of 20
The 'proportion of Operating Costs to be borne by each Member Agency during the
succeeding Fiscal Year shall be determined by the General Manager each year prior to May
1, based on the variables and formula set forth in Exhibit "B,"and the General Manager shall
submit these percentages to the Board of Directors for review, modification and/or approval
on or before June 1 of each year. At any time after the completion of the first two (2) Fiscal
Years immediately following the first meeting of the Board of Directors, the Board of
Directors may modify the manner in which each Member Agency's contribution to
Operating Costs is determined or calculated by an affirmative vote of four-fifths of the
Board of Directors.
Section 6.3.3. Capital Acquisition Costs. Costs of Special Service,. Bond Expenses. Costs
of acquiring new equipment or' constructing new facilities, costs of special services and
Bonds interest and redemption expenses (if any) shall be borne by each Member Agency in
the same proportion as Operating Costs determined, pursuant to Section 6.3.2, for the Fiscal
Year in which the cost is incurred.
Section 6.3.4. Capital Costs. The proportion of capital replacement costs to be borne by
each Member Agency annually shall be the same proportion as Operating Costs borne by
that Member Agency for that Fiscal Year as determined pursuant to Section 6.3.2.
Section 6.3.5. Insurance Costs. The premiums for the insurance policies described in
Section 3.10 shall be apportioned among the Member Agencies in the same manner as each
Member Agency's yearly percentage of Operating Costs, as determined pursuant to Section
6.3.2. In the event of any claim for damages which is not covered by insurance, or which
exceeds the limits of any applicable policy of insurance, the Member Agencies agree to
allocate among themselves the uninsured costs of defending such claim, and the uncovered
costs of settlement or judgment, if any, in the same proportions that each Member Agency's
annual payment to the Authority for insurance premiums bears to the whole of such annual
premiums collected by the Authority. As that term is used above, "annual premiums" refers
to the premiums the Authority collected during the year in which the claim arose.
Section 6.4. Payment of Costs. Beginning on the Effective Date of this Agreement, and quarterly
in advance thereafter for each Fiscal Year, each Member Agency agrees to pay the Authority its
allocated proportional share of the total estimated annual costs and expenses, as set forth in Section
6.3. The Authority shall submit to each of the Member Agencies a final detailed statement of the
final costs and expenses for the preceding Fiscal Year, allocated in the same manner as estimated
expenses were allocated, within three (3) months after the close of each Fiscal Year, whereupon
final adjustment of debits and credits shall be made by the Authority. If the amount of any allocated
share of any estimated item of expense due fi-om a Member Agency was less than the final allocation
of such item to such Member Agency, such Member Agency shall ~ pay the difference to
the Authority within 45 days. If the amount of any allocated share of any estimated items of
expense from a Member Agency was in excess of the final allocation of such item to such Member
Agency, the Authority shall reimburse or credit such excess to the appropriate account of such
Member Agency.
Joint Exercise of Pow~'s Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I :~DATA\WP~,GREEMNT.A-M~NIMAI..J.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 13 of 20
Section 6.5. Sources of Funds. Each Member Agency shall provide the funds required to be paid
by it to the Authority under this Agreement from any source of funds legally available to such
Member Agency for such purpose. ~
Section 6.6'. Additional or Modified Services and Charges to Member Agencies.
Section 6.6.1. Each Member Agency may contract with the Authority for greater or lesser
services than the Animal Control Services set forth in this Agreement. Subject to Section
6.6.2, the Member Agencies acknowledge and agree that after the first two (2) Fiscal Years
immediately following the first meeting of the Board of Directors, the contributions required
pursuant to Section 6.3 of a Member Agency that enters into such a contract with the
Authority may be modified accordingly, with the approval of the Board of Directors, to
account for the greater or lesser services being provided to that Member Agency by the
Authority.
SeCtion 6.6.2. Notwithstanding Section 6.6.1 above, if a Member Agency provides and
desires to continue to provide any of its own Animal Control Services as such Services are
specified in Exhibit "A" of this Agreement, then that Member Agency shall negotiate and
enter into a written agreement with the Authority to receive an appropriate reimbursement,
credit or other adjustment of that Member Agency's contribution to operating costs, capital
acquisition and replacement costs, and insurance costs of the Authority that are or will not
be incurred by the Authority as a result of that Member Agency's provision of that particular
service.
Section 6.6.3. Member Agencies requesting other animal related services from the
Authority in addition to those Animal Control Services specified in Exhibit "A" of this
Agreement shall be held financially responsible for direct additional costs incurred or
encumbered by the Authority in the implementation of special programs, projects, and
services.
ARTICLE VII
OWNERSHIP; ENFORCEMENT
Section 7.1. Ownership of Joint Facilities. Prior to the Effective Date, each Member Agency shall
convey to the Authority the real and personal property described in Exhibit ~ C, entitled "Joint
Facilities," attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which Joint Facilities, as the
same may be amended from time to time by the Board, will thereafter be owned, managed and
operated by the Authority.
Section 7.2. Enforcement by Authority_. The Authority is hereby authorized to take any or all legal
or equitable actions, including but not limited to injunction and specific performance, necessary or
permitted by law, to enforce this Agreement.
ARTICLE VHI
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Con~'ol Authority
I:'~DATA\WP~AGREEMNT.A-M~ANIMAI. J.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 14 of 20
TERMINATION
Section 8.1. Termination. This Agreement shall terminate only upon an agreement of all Member
Age ties; ..... :~'~ '- .......... ~'-' :" .... '-'--'~ -~--~' ~' .... bccn: ..... ~ ~_~ ........... .,:__ ,~.A_
of Section 9.2. Upon termination of this Agreement, any obligation of the Authority which
continues following termination shall be borne by the Member Agencies based on the percentages
determined p .ursuant to Section 8.3.
Section 8.2. Effective Dates of Termination. Any such termination shall not under any
circumstances become effective until June 30, next succeeding a minimum of twelve (12) months
following the effective date of a written notice of termination to the Board of Directors signed
approved by all Legislative Bodies.
Section 8.3. Disposition of Assets. Except as provided in Section 6.3 and subject to Section 9.2,
upon the termination of this Agreement, any assets acquired by the Authority during the period of
its existence and still on hand and all unencumbered cash reserves (collectively, "Assets and Cash
Reserves") shall be dislributed to the Member Agencies in the following manner: The total amount
of maintenance and operating costs paid by each Member Agency into the Operating Fund during
the entire existence of the Authority shall be added together and the percentage which each Agency's
total bears to the whole shall be determined. The Assets and Cash Reserves shall be divided among
the Member Agencies based on the above percentage, based on appraised value of the assets at the
time of termination, provided that the Joint Facilities conveyed to the Authority by each Member
Agency, as described in Exhibit D shall be excluded fi:om such distribution and appraisal and shall
be reconveyed to the contributing Member Agency upon termination of this Agreement. In the
event the Member Agencies cannot agree on how the distribution of Assets and Cash Reserves
pursuant to the distribution method set forth in this Section should be implemented, the City
Managers of all of the Member Agencies, or their respective designees, shall meet promptly to
develop a method for distributing the Assets and Cash Reserves among the Member Agencies.
Section 8.4. Continued Existence of Authority. Upon termination, this Agreement and the
Authority shall survive and continue to exist as required or necessary for the limited purpose of
distributing the Assets and Cash Reserves and winding up and closing out the business, accounts and
affairs of the Authority.
ARTICLE IX
WITHDRAWAL OF A MEMBER AGENCY
Section 9.1; Am'cement Continues. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 8.1, each Member
Agency agrees that the withdrawal of a Member Agency pursuant to this Article IX, is not intended
to and will not terminate this Agreement or affect the ability of the Board of Directors or the
remaining Member Agencies to carry out and fulfill the purposes of this Agreement.
Section 9.2. Withdrawal. A Member Agency may withdraw from participation in this Agreement
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:~DATA\WP~A(3REEMNT.A-MkANIMALJ.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 15 of 20
at any time :"~' ~-"-.. ~,~,.,~o ~'-,-,. .... ~----o,.,...oo,.,.,~.: ..... '~ subject to all of the following terms and conditions:
Section 9.2.1. If Bonds have been issued and the withdrawing Member Agency benefits
directly or indirectly from the Bonds issued and outstanding, the Member Agency shall not
withdraw from the Authority until such time as all of those Bonds and the interest thereon
shall first have been paid in full or provision for such full payment shall first have been
contractually made with the Authority and approved by the Board of Directors; and
Section 9 2 2
~ The obligations of the withdrawing Member Agency have been paid in full
and that provision for repayment of any other indebtedness which may exist shall be
covered by an agreement made between the Authority and the Member Agency approved
by the Board of Directors; and
Section 9.2.3. The withdrawing Member Agency provides the Board of Directors with at
least one hundred twenty (120) days' prior written notice of the date it intends to withdraw
from participation in this Agreement; and
Section 9.2.4. Concurrently with its written notice of intent to withdraw, the withdrawing
Member Agency provides to the Board of Directors a complete and detailed writing clearly
identifying those Joint Facilities and Assets and Cash Reserves and any other items
contributed to the Authority by that withdrawing Member Agency that the withdrawing
Member Agency believes it is entitled to have returned to it as of the effective date of its
withdrawal from participation in this Agreement.
Section 9.3. Restrictions. Any withdrawal from participation in this Agreement is restricted by the
restrictions on withdrawal contained in Section 9.2, above. In addition, subject to Section 9.4, each
withdrawing Member Agency, upon its withdrawal, waives any fight to seek a judicial
apportionment of any interest it may have in the Authority and/or in any assets of the Authority that
were not wholly and directly contributed to the Authority by the withdrawing Member Agency.
Section 9.4. ~. Utilizing the information submitted to the Board of Directors pursuant
to Section 9.2 above and any other related and relevant information submitted to the Board of
Directors, the Board of Directors shall detennine those Joint Facilities, Assets and Cash Reserves
and other items that shall be distributed to the withdrawing Member Agency and issue a direction
to the General Manager to distribute those Joint Facilities, Assets and Cash Reserves and other items
to the withdrawing Member Agency in a manner consistent with the Board of Director's
determination. In making its determination pursuant to this Section, the goal of the Board of
Directors shall be to return to the withdrawing Member Agency all of the Joint Facilities and other
discrete and tangible items contributed to the Authority by the withdrawing Member Agency
pursuant to this Agreement and to return the unused and unencumbered Assets and Cash Reserves
contributed by the withdrawing Member Agency, prorated as of the effective date of the withdrawal.
To the.extent, possible proration shall be based upon the contribution percentage attached to this
Agreement or subsequently amended, for those items or funds that were not contributed by an
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:kDATA\WPkAGREEMNT.A-~A~.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 16 of 20
individual agency.
ARTICLE X
MISCELLANEOUS
Section 10.1. Section Headings. All section headings in this Agreement are for convenience of
reference only and are not to be construed as modifying or governing language in the section
referred to or t9 define or limit the scope of any provision of this Agreement.
Section 10.2. Consent. Whenever in this Agreement any consent or approval is required, the same
shall not be unreasonably withheld.
Section 10.3. ~. This Agreement is made under the Constitution and laws of the
State of California and is to be so construed.
Section 10.4.
Section 10.4.1. This Agreement may be amended at any time, except as limited by Bond
covenants, if any.
Section 10.4.2. All amendments to the Agreement must be in writing, and must be
approved by the City or Town Councils of the Member Agencies prior to becoming
effective.
Section 10.5. Severabili _ty. In the event any provision of this Agreement is determined to be illegal
or invalid for any reason, all other provisions and articles of this Agreement shall remain in full
force and effect unless and until otherwise determined. The illegality of any provision of this
Agreement shall in no way affect the legality and enfomeability of any other provisions of this
Agreement.
Section 10.6. Successors. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of
the successors of the respective Member Agencies. No Member Agency may assign any right or
obligation hereunder without written consent of the other Member Agencies.
Section 10.7. Notice. Notice of any Member Agency to any other Member Agency shall be given
in the manner and to the addresses established in the Bylaws for this purpose.
///
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:'~DATA\WP'~AGREEMNT.A-M~ANIMALJ.COTIMay 25, 2000
Page 17 of 20
III
III
EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed and
attested by their proper officers thereupon duly authorized and their official seals to be hereto
affixed on the dates as shown herein.
MEMBER AGENCIES
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
CITY OF CAMPBELL, a municipal corporation
By:
Its: Its:
Date: Date:
ATTEST:
By:
Its:
Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Its:
CITY OF CUPERTINO, a municipal corporation
Date: ~- /~-.~) Date:
By:
Its:
ATTEST:
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:kDATA\WPkAGREEMNT.A-/VI~NIMALJ.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 18 of 20
'By:
Its:
Date:
///
///
///
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Its:
CITY OF MONTE SERENO,
a municipal corporation
By:
Its:
Date:
Date:
ATTEST:
By:
Its:
Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
CITY OF SANTA CLARA, a municipal corporation
By:
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:kDATA\WP~,GREEMNT.A-M~NIMALJ.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 19 of 20
Its:
Date:
Its:
Date:
ATTEST:
By:
Its:
Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Its:
Date:
CITY OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation
By:
Its:
Date:
ATTEST:
By:
Its:
Date:
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:~DATA\WP~.GREEMNT.A-~.CO7/May 25, 2000
Page 20 of 20
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Its:
Date:
CITY OF SUNNYVALE, a municipal corporation
By:
Its:
Date:
ATTEST:
By:
Its:
Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Its:
Date:
TOWN OF LOS GATOS, a municipal corporation
By:
Its~
Date:
ATTEST:
By:
Its:
Date:
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
I:~DATA\WP~AGREEMNT.A-M~.NIMALJ.CO7/IVlay 25, 2000
Page 21 of 20
EXItlBIT "A"
ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES
The term "Animal Control Services" in the Agreement to which this Exhibit "A" is attached means
all of the following services:
Field Services
Field services means all of the following services, including any vehicles, communications
equipment, office supplies, field and administrative personnel, and any other personnel,
supplies and equipment, reasonably required to perform the following services (the "Field
Services"):
Pick up of confined stray dogs, cats, and other small animals, including rabbits, chickens,
turkey, geese, and ducks, and excluding confined wildlife as defined in Section 711.2 of the
California Fish and Game Code, such as opossums, raccoons, skunks, or squirrels;
Pick up of dead animals, including wildlife, as described in more detail below under the
description of Dead Animal Services;
Pick up of injured stray dogs or cats and other small animals, without regard to weight, and
injured wildlife, excluding birds, that weigh fifty pounds (50 lbs.) or less, that are located
on public property or readily accessible on private property with the permission of the
property owner or occupant or the property owner's or occupant's authorized agent;
Response to emergency calls;
Investigating complaints of animal bites or attacks on humans, including the completion of
a report interviewing the parties involved, quarantining animals which have bitten humans,
preparing and transporting biting animals for rabies testing, and investigating alleged
violations of a quarantine;
Investigating and referring complaints of vicious dogs to the appropriate code enforcement
agency of a Member Agency for resolution;
Investigating and referring complaints of dangerous animals to the appropriate code
enforcement agency of a Member Agency for resolution;
Responding to complaints of dogs running at large;
Responding to complaints of domestic animals causing a nuisance, except domestic animals
making noise, and provide follow-up patrol on an "as available" basis;
Exhibit "A"
Page 1 of 3
Bo
Do
Exhibit "A"
Responding to police assist calls on animal-related issues, which service may include taking
control of an animal at the direction of a police officer on the scene; and
Investigating and referring to the appropriate code enforcement agency of a Member Agency
for resolution of complaints regarding the lack of proper care, condition, or attention of
domestic animals by their owners.
Shelter. Services
Shelter Services means all of the following services, including shelter facilities, supplies,
animal attendants, supervisors and administrative personnel, and any other personnel,
supphes and equipment reasonably required to perform the following services (the "Shelter
Services"):
Shelter of abandoned, impounded, lost or stray domestic animals brought to the shelter by
a Member Agency, a resident residing in a Jurisdictional Area, or shelter personnel;
Quarantine of biting animals;
Rabies testing of suspect animals;
Provision for surrender and reclaim of abandoned, lost or stray domestic animals during
established business hours; and
Euthanization and disposal of abandoned, lost, impounded, or stray domestic animals that
are unclaimed by'their owners and fail to meet the written health and temperament standards
of the shelter.
Medical Services
"Medical Services" means all of the following services, including office facilities, supplies,
and professional and trained personnel necessary to perform the following services (the
"Medical Services"):
Provision of veterinarian services twenty-four (24) hours per day to treat and provide
veterinarian care to stray, injured, or sick dogs, cats, and other impounded animals;
Monitor quarantined biter animals; and
Conduct vaccination climes and have available, free of charge to the public, rabies control
information.
Dead Animal Service,
"Dead Animal Services" means all of the following services, including any vehicles, storage
Page 2 of 3
facilities, disposal mechanisms, field and administrative personnel, and any other personnel,
supplies and equipment required to perform the following services (the "Dead Animal
Services"):
Pick up of dead animals, including wildlife and except livestock, from streets and public
property within Jurisdictional Areas, or from private property within Jurisdictional Areas
with the permission of the property owner, occupant or a representative of the property
owner or occupant;
Identification of and notification to the owner of the dead animal, whenever possible; and
Disposal of the body of the dead animal.
Exhibit "A"
Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT "B"
CONTRIBUTIONS FOR OPERATING COSTS -
FIRST TWO FISCAL YEARS -
Start-up Costs
Member Agencies agree that, pursuant to Section 6.3.2 of the Agreement to which this
Exhibit "B" is attached, for the r. .......,~, ,::__~, ,, .... :___~:_._~.. ~_,, .... :__ .,__ ~.__.
----,:-- -~,~-- ,-, ---~ -,',~,: ........ ~- ......-,:-- -c ...... ~ ---: ....... ' initial start up
period from the Effective Date until the date that the Joint Shelter is first opened, the
proportion of capital, start-up and operating costs of the Authority to be borne by each
Member Agency shall be as follows:
JURISDICTION
City of CAMPBELL
City of CUPERTINO
Town of LOS GATOS
City of MONTE SERENO
City of SANTA CLARA
City of SARATOGA
City of SUNNYVALE
ALLOCATION
PERCENTAGE
~ 10.10%
8-M,Z% 9.78%
X ATI' T~T~r~ A C'~ 10
8.47%
~ 0.88%
~ ~' ~ 30.17%
~ 8.04%
~o ~o~ 32.56%
Member Agencies acknowledge and agree that the proportions set forth above are based
upon a consideration of three (3) variables, as follows:
The population of each Member Agency to account for potential demand for Animal Conlrol
Services in each Jurisdictional Area; and
The mount of licensed animals owned or kept by residents of each Member Agency to
reflect different estimated levels of animal ownership in each Jurisdictional Area; and
The total number of days that an animal from each Member Agency is held at the current
animal shelter facility used by that Member Agency to reflect anticipated proportional use
of an animal shelter facility by each Member Agency.
Member Agencies further acknowledge and agree that each Member Agency's proportion
of annual maintenance and operating costs of the Authority set forth above was calculated
as follows:
Each Member Agency's respective percentage share of each of the variables set forth in
Subsection B above was calculated based upon 1998 data; and
Exhibit "B"
Page 1 of 2
Each Member Agency's respective percentage share of each variable was summed and
divided by three (3) to calculate a composite percentage cost share for each Member
Agency; and
Each Member Agency's respective composite percentage cost share was multiplied by the
total projected annual operating cost of an animal shelter facility to project each Member
Agency's percentage cost share, and all as more particularly described in Subsection 6 of
Section HI of that certain "Final Report for the Animal Services Feasibility Study," dated
May, 1999 and prepared for the City of San Jos6 by DMG-Maximus. This formula has been
adjusted to reflect the deletion of San ~ Jos6 and Milpitas with a recalculation based
upon the actual percentages minus San Joac'a Jos6's contribution as described in the Final
Report for the Animal Services Feasibility Study, prepared for the City of Santa Clara by
DMG-Maximus. This was augmented by additional calculations by DMG Maximus.
2. Operational Costs
After the opening of the Joint Shelter the following formula shaH be utilized, noting that
Sunnyvale is not utilizing field services:
All operational costs shall be totaled and then reduced by 25.74 % (The approximate
proportion of total operational costs attributable to field services). 74.26% of operational
costs shall be allocated based upon the formula noted above. The remaining 25.74% share
shall be allocated based upon the following formula (as calculated by DMG Maximus):
Campbell: 14.91%
Cupertino: 14.69 %
Los Gatos: 12.53%
Monte Sereno: 1.35%
Santa Clara: 44.38%
Saratoga: 12.14%
Exhibit "B"
Page 2 of 2
JOINT FACILITIES
EXHIBIT "C"
[Intentionally left blank; to be determined by the Board]
Exhibit "C"
Page 1 of I
CITY OF
CUPERTINO
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
- Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408) 777-3213
FAX: (408) 777-3109
HUMAN RESOURCES DIVISION
SUMMARY
Agenda Item No. L
Meeting Date: June 19, 2000
SUBJECT:
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement - Workforce Development Services
BACKGROUND:
The City of Cupertino and the cities of Los Altos, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Santa
Clara, and Sunnyvale have been in a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) since 1983 to offer
employment training services provided through the Job Training and Partnership Act
(JTPA) throughout the North Valley (NOVA) Job Training Consortium.
The JTPA of 1982 is sunsetting on June 30, 2000 and will be replaced by the Workforce
Investment Act (WIA) of 1998. JPA members are required to take action on a new
agreement pursuant to the 1998 WIA legislation.
The attached resolution and agreement will be effective July 1, 2000.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolution.
Su[mittedqby:
Wi'llialn J. P qoska
Human Resources Manager
Approvec:,..-
Don ' :
City Manager
Submission:
Printed on Recycled Paper
RESOLUTION NO. 00-174
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CUPERTINO AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A JOINT
EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT FOR WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE WORKFORCE
INVESTMENT ACT OF 1998
WHEREAS, the cities of Cupertino, Los Altos, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Santa
Clara and Sunnyvale have been in a Joint Powers Agreement since 1983 to offer
employment training services provided through the Job Training and Partnership Act
throughout the North Valley (NOVA) Job Training Consortium; and
WHEREAS, the federal Workforce Investment Act (WlA) of 1998, as amended, provides
financial assistance enabling local govenunents to assume responsibilities for job
training, employer services, community services, and for other purposes, and provides for
the formation of consortia wherein combinations of cities may unite to form a multi-
jurisdictional area for overseeing, planning, developing and monitoring a comprehensive
one-stop service-delivery system that will provide job training and employment
oppommities with universal access for customers seeking to further their careers
including economically disadvantaged, unemployed, and other underemployed workers;
and
WHEREAS, it will mutually benefit the Cities to enter into a joint powers
agreement whereby the Cities may avail themselves of the benefits and advantages of the
WIA for the residents and businesses within their respective jurisdictional areas.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Cupertino hereby approves the aforementioned agreement and authorizes the Mayor and
the City Clerk to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Cupertino.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19t~ day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
VOTE
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AYE S:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
Joint Exercise o£ Powers Agreement;
Workforce Development Services
This AGREEMENT, dated duly 1, 2000 by and between the cities of
Cupertino, Los Altos, Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Santa Clara
and Sunnyvale ("Cities" herein), municipal corporations of the 9tare of
California,
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the cities of Cupertino, Los Altos, Mountain View, Palo
Alto, Santa Clara and Sunnyvale have been in a Joint Powers
Agreement since 1983 to offer employment training services provided
through the Job Training and Partnership Act (JTPA) throughout the
North Valley (NOVA) Job Training Consortium; and
WHEREAS, the federal Workforce Investment Act of '1998 (Public Law
105-220), as amended ("WIA"), provides financial assistance enabling
local governments to assume responsibilities for job training, employer
services, community services, and for other purposes, and provides for
the formation of consortia wherein combinations of cities may unite to
form a multi-jurisdictional area for overseeing, planning, developing
and monitoring a comprehensive one-stop service-delivery system
which will provide job training and employment opportunities with
universal access for customers seeking to further their careers
including (but not limited to) economically disadvantaged, unemployed,
and other underemployed workers; and
WHEREAS, Section 6502, et. seq. of the Government Code of the State
of California authorizes public agencies to enter into agreements for
the purpo~.c of jointly exercising any power common to the public
agencies; and
WHEREAS, public agencies have inherent power to act for the benefit
of the health and general welfare of their residents; and
WHEREAS, each City is committed to improving access to lifelong
learning for our region's workers, and improving businesses' access to
a qualified labor force;
WHEREAS, it will mutually benefit the Cities to enter into a joint
powers agreement whereby the Cities may avail themselves of the
benefits and advantages of the WIA for the residents and businesses
within their respective jurisdictional areas; and
WHEREAS, the City of Milpitas has petitioned the Governor of
California and the NOVA Consortium cities to join the consortium.
Joint Powers Agreement
NOVA Consortium
duly 1, 2000
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
{1) Joint Powers Agency.
The City of Sunnyvale is hereby designated as the North Valley
Workforce Development Agency, referred to herein as the Joint Powers
Agencs/, the jurisdiction of which for purposes of this A§reement shall
be the Cities of Cupertino, Los Altos, Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo
Alto, Santa Clara, and Sunnyvale. Each of the foregoing Cities hereby
delegates its authority to carry out the purpose of this Joint Powers
Agreement to the Joint Powers Agency.
(2) Purpose-Joint Powers Agency.
The Joint Powers Agency is designated for the purpose of carrying out
job training and employment programs, within a one-stop service-
delivery system, with universal access for customers seeking to further
their careers including (but not limited to) economically disadvantaged,
unemployed and underemployed persons within its jurisdiction,
according to plans pursuant to the Workforce Investment Act (WIA),
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity ReconciIiation Act,
California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKS)
and other workforce development legislation.
(3) Authority-Joint Powers Agency.
The Joint Powers Agency is hereby authorized, in its own name, to do
all acts necessary for the exercise of its authority to accomplish the
purpose as set forth herein include, but not limited to, any or all of the
following:
(a) Establish a local Workforce Investment Board (WIB) to fulfill
the responsibilities delineated in WIA;
(b) Enter into subgrants, contracts and other necessary
agreements;
(c) Receive and expend funds;
(d) Employ personnel;
(e) Organize and train staff personnel;
(f) Prepare a comprehensive five-year plan for one-stop service-
delivery system;
2
Joint Powers Agreement
NOVA Consortium
July 1, 2000
(g) Develop procedures for governance, planning, operation,
assessment and fiscal management of the one-stop service-
delivery system;
(h) Evaluate program performance based on measurable outcomes
and customer satisfaction and determine resulting needs and
reallocation of resources;
(i) Execute and/or modify grant agreements with the U.S.
Department of Labor, the State of California, the County of Santa
Clara and other interested investors;
(j) Prepare an annual budget and cost allocation plan.
Pursuant to the WIA, the Joint Powers Agency shall conduct studies
and make analysis of the needs for training and employment programs
among the Cities; shall establish and coordinate training and
employment programs within the Region; and shall undertake any
other act or acts that may be required to accomplish the purposes of
this joint exercise of powers agreement and the WIA.
(4) Distribution of Job Training Services.
The Joint Powers Agency shall distribute job training opportunities,
business services and all other services delivered hereunder among
the Cities on an equitable basis, in reasonable proportion to the needs
and markets for such services, as determined by current census,
unemployment and other objective data. All other management
functions performed, hereunder, except individual reports to Cities of
Agency activities, shall be on a regional basis, without partiality or
regard for political boundaries among the Cities.
(5) Term of Agreement.
This Agreement shall become effective as of the date of its approval by
a majority of the legislative bodies of the Cities, and shall continue in
full force and effect until terminated by all of the parties to this
Agreement. Any City may terminate its participation in the Agreement
as of the end of any fiscal year by giving written notice of its intention
to terminate at least six (6) months prior to the end of the fiscal year
in which such notice is given, to all other Cities. This Agreement may
be terminated at any time by mutual agreement of all parties hereto.
3
Joint Powers Agreement
NOVA Consortium
July 1, 2000
(6) Governing Board.
The Joint Powers Agency shall be administered solely by the City
Council of the City of Sunnyvale, which shall function as its Governing
Board.
(7) Meetings and deliberations of the Governing Board.
All official acts of the Governing Board shall be taken during public
meetings, the date, place, and time of which have been published in
the manner applicable to meetings of public bodies. All official actions
on behalf of the Joint Powers Agency shall be taken by and designated
in the official minutes of the Sunnyvale City Council. All of the rules
and regulations governing meetings to be held by the City Council of
the City of Sunnyvale are hereby adopted as the rules and regulations
governing meetings of the Joint Powers Agency Governing Board.
(8) Officers and Employees. ,
The Governing Board shall have the responsibility and authority to
designate current or additional regular employees of the City of
Sunnyvale as administrative, managerial and staff personnel of the
Joint Powers Agency. Such personnel shall remain employees of the
City of Sunnyvale, subject to all of the terms and conditions of
employment otherwise applicable to Sunnyvale employees. The
Governing Board is further authorized to hire temporary employees and
consultants, and to provide such other facilities, supplies, equipment,
office space and customary administrative resources, as are reasonably
necessary to performance of the activities undertaken pursuant to this
Agreement. Reimbursement for all of the foregoing personnel and
administrative cost shall be exclusively from grants or funds
appropriated by state or federal laws & regulations, private foundations
and other investors.
(9) Statement of Conditions and Criteria.
The parties hereto make the following statements and certify as follows:
(a) The respective addresses of the parties are as follows:
City of Cupertino
Office of the City Manager
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
City of Los Altos
Office of the City Manager
1 North San Antonio Road
Los Altos, California 94022
4
Joint Powers Agreement
NOVA Consortium
July 1, 2000
City of Milpitas
Office of the City Manager
455 East Calaveras Blvd.
Milpitas, California 95035
City of Mountain View
Office of the City Manager
P.O. Box 7540
Mountain View, California 94039-7540
City of Palo Alto
Office of the City Manager
P.O. Box 10250
Palo Alto, California 94303
City of Santa Clara
Office of the City Manager
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, California 95050
City of Sunnyvale
Office of the City Manager
P.O. Box 3707
Sunnyvale, California 94088-3707
(b) The geographical area to be served by the Joint Powers Agency
shall be all that area within the geographical boundaries of the
parties hereto.
(c) The total population within the jurisdictional areas hereto
combined is estimated to be 510,000.
(d) The parties, by their signatures to this Agreement and seals
affixed hereto, certify that all parties are authorized pursuant to
law to provide the services for which this Agreement is entered
into in all of the geographical area within the jurisdiction of the
parties.
(e) Attached and incorporated by this reference is a written
statement of the chief legal officers of each City, setting forth
therein the authority, of the parties to enter into this Joint
Powers Agreement.
Joint Powers Agreement
NOVA Consortium
July 1, 2000
(f) The parties, by their signatures and seals to this agreement
affixed, certify that to the extent consistent with state law and
local ordinances, they accept responsibility for the operation of
the programs initiated and continued pursuant to this
Agreement.
(10) Liability.
(a) The City of Sunnyvale, and those persons, agencies and
instrumentalities used by it to perform the functions authorized
herein, shall be exclusively liable for damages to any person
arising from activities of the Joint Powers Agency.
(b) The City of Sunnyvale shall hold harmless and indemnify
cities, and each of them, including their officers and employees,
from any claim or liability arising from acts or omissions of the
City of Sunnyvale in the administration of this Agreement, and in
so doing, shall provide cities, and each of them, with legal defense
of any and all claims or liabilities and shall pay reasonable
attorney's fees and costs incurred in providing such defense.
(1 1) Reports.
The Joint Powers Agency shall, at Cities' request, provide written
reports of the finances, activities and business affairs of the Agency to
the Cities.
(12) Breach.
If default shall be made by any party hereto, in any covenant contained
in this Agreement, such default shall not excuse the party from
fulfilling its obligations under this Agreement. The parties declare that
this Agreement is entered into for the benefit of the Joint Powers
Agency and hereby grant to the Agency the fight to 'enforce, by whatever
lawful means the Agency deems appropriate, all of the obligations of
each of the parties hereunder. Each and all of the remedies given to
the Agency hereunder or by law now or hereafter enacted are
cumulative and the exercise of one right or remedy shall not impair the
right of the Agency to any or all other remedies.
(13) Severability.
Should any part, term, or provision of this Agreement be decided by the
courts to be illegal or in conflict with any law of the State of California
or otherwise be rendered unenforceable or ineffectual, the validity of
the remaining portions or provisions shall not be effected thereby.
Joint Powers Agreement
NOVA Consortium
July 1, 2000
WHEREFORE, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed by their respective officers duly authorized.
CITY OFFICER ATTEST
Cupertino
John Statton, Mayor
Kimberly Smith, City Clerk
Los Altos
John Moss, Mayor
Carol Scharz, City Clerk
Milpitas
Henry C. Manayan, Mayor
Gail Blalock, City Clerk
Mountain View
Rosemary Stasek, Mayor
Angelita M. Salvador, City Clerk
Palo Alto
Liz Kniss, Mayor
Donna Rogers, City Clerk
Santa Clara
Judy Nadler, Mayor
Judy Boccignone, City Clerk
Sunnyvale
Patricia Vorreiter, Mayor
Linda Kelley, Deputy City Clerk
7
Joint Powers Agreement
NOVA Consortium
July 1, 2000
STATEMENT OF OPINION; LEGAL AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO
JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT FOR WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
I, the .undersigned chief legal officer of the City identified below
opposite my own name, am an attorney licensed to practice before the
Supreme Court of the State of California. It is my opinion that the City
which I represent is fully authorized by the laws of the State of
California to enter into that certain agreement entitled "Joint Exercise
of Powers Agreement; Workforce Development Services" dated July 1,
2000, and to participate in the governmental actions described therein.
CITY CITY ATTORNEY DATE
· ....
Cupertino
Chiles
Los Altos
Robert K. Booth, Jr.
Milpitas
Steven T. Mattas
Mountain View
Michael D. Martello
Palo Alto
Ariel Pierre Calonne
Santa Clara
Michael R. Downey
Sunnyvale
Valerie J. Armento
8
CITY OF
CUPE INO
City Hall
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3212
Fax' (a. nR) 777.~:166
OFFICE OF TI-IE CITY MANAGER
SUMMARY
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Application for Alcoholic Beverage License.
BACKGROUND
AGENDA DATE ~ -~/9 - o o
Name of Business:
Location:
Type of Business:
Type of License:
Reason for Application:
Loree Liquors
19050 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Liquor Store
Off-Sale General
Person to Person Transfer
RECOMMENDATION
There are no use permit restrictions or zoning restrictions which would prohibit this use and staff
has no objection to the issuance of the license.
Prepared by:
Ciddy Wordell', City Planner
D~d~I~. B~'~t, City Manager
G:planning/misc/abcloree
Printed on Recycled Paper
?Ii
State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE(S)
ABC 211 (6/99)
TO: Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
100 Paseo de San Antonio
Room 119
San Jose, CA 95113
(408)277- 1 200
DISTRICT SERVING LOCATION:
First Owner:
Name of Business:
Location of Business:
County:
Is premise inside city limits'?
Mailing Address'
premises address)
Type of license(s): 21
Transferor' s license/name:
File Number: 366352
Receipt Number: 1282324
Geographical Code: 4303
Copies Mailed Date: May 22, 2000
Issued Date:
SAN .lOSE
CHOI JOONG BOCK
LOREE LIQUORS
19050 STEVENS CREEK BLVD
CUPERTINO, CA 95014
SANTA CLARA
92614 /LEE JOHNNEY M
Dropping Partner: Yes
No
License Type Transaction Type Fee Type
21 OFF-SALEGENERAL PERSON TO PERSON TRANSF NA
21 OFF-SALE GENERAL ANNUAL FEE NA
21 OFF-SALE GENERAL STATE FINGERPRINTS NA
Master
Y
Y
N
Dup Date
0 05/22/00
0 05/22/00
2 05/22/00
Fee
$1,274.00
$446.00
$78.00
Total
$1,798.00
Have you ever been convicted of a felony? No.
Have you ever violated any provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, or regulations of the
Department pertaining to the Act? No
Explain any "Yes" answer to the above questions on an attachment which shall be deemed part of this application.
Applicant agrees (a) that any manager employed in an on-sale licensed premise will have all the
qualifications of a licensee, and (b) that he will not violate or cause or permit to be violated any of the
provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act.
$'1'A1'~50l~ CALIFORNIA County of' SANTA CLARA Date: May 22, 2000
Under penalty of perjury, each person whose signature appears below, certifies and says: (I) He is an applicant, or one of the applicants, or an
executive officer of the applicant corporation, named in the foregoing application, duly authorized to make this application on its behalf; (2) that
he has read the foregoing and knows the contents thereof arid that each of the above statements therein made are true; (3) that no person other
than the applicant or applicants has any direct or indirect interest in the applicant or applicant's business to be conducted under the license(s) for
which this application is made; (4) that the transfer application or proposed transfer i,,/ not made to satisfy the payment of a loan or to fulfill an
· Applicant Name(s) ~~Applicant Signature(s) ~ ~/
CHOI JOONG BOCK ~~,.l~~!a~ ~.2Z'
RESOLUTION NO. 00-175
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
APPROVING CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 SENIOR CENTER
EXPANSION, PROJECT NUMBER 99-9210
RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Cupertino, California, that
Change Order No. 3 for changes to work which has been approved by the Director of
Public Works and this day presented to this Council, be, and it hereby approved in
conjunction with the project known as
SENIOR CENTER EXPANSION,
PROJECT NUMBER 99-9210
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that funds are available and no further
appropriation is necessary.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
CITY OF
CUPEI iNO
c~ty Hal!
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408)777-3354
FAX: (408)777-3333
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CUPERTINO SENIOR CENTER
PROJECT NUMBER 99-9201
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 3
Contractor
McCrary Construction Company
1300 Elmer Street '
Belmont, CA 94002-4011
The following changes are hereby approved:
3A.
Construct Memorial Par Restrooms facilities
Total Change Order No. 3
Total Project:
Original Contract
Change OrderNo. 1
Change Order No. 2
Change Order No. 3
Revised Contract
$ 3,357,800.00
2,753.92
9,171.00
175,674.00
$ 3,545,398.92
175,674.00
$ 175,674.00
CONTRACTOR
CITY OF C-tTPEKTINO
Title
Date
Bert ~. Viskovich
Director of Public Works
City Council:
Resolution No.
(Date)
RESOLUTION NO. 00-176
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
MAKING DETERMINATIONS AND APPROVING THE REORGANIZATION OF
TERRITORY DESIGNATED "SAN FERNANDO AVENUE 00-05",
APPROXIMATELY 0.456 ACRE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SAN
FERNANDO AVENUE BETWEEN BYRNE AVENUE AND ORANGE AVENUE;
WANG AND YEN (APN 357-15-048)
WHEREAS, a petition for the annexation of certain territory to the City of
Cupertino in the County of Santa Clara consisting of 0.456+ acre on the north side of
San Femando Avenue (APN 357-14-048) has been filed by property owner Tai-Tsong
Wang and Pau-Ling Sophia Yen; and
WHEREAS, on May 15, 2000, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 00-146
initiating proceedings for annexation of the area designated "N. San Femando Avenue
00-05"; and
WHEREAS, said territory is uninhabited and all owners of land included in the
proposal consent to this annexation; and
WHEREAS, Section 35150.5 of the California Government Code states that the
Local Agency Formation Commission shall not have any authority to review an
annexation to any City in Santa Clara County of unincorporated territory which is within
the urban service area of the city of the annexation if initiated by resolution of the
legislative body and therefore the City Council of the City of Cupertino is now the
conducting authority for said annexation; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 56837 provides that if a petition for
annexation is signed by all owners of land within the affected territory the City Council
may approve or disapprove the annexation without public hearing; and
WHEREAS, evidence was presented to the City Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Cupertino as follows:
That it is the conducting authority pursuant to Section 35150.5 of the Government
Code for the annexation of property designated "San Femando Avenue 00-05",
more particularly described in Exhibit "A";
That the following findings are made by the City Council of the City of
Cupertino:
ao
That said territory is uninhabited and comprises approximately 0.456
acre.
Resolution No. 00-176 Page 2
Co
go
jo
k°
mo
That the annexation is consistent with the orderly annexation of territory
with the City's urban service area and is consistent with the City policy
of annexing when providing City services.
The City Council has completed an initial study and has found that the
annexation of said territory has no significant impact on the environment,
and previously approved the granting of a Negative Declaration.
The City Council on May 16, 1983, enacted an ordinance prezoning
the subject territory to City of Cupertino Pre R1-8 zone.
Annexation to the City of Cupertino will affect no changes in special
districts.
That the territory is within the city urban service area as adopted by the
Local Agency Formation Commission.
That the annexation is made subject to no terms and conditions.
That the County Surveyor has determined the boundaries of the proposed
annexation to be definite and certain, and in compliance with the
Commission's road annexation policies. The City shall reimburse the
County for actual costs incurred by the County Surveyor in making this
determination.
That the proposed annexation does not create islands or areas in which it
would be difficult to provide municipal services.
That the proposed annexation does not split line of assessment of
ownership.
That the proposed annexation is consistent with the City's General Plan.
That the City has complied with all conditions imposed by the
commission for inclusion of the territory in the City's urban service area.
That the territory to be annexed is contiguous to .existing City limits under
provisions of the Government Code.
That said annexation is hereby ordered without election pursuant to Section 35151
et seq. of the Government Code.
That the Clerk of the City Council of the City of Cupertino is directed to give
notice of said annexation as prescribed by law.
Resolution No. 00-176 Page 3
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon completion of these reorganization
proceedings the territory annexed will be detached from the Santa Clara County Lighting
Service District.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Cupertino this 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
EXHIBIT
ANNEXATION TO THE CITY
ENT I TLED:
SAN' FERNANDO AVE.
( TAI-TSONG. WONG )
"A"
OF CUPERTINO
00-05
Ail that certain real property situated in the County of Santa
Clara, State of California, being a portion of Section.107 of
"Map of Subdivision 'A' Monta Vista" which map was filed for
record, on April 11, 1917 in Book "P" of Maps at page 20~ Santa
Clara County Records, more. particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the Northeasterly corner of said SecTion said
'point being the Southeasterly corner of that certain annexation
to the City of Cupertino entitled "Almaden Ave. 92-05", and also
being a point on the Westerly line of that certain annexation to
said City entitled "Almaden Ave. 96-15";
Thence along the Easterly. line of said Section and the Westerly
line of said "Almaden 96-15".annexation, 'South 50.00 feet;
thence leaving said Westerly line of said '"Almaden 96-15"
annexation and continuing along said Easterly line of said
Section, South 148'.42 feet' to a point on the Northerly line of
San Fernando Avenue, 40 feet'in'width, said point also being on
the Northerly boundary of that certain annexation 'to said City
entitled "San Fernando Ave. 88-07";
Thence along said last named lines, West 100,15 feet to the
Westerly line of said Section;
Thence along said Westerly line, North 198.42 feet to the North-
westerly corner thereof;
Thence along the Northerly line-of ~aid Section, East 50.15 feet
to the Southwesterly corner of the above referred to "Almaden
Ave. 92-05" annexation; thence continuing along said Northerly
line of said Section and said southerly line of said "Almaden 92-
.05" annexation, East 50.00 feet to the point of beginning.
Containing 0.'456 of an acre, more or less.
Date: March 15, 'h000. Revised: April 20, 2000
APN: 357-15-47 & -48
Address: 21909 San Fernando Avenue., Cupertino, C.
50./5 L_~ ...5-_°:90 .
lO0. l~
o F Di~Bino
-""~Alrnczden
! 96-t~J
N
I~ ":, 5an Fernando AVe. ,95-07 0
I ~ Scan Fcrncm~l° ~'e~'i~e'd'.' A?/'f/2d, 2000
[ ~ '~ ,A,~a=ar PRO POSED..ANNEY~ATION
l:)olor~s ~ TO THE CITY OF CU?ERTIkiO
E NTt TLEP
L OCATI6N MAP_ ~AN FERNANDO AVE.OO-O:S
RESOLUTION NO. 00-177
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION AGREEMENT OF EMPLOYMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AND DAVID KNAPP, CITY MANAGER
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council a proposed Agreement
of Employment between the City of Cupertino and David Knapp; and
WHEREAS, the terms, conditions and provisions of the agreement have been
reviewed and approved by the Director of Administrative Services and the City Attorney.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Cupertino hereby approves the aforementioned agreement and authorizes the Mayor to
execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Cupertino.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Members of the City Council
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
AGREEMENT OF EMPLOYMEI~ BETW~_ EN TI~
CITY OF CUPERTINO AND DAVID ICNAPP CITY
MANAGER
Agreement made ~tis day of 2 2000, between
the City of Cupertino hcreir~after referred to ns the "City" and David Knapp,
hereinafter referred to ns the "City Manager."
Section 1. Employment and Duties
The City agrees to employ David Knnpp ns the City Manager of the City of
Cupertino to perform the functions and duties specified in Sc-cOon 2.28.040 of the
City's ordinance code, and to peri'erin other legally permissible and proper duties and
functions as the City Council shall from time to time assign. The City Manager
agrees that to the best of his ability and experience he will at all times loyally and
conscientiously perform all o£ the duties and obligations required of him either
expressly or implicitly by the terms of this Agreement.
Se~'tion 2. Term -: Termination
The provisions of this A~reernent shall commence upon its execution, nnd
shall continue until terminated by mutual agreement or ns otherwise provided for
hereinaf~,
Ac
Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with
the right of the City Council ~o ~-rrninate the services of the City Manager
at any time by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the City Council ns provided in
Section 2.28.090 of the City's ordinance code.
B0
Nothing in this A~eement shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with
the right of the City Mmager to resign at any time from his position with
the City, provided that he shall give the City four weeks written notice in
ndvnnce, unless the parties agree otherwise,
The City Manager agrees to remain in the exclusive employ of the City
during the term of this Agreement. and not become employed by any other
employer until this Agreement is terminated. The term "employed" shall
not be construed to include occasional teaching, writing, consulting~ or
military reserve service performed on the City Manager's time off.
Section 3, Severance Pay
In thc event that the City terminates this Agreement ns provided in Se~ztion
2 ~bove, for cause, sm defined herein, then such tcrminmion may occur
immediately, and, in tha~ ~vent, the City will have no ~urther obligation,
/, 0 --2/
financial or otherwise, to the City Manager under_the terms ofihis
Bo
In the event thru the City terminates this Agreement as provided in Section
2 above for any reason other than for cause, then the City asrees to pay to
the City Manager a cash payment equal to six months aggregate salary to
be paid at the option of the City Manager in a) lump sum upon the date of
termination; b) lump sum on January 2 of the year following termination;
or c) six equal monthly payments.
C, As used in this section, the term "for cause" means 0nly the following:
1) Death of the City Manager.
2) The continued incapacity on the part of the City Manager to perform
his duties for a period of ninety (90) consecutive days or more.
3) The willful breach of duty by the City Manager in the course and
scope of his duties as City Manager, as specified in Section 2.25.040 of
the City's ordinance code.
4) At times other than mcdioal incapacitation, thc habitual neglect by the
City Manager of his duties, as specified in Section 2.28.040 of the City's
ordinance code.
5) The willfid or permanent material breach of any obligations contained
in this Agreement.
6) The conviction of the City Manager of any mime involving moral
turpitude.
Secti'°n4....Sa!arv and Benefi_tS
The City agrees to pay the City Manager for his services hereto an annual base
salary of $160,000.00, payable in installments at the same time as other employees of
the City are paid. Said base salary may be modified by the City Council on an annual
basis effective on cach one year anniversary of the City Manager's cmploymcnt.
In addition, the City shall also pay to, or on behalf of the City Manager all
benediis, which are available, or which will become available, to the City's other
senior management employees based upon his basc salary including, but not limited
to, PIgR8 retirement benefits, health and dental benefits, life insurance, disability,
deferred compensation program, and administrative leave pay out. The City Manager
will also receive a car allowance 0f$350 per month. The City Manager shall receive
15 days paid vacation per year, plus siok days, holidays, and administrative leave
under the same program as is available to other senior management employees.
addition, the City Manager will receive 1 $ days of paid xacation credit at the
commencement of employment with the City.
In
Se~ion 5, P~ffO.~qe Evaluation
.A.
The City Council shall review and evaluate the performance of the City
Manager at least annually. Said review and evaluation shall be in
nc, cordance with speoific ~ritefia developed jointly by the City and the City
Manager. Said criteria may be added to or deleted from az the City
Council from time to time determines, in consultation with the City
Manager.
At lenst annually, the City Council and the City Manager shall define such
goals and perforce objefftiv~s which they may determine necessary for
the proper operation of the City, nnd in the attainment of the City Council'~
policy obje,~tives and shall further establish a relative priority ninon8
~-ious I~oals mad objectives. They shall be attainable within the time
limitations ns specified and the annual operating and capital budgets and
appropriations provided.
Section 6. Residency - Housing Allow.~rice
ho
As required by Section 2.28.020 of thc City's ordinance code, within 180
days of his appointment, the City Manager must become a resident of the
City. Continued residence in the City is a condition of the City Manager's
employment.
The City Manager shall be reimbursed, or the City may pay directly, for
the reasonable and customary expense ofpacidng and moving himself, his
family, and his personal property from his current residence to the City of
Cupertino, whioh shall include unpacking any storage costs necessary and
insurance char~es.
In the event that the City is willing and able to purchase the former City
Manager's equity interest in the residence located at 10346 Scenic Blvd.,
Cupertino, California, the City Manager shall be allowed to purchase an
equity interest therein under thc terms and conditions set forth in the
attached "A~x,,ernent for Housing Assistanoe."
In the event that either the City Manager or the City is unwilling or unable
to execute the "Agreem~t for Housing Assistance," the City will provide
the City Manager, at minimum, with the same housing assistance provided
to the City's Depaiha,ent Heads or with other enhanced housing assistance
as the parties nmy agj-ee.
Section 7. Profession01 .Develooment
Ao
The City hereby agrees to budget for and to pay the travel and subsistence
expenses of th, City Manager for professional and oi~cial travel, meetings
and occasions adequate to continue the professional development of the
City Manager and to pursue necessary official functions for thc City,
including, but not limited to, the annual conference of' the International
City Management Association, the League of Cali£omia Cities, and such
other national, regional, state and local govemmental groups and
committees thereof which the City Manager serves as a member. In
addition, the City shall pay the membership dues for such groups.
The City also agr~s to budget and to pay for the travel and subsisten~
expenses of the City Manager for short courses, institutes, and seminars
which are necessary for his professional development and for the 8ood
tho city.
Section 8. Indemnification
The City shall defend, hold harmless and indemnify the City Manager against
any tort, professional liability claim or demand or other legal action, whether
groundless or otherwise, arising out of an alleged act or omission occumng in the
pm~ormance of the City Manager's duties as defined herein except for those arising
out of intentional wrongful acts.
Section 9. Bondin~
The City shall be~x the full cost of any fidelity or other bonds required of the
City Man.;er under any law or ordinanoe.
Section 10. ,Al~!icasbl~ ~ md Ordinances
All provisions of the City ordmanc~ code, and resulations and roles of the City
related to vacastion and sick I~ave~ retirement and pun,sion system contributions,
holidays, and other fringe benefits and working conditions as they now exist or
hereafter may be amended, also shall apply to the City Manager as they would to
other senior management employees of the City.
Se~ion 1 I. Entire A~ret~ne0~
This Agr~x~nent ca:institutes the entire Agr~-ment of the parties and supersedes
any and all agreements, either oral or written, between the parties with respect to the
subject matt~ o£this Agreement_ Any modification of this Agreement shall be
effective only if in writing and signed by both parties.
CITY OF~CUPERTINO
Mayor
GI~R
ATTEST
c~ Cl~rk
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Chades T. Kiliaa, Cit~ Attorney
AGREEMENT I~OR HOUSING ASSISTANCE
THIS AGREEMENT is executed this __ day of
,, ,2000, by and b~-twecn the CITY OF CUPERTINO, a
municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and DAVID KNAPP
who has been employed as City Manager by CITY, hereinaf~r r~erred to as
P~CITALS
WHtgREAS, CITY ha~ retained KNAPP as its City Manager, the chief
administrative position in CITY, after an extensive search for the most
qualified candidate; and
WHEREAS, CITY requires its City Manager to reside within the City
limits; and
WHEREAS, CITY and KNAPP have met and discussed compensation
and realiz~ that due to extremely high costs of housing within Cupertino,
CITY must assist KNAPP m obtaining suitable housing within Cupertino; and
WHEREAS, KNAPP contemplates the purchase of an equity interest in
the house and lot located at 10346 Scenic Blvd., Cupertino, California,
(h~remaffer referred to as "the residence", and the CITY'S former City
Manager DONALD BROW~, and
WHERI~AS, The CITY may elect to purchase DONALD BROWN'S
interest in the residence at a price based upon current market value (hereinai~er
referred ~o as "the markzt value"). In order to d~rmine the market value of
the residence, the CITY has ordered ~he preparation of a written appraisal
performed by a qualified appraiser.
NOW, TI~PO~, 1T IS AGRI~t~D as follows;
1. ~}~IL0~. The purposc of this Agreement is to sa forth those
understandings reached by CITY and KNAPP regarding housing assistant. It
is understood thru subsequent to the execution of the Agreement, KNAPP must
execute further documents and KAY L, KNAPP, his wife, will execute the
same documents with respect to tho purchase of equity interest in the
r~sidence.
2. T~ns of Em~lovment. This Agreement addresses only one
segment of KNAPP'S terms and conditions of employment. It is understood
that CITY and KNAPP may agree to such other terms as are consistent with
the municipal codc and California law.
NurSer, it is expressly agreed that nothing contained herein shall be
conswued to provide KNAPP. a cona'a~t of employment as City Manager.
CITY, through its City Council, continues to maintain its sole authority to
retain or dismiss its City Manager from employment. The exercise of such
authority by CITY shall not establish in KNAPP a cause of action for money
damages due to a loss of the housing assistance provided herein. Nothing
herein is intended to create any obligation to provide housing assistance for
any person or persons except KNAPP himself.
3. Ci~ Loan for Purchase ofEauitv l~to~t. KNAPP may obtain,
upon rt:quesg a loan from the CITY not to exceed $300,000 to be used for the
purchas~ of an equity share in the residence. Said loan is to be evidenced by a
promissory note in fawr of thc CITY secured by a first deed of trust
encumbering the residence. Said promissory note shall be for a term not to
exceed 40 years and shall bear a variable interest rate equal to thc percentage
interest paid by Local Agency lnve~;i,,ent Formation (LAIF) adjusted annually
based upon the mean average for the prior 1:2 months and shall be payable in
monthly installments of principal and interest. KNAPP may prepay at any
IKTdD~ARHA
time all, or aportion, of this loan without penalty. KNAPP shall au~onze
CITY to make an automatic payroll deduction to cover payments with respect
to the CITY'S loan. Such payroll deduction shall have priority over all other
deductions except those required by law. Tho CITY shall provide KNAPP a
year-end sta~ernent ahowing the amount allocated paid to principal and thc
amount paid as interest. Notwithstanding any provision to thc contrary, the
note shall become immediately due and payable upon sale or transfer of the
residence or upon cessation of it as KNAPP'S primary residence. Said loan is
only available to KNAPP as part of an equity interest purchase, whereby he
invests a mimmum of $50,000 of his own funds in the residence.
4. F~uitv Share Title. Title to the residence shall be held by CITY and
K]qAPP as tenants in common.
5. Altocati.0p of costs with r _es~ct to the ~csidence:
A) KNAPP shall be responsible for taking out and maintaining, at
his sole cost, file, casualty, ~ld liability insurance on the residence with
coverage and terms, and in an amount, which are satisfactory to CITY and
naming the CITY, and its officers, agents, and employees, a~ additional
insureds thereunder, and as beneficiaries in proportion to the CITY'S equity
interest. The (~ity and the Manager shall share earthquake insurance prcmium
in same proportion as their invesUnents.
B) KNAPP shall be responsible for making all necessary repairs to
the residence, provided, however, that with respect to any specit~ic repair
whose cost is greater than $3,500, the parties shall share the cost of said repair
in proportion to their respective equity interests at the time said repairs are
made. Prior to commencm$ any work of repair costing more than $3,500,
PC/DIRfK/ARHA
KNA~P shall confer with Mayor and City Attorney and obtain CITY'S
agreement ns ~ said repair.
C) The parties shall share ~ property taxes and assessm~ms on
the same basis as their re~peotive inte~sts in ~e property.
6. Sale of the Residence.
A) KNAPP, at his sole option, may sell the residence at any
based upon a price which is mutually agreed upon by the parties.
B) At the time of sale, the balance of loan made by CITY to
K~APP pursuant to paragraph 3 shall be fully paid.
C) Upon said sale,.the parties shall receive the amount of proceeds,
after said loan above described and all costs of sale are paid, as follows:
a) KNAPP shell receive a percentage of the balance based
upon the ratio that his original contribution (including cash and loan)
described in paragraph 3 of this Agreement bears to the total market value of
the residence. As used m this Agreement, the phrase "total market value ofthe
residence" means the value established by the City Council for purposes of
purchasing the former City Manager's equity interest in the residence.
b) CITY shall receive thc reraaining percentage of said
balance.
7. Adjustments of Eouitv Between ~_e Parti~,
A) At any time or times during the period KZqAPP resides at the
residence, he may purchase all, or a portion of CITY'S interest in the
residence. The price shall be established as provided herein.
B) Unless the parties otherwise agree as to the price, each party
shall appoint an appraiser, sod their decisions shall be averaged and shall be
final, unless they shall differ by 5% or more in value, in which case a third
appraiser shall be selected by the other two appraisers, unless CITY and
KNAPP jointly select such third appraiser. Said third appraiser shall appraise
the residence, and his appraisal shall be averaged with the closest other
appraisal. The amount so averaged shall be final. Costs of all appraisals shall
be split equally between the parties.
C) KNAPP shall pay CITY thai portion of CITY'S interest he
wishes to purchase based upon the formula for sale of residence contained in
section 3 of this Agreement aad CITY shall execute the necessary documents
evidencing such transfer.
8. Termination of Agreement.
A) KNAPP acknowledges and agrees thai this housing assistance
agreement is not assumable by any subsequent buyer or transferree of thc
residence in that i~ was specifically negotiated as ~ of the Civ/Manager's
employment agreement, thai the payroll deductions provisions act as security
to the benefit of the CITY, and that the general aspects of the City
Manager/City Council relationship indicate that the assistance is fashioned for
KNAPP alone.
B) It is further agreed that upon termination of KNAPP'S
employment, or upon his failure to utilize the residence as his primary
residence, or upon his death, the balance of CITY'S loan shall become due and
payable within 180 days.
C) In the event of KNAPP'S death, his executor or administrator
shall be granted the option of purchasing CITY'S interest in tho residence
within one hundred eighty (180) days of death. Upon occurrence of any other
event described in paragraph BB above, K.NAPP shall be t~ranted said option to
purchase but only for a period of 180 days from thc date of the occurrence.
During said option periods above de,scribed, KNAPP or his executor or
adminisuator, as the case may be shall continue to-make all payments with
respect to the residence that KNAPP would otherwise-be required to make
regardless of whether any option described herein is actually excrcised.
D) In the event that KI~APP or his executor or administrator docs
not exercise his option to purchase the residence hereunder, CITY shall have
the option to purchase KNAPP'S interest in the residence within one hundred
ghty (1 SO) days there, alter.
E) Any option described above shall be for the purchase of the
residence at a price established under paragraph 7B and with respect to the
allocation formula desoril~l in paragraph 6,
F) Neither KNAPP nor his executor or administrator shall sell,
lease, rent, or encumber the residence in any way without the written consent
of CITY in advance.
9. ]}.i~[i!!lL~l. This Asreement binds the parties, their successors,-
and personal representatives, and is not assignable by either party without the
express written consent of the other party,
10. _Invalidity. In the event this Agreement or any part thereof should
be held invalid, CITY sad KNAPP agree to discuss alternatives within the
CITY'S discretion; however, KNAPP has no vested right to alternative
cA~ll~on.
11. Spousal _A!lreement, This Agreem~ shall become effective only
upon the consent and ag~,~ement thereto by KAY L. KNAPP, and shall become
null and void if she shall refuse to execute any or all other documents deemed
necessary by CITY to initially consummate this transaction in its entirety.
KAY L. K,NAPP also agrees to execute ali documents necessary to carry out
this Agreements at all times during its term.
I2. Authority. The Mayor is h~l-eby authorized and directed to execute
all documents necessary to carry out this A~reement.
CITY OF CUPERTrNO
DAVID KNAPP
$ohn Smtton, Mayor
Attest:
I agr~ and consent to
each of the provisions
of this Agreement
City Clerk
KAY L KNAPP
~iPPROVED AS TO FORM:
CHARLES T. KILIAN
RESOLUTION NO. 00-178
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCEPTING QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION FOR
UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS FROM JOHAN A. DARMAWAN
AND SUSANA T. DARMAWAN; 22650 ALCALDE ROAD, APN 342-16-042
WHEREAS, Johan A. Darmawan and Susana T. Darmawan have executed a
"Quitclaim Deed and Authorization", which is in good and sufficient form, quitclaiming
all their rights in and authorizing the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of
California, to extract water fi:om the underground basin, underlying that certain real
property situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described as follows:
All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of
Santa Clara, State of California, as shown and delineated on the attached
Exhibits "A" and "B".
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Cupertino accept said
"Quitclaim Deed and Authorization" so tendered; and
IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record
said "Quitclaim Deed and Authorization" and this resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYE S:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
I/A-
QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION
FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS
APN 342-16-042
22650 Alcalde Road
Johan A. Darmawan and Susana T. Darmawan, hereinafter referred to as the
"GRANTOR', this .~2Oday of ~ 2000, hereby grant, bargain, assign, convey, remise,
release and forever quitclaim unto the CITY OF CUPERTINO, a municipal corporation,
hereinafter referred to as the "GRANTEE", its successors and assigns, all the right, title,
interest, estate, claim and demand, both at law and in equity, and as well in possession as in
expectancy of the GRANTOR as owner of that certain real property situate in the County of
Santa Clara, State of California, and specifically described as follows:
SEE ATTACHED EXH/BIT "A" & "B"
to pump, take or'otherwise extract water fxom the underground basin or any underground
strata in the Santa Clara Valley for beneficial use upon the lands overlying said underground
basin, and GRANTOR hereby irrevocably authorized GRANTEE, its successors and assigns,
on behalf of the GRANTOR and its successors in ownership or overlying lands in the said
lots to take from said underground basin within the said lots any and all water which the
owner or owners of said overlying lands may be entitled to take for beneficial use on said
lands and to supply such water to such owner or owners or others as a public utility;
provided, however, that nothing contained in this instrument shall be deemed to authorize
GRANTEE to enter upon any of the lots delineated upon the above described map or to
authorize GRANTEE to make any withdrawal of water which will result in damage to any
building or structure erected upon said lots.
This assignment, conveyance and authorization is made for the benefit of lots within the
above described plat and description and shall bind the owner of said lots within said plat and
description.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, GRANTOR has execmed this instrument the day and year first
above written.
(Acknowledgment and Notarial Seal Attached)
Johan A. Darmawan
Susana T. Darmawan
MARIE E B,q. ERAN) ~,
Comm. #, 1 o, 0, O ~,
NOTARY PUBLIC.CA~)FORNIA ~1
Santa Clara Coumv
EXHIBIT A
(Dedication of Underground Water Rights)
All of that certain property in the City of Cupertino described as follows:
All of Sections 95 and 96 as shown on that certain map entitled 'Map of the
Inspiration Heights Monta Vista", as recorded in Volume P of Maps, page 13,
Santa Clara County Records
SANTA LUCIA
NOO'OO'OO'E
ROAD
m LNOO'OO'OO"E
13.54'
I
I
79.4.2'
NOO'O3'13"W
EXHIBIT B
II
QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION
FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS
APN 342-17-007
10655 Santa Lucia Rd
Sanjay Swamy and Tulsi B. Swamy~ hereinafter referred to as the "GRANTOR', this
day of '/Y~ 2000, hereby grant, bargain, assign, convey, remise, release and forever
quitclaim unto the CITY OF CUPERTINO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to
as the "GRANTEE", its successors and assigns, all the right, title, interest, estate, claim and
demand, both at law and in equity, and as well in possession as in expectancy of the
GRANTOR as owner of that certain real property situate in the County of Santa Clara, State
of California, and specifically described as follows:
SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" & "B"
to pump, take or otherwise extract water from the underground basin or any underground
strata in the Santa Clara Valley for beneficial use upon the lands overlying said underground
basin, and GRANTOR hereby irrevocably authorized GRANTEE, its successors and assigns,
on behalf of the GRANTOR and' its successors in ownership or overlying lands in the said
lots to take from said underground basin within the said lots any and all water which the
owner or owners of said overlying lands may be entitled to take for beneficial use on said
lands and to supply such water to such owner or owners or others as a public utility;
provided, however, that nothing contained in this instrument 'shall be deemed to authorize
GRANTEE to enter upon any of the lots delineated upon the above described map or to
authorize GRANTEE to make any withdrawal of water which will result in damage to any
building or structure erected upon said lots.
RESOLUTION NO. 00-179
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCEPTING QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION FOR
UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS FROM SANJAY SWAMY AND TULSI B.
SWAMY; 10655 SANTA LUCIA ROAD, APN 342-17-007
WHEREAS, Sanjay Swamy and Tulsi B. Swamy have executed a "Quitclaim
Deed and Authorization", which is in good and sufficient form, quitclaiming all their
rights in and authorizing the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of
California, to extract water fi:om the underground basin, underlying that certain real
property situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described as follows:
All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of
Santa Clara, State of California, as shown and delineated on the attached
Exhibits "A" and "B".
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Cupertino accept said
"Quitclaim Deed and Authorization" so tendered; and
IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record
said "Quitclaim Deed and Authorization" and this resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
This assignment, conveyance and authorization is made for the benefit of lots within the
above described plat and description and shall bind the owner of said lots within said plat and
description.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, GRANTOR has executed this insmmaent the day and year first
above written.
(Acknowledgment and Notarial Seal Attached)
OWNERS:
Sanjay S~a/~
Tulsi B. Swamy
E HIBIT A
LEGAL DESCR, IPTiON
· ',.: ,.:..~. . .. t
The~laXi~ re£errea to~ herein.is situatea in the Sta~e of California,
'County::of Santa Clara~"~City of' Cupertino ~gscribea as follows~
SE~.TIONS 129 AND 143, mMap of Inspiration He~ghts, Monte Vista.,
f£1e~ for record.on April'11, 1917, in Book P of Maps at Page 13,
Santa Clara'.County'... .
oO
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California '[ ss.
County of SANTA CLARA
On 29.MAY 2000.
Date
personally appeared SANdAY
,beforeme, ZIGGIE DUDZIUK-NOTARY PUBLIC.--%
Name and Title of Officer (e.g., "Jane Doe, Notary Public")
SWAMY,TULSI B.SWAMY.
Name(s) of Signer(s)
ii,'~ personally known to me
roved to me on the basis of satisfactory
ence
to be the person(s) whose name(s),~are
subscribed to the within i,nst. J,[,j~ent /and
~,,_~,,~_.,~v._,~,__.._,~,/.~. acknowledged to me th, at.h~/s.,~he~executed
[~J~ZIGGIEDUDZIUK[~ OMM. 1265198 the same in Iff/s~r~/~,~-"~au.t~oriz.~
· ,u.-..~.~_J, ,~ capacity(les), and/ that I~y h"~~
~. ~.%,il,,,~! ~rr^c.~.~coum.¢ _-, signature(s) on the instrument the p~rs'on(s), or
'""~~ the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed ~h~nt.
Though the t -- ~
'nformatio~n beiow is'~not requiTed b~Love v~lua, e to persons relying on t~documen,
and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another documebt.
Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document: qUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION FOR
UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS.
Document Date: Number of Pages:
Signer(s) Other Than Named Above:
Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer
ner's Name:
Individual
Corporate Officer -- Title(s):
[] Partner--[] Limited [] General
[] Attorney in Fact
[] Trustee
[] Guardian or Conservator
[] Other:
Signer Is Representing:
Top of thumb here
1999 National Notary Association · 9350 De Soto Ave., RO. Box 2402 · Chatsworth, CA 91313-2402 · www. nationalnota~.org Prod. No. 5907Reorder: Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827
RESOLUTION NO. 00-180
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCEPTING GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR ROADWAY PURPOSES FROM
JOHAN A. DARMAWAN AND SUSANA T. DARMAWAN;
22650 ALCALDE ROAD, APN 342-16-042
WHEREAS, Johan A. Darmawan and Susana T. Darmawan have executed a
Grant of Easement for Roadway Purposes which is in good and sufficient form, granting
to the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, easement over
certain real property for roadway purposes, situate in the City of Cupertino, more
particularly described in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B", attached hereto and made a part
hereof, which is as follows:
All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of
Santa Clara, State of California, located at 22650 Alcalde Road.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Cupertino accept said
grant so tendered; and
IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record
said grant and this resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
GRANT OF EASEMENT
FOR ROADWAY PURPOSES
APN 342-16-042
22650 Alcalde Road
Johan A. Darmawan and Susana T. Darmawan, grant(s) to the CITY OF CUPERTINO for
public roadway purposes, together with the right to construct, repair, operate, and maintain any
and all public utilities and improvements which shall be or become necessary for preservation of
thc public safety, welfare or convenience, the hereinafter described property which is situated in
the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, and as described as follows:
(See Exhibit "A" & "B")
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, executed this q.~ d~ay of ~
!
,2000.
(Notary acknowledgment to be attached)
Johan A. Darmawan
Susana T. Darmawan
~~ MARIE E BRESANI
~/=~'~ Comm. # 1151370
W ~.~.~1 NOTARY PUBLIC-CALIFORNIA
r. ~My Comm. Expires Aug, 15 2001
EXHIBIT A
All of that certain property described as follows:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of Section 96 as shown on that certain map
entitled "Map of the Inspiration Heights Monta Vista", as recorded in Volume P of
Maps, page 13, Santa Clare County Records; thence proceeding North 13.54',
thence N44°02'38"E 76.86' to the True Point of Beginning, thence
N44°02'38"E 13.86', thence S89°47'36"E 134.26', thence S00°03'13"E 10.00',
thence N89°47'36"W 143.91' to the True Point of Beginning.
Containing 1391 square feet, more or less, and lying within the City Limits of
Cupertino, California.
EXHIBIT B
All of that certain property described as follows:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of Section 96 as shown on that certain map
entitled "Map of the Inspiration Heights Monta Vista", as recorded in Volume P of
Maps, page 13, Santa Clara County Records; thence proceeding North 13.54',
thence N44°02'38"E 14.38', thence South 23.94', thence N89°40'00"W 10.00' to
the Point of Beginning.
Containing 187 square feet, more or less, and lying within the City Limits of
Cupertino, California.
SANTA LUCIA ROAD
NO0"O0'O0'~__
~J
m L NOO'OO'OO"E
I
~>~
rtl _
0
::::[:1 '"ri J z
:::10
69.42'
N00'05'15'W
IO.ooJ
EXHIBIT B
-I
RESOLUTION NO. 00-181
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCEPTING GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR ROADWAY PURPOSES FROM
SANJAY SWAMY AND TULSI B. SWAMY; 10655 SANTA LUCIA ROAD,
APN 342-17-007
WHEREAS, Sanjay Swamy and Tulsi B. Swamy have executed a Grant of Easement for
Roadway Purposes which is in good and sufficient form, granting to the City of Cupertino,
County of Santa Clara, State of California, easement over certain real property for roadway
purposes, situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit
"B", attached hereto and made a part hereof, which is as follows:
All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa
Clara, State of California, located at 10655 Santa Lucia Road.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of CUpertino accept said grant so
tendered; and
IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said
grant and this resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
GRANT OF EASEMENT
FOR ROADWAY PURPOSES
APN 342-17-007
10655 Santa Lucia Road
Sanjay Swamy and Tulsi B. Swamy, grant(s) to the CITY OF CUPERTINO for public
roadway purposes, together with the right to construct, repair, operate, and maintain any and all
public utilities and improvements which shall be or become necessary for preservation of the
public safety, welfare or convenience, the hereinafter described property which is situated in the
City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, and as described as follows:
(See Exhibit "A" & "B")
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, executed this~.~_day of /~o~(~ , 2000.
(Notary acknowledgment to be attached)
Owners:
Tulsi B. Swamy
"Exhibit A"
A ten (10.00) feet street dedication to the City of Cupertino lying on Section 129 as
shown on "Map of Inspiration Heights, Monte Vista", filed for record on April 11, 1917,
in Book P of Maps at Page 13, Santa Clara County and is more particularly described as
follows:
The northeasterly ten (10.00) feet of the said Section 129, measured at right angle.
14'z
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California ~ ss.
County of SANTA £1 ARA
ZIGGIE DUDZIUK-NOTARY PUBLIC. ,
Name and Title of Officer (e.g., "Jane Doe, Notary Public")
On 2q.MAY 20013. ,beforeme,
Date
personally appeared
SAN,lAY SWAMY;TtJl SI B.SWAMY. ,
Name(s) of Signer(s)
e~idperSonally known to me
roved to me on the basis of satisfactory
ence
to be the person(s) whose name(s)~s~are
subscribed to the withi/Q._i~nstr~enf and
acknowledged to me that lYe,/sl3~'/tl~ev)executed
the same in h~l~r~' ~utho~
capacity(ies), and th'at ~ ~,/~h~
signature(s) on the instrument the
the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESSm h~l~eal.- ~
Place Notary Seal Above ~''''~- "~' ~ ~;ig n~~,~'~'~ '7
Though the information below is not required~ve vaUlu, r)leto persons relying on the docfbment
and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document.
Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document: GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR ROADWAY PURPOSES.
Document Date:
Number of Pages:
Signer(s) Other Than Named Above:
Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer
,¢~ner's Name: Individual
Corporate Officer -- Title(s):
[] Partner I [] Limited ~ General
[] Attorney in Fact
~, Trustee
[] Guardian or Conservator
[] Other:
Signer Is Representing:
Top of thumb here
999 National Notary Association · 9350 De Soto Ave., RO. Box 2402 · Chatsworth, CA 91313-2402 · www. nationainotaly, org Prod. No. 5907 Reorder: Call ToIFFree 1-800-876-6827
RESOLUTION NO. 00-182
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
SETTING DATE FOR CONSIDERATION OF REORGANIZATION OF AREA
DESIGNATED "GRENOLA DRIVE 00-02", PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE
NORTH SIDE OF GRENOLA DRIVE BETWEEN FLORA VISTA AVENUE AND
ANN ARBOR DRIVE; APPROXIMATELY 0.215 ACRE, LIOU AND CHEN
(APN 326-28-009)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino has received a request for
annexation of territory designated "Grenola Drive 00-02" from property owners, Ker-
Chung Liou and Lih-Yn Chen; and
WHEREAS, the property, 0.215+ acre on the north side of Grenola Drive
between Flora Vista Avenue and Ann Ar~or Drive (APN 326-28-009) is contiguous to
the City of Cupertino and is within its urban service area; and
WHEREAS, annexation would provide for use of City services; and
WHEREAS, this territory is uninhabited and was prezoned on June 5, 2000, to
City of Cupertino Pre RI-10 zone; and
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino, as Lead Agency for environmental review
completed an initial study and granted a Negative Declaration for annexation; and
WHEREAS, the County Surveyor of Santa Clara county has found the map and
description (Exhibits "A" and "B") to be in accordance with Govemment Code Section
56826, the boundaries to be definite and certain, and the proposal to be in compliance
with LAFCO's road annexation policies; and
WHEREAS, the fee set by the County of Santa Clara to cover staff cost for above
certification has been paid; and
WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section 56826 the City Council of
the City of Cupertino shall be conducting authority for a reorganization including an
annexation to the City; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 56837 provides that if a petition for
annexation is signed by all owners of land within the affected territory the City Council
may approve or disapprove the annexation without public hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Cupertino hereby initiates annexation proceedings and will consider annexation of the
territory designated "Grenola Drive 00-02" and detachment from the Santa Clara County
Lighting Service District at their regularmeeting of July 17, 2000.
/3#-/
Resolution No. 00-182 Page 2
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote: _
Vote
AYES:
NOES: ·
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Members of the City Council
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
Grenola Drive 00-02 1a res
F_'/.I 5 T'IN~ AHI,4EY, AT ioN:
"5'TELLING PA~Y-,.6'.G-6'
,N o° o5'55"vu
589 °~-7'44)"E
VI C Ihtl'T"l' 1','1 A P
HO'l' To S CALF_.
E'~ Ft I ID IT
PEOI:::)OSED ANNE'XATI0 ~
TO THE C..I'T"t"0F CUPERTI/~O
ENTITLED'.
GEENOLA. gE. OO-O?-
PETS. 2.6~ 2oo0 sc-ALE'.
EXHIBIT "A"
ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ENT I TLED:
GI F. NOLA DRIVE 00-02
Ail that certain real property situated in the County of Santa
Clara, State of California, being all of Lot 87 in Tract No. 682,
GARDEN GATE VILLAGE UNIT No. 2, a map of which was filed for
record on February 20, 1950 in Book 26 of Maps at page(s) 24 and
25, said lot being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the Northwesterly corner of said Lot on the
Southerly line of that certain annexation to the City of
Cupertino, California, entitled "STELLING PARK 65-6";
Thence along said Northerly line of said Lot also being the
southerly line of said annexation S89°57'40"E 65.71 feet to an
angle point on the Northerly line of said Lot;
Thence along the Easterly line of said annexation of said City
N00°03'55"W 0.70 feet to an angle point on the Northerly line of
said Lot;
Thence leaving said Easterly line of said annexation S89°54'E
9.29 feet to the most Northeasterly corner of said Lot;
Thence along the Easterly line thereof, South 125.53 feet to the
Southeasterly corner of said Lot on the Northerly line of Grenola
Drive, 60 feet in width;
Thence along said Northerly line of said Grenola Drive, West
75.00 feet to the Southwesterly corner of said Lot;
Thence along the Westerly line thereof, North 124.89 feet to the
point of beignning.
Containing 0.215 of an acre, more or less.
Date: February 25, 2000
APN: 326-28-009
Site Address: 21,095 Grenola Drive, Cupertino, CA
Revised: March 23, 2000
RESOLUTION NO. 00-195
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
SETTING DATE FOR CONSIDERATION OF REORGANIZATION OF AREA
DESIGNATED "ALCAZAR AVENUE 00-08", PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF ALCAZAR AVENUE BETWEEN ORANGE AVENUE AND
IMPERIAL AVENUE; APPROXIMATELY 0.183 ACRE, BRUFFEY AND EASTMAN
(APN 357-19-012)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino has received a request for
annexation of territory designated "Alcazar Avenue 00-08" fi.om property owners, Bill
Bmffey and Patricia Easlxnan; and
WHEREAS, the property, 0.183+ acre on the south side of Alcazar Avenue
between Orange Avenue and Imperial Avenue (APN 357-19-012) is contiguous to the
City of Cupertino and is within its urban service area; and
WHEREAS, annexation would provide for use of City services; and
WHEREAS, this territory is uninhabited and was prezoned on May 16, 1983, to
City of Cupertino Pre R1-75 zone; and
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino, as Lead Agency for enviromental review
completed an initial study and granted a Negative Declaration for annexation; and
WHEREAS, the County Surveyor of Santa Clara county has found the map and
description (Extfibits "A" and "B") to be in accordance with Government Code Section
56826, the boundaries to be definite and certain, and the proposal to be in compliance
with LAFCO's road annexation policies; and
WHEREAS, the fee set by the County of Santa Clara to cover staff cost for above
certification has been paid; and
WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section 56826 the City Council of
the City of Cupertino shall be conducting authority for a reorganization including an
annexation to the City; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 56837 provides that if a petition for
annexation is signed by all owners of land within the affected territory the City Council
may approve or disapprove the annexation without public hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Cupertino hereby initiates annexation proceedings and will consider 'annexation-of the
Resolution 00-195 Page 2
territory designated "Alcazar Avenue 00-08" and detachment fi:om the Santa Clara
County Lighting Service District at their regular meeting of July 17, 2000.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Members of the City Council
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
EXHIBIT "A"
PROPOSED ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
ENTITLED:
ALCAZAR A E. 00-08
Ail that certain real property situated in the County of Santa
Clara, State of California, bein§ all of Lot 20 of Tract No. 300,
MAP OF NOONAN SUBDIVISION - UNIT No. 2, which map was filed for
record on May 6, 1946 in Book 10 of Maps at Page 16, in the
Office of the Recorder of said County, more particularly
described as follows:
Beginning at the Northwesterly corner of said Lot on the
Southerly line of Alcazar Avenue, 50 feet wide, said point bein§
distant S89°58'E 200.24 feet from the Southwesterly corner of the
"Alcazar 86-01" annexation to the City of Cupertino, California.
Thence along the Northerly line of said Lot, also being the
Southerly line of said Alcazar Avenue and the Southerly line of
said annexation, continue S89°58'E 60.00 feet to the North-
easterly corner of said Lot, also being the Northwesterly corner
of the "Alcazar Ave. 97-10" annexation to said City.
Thence along the Easterly line of said Lot, also being the
Westerly line of said "Alcazar Ave. 97-10" annexation, South
132.59 feet to the Southeasterly corner of said Lot, also being
the Southwesterly corner of said "Alcazar Ave. 97-10" annexation.
Thence along the Northerly line of the "Noonan 73-8"
annexation and along the Southerly line of said Lot, N89°58'W
60.00 feet to the Southwesterly corner of said Lot.
Thence leaving said Northerly line of said Noonan annexation
and along the Westerly line of said Lot, North 132.59 feet to the
point of beginning.
Containing 0.183 of an acre, more or less.
APN: 357-19-012
Date: May 10, 2000
Prepared by: E.J. Hahamian, Civil Engineer
· " 8ound~r_y line o~eXist'inj~ ~nneXa~ion
60.00 L',-~'T' i9
7.~- o,~ "
A L~cA'
oolor~ d
zAt2.~.
[XHI&IT' "8"
PP, O PO5 EP ANNEXATION 'To'ritE
CITY OF CUPIE~INO ElqiTLED:
'ALCAZAR A VE. ,~O0-08"
API~, 357-19- 0
l~l c ,'" { ~ licit7
VIC I NIT"I' MAP
NOT '1'0 5 CA L E
SC. ALE-. I" =,50
MAY Io, 2000
CITY OF
CUPERTINO
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3262
FAX: (408) 777-3366
Agenda Item
SUMMARY
Date: June 19, 2000
Subject: Approval of recommendation from Telecommunications Commission for awarding a
public access grant.
Background: At its meeting June 7, the Telecommunications Commission reviewed an
application for a public access grant totaling $594. The commission has a $2,000 grants budget,
and funding for the proposal would come from that source.
The commission discussed the project with Linda Grodt, who produces a multi-award
winning program called Silicon Kids The grant proposal is to cover costs for a series of three
programs, each involving youngsters as hosts and interviewers, under the theme: Youth and
Democracy--Future Leaders at Work. The programs will feature 1.) The NASC conference this
month 2.) The California Democratic Convention and 3.) KidsVention 2000.
Commissioners cited Grodt's long-running string of successful programming, and said
they believed her project would be a positive one for the community. One commissioner, David
Eggleston, abstained because his step-daughter is a member of the Silicon Kids crew.
Recommendation: The City Council approve the recommendation from the
Telecommunications Commission to award a $594 grant to access producer Linda Grodt to
produce three youth and democracy programs for the public access channel.
Submitted By:
Donna Krey
Public Information Officer
City Manager
Printed on Recvcled Paoer
City of Cupertino
Telecommunications Commission
GRANT APPLICATION FORM
Preamble: Individuals or organiTations wishing to produce a public access program and
apply for a grant that meets the goals outlined in the Grant Guidelines and Grant
Application Procedure must complete the application below and submit it to the Public
Information Officer, City of Cupertino, 10300 Tone Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014.
C, rant amounts will normally be limited to a maximum of $250 per project per individual
or organization per fiscal year (Julyl through June 30). This amount will be at the
discretion of the Telecommunications Commission.
Deadline for Application: the 15m of each month.
~Name: Linda Grodt Phone: (W)
Address: 501 W.. Hacienda Ave. Apt. D 16 Phone: 866-2050 ~
Campbell CA ~5008
Organization: Amount requested: $ 5%.00-
''Silicon Kids"
Describe your project; include a timeline and budget. Explain the intended use of the
grant funds. Use the Grant Guidelines and Grant Application Procedure in filling out
this application.
"Silicon Kids" is a multi-award winning children-teen television program with five
youngsters who are the hosts and interviewers. The program is to inform youngsters
and the community that there are fun, interesting, and educational places to visit in
the Cupertino area in an entertaining way. The program introduces many interesting
people in the area and local youngsters who are exemplary in the community, to the
audience. The program also takes the audience to places they wouldn't be able to ~
visit themselves. Youngsters are involved in the pre-production planning and the actual
tapings. The program fills a need for quality children's programming in Cupertino.
My grant request is for $59~-00 to cover my expenses for producing three "Silicon Kids"'
programs.. The theme for these shows is "Youth and Democracy: Future Leaders at Work".
The first request is for $220.00 to produce a program on the National Association of
Student Councils Conference which is going to be held at Monta Vista High School
June 2A-28. Student leaders from all over the United States and a few foreign countries
will attend. I plan on taping the various workshops and events and to have interviewa
with the attending students. Also I will try to get an interview with astronaut
Sally Ride who will be a guest speaker. This program will show teens learning to be
leaders for their school councils and at work doing community service. It will give
teens a good image. I have already taped a committee meeting for the conference on
May 11. I hope to have this program completed either late 2000 or early 2001.
The second part ofm~equest is for $202.X)0 to complete a show about the California
Democratic Convention that was held in San Jose on February 12, 2000. i taped the
various speeches and events. The hosts interviewed two California Democratic leaders
and Senator Diane Feinstein. The show will give Cupertino residents a local connection
and close-up look at national leaders and politics. Hopefully, the show will encourage
youngsters to get involved in politics and let their voices be heard on issues.
I hope to complete this show before Fall 2000.
OitANT ~l~lCAriO~, ~ ~ & ~ AI~C. ATION PitOC~tli~ Pa~e I of 5 ~
7/4/99
Page 2 Grant Application Form
The third Krant recuest is for $172.O0 to complete a program on KidsVention 2000
which was held on March l, 2000, at the San Jose Event Center. I taoed the Press
Conference and events. The hosts interviewed three adults, including California
Secretary of State Bill Jones, and a teen delegate.
Also I taned one of the hosts voting (Kids Voting) on election day March 7.
I hone this show will. encourage youngsters to get involved in political issues and
to be informed future voters.
I hope to have this orogram comnleted by Fall 2000.
NASC Conference
California Democratic Convention
KidsVention 2000
$220.00
$202.0O
$172.00
Total $59g.OO
Linda Grodt - Producer-Director-Cameraperson-Editor of "Silicon Kids"
50]. W. Hacienda Ave., Apt. D 16
Camnbell, CA 95008
(LOg) 866-2050
May lg, 2000
"Silicon Kids" Grant Proposal Budget
Taping the National Association of Student Councils Conference at Monta Vista
High School June 2g-28, 2000
Tanes
Source Taoe's
Hi-8
Sony 30 minute (P-3OHMPX)
Sony 60 minute (P-6OHI~°X)
(4) at $8..00 each
(2) at $11..00 each
32.00
22.00
Sony KSP--30 minute 3/A" Tapes
Sub-~ster Tape for Editing
Master Tape--Program FJited
First Off Mas%er Tap=
$18. O0
$1g. OO
&lS. OO
18.00
18.00
18..00
Dubs of finished program~, for
participants involved in
taping 1/2" VHS
(3) at $5.00 each
15~O0
Still Photography taken during
tapings--Film-Developing-Reprints
15.00
Miscellaneous (unforeseen costs)
10.OO
Parking Sticker at De Anza College for a
Quarter Session for editing program
27..00'
Travel Costs to Tapings & F~iting
25.00
Publicity---Press Releases--Flyers--Duplication
Paper--Fnvelopes--Stamps
Total
$220.00
"Silicon Kids" Grant Proposal Budget
Already taped but not edited The California Democratic Convention at the San Jose
Convention Center February 12, 2000
Tapes
Source Taoe~
Hi-8
Sony 30 minute (P-3OH~<PX)
Sony 60 minute (P-6OHMPX)
(1) at ~8..OO each
(1) at ~11.OO each
8..00
11.00
Sony KSP-30 minute 3/A" Tapes
Sub-Master Tape for Editing
Master Tape--Progr~gn Edited
First Off Master Tape
$1S.oo
~18.00
s.oo
18. O0
18 ..00
18.00
Dubs of finished program for
participants involved in
taping 1/2"
(5) at $5.00 each
25.OO
Still Photography taken during
taping--Film-Developing-Reprints
15.oo
Phone Calls and Fax ~o Sacramento to:set up the taping
7 ..00
Items bought at the Convention to be used
in the program---Small FI.ag--2 Pins-Small Donkey
10. O0
Parkingat the San Jose Convention Center
5.00
Misce].laneous (unforeseen costs)
Parking Sticker at De Anza College for a
Quarter Session for editing program
27.00
Travel Costs to Taping & Editing
~5-oo
Publicity--Press Releases--Flyers--Duplication
Paper-Envelopes--Stamps
Total
l ..oo
1~2o2..oo
"Silicon Kids" Grant ~¥oposal Budget
Already taped but not edited KidsVention 2000 at the ~an Jose Event Center
And a "Silicon Kids" Host voting on Election Day March 7, 2000
,'.~%r ch 1,
Taoes
Source Taoes
Sony 30 minute
Sony 60 ~inute
Hi-8
(P-3oM~x)
(P-6OHMPX)
(1) at $8.00
(1) at ~ll..O0
8.00
11.00
Sony KSP-3_0_~.$nute 3Z4" Tapes_
~ub-M~ster Tape for F~iting
Master Tape--Progran FJited
First Off Master Tape
~1~.00
.:~lg. O0
~1~.00
18.00
18.00
18.00
Dubs of finished program for
participants involved in
taping 1/2" VHS
Still }%otography taken
during taping--Film-Developing-Reprints
(3) at $5..00
15.00
Parking at the San Jose State Event Center
5.O0
Miscellaneous (unforeseen cost~)
10.00
ParkinK Sticker at De Anza College for a
Ouarter Session for editing program
27.00
Travel Costs to Tapings & Fditing
.V..: 5 .OO
Publicity--Press Releases--Flyers--Duplication
Paoer--Envelopes--Stamps
Total
15:.00
$I72;00
S£~r~MS£R 1, 1999
Photograph by Skye Dunlap
Cupertino's Amber Duran, 15, tapes an interview with Kris Covarrubias of the Tech Museum of
Innovation in San Jose for an upcoming segment of the award-winning 'Silicon Kids' TV show.
Youth TV show continues excellence
By JULIE WANG
During its 13-year run on
public-access television, Silicon
Kids has earned 14 first-place
Bay Area Cable Excellence
(BACE) awards and almost.30
award nominations for its spirit-
ed, entertaining and education-
al focus targeted towards youth.
This year was no exception
for the locally produced youth
television program.
The programtwritten,
directed, produced and edited
by Campbell resident Linda
Grodttwon first place in the
Best Community Event cate-
gory, a general outstanding
series award, at this year's
BACE awards held in the East
Bay city of Newark.
"I like the challenges of it,
and I like being creative about
it," Grodt says`
The show, which resembles a
TV news magazine, is broad-
cast out of De Anza College
Television Center and features
five or six local teenagers,
including two Cupertino resi-
dents, as hosts,
"It's almost like a news mag-
azine for kids, though it's more
of a documentary format," says
Bob Haber, De Anza's public
access director. "It's a young
people's version of 20/20, but
with community news."
Silicon Kids began after
Grodt, a former kindergarten
teacher, was inspired by her
teaching experience to pro-
duce a children's television
show that would be fun as well
as educational.
"I visited an elementary
school and talked to classes at
various grade levels," Grodt
saya "1 explained to the chil-
dren that I wanted to produce
a program and wanted their
ideas and suggestions."
Grodt began searching for
six youngsters with varying
personalities to volunteer as
hosts of the show. "They had tO
have a lot of patience in order
~' ~1 page 8
SEPT£MB.ER. 1. !999T.HE ..CUPER.T!NO COURIER
'Silicon Kids' host Vanessa Grund interviews childhood and adolescent
psychiatrist Andrew Giammona about services that EMQ provides.
TV: Show hosted by local teens
Continued from page 5 doing services for the commumty, and
to endure the hours of taping," she
sayx "Most of the kids chosen, I knew,
or [they] were recommended to me."
The hostn either live in Cupertino or
attend a school in the Cupertino
Union School or Fremont Union High
School districts
Now Orodt is in the process of find-
lng her fourth set of Silicon Kids to
replace those who moved away or left
the show for college.
A recent addition to the show is
Amber Duran, a sophomore at Monta
V'mta High School. Duran, added to
the cast in August, is well on her way to
being a veteran of the show with her
interview of Richard Riley, the U.S.
secretary of education and taped seg-
ments at The Tech Museum of
Innovation in San Jose last week.
Cupertino's T.J. Guy, who will attend
Cai Poly--San Luis Obispo in the fall,
hosted the show for five yeatx "It was
a lot of fun," he says. "I got to meet
new people, go to a lot of places and
got some experience in TV I wouldn't
have normally. I strongly recommend
it to any young kid who wants to get
out there and be on TV."
Guy, a graduate of Cupertino High
School, was recommended to be a host
by his junior high school drama
teacher. One of Guy's favorite seg-
ments was when he attended the
Indian powwow at De Anna College.
Saratoga resident Jennder Chang was
with the show for more than four yeara
"My years with S///con K/ds were very
rewarding and memorable," Chang says.
"I definitely learned a lot that has stayed
with me into my fi~t couple years of col-
leg,' I look at things di~erentb] and 1
have a grea~em' re~)~ct {or the media.
Having experienced it, I know how diffi-
cult it ia It's a lot o! behind-the-scenes
grunt work and learning how to articu-
late and present yourseff professionally
in front of the camera."
Silicon Kids tapes about four show~ a
year, and features places, youngsters
locals with unique talents Niles Canyon
Railroad, Tam Communications in San
Jo~e and the "American Smithsonian"
traveling exhibit have all been [eatured
by the program. Celebritie,v--induding
Bob Hope, lanet Evans, and Ronnie
Lott---have also appeared.
"I hoped to give the community
quality television for youngsters, just
to son of introduce the audience to
what's out there to take advantage of,
and to see the interesting people that
are in the community," Grodt saya
With its numerous awards and high
public regard, the show seems to have
accomplished Grodt's goal.
"It's a good service to the communi-
ty, and it leaves the community with a
positive impression of young people,"
Haber says.
In addition, it has also educated
those students directly involved in
working with the show.
"It's been great learning to deal with
people and learning the value of a chil-
dren's program," says Vanessa Orund,
a Lynbrook High School senior.
Orund has been with the show for
three years. "It's given me an under-
standing of meeting deadlines and
working for a greater goal."
Orodt looks forward to the day when
Silicon Kids can expand to main broad-
casting channels, but pauses when she
evaluates the barrier imposed by limit-
ed sponsorship. Aside from a $250
grant Cupertino gave her to produce
one show, Orodt says, she funds each
episode out of her own pocket.
"I would really like to see the show
on non-cable channels start in the
South Bay, and then all over the Bay
Area," Grodt sayx "It can be a Bay
Area Backroads or an Evening
Magazine. It's a labor of love."
Silicon Kids can be viewed on
Cupertino Community Television's
Channel 15 on Sundays at 5:30 p. nt;
Tuesdays at 4 p. rrc; and Wednesdays at
5 p. nt
CITY OF
CUPE INO
City Hall
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
FAX (408) 777-3333
Summary
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
AGENDA ITEM
AGENDA DATE June 19, 2000
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Authorization to Execute Agreements: Agency Agreement for Countywide Household Hazardous
Waste Collection Program and Agency Agreement for Countywide AB939 Implementation Fee
Increase and Reauthorization
BACKGROUND
Countywide Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program
The City Council, in October 1991, approved the original agreement for the Countywide Household
Hazardous Waste collection Program. In 1997, an entirely new agreement was approved and two
amendments to that agreement approved since that time. The City has continuously provided
household hazardous waste collection services to its residents through the countywide program.
There are several new features to the agreement as described below:
· Length of agreement 3 years in lieu of current 1-year term.
· Provides HWW collection services to a minimum of 3% of households per jurisdiction with the
option of augmenting costs for increased resident participation.
· Includes abandoned waste disposal costs that will fund disposal of HHW illegally abandoned at
nonprofit charitable reuse organizations.
Currently Cupertino is providing funding to serve approximately 5% of households. The new
agreement allows the city to augment the basic 3% funding level. The proposal does not fund an
optimum level of HHW services for all cities, but provides the highest level that participating cities
could agree upon. The fee increase is revenue neutral. In the past, HHW services were funded through
the garbage rates and then paid to the County directly for services. In the new proposal, a portion of the
garbage rates will be used to pay for the higher tipping fee, which will then go to the County for
administration of the HHW program. The advantage to this funding mechanism is that all participating
cities have committed to servicing 3% of households in their jurisdictions and have a stable-funding
source. In the past, if one jurisdiction cut their funding for the year, costs for the other jurisdictions
soared. All jurisdictions will be paying their fair share for the fixed costs.
Pdnted on Recycled Paper
Countywide AB939 Implementation Fee
The Countywide AB939 Implementation Fee became effective July 1, 1992 to fund local costs of
preparing, adopting and implementing integrated waste management plans and programs. It's included
in the tipping fee along with other taxes and disposal costs imposed on each ton of waste disposed of at
landfills. The new agreement will include waste taken to landfills or non-disposal facilities. The fee is
collected on behalf of the cities by the county and distributed to them for the purpose of funding
jurisdiction-specific programs required for meeting AB 939 waste stream diversion goals. The
agreement proposes an increase in the AB 939 fee of $1.50 per ton, for a total fee of $2.80 per ton, to
generate revenue to fund household hazardous waste services.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 00- /t~'~ authorizing execution of the
Agency Agreement for Countywide Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program and adopt
Resolution No. 00-, 19¢ authorizing execution of the Agency Agreement for Countywide AB939
Implementation Fee Increase and Reauthorization.
-~t.ert J. Vi;l{~ i~r~h -'_ ~
irector of~ublic Works
City Manager
RESOLUTION NO. 00-183
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGENCY AGREEMENT FOR
COUNTYWIDE HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION PROGRAM
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council the "Agency Agreement
For Countywide Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program", between the County
of Santa Clara and the City of Cupertino; and
WHEREAS, the Agency Agreement will provide for continued city participation
in the household hazardous waste collection program for fiscal years 2000-01 through
2002-03; and
WHEREAS, the provisions of the Agency Agreement have been reviewed and
approved by the Director of Public Works and the City Attorney;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Cupertino hereby approves the "Agency Agreement For Countywide Household
Hazardous Waste Collection Program" and authorizes the Mayor and the City Clerk to
execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Cupertino.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
RESOLUTION NO. 00-196
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGENCY AGREEMENT FOR A
COUNTYWIDE AB939 IMPLEMENTATION FEE BETWEEN THE COUNTY
OF SANTA CLARA AND THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council an "Agency Agreement
for Countywide AB939 Implementation Fee", between the County of Santa Clara and the
City of Cupertino which provides for the County to administer the program to collect fees
for the cost of preparing, adopting and implementing an integrated waste management
plan, all as more particularly specified in said agreement; and
WHEREAS, the fee will be imposed on each ton of waste taken to landfills or
non-disposal facilities; and
WHEREAS, the provisions of the Agency Agreement have been reviewed and
approved by the Director of Public Works and the City Attorney;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Cupertino hereby approves the "Agency Agreement for Countywide AB939
Implementation Fee" and authorizes the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute said
agreement on behalf of the City of Cupertino.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19t~ day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
CITY OF
CUPEP TINO
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
FAX (408) 777-3333
AGENDA ITEM
Summary
AGENDA DATE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
June 19, 2000
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Authorization for execution of Antenna Site Lease Agreement between the City of Cupertino and Nextel of
California, Inc., a Delaware Corporation dba Nextel Communications
BACKGROUND
Nextcl of California, Inc. desires to utilize the City's Service Center to erect an antenna for wireless
antenna. Thc City benefits by leasing property and receiving a revenue stream.
Terms of the Agreement
The following are the high points of the agreement:
· The term is for five years and two renewable options of five years each, bringing the total to 15
years.
· The size of the area leased by the City is approximately 600 square feet at the rear of the
Service Center adjacent to the freeway.
· The facility will consist of an antenna pole, to be approved by the Planning Commission, and a
small building to house equipment.
· The lease is $1,800 per month with a cost of living increase of 5% per year.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 00- [~//, authorizing the Mayor to execute
the Antenna Site Lease Agreement with Nextel Communications.
l~irector of p~
rich
~ublic Works
Approve~ fo~/s~nission:
Don~ D)Bf~wn
City Manager
Printed on Recycled Pal~er
RESOLUTION NO. 00-184
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF ANTENNA SITE LEASE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AND NEXTEL OF
CALIFORNIA, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, dba NEXTEL
COMMUNICATIONS
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council an Antenna Site Lease Agreement
for the lease of facilities located at the Cupertino Service Center, 10555 South Mary Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the provisions, terms, and conditions of the aforementioned agreement have
been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and the Director of Public Works.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino
hereby authorizes the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of
Cupertino.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino
this 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
/(o-'2-'
CITY OF
cupertino
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408) 777-3213
FAX: (408) 777-3109
HUMAN KL~UUK~CI~ DIVI~filI,)N
SUMMARY
Agenda Item bio.
Meeting Date: June 19, 2000
SUBJECT:
Unrepresented Employees Compensation Program.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council approved terms and conditions of employment for City of Cupertino
employees in July 1999 for the period July 1999 through June 2002. Terms and
conditions of employment for represented employees is set forth in memoranda of
understanding. Terms and conditions for unrepresented employees is described in the
attached document that is updated annually.
The unrepresented compensation program has been amended with a 3.6% salary adjust-
ment consistent with that received by represented employees. The monthly group
insurance contribution has been increased $50.00 monthly consistent with the increase for
represented employees. Finally, Policy No. 4 has been amended to provide the Secretary
to the City Manager and City Council a monthly car allowance of $200.00.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolution.
Sub, e( )y:
Williarff Woska
Human Resources Manager
Approv~fc Submission:...
--- ~>
Do~'Xl~ rown
City Manager
/7-""/
RESOLUTION NO. 00-185
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING THE UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION
PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to modify the Unrepresented Employees'
Compensation Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Unrepresented Employees'
Compensation Program be amended as shown in Attachment "A" which is incorporated
in this resolution by this reference.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino on the 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
Attachment A
City of Cupertino
Unrepresented Employees'
Compensation Program
July 2000
RESOLUTION NO. 00-185
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING THE UNREPRESENTED COMPENSATION PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to modify the Unrepresented Compensation
Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT THE unrepresented
Compensation Program be amended as shown in Attachment "A" which is incorporated
in this resolution by this reference.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino on the 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
INDEX
Category
PROGRAM PURPOSE AND DEFINITIONS FOR
ELIGIBILITY
SALARY SCHEDULE
TRAINING AND CONFERENCES
I POLICY
II DEFINITIONS
III REIMBURSEMENT SCHEDULE
IV ATTENDANCE AUTHORIZATION
V FUNDING
AUTOMOBILE ALLOWANCES AND MILEAGE
REIMBURSEMENTS
ASSOCIATION MEMBERSHIP AND
PROFESSIONAL PUBLICATIONS
OVERTIME WORKED
HEALTH BENEFITS PLAN - EMPLOYER
CONTRIBUTION
FLEXIBLE HOLIDAYS
LIFE AND LONG TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE
DEFERRED COMPENSATION
Policy No.
1
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
Page
1
3
4
4
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Category Policy No. Page
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM
CONTRIBUTIONS
DENTAL INSURANCE - EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION
ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE
EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
PUBLIC SERVICE CREDIT - VACATION ACCUMULATION
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
VISION INSURANCE - EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION
ATTACHMENT 'T' - LISTING OF CLASSIFICATIONS - SALARY
SCHEDULE
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 1
PROGRAM PURPOSE AND
DEFINITIONS FOR ELIGIBILITY
It is City of Cupertino policy that those certain persons holding positions hereinafter
defined and designated either as management or confidential positions shall be eligible for
participation under the Unrepresented Employees Compensation Program as hereby adopted by
action of the City Council and as same may be amended or as otherwise modified from time to
time.
It is the stated purpose of this Compensation Program to give recognition to and to
differentiate those eligible employees from represented employees who achieve economic gain
and other conditions of employment through negotiation. It is the intent that through this policy
and those which are adopted or as may be modified or rescinded from time to time such
recognition may be given.
Eligibility for inclusion with this Compensation program is limited to persons holding
positions as management or confidential employees as defined under section 2.52.290 of the
Cupertino Municipal Code. These are as designated by the Appointing Authority and may be
modified as circumstances warrant.
Although subject to change in accordance with provision of the Personnel Code, the
positions in the following classifications have been designated as unrepresented.
MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL CLASSIFICATIONS:
Classification Title
Accountant
Accounting Technician
Administrative Secretary
Assistant City Attorney
Building Official
City Clerk
City Manager
City Planner
Deputy City Attomey
Deputy City Clerk
Director of Administrative Services
Director of Community Development
Director of Parks and Recreation
Director of Public Works
Environmental Programs Manager
GIS Coordinator
Human Resources Manager
Human Resources Technician
Network Specialist
Public Information Officer
MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL CLASSIFICATIONS (Continued)
Public Works Projects Manager
Public Works Supervisor
Public Works Superintendent
Recreation Supervisor
Secretary to the City Attorney
Secretary to the City Manager
Traffic Engineer
Adopted by Action of the
City Council, April 1, 1974
Revised 10/74, 3/78, 6/81, 6/82, 7/85, 7/87, 1/89, 7/90, 4/91, 5/91,
7/92, 6/95, 6/96, 7/99
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 2
SALARY SCHEDULE
AND OTHER SALARY RATES
It is City of Cupertino policy that eligible persons under this Compensation Program shall
be compensated for services rendered to and on behalf of the City on the basis of equitably of
pay for duties and responsibilities assigned, meritorious service and comparability with similar
work in other public and private employment in the same labor market; all of which is contingent
upon the City's ability to pay consistent with its fiscal policies.
As rates of pay are developed through meet and confer processes subject to the
underlying provisions of the Pay Plan for administration purposes, so are those rates of pay
included herein as a part of this Compensation program. The inclusion herein of said rates and
schedules does not affect any effective dates or otherwise reflect on the approval processes
required but is shown as an integral part of this Program for completeness of record.
Adopted by Action
of the City Council
April 1, 1974
Revised 8/78, 7/79, 6/80, 7/92, 6/95
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES'COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 3
TRAINING AND CONFERENCES
I. POLICY
A. Management Personnel
It is City of Cupertino policy that eligible persons, other than the City Manager, under this
Compensation Program shall be reimbursed in accordance with the schedules, terms and
conditions as set forth herein for attendance at conferences, meetings and training sessions as
defined below for each. It is the intent of this policy to encourage the continuing education
and awareness of said persons in the technical improvements and innovations in their fields
of endeavor as they apply to the City. One means of implementing this encouragement is
through a formal reimbursement schedule for authorized attendance at such conferences,
meetings and training sessions.
B. Non-Management Personnel
When authorized by a Department Head, a non-management person may attend a conference,
meeting or training session subject to the stated terms and conditions included herein for each
with payment toward or reimbursement of certain expenses incurred being limited to
authorized actual costs thereof.
II DEFINITIONS
A. Budgetary Limitations
Funding capability for payment toward or reimbursement of expenses incurred for attendance
at conferences, meetings and training sessions shall be limited to the amount appropriated as
a line item for each applicable amount.
B. Conferences
A conference is an annual meeting of a work related organization the membership of which
may be held in the name of the City of the individual.
4
C. Local Area
A local area is that within an approximate 100 mile radius or two hours drive of the City.
D. Meetings
A "meeting" shall mean a convention, conference, seminar, workshop, meal or like assembly
having to do with municipal government operations. An employee serving on a panel for
interviews of job applicants shall not come under this definition.
E. Training Session
A training session is any type of seminar or workshop the attendance at which is for the
purpose of obtaining information of a work related nature to benefit the City's operations or
to enhance the attendee's capabilities in the discharge of assigned duties and responsibilities.
III REIMBURSEMENT SCHEDULE
A. Registration
Registration fees for authorized attendance at a meeting or training session will be paid by
the City.
B. Transportation
When an expenditure is authorized or is eligible for reimbursement the City will pay
transportation costs from the attendee's home to the destination and return on the basis of the
costs for the nearest route by air at the air coach fare. Transportation costs also may include
limousine or taxi service to and from the attendee's home and the airport or for airport or
destination parking charges for personal automobiles so parked when such is used in lieu of
travel by air. Use of a personal automobile for City business shall be reimbursed at a rate per
mile then in effect for such use except in no case shall it exceed air coach fare.
Requests for car rentals must have prior approval by the City Manager for reimbursement.
Reimbursement for use of a personal automobile on City business within a local area will not
be made so as to supplement that already being paid to those persons receiving a monthly
mileage allowance.
C. Hotel
Payments toward or reimbursement of hotel or lodging expenses is limited to the actual cost
of the room. Such payments or reimbursements shall not be made for hotel or lodging
expense when incurred within the local area. Exceptions to this requirement shall be for
attendance at the Annual League of California Cities Conference and for those nights when
attendance at other conferences, meetings and training sessions official functions would
preclude the return to the City by the attendee within two hours after the end of the normal
working day.
D. Other Expenses
Payments toward or reimbursement of expenses at such functions shall be limited to the
actual costs consistent with the application of reasonable standards.
Costs of special luncheon or dinner meetings or other programs on the agenda and not
covered by registration fees may be paid or reimbursed in addition to this daily allowance
when approved by the City Manager.
Other reasonable expenses related to business purposes shall be paid consistent with this
policy.
No payments shall be made unless, where available, receipts are kept and submitted for all
expenses incurred. When receipts are not available, qualifying expenditures shall be
reimbursed upon signing of an affidavit of expenditure.
No payment shall be made for any expenses incurred which are of a personal nature or not
within a standard or reasonableness for the situation as may be defined by the City Manager.
IV ATTENDANCE AUTHORIZATION
A. Budgetary Limitations
Notwithstanding any attendance, authorization contained herein, reimbursement for expenses
incurred or expenditures made relative to conferences, meeting or training sessions shall not
exceed the budgetary limitations.
6
B. Conference Attendance
Attendance at conferences or seminars by employees must l~e approved by the Department
Head or the City Manager.
C. Meetings
Any employee, management or non-management, may attend a meeting when authorized by
the Department Head.
D. Training Sessions
Any employee, management or non-management, may attend a training session when
authorized by the Department Head.
A. Appropriation Policy
V. FUNDING
It shall be the policy of the City to appropriate funds subject to availability of resources.
B. Training Sessions
Payments toward or reimbursement of expenses incurred in attendance at training sessions,
will be appropriated annually through the budget process.
There also will be an appropriation to the Department of Parks and Recreation each year to
be used as payment toward or reimbursement of expenses incurred for its in-service training
program.
Excluded from this funding capability is that amount to be determined each year and
appropriated to the Personnel Division for costs incurred in training programs of a general
nature and applicable to all employees.
Revised 7/83, 7/85, 7/87, 7/88, 7/91, 7/92
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 4
AUTOMOBILE ALLOWANCES AND
MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENTS
It is City of Cupertino policy that eligible persons under this Compensation Program shall
be compensated fairly for the use of personal automotive vehicles on City business. In many
instances the use of personal vehicles is a condition of employment due to the absence of
sufficient City owned vehicles for general transportation purposes. It is not intended, however,
that such a condition of employment should work an undue hardship. For this reason, the
following policies shall apply for mileage reimbursements.
Those persons who occasionally are required to use their personal automobiles for City
business shall be reimbursed for such use at an appropriate rate established by the City Council.
Submission of reimbursement requests must be approved by the Department Head.
Employees in the following classifications shall be paid on a monthly basis the following
automobile allowance:
Classification
Allowance
City Manager
City Attorney
Director of Administrative Services
Director of Community Development
Director of Parks and Recreation
Director of Public Works
City Clerk
Human Resources Manager
Public Information Officer
Traffic Engineer
Recreation Supervisor
Secretary to City Manager
$350.00
350.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
300.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
200.00
200.00
Employees receiving automobile allowance shall be eligible for reimbursement for travel
that exceeds two hundred miles round trip.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
April 1, 1974
Revised
7/74, 5/79, 6/80, 7/81, 8/84, 7/87, 1/89, 7/90,
7/92, 6/96, 8/99, 6/00
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 5
ASSOCIATION MEMBERSHIPS AND
PROFESSIONAL PUBLICATIONS
It is City of Cupertino policy that eligible persons under this Compensation Program shall
be entitled-to City sponsored association memberships as well as receiving subscriptions to
professional and technical publications. Such sponsorship, however, shall be conditioned upon
the several factors as set forth below.
Each association for which membership is claimed must be directly related to the field of
endeavor of the person to be benefited. Each claim for City sponsored membership shall be
submitted by or through the Department Head with their concurrence to the City Manager for
approval.
Subscriptions to or purchase of professional and technical publications may be provided
at City expense when such have been authorized by the Department Head providing the subject
matter and material generally contained therein are related to municipal governmental operations.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
April 1, 1974
Revised
7/92
City of CUpertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 6
OVERTIME WORKED
Management and non-represented professional employees are ineligible for overtime
payments for time worked in excess of what otherwise would be considered as a normal work
day or work week for other employees. However, no deduction from leave balances are made
when such an employee is absent for less than a regular work day. Nothing in this policy
precludes the alternative work schedule, which may include an absence of a full eight hour day,
when forty hours have been worked in the same seven day work period.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
April 1, 1974
Revised
6/80, 7/91, 7/92, 6/96, 7/97
10
/%--1
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES'COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 7
HEALTH BENEFITS PLAN - EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide group hospital and medical insurance
under which employees in Management and Confidential positions and their dependents may be
covered. The purpose of this program is to promote and preserve the health of employees and
their families through comprehensive health plans available only through employer sponsorship.
Although the premium cost for the insurance provided remains the ultimate responsibility
of the employee in these positions, the City shall contribute an amount of $570.00 per employee
per month towards the premium or pay the full cost of the premium if less than this amount. If
the premium amounts for any employee covered by this policy are less than $570.00 per month,
the difference between the premium amount and $570.00 will be included in the employee's
gross pay.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
September 16, 1974
Revised
7/75, 7/76, 7/77, 8/78, 7/79, 6/80, 6/81, 7/81, 6/82, 7/83, 7/84,
7/88, 7/89, 7/90, 7/91, 7/92, 6/95, 7/97, 7/99, 6/00
11
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 8
FLEXIBLE HOLIDAYS
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to recognize days of historical and national
significance as holidays of the City without loss of pay or benefits. Recognizing the desirable
times throughout the year, it is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide days off in lieu of
holidays for management and confidential employees at such times as are convenient for each
employee and supervisor, when such policy is compatible with the workload and schedule of the
City.
Employees occupying these positions shall be provided 20 hours per calendar year as
non-work time with full pay and benefits. Employees may accumulate flexible holiday hours up
to two times their annual accrural.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
July 7, 1975
Revised 6/80, 6/89, 7/92, 7/99
12
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 9
LIFE AND LONG TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to make available group insurance for
Management and Confidential employees that will mitigate the personal and family financial
hardships resulting from continuing disability that prevents an employee from performing
gainfully in his or her occupation. It is further the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide life
insurance benefits in an amount of two and one half times the employee's annual salary to a
maximum of $250,000.00.
Employees occupying unrepresented positions may enroll in the disability income
program and the life insurance program offered if eligible under the contract provisions of the
policy and the personnel rules of the City. The full cost of premiums for these programs shall be
paid by the City for such employees.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
September 16, 1976
Revised 7/76, 6/80, 6/81.6/82, 6/92
13
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 10
DEFERRED COMPENSATION
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide equitable current compensation and
reasonable retirement security for management and confidential employees for services
performed for the City. The City participates in the California Public Employees' Retirement
System (PERS) and deferred compensation plans have been established. Both the employee and
employer may make contributions from current earnings to these plans. The purpose of this
policy is to promote means by which compensation may be provided in such manner and form to
best meet the requirements of the City and the needs of individual employees, thereby increasing
the ability, to attract and retain competent management and confidential employees.
The City shall maintain and administer means by which employees in these positions
may defer portions of their current earnings for future utilization. Usage of such plans shall be
subject to such agreements, rules and procedures as are necessary to properly administer each
plan. Employee contributions to such plans may be made in such amounts as felt proper and
necessary to the employee. Employer contributions shall be as determined by the City Council.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
July 7, 1975
Revised 6/80, 7/87, 7/92, 7/99
14
/7--7..o
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 11
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM CONTRIBUTION
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to pay the eligible employee's contribution rate to
the Public Employees' Retirement System not to exceed seven percent (7%) of the applicable
salary.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
June, 1981
Revised 6/87, 6/89, 7/90, 7/91, 7/92
15
/'7 ~ 2- /
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 12
DENTAL INSURANCE - EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide dental insurance under which
employees in Management and Confidential positions and their dependents may be covered. The
purpose of this program is to promote and preserve the health of employees.
The premium cost for the insurance provided by the City shall not exceed $74.47 per
month per employee. Enrollment in the plan or plans made available pursuant to this policy shall
be in accordance with Personnel Rules of the City and the provisions of the contract for such
insurance between the City and carrier or carriers.
Adopted by Action of
City Council
July 1, 1983
Revised 7/87, 7/88, 7/89, 7/90, 7/91, 7/92, 6/95, 7/99
16
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 13
ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE
The City Manager, City Attorney, and department heads shall receive forty (40) hours of
administrative leave with pay per year. Unrepresented employees exempt from the provisions of
the Fair Labor Standards Act shall receive twenty-four (24) hours of administrative leave with
pay per year.
Employees may accumulate administrative leave hours up to their annual accrual.
Employees shall be eligible to convert administrative leave hours to pay one time each
calendar year.
Adopted by Action of
the City Council
July, 1988
Revised
7/92, 7/97, 7/99
17
f-/-
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 14
EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide an Employee Assistance Program for
the benefit of Management and Confidential employees and their eligible dependents. The
purpose of this program is to provide professional assistance and counseling concerning
financial, legal, pre-retirement, and other matters of a personal nature.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
June 17, 1996
18
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 15
PUBLIC SERVICE CREDIT - VACATION ACCUMULATION
The City Manager, City Attorney, and department heads shall earn vacation hours under
the same vacation accumulation schedule as all other employees. Credit shall be provided for
previous public sector service time on a year-for-year basis as to annual vacation accumulation.
Credit shall only be given for completed years of service. Public service credit shall not apply to
any other supplemental benefit. Employee(s) affected by this policy will have the responsibility
of providing certification as to previous public sector service.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
July 7, 1997
Revised 6/99
19
City of Cupertino
UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Policy No. 16
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Housing assistance will be offered to the City Attomey and department heads pursuant to
Resolution No. 99-070 as amended.
Adopted by Action of the City Council
July 7, 1997
Revised 7/99
20
City of Cupertino
Unrepresented Employees' Compensation Program
Policy No. 17
VISION INSURANCE - EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino to provide vision insurance under which
employees and their dependents may be covered. The purpose of this program is to promote and
preserve the health of employees.
The premium cost for the insurance provided by the City shall not exceed $13.90 per
month per employee. Enrollment in the plan or plans made available pursuant to this policy shall
be in accordance with the provisions of the contract between the City and carrier or carriers
providing vision insurance coverage,
Adopted by Action of the City Council
July 1997
Revised 7/99
21
/7-27
City of Cupertino
Attachment "I"
Listing of Unrepresented Classifications by
Salary Rate or Pay Grades
City Council
and
Planning Commission
Compensation
Effective June 19, 2000
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CLASSES OF POSITION/CITY COUNCIL
AND PLANNING COMMISSION
EFFECTIVE JUNE 19, 2000
The salaries, wages or rates of pay for those officers and employees whose positions are exempt
under the provisions of the Cupertino Municipal Code, and members of the City Council and
Planning Commission, are set forth below.
CLASSIFICATION
CITY MANAGER
DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY ATTORNEY
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION -
$50/meeting (maximum $200/mo)
Only the City Council can modify these rates.
$12,559
$8,301 - 10,090
$7,802 - 9,485
$7,802 - 9,485
$9,340- 1.1,351
$11,855
$535.80/mo.
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CLASSES OF POSITIONS BY PAY GRADE
MANAGEMENT CLASSIFICATIONS
EFFECTIVE JUNE 19, 2000
Classification
Assistant City Attomey
Building Official
City Clerk
City Planner
Environmental Programs Manager
Human Resources Manager
Information Technology Manager
Public Information Officer
Public Works Projects Manager
Public Works Supervisor
Recreation Supervisor
Service Center Manager
Traffic Engineer
Approx. Monthly Salar~Range
$5,409 - 6,574
$6,669 - 8,106
$5,409 - 6,574
$6,669 - 8,106
$5,328- 6,477
$6,377 - 7,751
$5,409 - 6,574
$5,409 - 6,574
$5,409 - 6,574
$4,994 - 6,070
$4,994 - 6,070
$6,669 - 8,106
$6,669 - 8,106
I7-- °
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CLASSES OF POSITIONS BY PAY GRADE
CONFIDENTIAL CLASSIFICATIONS
EFFECTIVE JUNE 19, 2000
Classification
Accountant
Accounting Technician
Administrative Secretary
Community Relations Coordinator
Deputy City Attorney
Deputy City Clerk
GIS Coordinator
Human Resources Technician
Network Specialist
Secretary to the City Manager
Secretary to the City Attorney
Approx. Monthly Salary Range
$4,473 - 5,436
$4,150 - 5,045
$3,726 - 4,529
$4,300 - 5,227
$4,476 - 5,439
$3,726 - 4,529
$4,300 - 5,227
$4,150 - 5,045
$4,300 - 5,227
$4,076 - 4,955
$4,076 - 4,955
CITY OF
CUPE INO
Parks and Recreation Department
Summary
Agenda Item Number
Agenda Date: June 19, 2000
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Request from Iranian Federated Women's Club and Payvand Cultural School for waiver of use
fees sponsored by the fourth annual Iranian Art and Cultural Event to be held at the Quinlan
Community Center.
BACKGROUND
To support the cultural perspective of a local non-profit educational and service organization, the
Iranian Federated Women's Club has scheduled the fourth annual Iranian Fund-raiser Gala at the
Quinlan Community Center on October 8, 2000. The Iranian Federated Women's Club is
requesting waiver of the use fee. Although this request is not compliant with the council's fee
waiver policy, the nature of the event is consistent with council goals. In such cases, council has
historically waived the room rental charges but not staff expenses. The organization will be
responsible for $130.00 for staff costs.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City Council waive the room rental fees in the approximate amount of $770.00 for The Iranian
Federated Women's Club and Payvand Cultural School fundraiser on October 8, 2000.
SUBMITTED BY
Recreation Supervisor
APP?~D~_ _ BMISSION
Don~l~l D'7. Brd"wn
City Manager
TO CITY COUNCIL
Pfinted on Recycled Paper [ ~ ' /
June 9, 2000
Mrs. Julia Lamy
Facility Supervisor for Cupertino Parks and Rec. Dept.
10185 N. Stelling Rd.
Cupertino, CA 95014
Dear Julia,
The Iranian Federated Woman's Club and Payvand Cultural School are seeking funding
and supporting to bring our cultural perspective to this wonderful diverse community by
sponsoring the Fourth annual Iranian Art and Cultural Event, is scheduled at Quinlan
Community Center in Cupertino on October 8, 2000.
The funding and supporting will underwrite a one-day festival that will include a wide
variety of community activities: dance, music, poetry, handicrafts, and food.
Need: Young Iranian Americans, like many immigrant children face the difficulty of
integrating their Iranian identifies in a new environment.
They need to be able to be Americans who are proud of their cultural heritage.
Our Organization and its Mission: Imman Federated Women's Club and Payvand cultural
school are a non-profit corporation that work to aid Iranian Americans to be good
Americans and maintain their own heritage through classes in language, dance, mnsic,
painfing~ and other activities. In addition we contribute to our American environment by
supporting various activities that integrate our young people and children to become
Americans in a positive way.
I would appreciate if you would be kind enough to wave the fee for using the community
room, Social room, and inside the building ( like last year) on that day.
Please do not hesitate to call me at (408) 865- 0969, if you have any questions.
Thank you for your consideration and cooperation.
Sincerely,
Fariba Nejat, Presidem
If-Z-
CITY OF
cupertino
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
FAX (408) 777-3333
AGENDA ITEM
Summary
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
AGENDA DATE June 19, 2000
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Authorization for execution of First Amendment to Agreement Between the City of San Jose and the
City of Cupertino for Maintenance of Traffic Signals Under Joint Jurisdiction
BACKGROUND
Cupertino jointly maintains traffic signals under joint jurisdiction on De Anza Boulevard and Bollinger
Road with the City of San Jose.
On August 4, 1998, Cupertino and San Jose executed an agreement for joint maintenance of these
traffic signals.
Staff wants to amend the agreement to include another traffic signal on Bollinger Road at Johnson
Avenue. Cupertino assumed half of the joint maintenance at this traffic signal when Rancho
Rinconada was annexed into the city in April 1999.
Staff from Cupertino and San Jose further agreed to assume full responsibility for maintenance,
included costs for De Anza Boulevard and Bollinger Road. Cupertino will maintain the five traffic
signals on De Anza Boulevard; San Jose will maintain four traffic signals on Bollinger Road.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 00- /~/{~ authorizing execUtion of First
Amendment to Agreement Between the City of San Jose and the City of Cupertino for Maintenance of
Traffic Signals Under Joint Jurisdiction
~{.ert J.'Vil;
irector of
Ovlch
?ublic Works
Appro~/~mission:. ;
Doh'~ld'D. l~v~
City Manager
Printed on Recycled Paper c~ ~) "'" /
RESOLUTION NO. 00-186
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN JOSE AND THE CITY OF CUPERTINO FOR
MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS UNDER JOINT JURISDICTION
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council a First Amendment to Agreement
Between the City of San Jose and the City of Cupertino for Maintenance of Traffic Signal Under
Joint Jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the provisions, terms, and conditions of the aforementioned amendment to
agreement have been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and the Director of Public
Works.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino
hereby authorizes the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute said amendment to agreement on behalf
of the City of Cupertino.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino
this 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
AYE S:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Members of the City Council
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
CITY OF
CUPERTINO
103 O0 Torre A venue
Cupertino, California 95014
Telephone: (408) 777-3308
FA~: (408) 777-3333
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SUMMARY
Agenda No.
Agenda Date: June 19, 2000
Application Summary:
Joint Public Hearing on the Adoption of the Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino
Vallco Redevelopment Project
RECOMMENDATION:
Cupertino
·
Cupertino
·
Redevelopment Agency:
Certifying and making findings based upon consideration of the Final
Environmental Impact Report. Resolution No. RA-00-06.
· Finding that the use of taxes allocated from the Project for the purpose of
improving and increasing the community's supply of low- and moderate-
income housing outside the Project Area will be of benefit to the Project.
Resolution No. R~-00-07.
City Council:
Certifying and making findings based upon consideration of the Final
Environmental Impact Report. Resolution No. 00-187.
· Finding that the use of taxes allocated from the Project for the purpose of
improving and increasing the community's supply of low- and moderate-
income housing outside the Project Area will be of benefit to the Project.
Resolution No. 00-188.
· Approval and adoption of Redevelopment Plan (first reading). Ordinance No.
1850.
BACKGROUND:
The adoption of the Redevelopment Plan is the final action of the City Council in the
approval of the Valleo Redevelopment Project. The Final Environmental Impact Report
(FEIR) and the Redevelopment Plan were recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission on March 27, 2000 and were forwarded to the Agency and City Council on
May 15. The Agency received the Redevelopment Plan and submitted it to the City
Council on that date, and the public hearing was set for June 19. On March 27th, the
Planning Commission also transmitted a Minute Order regarding conformity of the
Redevelopment Plan with the General Plan, recommending that the City Council evaluate
traffic, air quality, height and setbacks pertaining to conformity (#6019). A response to
the minute order is found in the FEIR, pages 2-36 to 2-39.
Representatives of the City's economic consultants for the Redevelopment Agency,
Keyser Marston Associates, and the City's legal consultant, Nicole Murphy, will attend
the meeting to direct the actions required and answer questions.
DISCUSSION:
The outline for the meeting is:
General Background Comments
Reasons for and benefits of the redevelopment process.
Entering four documents into the public record: Exhibits 1-4
Summary of the Redevelopment Plan
Enter the proposed Redevelopment Plan as part of the record: Exhibit 5.
Summary of the Agency's Report to the City Council
Summary of contents of the report, blight, proposed redevelopment activities, financial
feasibility, and implementation plan; description of the supplement to the report:
Exhibits 6 and 7.
Final Environmental Impact Report
Review of Final EIR, summary of comments received and responses: Exhibit 8 (Draft
EIR previously received by the City Council, not enclosed)
Rules Governing Participation by Property Owners and the Extension of
Reasonable Preferences to Business occupants in the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project.
These rules were previously adopted by the Agency. Will be made a part of the record:
Exhibit 9
Written Comments
Placed into the record: Exhibit 10
Oral Testimony
Closing of Hearing
Consider and Act on Redevelopment Plan
See recommendation on page 1.
Adjourn
Enclosures:
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency:
Resolution No. RA-00-06.
Resolution No. RA-00-07.
Cupertino City Council:
Resolution No. 00-187.
Resolution No. 00-188.
Ordinance No. 1850.
Exhibit 1
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 3
Exhibit 4
Exhibit 5
Exhibit 6
Exhibit 7
Exhibit 8
Exhibit 9
Exhibit 10
Affadavit of Publication
Certificate of Mailing (to each assessee of land and business owner or
operator)
Certificate of Mailing (each taxing entity)
Certification of Certain Official Actions
Redevelopment Plan
Report of the Agency to the City Council
Supplement to the Report of the Agency to the City Council
Final Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR previously received by
City Council, not enclosed)
Owner Participation Rules
Written Comments on Redevelopment Plan
Planning i2ommission Minute Order
Prepared by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner
Submitted by:
/
' ~,
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
G:planningJpdreport/cc/redev¢161900
Approved by:
City Manager
RESOLUTION NO. RA-00-06
RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
CERTIFYING THE COMPLETION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT;
ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF FINDINGS, FACTS, AND
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
WHEREAS, as the Lead Agency, the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the
"Agency") has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (the "EIR") on the proposed
Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project (the "Project") pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., hereinafter referred to as "CEQA"),
the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (14
California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq., hereinafter referred to as the
"State CEQA Guidelines") and procedures adopted by the Agency relating to
environmental evaluation; and
WHEREAS, the Agency transmitted for filing a Notice of Completion of the Draft
EIR and thereafter in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines
forwarded the Draft EIR to the State Clearinghouse for distribution to those state
agencies that have discretionary approval or jurisdiction by law over natural resources
affected by the Redevelopment Plan, to the affected taxing agencies, and to other
interested persons and agencies, and sought the comments of such persons and
agencies; and
WHEREAS, notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting comments on
the Draft EIR was published in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State
CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was thereafter revised and supplemented to adopt
changes suggested, to incorporate comments received during the public review period
pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, and to incorporate the Agency's
responses to said comments, and as so revised and supplemented, a Final EIR was
prepared by the Agency; and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR, as revised and
supplemented to incorporate all comments received and the responses of the Agency
thereto, and is part of the Agency's Report to the City Council on the Redevelopment
Plan;
CUP/AgResoCertEIR
6115100
THE CUPERTINO
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AS FOLLOWS: _
Section 1. The Agency hereby certifies that the Final EIR for the Project is
adequate and has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA
Guidelines, and local procedures adopted by the Agency pursuant thereto and that the
Agency has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to
adopting this resolution. The Agency hereby finds that the Final EIR reflects the
independent judgment of the Agency.
Section 2. The Agency hereby adopts the Statement of Findings, Facts, and
Overriding Considerations relating to the environmental impact of the Redevelopment
Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project as set forth in Exhibit A attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (including, without limitation, the
mitigation measures set forth therein). Based upon such Statement of Findings, Facts,
and Overriding Considerations, the Agency hereby finds that all significant
environmental effects have been eliminated or substantially lessened except the
following unavoidable adverse impacts:
Cumulative impacts on the Wolfe Road/Pruneridge Avenue intersection. With
the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the
area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, the operation of the
intersection of Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate
from LOS D to LOS E+ during the PM peak hour. There are no feasible physical
improvements that could be constructed at this intersection that would mitigate
this impact to a less than significant level.
Regional emissions. Additional traffic generated by shopping center expansion
would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District's ("BAAQMD") thresholds of significance. BAAQMD
guidance provides that projects that would individually have a significant air
quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air
quality impact. The proposed project therefore would also have a significant
cumulative impact on regional air quality. Mitigation measures are set forth in
the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A).
Those mitigation measures will assist in reducing project and cumulative impacts
on regional air quality, but would not reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant
level.
Based upon the foregoing, the Agency finds and determines that the
Redevelopment Plan will have a significant effect upon the environment but that the
benefits of the Redevelopment Plan outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts for the
reasons set forth in the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations, in
particular, Part V thereof.
Section 3. Upon approval and adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City
Council, the Agency Secretary is hereby directed to file a Notice of Determination with
the County Clerk of the County of Santa Clara pursuant to the provisions of Section
21152 of CEQA and Section 15094 of the State CEQA Guidelines, along with two
copies of the Certificate of Fee Exemption as required pursuant to Title 14, California
Code of Regulations, Section 753.5(c).
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino Redevelopment
Agency this day of ,2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the Redevelopment Agency
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Secretary
Chairman, Redevelopment Agency
EXHIBIT A
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS, FACTS, AND OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS RELATING TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et
seq., "CEQA") provides, in Section 21081, that:
"[N]o public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an
environmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or
more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project
is approved or carried out unless both of the following occur:
"(a) The public agency makes one or more of the following findings with
respect to each significant effect:
"(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant
effects on the environment.
"(2) Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility
and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can
and should be, adopted by that other agency.
"(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make
infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the
environmental impact report.
"(b) With respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding
under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), the public agency finds that
specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits
of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment."
As defined in CEQA, "'significant effect on the environment' means a substantial, or
potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment." (Public Resources Code
Section 21068.)
Exhibit A
Page ] of ]6
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL
For purposes of CEQA, the "project" addressed in the Final Environmental Impact
Report (the "Final EIR") is the adoption and phased implementation of the
Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project (the "Project"). As more particularly identified in the Final EIR,
The Project Area is more particularly identified in the Final EIR. Under the
Redevelopment Plan, the Project would be developed in accordance with the land uses
designated and permitted by the General Plan for the City of Cupertino. The
Redevelopment Plan also specifically recognizes the development rights vested under
that certain Development Agreement dated August 15, 1991, adopted by the City
Council of the City of Cupertino by Ordinance No. 1540 on July 15, 1991. The Final
EIR describes the environmental impacts that may occur as a result of the adoption and
phased implementation of the Redevelopment Plan and identifies, where applicable,
measures which would mitigate significant effects on the environment to a level of
insignificance. Findings regarding the significant effects of the Project are set forth
below.
III.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT; FINDINGS REGARDING
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT
This Part III identifies the potentially significant and unavoidably significant effects of the
Project as determined by the Agency and the City Council, including the findings and
facts supporting the findings in connection therewith.
A. Land Use and Planning
1. Environmental Impact
Land Use Incompatibilities Between Proposed Modifications
and Adjacent Areas: The proposed location of the new 168-
room Hotel #2, west of Wolfe Road, could result in
potentially significant adverse land use compatibility effects
on adjacent existing residential areas to the west of the
project site. These potential adverse effects could include:
height and scale incongruities, introduction of night-time light
impacts from the hotel and hotel parking area lighting
features, construction period emissions (air), and increased
noise associated with mechanical equipment and project
construction.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Exhibit
Page 2 of
Bo
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measures are incorporated into-the Redevelopment Plan:
In conducting the design review process for Hotel #2,
particular emphasis will be placed on the need to
incorporate building design, setback, lighting controls,
and other measures to ensure against adverse
impacts on the nearest residential neighborhood to
the west.
The construction period air quality (dust) mitigation
measures identified in Section 9.3 of the Final EIR will
be implemented.
Visual Factors
1. Environmental Impact
ao
Visual Impacts of Wolfe Road Tree Removal: The proposed
new department store and to a lesser extent, the proposed
expansion of the retail bridge across Wolfe Road, could
displace existing Wolfe Road street trees, resulting in the
loss of visually important mature street trees and the
conspicuous disruption of the existing Wolfe Road visual
character at this location.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
To the extent possible, the layout for the proposed
new department store and retail bridge will retain and
protect some of the existing street trees and/or a
street tree replacement plan will be implemented
which, to the satisfaction of the City, will be sufficient
to offset project-related losses and restore visual
continuity on the affected segment of Wolfe Road.
Exhibit A
Page 3 of 16
C. Transportation and Parking
Environmental Impact
ao
Project Impact on Westbound Left-Turn Storage at the Wolfe
Road/Homestead Road Intersection: The estimated
maximum vehicular queue in the westbound left-turn lanes
at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road intersection is
estimated to exceed the available storage under existing
conditions by six vehicles. VVith the addition of traffic
associated with other approved developments and the
proposed project, the queue is estimated to exceed the
available storage by 10 vehicles.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
C°
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
As part of the project development, the westbound
left-turn pocket at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road
intersection will be lengthened by modifying the
striping on the Homestead Road approach to provide
two 320-foot left-turn lanes.
o
Environmental Impact
ao
Project..!mpact on Eastbound Left-Turn Storage at the Wolfe
Road/Stevens Creek Boulevard Intersection: VVith the
addition of traffic associated with the proposed project, the
maximum queue in the eastbound left-turn pocket at the
Wolfe Road/Stevens Creek Boulevard intersection is
projected to exceed the available storage length by one
vehicle during the AM peak hour.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
C°
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
Exhibit
Page 4 or'
(~)
As part of the project development, the eastbound
left-turn pocket at the Wolfe Rload/Stevens Creek
Boulevard intersection will be lengthened by
modifying the striping and median on the Stevens
Creek Boulevard approach to provide one 170-foot
and one 430-foot-long left-turn lane.
Environmental Impact
Project Impact on Westbound Left-Turn Storage at the
Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard Intersection:
The maximum queue projected in the westbound left-turn
pocket at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard
intersection is 18 vehicles under existing conditions and 20
vehicles under project conditions. The existing turn pocket
storage is approximately 16 vehicles in two 190-foot-long
lanes. The estimated maximum queue under project
conditions would exceed the available storage length by
four.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
As part of the project development, the eastbound
left-turn pocket at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De
Anza Boulevard intersection will be lengthened by
modifying the striping and median on the Stevens
Creek Boulevard approach to provide two 250-foot-
long left-turn lanes.
Environmental Impact
a. Potential Operational Impact at the Vallco Parkway
(Realigned) Parking Structure Driveways: The design of
relocated Vallco Parkway and the associated new adjacent
parking structure driveways has not been finalized. If
separate left-turn lanes for inbound traffic at the parking
structure driveways on Vallco Parkway are not provided, a
potentially significant impact would occur at these locations.
Exhibit A
Page 5 of ]6
b. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
As part of the project development, the provision of
separate left-turn lanes for inbound traffic at the
Vallco Parkway driveways will be required.
5. Environmental Impact
Potential Increased Demand for Bicycle Access: The project
has the potential to increase demand for bicycle access to
the site. There are no exiSting bicycle facilities serving the
site.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(i)
The project design shall incorporate support facilities
for bicycles (e.g., bike racks for patrons and bicycle
lockers and showers for employees).
6. Environmental Impact
Potential Parking Impacts: The project has the potential to
substantially increase the demands for convenient on-site
parking which may result in Iocational and overall shortages
in parking supply.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
Parking will be required to be constructed at the retail
parking ratio specified in the Development Agreement
(August 15, 1991) and/or at the parking ratios
Exhibit A
Page 6 of 16 ~)
specified in the City's zoning ordinance. In addition,
to the extent necessary and feasible, off-site
employee parking and/or a valet program during the
peak holiday season shall be implemented.
Environmental Impact
Cumulative Impacts on the Homestead Road/Wolfe Road
Intersection: VVith the traffic associated with the proposed
project, approved developments in the area, and other
reasonably foreseeable development, operation of the
intersection of Homestead Road and Wolfe Road is
projected to deteriorate from LOS D- to LOS E during the
PM peak hour.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
Implementation of the City's planned Homestead
Arterial Management Program would improve
operations at this intersection. PM peak-hour
operations with improved signal progression along
Homestead Road are estimated to be at LOS D-.
Environmental Impact
ao
Cumulative Impacts to the Wolfe Road/Pruneridge Avenue
Intersection: With the traffic associated with the proposed
project, approved developments in the area, and other
reasonably foreseeable development, operation of the
intersection of Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is
projected to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E+ during the
PM peak hour.
bo
Finding: This is an unavoidable significant effect. Specific
economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the
Project make the alternatives infeasible and outweigh this
significant effect.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The specific economic,
legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project
Exhibit A
Page '/of 16 /~
are more particularly described in the Statement of
Overriding Considerations contained in Part V of this
Statement of Findings, Facts and Overriding Considerations.
Public Services
1. Environmental Impact
ao
Increase in Demand for Fire Protection and Emergency
Medical Services: The proposed project would attract new
patrons to the proposed new peripheral retail store,
restaurant, two hotels, department store(s), and other retail
space increases, increasing the demand for fire protection
and emergency medical services. In addition, traffic
generated by the proposed project and other development in
the area. may create greater traffic congestion, potentially
increasing emergency response times. The Central Fire
District may require additional staffing and/or equipment to
provide an adequate level of service to the project.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measures are incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
As part of the project development, compliance with
all applicable codes will be required, including the
1994 Uniform Fire Code, current Uniform Building
Code, Electrical Code, Mechanical Code and
Municipal Code, to ensure adequate installation of
sprinkler systems, water delivery systems, and other
provisions.
(2)
As part of the project development, compliance with
detailed project design features identified by the
Central Fire District will be required during the City's
plan review and permitting process.
2. Environmental Impact
ao
Increase in Demand for Police Services: The proposed
project would attract new patrons to the proposed new
peripheral retail store, restaurant, two hotels, department
Exhibit A
Page Sofl6 /-
store(s), and other retail space increases, increasing the
demand for fire protection and-emergency medical services.
In addition, traffic generated by the proposed project and
other development in the area may create greater traffic
congestion, potentially increasing emergency response
times. The Santa Clare County Sheriff's Department may
require additional staffing to provide an adequate level of
service to the project.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
As part of the project development, coordination with
the City and the County Sheriff's Department will be
required to quantify potential impacts on police
services and develop an appropriate mitigation
strategy, including adequate site lighting for security.
Additional Facts: The City of Cupertino has approved an
agreement with the County of Santa Clara whereby the City
has agreed to pay the cost of one additional sheriff's deputy
for a certain period of time.
Environmental Impact
a. Potential for Delays in
numerous access points
confusion to emergency
response times.
Emergency Response: The
to the project site may create
responders, possibly adding to
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Ce
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
Coordination with the Sheriff's Department and Central
Fire District will be required, as necessary and appropriate,
to assign specific access point designations.
Exhibit
Page 9 of
Air Quality
Environmental Impact
a. Project Sanitary Sewer System Impacts: The sewer
collection demands associated with the proposed project
could exceed the capacity of the existing sewer main under
1-280 currently serving the project site.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
As part of the project development, wastewater
generation increases shall be compared by a civil
engineer to determine whether existing capacity is
sufficient and, if not, collection capacity improvements
shall be required.
Environmental Impact
Construction Emissions: Project construction activities such
as building demolition, excavation and grading operations,
construction vehicle traffic and wind blowing over exposed
earth would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive
particulate matter emissions that would affect local air
quality.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
Fugitive dust control measures will be required to be
implemented during project demolition and
construction activities.
Exhibit
Page ]0 of
Fo
Environmental Impact
a. Regional Emissions: Additional traffic generated by
shopping center expansion would generate regional
emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District's ("BAAQMD") thresholds of significance. BAAQMD
guidance provides that projects that would individually have
a significant air quality impact would also be considered to
have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The
proposed project therefore would also have a significant
cumulative impact on regional air quality.
Finding: This is an unavoidable significant effect. Specific
economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the
Project make the alternatives infeasible and outweigh this
'significant effect.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The specific economic,
legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project
are more particularly described in the Statement of
Overriding Considerations contained in Part V of this
Statement of Findings, Facts and Overriding Considerations.
Geology and Soils
1. Environmental Impact
ao
Expansive Soils and Soil Settlement: New development on
the project site may be subject to foundation and
infrastructure (i.e., utility pipe) damage from expansive soils
Or settlement of soils. Although it is likely that any such soils
on the site were treated or removed prior to the construction
of the existing structures, it is possible that some hazards
remain or that remediation standards have increased.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
In accordance with standard City procedures, a soils
report will be required in connection with project
development, which shall be based
Exhibit A
Page 11 of t6
on a sufficient
analysis of soils conducted by a qualified engineer or
geologist and include appropriate soils, foundation
and structural engineering to adequately account for
any expansive soil underlying the site.
2. Environmental Impact
ao
Seismic Shaking Hazards: The project would be subject to
strong to very strong seismic shaking in the event of a major
earthquake on the Hayward, San Andreas, or Calaveras
fault systems. This shaking could, in turn, result in ground
failure from liquefaction or differential settlement. Shaking or
resulting ground failure could damage or destroy improperly
designed or constructed new structures and infrastructure
and result in hazards of injury or death to new building
occupants. Potential damage to the proposed cinema would
be of particular concern due to the likely high concentration
of occupants.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measures are incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
Submission of a detailed site-specific geotechnical
investigation for the project, and commitment to
compliance with all recommendations, will be required
prior to project development.
(2)
The use of flexible connections for all water and
sewer lines and, as appropriate, underground power
and telecommunications lines will be required.
Cultural Resources
1. Environmental Impact
ao
Disturbance of Historic Archaeological Resources: Although
the potential for the project site to contain archaeological
resources is currently considered Iow, construction of the
proposed new store, cinema, restaurant, and parking
facilities could disturb sensitive,, as-yet unknown historic
archaeological resources..
Exhibit A
Page 12 of 16
Finding: Changes or alteratiohs have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
In the event that subsurface cultural resources are
encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work
in the immediate vicinity shall be stopped and a
qualified archaeologist retained to evaluate the finds.
The discovery or disturbance of any cultural
resources shall also be reported to the California
Historic Resources Information System and, if Native
American artifacts are found, to the Native American
Heritage Commission. Identified cultural resources
should be recorded on form DPR 523 (historic
properties). Mitigation measures prescribed by these
groups and required by the City will be undertaken
prior to resumption of construction activities. If
human remains are found during project grading,
work shall be halted and the County Coroner shall be
informed immediately. If disturbance of a cultural
resource cannot be avoided, a mitigation program,
including measures set forth in Section 15126.4 of the
State CEQA Guidelines, shall be implemented.
Environmental Impact
Disturbance of On-site Culturally Significant Trees: Project
construction could disturb culturally significant trees at the
project site, especially those located near the proposed new
department store, parking structure, and peripheral retail
store.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
A survey of existing trees on the project site shall be
conducted. In connection with any tree defined as a
Exhibit A
Page ]3 of 16
"heritage tree" or a "specimen tree" by the Cupertino
Municipal Code (chapter-14.18), compliance with City
policies and ordinance requirements for tree
protection and maintenance shall be required.
IV. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT
CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the Project or
to the location of the Project which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the
Project and to evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. Section 15126(d)(1)
of the State CEQA Guidelines states that the "discussion of alternatives shall focus on
alternatives to the project or to its location which are capable of avoiding or
substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives
would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be
more costly."
As more particularly set forth in the Final EIR, the Project was compared to the
following alternatives: (1) no project; (2) alternative land use mix--2,984-seat cinema in
place of 95,000-square-foot retail store; (3) mitigated project alternative; (4) modified
redevelopment area boundaries; (5) alternative project location.
The analysis in the Final EIR concludes that the Mitigated Project is the environmentally
superior alternative. The Mitigated Project is the proposed project incorporating all of
the mitigation measures recommended by the Final EIR.
Based on the information contained in the Final EIR and the foregoing, the Agency and
the City Council find that none of the other alternatives (those alternatives other than
the Mitigated Project) are feasible in that none of the other alternatives will accomplish
the basic objectives of the Project to eliminate blight in the Project Area. As a result,
none of the other alternatives are acceptable when compared to the project as
proposed and modified by the mitigation measures adopted by the Agency and City
Council, i.e., the Mitigated Project.
V. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
CEQA requires a public agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its
unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. As set
forth in Part III hereof, the Agency and the City Council have determined that the only
unavoidable environmental consequences of the Project are the following:
Transportation and Planning: Cumulative impacts on the Wolfe
Road/Pruneridge Avenue intersection. With the traffic associated with the
proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other
reasonably foreseeable development, the operation of the intersection of
Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS
Exhibit A
Page ]4 of 16
D to LOS E+ during the PM peak hour. There are no feasible physical
improvements that could be constructed at~ this intersection that would
mitigate this impact to a less than significant level.
Bo
Air Quality: Regional emissions. Additional traffic generated by shopping
center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay
Area Air Quality Management District's ("BAAQMD") thresholds of
significance. BAAQMD guidance provides that projects that would
individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered
to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project
therefore would also have a significant cumulative impact on regional air
quality. Mitigation measures are set forth in the Statement of Findings,
Facts, and Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A). Those mitigation
measures will assist in reducing project and cumulative impacts on
regional air quality, but would not reduce the impacts to a less-than-
significant level.
The Agency and the City Council find that the above-referenced unavoidable
environmental consequences of the Project are acceptable when balanced against its
benefits. This finding is based on the following facts:
The Project will serve a critical need, that being the elimination and
prevention of the spread of blight and deterioration in the Project Area and
the conservation, rehabilitation and redevelopment of the proposed
Project Area in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan, the General
Plan for the City of Cupertino and local codes and ordinances.
The promotion of new and continuing private sector investment within the
Project Area will prevent the loss of and facilitate the capture of
commercial sales activity.
The Project will allow for the elimination of blight through rehabilitation and
reconstruction, new development, and the assembly of parcels into more
developable sites for more desirable uses.
The Project will result in the elimination or amelioration of certain
environmental deficiencies, including substandard vehicular circulation
systems.
o
New construction within the Project Area will result in an environment
reflecting a high level of concern for architectural, landscape, and urban
design and land use principles appropriate for attainment of the objectives
of the Redevelopment Plan.
Exhibit A
Page 15 ot' 16
o
go
Project implementation would result in the retention and expansion of
businesses by means of redevelopment and rehabilitation activities and
by encouraging and assisting in the cooperation and participation of
owners, businesses, and public agencies in the revitalization of the
Project Area.
Revitalized commercial development will result in the creation and
development of local job opportunities and the preservation of the area's
existing employment base.
Project implementation will strengthen the economic base of the Project
Area and the City by installing needed site improvements and stimulating
commercial development.
Project implementation will expand and improve the City's supply of
affordable housing.
Exhibit
Page 16 of
RESOLUTION NO. RA-00-07
RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FINDING THAT THE
USE OF TAXES ALLOCATED FROM THE
CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCREASING,
IMPROVING, AND PRESERVING THE
COMMUNITY'S SUPPLY OF LOW- AND
MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING OUTSIDE THE
PROJECT AREA WILL BE OF BENEFIT TO THE
PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") has prepared a
proposed Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project (the "Project") which would result in the allocation of taxes from the
Project Area to the Agency for the purposes of redevelopment; and
WHEREAS, Section 33334.2 of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health
and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) requires that not less than twenty percent (20%) of all
taxes so allocated be used by the Agency for the purpose of increasing, improving, and
preserving the community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing available at affordable
housing cost; and
WHEREAS, Section 33334.2(g) of the Community Redevelopment Law provides that
the Agency may use such funds outside the Project Area if a finding is made by resolution of the
Agency and the City Council that such use will be of benefit to .the Project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY that the use of taxes allocated from the Project Area for the purpose of increasing,
improving, and preserving the community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing
available at affordable housing cost outside the Project Area will be of benefit to the Project.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency this
19~ day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Resolution No. RA-00-07 Page 2
Vote
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Members of the Redevelopment Agency
APPROVED:
Secretary
Chairman, Redevelopment Agency
RESOLUTION NO. 00-187
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CUPERTINO CONSIDERING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT; ADOPTING A
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS, FACTS, AND
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
WHEREAS, as the Lead Agency, the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the
"Agency") has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (the "EIR") on the proposed
Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project (the "Project") pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., hereinafter referred to as "CEQA"),
the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (14
California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq., hereinafter referred to as the
"State CEQA Guidelines"), and procedures adopted by the Agency relating to
environmental evaluation; and
WHEREAS, the Agericy transmitted for filing a Notice of Completion of the Draft
EIR and thereafter in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines
forwarded the Draft EIR to the State Clearinghouse for distribution to those state
agencies which have discretionary approval or jurisdiction by law over natural resources
affected by the Redevelopment Plan, to the affected taxing agencies, and to other
interested persons and agencies and sought the comments of such persons and
agencies; and
VVHEREAS, notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting comments on
the Draft EIR was published in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State
CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was thereafter revised and supplemented to adopt
changes suggested, to incorporate comments received during the public review period
pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, and to incorporate the Agency's
CUP/CCResoEIRFndgs 1
6/15~00
responses to said comments, and as so revised and supplemented, a Final EIR was
prepared by the Agency; and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR, as revised and
supplemented to incorporate all comments received and the responses of the Agency
thereto, and is part of the Agency's Report to the City Council on the Redevelopment
Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino is a Responsible Agency, as defined in Section
21069 of the Public Resources Code, with respect to the Redevelopment Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CUPERTINO AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council has duly reviewed and considered the Final EIR
prepared and certified by the Agency prior to adopting this resolution and acting on the
Redevelopment Plan.
Section 2. The City Council hereby adopts the Statement of Findings, Facts,
and Overriding Considerations relating to the environmental impact of the
Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project as set forth in
Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (including, without
limitation, the mitigation measures therein set forth). Based upon such Statement of
Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations, the Agency hereby finds that all
significant environmental effects have been eliminated or substantially lessened except
the following unavoidable adverse impacts:.
Cumulative impacts on the Wolfe Road/Pruneridge Avenue intersection.
With the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved
developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable
development, the operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and
Pruneridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E+
during the PM peak hour. There are no feasible physical improvements
that could be constructed at this intersection that would mitigate this
impact to a less than significant level.
CUP/CCResoEIRFndgs 2
' 6/15/00
Regional emissions. Additional traffic generated by shopping center
expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District's ("BAAQMD") thresholds of significance.
BAAQMD guidance proyides that projects that would individually have a
significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a
significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project therefore
would also have a significant cumulative impact on regional air quality.
Mitigation measures are set forth in the Statement of Findings, Facts, and
Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A). Those mitigation measures will
assist in reducing project and cumulative impacts on regional air quality,
but would not reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Based upon the foregoing, the City Council finds and determines that the
Redevelopment Plan will have a significant effect upon the environment but that the
benefits of the Redevelopment Plan outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts for
the reasons set forth in the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding
Considerations, in particular, Part V thereof.
Section 3. Upon approval and adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City
Council, the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a Notice of Determination with the
County Clerk of the County of Santa Clara pursuant to the provisions of Section 21152
of CEQA and Section 15096(i) of the State CEQA Guidelines.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Cupertino this day of , 2000,
following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
by the
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
CUP/CCResoEIRFndgs 3
6/15/00
EXHIBIT A
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS, FACTS, AND OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS RELATING TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
I. INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et
seq., "CEQA") provides, in Section 21081, that:
"[N]o public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an
environmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or
more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project
is approved or carried out unless both of the following occur:
"(a) The public agency makes one or more of the following findings with
respect to each significant effect:
"(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant
effects on the environment.
"(2) Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility
and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can
and should be, adopted by that other agency.
"(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including considerations for the provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make
infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the
environmental impact report.
"(b) With respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding
under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), the public agency finds that
sPecific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits
of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment."
As defined in CEQA, "'significant effect on the environment' means a substantial, or
potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment." (Public Resources Code
Section 21068.)
Exhibit A
Page I of 16
-- II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL
For purposes of CEQA, the "project" addressed in the Final Environmental Impact
Report (the "Final EIR") is the adoption and phased implementation of the
Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project (the "Project"). As more particularly identified in the Final EIR,
The Project Area is more particularly identified in the Final EIR. Under the
Redevelopment Plan, the Project would be developed in accordance with the land uses
designated and permitted by the General Plan for the City of Cupertino. The
Redevelopment Plan also specifically recognizes the development rights vested under
that certain Development Agreement dated August 15, 1991, adopted by the City
Council of the City of Cupertino by Ordinance No. 1540 on July 15, 1991. The Final
EIR describes the environmental impacts that may occur as a result of the adoption and
phased implementation of the Redevelopment Plan and identifies, where applicable,
measures which would mitigate significant effects on the environment to a level of
insignificance. Findings regarding the significant effects of the Project are set forth
below.
III.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT; FINDINGS REGARDING
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT
This Part III identifies the potentially significant and unavoidably significant effects of the
Project as determined by the Agency and the City Council, including the findings and
facts supporting the findings in connection therewith.
A. Land Use and Planning
1. Environmental Impact
Land Use Incompatibilities Between Proposed Modifications
and Adjacent Areas: The proposed location of the new 168-
room Hotel #2, west of Wolfe Road, could result in
potentially significant adverse land use compatibility effects
on adjacent existing residential areas to the west of the
project site. These potential adverse effects could include:
height and Scale incongruities, introduction of night-time light
impacts from the hotel and hotel parking area lighting
features, construction period emissions (air), .and increased
noise associated with mechanical equipment and project
construction.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Exhibit
Page 2 of
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measures are incorporated into-the Redevelopment Plan:
In conducting the design review process for Hotel #2,
particular emphasis will be placed on the need to
incorporate building design, setback, lighting controls,
and other measures to ensure against adverse
impacts on the nearest residential neighborhood to
the west.
The construction period air quality (dust) mitigation
measures identified in Section 9.3 of the Final EIR will
be implemented.
Visual Factors
1. Environmental Impact
Visual Impacts of Wolfe Road Tree Removal: The proposed
new department store and to a lesser extent, the proposed
expansion of the retail bridge acroSs Wolfe Road, could
displace existing Wolfe Road street trees, resulting in the
loss of visually important mature street trees and the
conspicuous disruption of the existing Wolfe Road visual
~haracter at this location.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts 'in Support of the Finding: The' following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
To the extent possible, the layout for the proposed
new department store and retail bridge will retain and
protect some of the existing street trees and/or a
street tree replacement plan will be implemented
which, to the satisfaction of the City, will be sufficient
to offset project-related losses and restore visual
continuity on the affected segment of Wolfe Road.
Exhibit ^
Page 3 of 16
-- C. Transportation and Parking
Environmental Irhpact
ao
Project Impact on Westbound Left-Turn Storage at the Wolfe
Road/Homestead Road Intersection: The estimated
maximum vehicular queue in the westbound left-turn lanes
at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road intersection is
estimated to exceed the available storage under existing
conditions by six vehicles. With the addition of traffic
associated with other .approved developments and the
proposed project, the queue is estimated to exceed the
available storage by 10 vehicles.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
As part of the project development, the westbound
left-turn pocket at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road
intersection will be lengthened by modifying the
striping on the Homestead Road approach to provide
two 320-foot left-turn lanes.
Environmental Impact
Project Impact on Eastbound Left-Turn Storage at the Wolfe
Road/Stevens Creek Boulevard Intersection: With the
addition of traffic associated with the proposed project, the
maximum queue in the eastbound left-turn pocket at the
Wolfe Road/Stevens Creek Boulevard intersection is
projected to exceed the available storage length by one
vehicle during the AM peak hour.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
Exhibit
Page 4 of
(~)
As part of the project development, the eastbound
left-turn pocket at the-Wolfe Rload/Stevens Creek
Boulevard intersection will be lengthened by
modifying the striping and median on the Stevens
Creek Boulevard approach to provide one 170-foot
and one 430-foot-long left-turn lane.
Environmental Impact
Project Impact on Westbound Left-Turn Storage at the
Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard Intersection:
The maximum queue projected in the westbound left-turn
pocket at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard
intersection' is 18 vehicles under existing conditions and 20
vehicles under project conditions. The existing turn pocket
storage is approximately 16 vehicles in two 190-foot-long
lanes. The estimated maximum queue under project
conditions would exceed the available storage length by
four.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
As part of the project' development, the eastbound
left-turn pocket at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De
Anza .Boulevard intersection will be lengthened by
modifying the striping and median on the Stevens
Creek Boulevard approach to provide two 250-foot-
long left-turn lanes.
Environmental Impact
a. Potential Operational Impact at the Vallco Parkway
(Realigned) Parking Structure Driveways: The design of
relocated Vallco Parkway and the associated new adjacent
parking structure driveways has not been finalized. If
separate left-turn lanes for inbound traffic at the parking
structure driveways on Vallco Parkway are not provided, a
potentially significant impact would occur at these locations.
Exhibit A
Page 5 of 16
b. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment .Plan:
(.1)
As part of the project development, the provision of
separate left-turn lanes for inbound traffic at the
Vallco Parkway driveways will be required.
5. Environmental Impact
ao
Potential Increased Demand for Bicycle Access: The project
has the potential to increase demand for bicycle access to
the site. There are no existing bicycle facilities serving the
site.
bo
Findin~]: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
The project design shall incorporate support facilities
for bicycles (e.g., bike racks for patrons and bicycle
lockers and showers for employees).
6. Environmental Impact
Potential Parking Impacts: The project has the potential to
substantially increase the demands for convenient on-site
parking which may result in Iocational and overall shortages
in parking supply.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
Parking will be required to be constructed at the retail
parking ratio specified in the Development Agreement
(August 15, 1991)
Exhibit A
Page 6 of 16
and/or at the parking ratios
specified in the City's zoning ordinance. In addition,
to the extent necessary and feasible, off-site
employee parking and/or a valet program during the
peak holiday season shall be implemented.
Environmental Impact
ao
bo
co
Cumulative Impacts on the Homestead Road/Wolfe Road
Intersection: With the traffic associated with the proposed
project, approved developments in the area, and other
reasonably foreseeable development, operation of the
intersection of Homestead Road and Wolfe Road is
projected to deteriorate from LOS D- to LOS E during the
PM peak hour.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
Implementation of the City's planned Homestead
Arterial Management Program would improve
operations at this intersection. PM peak-hour
operations with improved signal progression along
Homestead Road are estimated to be at LOS D-.
Environmental Impact
ao
co
Cumulative Impacts to the Wolfe Road/Pruneridge Avenue
Intersection: With the traffic associated with the proposed
project, approved developments in the area, and other
reasonably foreseeable development, operation of the
intersection of Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is
projected to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E+ during the
PM peak hour.
Finding: This is an unavoidable significant effect. Specific
economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the
Project make the alternatives infeasible and outweigh this
significant effect.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The specific economic,
legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project
Exhibit A
Page ? of 16
are more particularly described in the Statement of
Overriding Considerations contained in Part V of this
Statement of Findings, Facts and Overriding Considerations.
Public Services
1. Environmental Impact
Increase in Demand for Fire Protection and Emergency
Medical Services: The proposed project would attract new
patrons to the proposed new peripheral retail store,
restaurant, two hotels, department store(s), and other retail
space increases, increasing the demand for fire protection
and emergency medical services. In addition, traffic
generated by the proposed project and other development in
the area may create greater traffic congestion, potentially
increasing emergency response times. The Central Fire
District may require additional staffing and/or equipment to
provide an adequate level of service to the project.
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measures are incorporated into the .Redevelopment Plan:
As part of the project development, compliance with
all applicable codes will be required, including the
1994 Uniform Fire Code, current Uniform Building
Code, Electrical Code, Mechanical Code and
Municipal Code, to ensure adequate installation of
sprinkler systems, water delivery systems, and other
provisions.
(2)
As part of the project development, compliance with
detailed project design features identified by the
Central Fire District will be required during the City's
plan review and permitting process.
2. Environmental Impact
Increase in Demand for Police Services: The proposed
project would attract new patrons to the proposed new
peripheral retail store, restaurant, two hotels, department
Exhibit A
Page s of 16
4-35
bo
store(s), and other retail space increases, increasing the
demand for fire protection and-emergency medical services.
In addition, traffic generated by the proposed project and
other development in the area may create greater traffic
congestion, potentially increasing emergency response
times. The Santa Clara County Sheriff's Department may
require additional staffing to provide an adequate level of
service to the project.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
As part of the project development, coordination with
the City and the County Sheriff's Department will be
required to quantify potential impacts on police
services and develop an appropriate mitigation
strategy, including adequate site lighting for security.
Additional Facts: The City of Cupertino has approved an
agreement with the County of Santa Clara whereby the City
I'ias agreed to pay the cost of one additional sheriff's deputy
for a certain period of time.
Environmental Impact
ao
Potential for Delays in Emergency Response: The
numerous 'access points to the project site may create
confusion to emergency responders, possibly adding to
response times.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(ID
Coordination with the Sheriff's Department and Central
Fire District will be required, as necessary and appropriate,
to assign specific access point designations.
Exhibit
Page 9 of
Eo
Air Quality
Environmental Impact
a. Project Sanitary Sewer System Impacts: The sewer
collection demands associated with the proposed project
could exceed the capacity of the existing sewer main under
1-280 currently serving the project site.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
As part of the project development, wastewater
generation increases shall be compared by a civil
engineer to determine whether existing capacity is
sufficient and, if not, collection capacity improvements
shall be required.
Environmental Impact
ao
Construction Emissions: Project construction activities such
as building demolition, excavation and grading operations,
construction vehicle traffic and wind blowing over exposed
earth would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive
particulate matter emissions that would affect local air
quality.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
Fugitive dust control measures will be required to be
implemented during project demolition and
construction activities.
Exhibit A
Page 10 of 16
2. Environmental Impact
ao
Regional Emissions: Additional traffic generated by
shopping center expansion would generate regional
emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District's ("BAAQMD") thresholds of significance. BAAQMD
guidance provides that projects that would individually have
a significant air quality impact would also be considered to
have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The
proposed project therefore would also have a significant
cumulative impact on regional air quality.
bo
Finding: This is an unavoidable significant effect. Specific
economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the
Project make the alternatives infeasible and outweigh this
significant effect.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The specific economic,
legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project
are more particularly described in the Statement of
Overriding Considerations contained in Part V of this
Statement of Findings, Facts and Overriding Considerations.
Geology and Soils
1. Environmental Impact
Expansive Soils and Soil Settlement: New development on
the project site may be subject to foundation and
infrastructure (i.e., utility pipe) damage from expansive soils
or settlement of soils. Although it is likely that any such soils
on the site were treated or removed prior to the construction
of the existing structures, it is possible that some hazards
remain or that remediation standards have increased.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
In accordance with standard City procedures, a soils
report will' be required in connection with project
development, which shall be based on a sufficient
Exhibit A
Page ] ] of 16
analysis of soils conducted by a qualified engineer or
geologist and include appropriate soils, foundation
and structural engineering to adequately account for
any expansive soil underlying the site.
2. Environmental Impact
a=
Seismic Shaking Hazards: The project would be subject to
strong to very strong seismic shaking in the event of a major
earthquake on the Hayward, San Andreas, or Calaveras
fault systems. This shaking could, in turn, result in ground
failure from liquefaction or differential settlement. Shaking or
resulting ground failure could damage or destroy improperly
designed or constructed new structures and infrastructure
and result in hazards of injury or death to new building
occupants. Potential damage to the proposed cinema would
be of particular concern due to the likely high concentration
of occupants.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measures are incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
Submission of a detailed site-specific geotechnical
investigation for the project, and commitment to
compliance with all recommendations, will be required
prior to project development.
(2)
The use of flexible connections for all water and
sewer lines and, as appropriate, underground power
and telecommunications lines will be required.
Cultural Resources
1. Environmental Impact
ao
Disturbance of Historic ArchaeolOgical Resources: Although
the potential for the project site to 'contain archaeological
resources is currently considered Iow, construction of the
proposed new store, cinema, restaurant, and
facilities could disturb sensitive,, as-yet unknown
archaeological resources..
Exhibit A
Page ]:z of 16
parking
historic
bo
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
In the event that subsurface cultural resources are
encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work
in the immediate vicinity shall be stopped and a
qualified archaeologist retained to evaluate the finds.
The discovery or disturbance of any cultural
resources shall also be reported to the California
Historic Resources Information System and, if Native
American artifacts are found, to the Native American
Heritage Commission. Identified cultural resources
should be recorded on form DPR 523 (historic
properties). Mitigation measures prescribed by these
groups and required by the City will be undertaken
prior to resumption of construction activities. If
human remains are found during project grading,
work shall be halted and the County Coroner shall be
informed immediately. If disturbance of a cultural
resource cannot be avoided, a mitigation program,
including measures set forth in Section 15126.4 of the
State CEQ^ Guidelines, shall be implemented.
Environmental Impact
ao
Disturbance of On-site Culturally Significant Trees: Project
construction could disturb culturally significant trees at the
project site, especially those located near the proposed new
department store, parking structure, and peripheral retail
store.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Co
Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation
measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan:
(1)
A survey of existing trees on the project site shall be
conducted. In connection with any tree defined as a
Exhibit
Page ]3 or'
"heritage tree" or a "specimen tree" by the Cupertino
Municipal Code (chapter 14.18), compliance with City
policies and ordinance requirements for tree
protection and maintenance shall be required.
IV. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT
CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the Project or
to the location of the Project which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the
Project and to evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. Section 15126(d)(1)
of the State CEQA Guidelines states that the "discussion of alternatives shall focus on
alternatives to the project or to its location which are capable of avoiding or
substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives
would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be
more costly."
As more particularly set forth in the Final EIR, the Project was compared to the
following alternatives: (1) no project; (2) alternative land use mix--2,984-seat cinema in
place of 95,000-square-foot retail store; (3) mitigated project alternative; (4) modified
redevelopment area boundaries; (5) alternative project location.
The analysis in the Final EIR concludes that the Mitigated Project is the environmentally
superior alternative. The Mitigated Project is the proposed project incorporating all of
the mitigation measures recommended by the Final EIR.
Based on the information contained in the Final EIR and the foregoing, the Agency and
the City Council find that none of the other alternatives (those alternatives other than
the Mitigated Project) are feasible in that none of the other alternatives will accomplish
the basic objectives of the Project to eliminate blight in the Project Area. As a result,
none of the other alternatives are acceptable when compared to the project as
proposed and modified by the mitigation measures adopted by the Agency and City
Council, i.e., the Mitigated Project.
V. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
CEQA requires a public agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its
unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. As set
forth in Part III hereof, the Agency and the City Council have determined that the only
unavoidable environmental consequences of the Project are the following:
Transportation and Planning: Cumulative impacts on the Wolfe
Road/Pruneridge Avenue intersection. With the traffic associated with the
proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other
reasonably foreseeable development, the operation of the intersection of
Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS
Exhibit A
Page 14 of 16
D to LOS E+ during the PM peak hour. There are no feasible physical
improvements that could be constructed at this intersection that would
mitigate this impact to a less than significant level.
Air Quality: Regional emissions. Additional traffic generated by shopping
center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay
Area Air Quality Management District's ("BAAQMD") thresholds of
significance. BAAQMD guidance provides that projects that would
individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered
to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project
therefore would also have a significant cumulative impact on regional air
quality. Mitigation measures are set forth in the Statement of Findings,
Facts, and Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A). Those mitigation
measures will assist in reducing project and cumulative impacts on
regional air quality, but would not reduce the impacts to a less-than-
significant level.
The Agency and the City Council find that the above-referenced unavoidable
environmental consequences of the Project are acceptable when balanced against its
benefits. This finding is based on the following facts:
The Project will serve a critical need, that being the elimination and
prevention of the spread of blight and deterioration in the Project Area and
the conservation, rehabilitation and redevelopment of the proposed
Project Area in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan, the General
Plan for the City of Cupertino and local codes and ordinances.
The promotion of new and continuing private sector investment within the
· Project Area will prevent the loss of and facilitate the capture of
commercial sales activity.
The Project will allow for the elimination of blight through rehabilitation and
reconstruction, new development, and the assembly of parcels into more
developable sites for more desirable uses.
o
The Project will result in the elimination or amelioration of certain
environmental deficiencies, including substandard vehicular circulation
systems.
o
New construction within the Project Area will result in an environment
reflecting a high level of concern for architectural, landscape, and urban
design and land use principles appropriate for attainment of the objectives
of the Redevelopment Plan.
Exhibit A
Page 15 of 16
o
Project implementation would result in the retention and expansion of
businesses by means of redevelopment and rehabilitation activities and
by encouraging and assisting in the cooperation and participation of
owners, businesses, and public agencies in the revitalization of the
Project Area.
Revitalized commercial development will result in the creation and
development of local job opportunities and the preservation of the area's
existing employment base:
Project implementation will strengthen the economic base of the Project
Area and the City by installing needed site improvements and stimulating
commercial development.
Project implementation will expand and improve the City's supply of
affordable housing.
Exhibit A
Page 16 of 16
RESOLUTION NO. 00-188
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CUPERTINO FINDING THAT THE USE OF
TAXES ALLOCATED FROM THE CUPERTINO
VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR THF~
PURPOSE OF INCREASING, IMPROVING, AND
PRESERVING THE COMMUNITY'S SUPPLY OF
LOW- AND MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING
OUTSIDE THF~ PROJECT AREA WILL BE OF
BENEFIT TO THE PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") has prepared a
proposed Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project (the "Project") which would result in the allocation of taxes from the
Project Area to the Agency for the purposes of redevelopment; and
WHEREAS, Section 33334.2 of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health
and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) requires that not less than twenty percent (20%) of all
taxes so allocated be used by the Agency for the purpose of increasing, improving, and
preserving the community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing available at affordable
housing cost; and
WHEREAS, Section 33334.2(g) of the Community Redevelopment Law provides that
the Agency may use such funds outside the Project Area if a finding is made by resolution of the
Agency and the City Council that such use will be of benefit to the Project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CUPERTINO that the use of taxes allocated from the Project Area for the purpose of
increasing, improving, and preserving the community's supply of low- and moderate-income
housing available at affordable housing cost outside the Project Area will be of benefit to the
Project.
CUP/CCResoUseTaxes
6/14/00
Resolution No. 00-188 Page 2
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this
19~ day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Members of the City Council
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
ORDINANCE NO. 18~0
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND ADOPTING
THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City Council of ~e City of Cupertino (the "City Council") has received
from the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") the proposed Redevelopment Plan
(the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project"), a
copy of which is on file at the office of the Agency at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino,
California, and at the office of the City Clerk at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California,
together with the Report of the Agency to the City Council on the proposed Redevelopment Plan,
including: (1) the reasons for selection of the Project Area; (2) a description of the physical and
economic conditions existing in the Project Area; (3) a description of specific projects proposed
by the Agency in the Project Area and an explanation of how the proposed projects will alleviate
the conditions existing in the Project Area; (4) the proposed method of financing redevelopment
of the Project Area, including an assessment of the economic feasibility of the Project and an
explanation of why the elimination of blight and redevelopment of the Project Area cannot be
accomplished by private enterprise acting alone or by the City Council's use of financing
alternatives other than tax increment financing; (5) an analysis of the Preliminary Plan for the
Project; (6) the Report and Recommendations of the Planning Commission of the City of
Cupertino (the "Planning Commission"); (7) the Final Environmental Impact Report; (8) a
summary of consultations with affected taxing agencies; and (9) an Implementation Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reported that the Redevelopment Plan
conforms to the General Plan of the City of Cupertino and has recommended approval of the
Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Agency prepared and circulated a Draft Environmental Impact Report
(the "Draft EIR") on the Redevelopment Plan in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the Guidelines for Implementation
of the California Environmental Quality Act (14 Cal. Code Regs. Section 15000 et seq.), and
environmental procedures adopted by the Agency pursuant thereto, and the Draft EIR was
thereafter revised and supplemented to incorporate comments received and responses thereto,
and, as so revised and supplemented, a Final Environmental Impact Report (the "Final EIR") was
prepared and certified by the Agency; and
WHEREAS, the Agency and the City Council have reviewed and considered the Final
EIR on the Redevelopment Plan and have determined that, for certain significant effects
identified by the Final EIR, mitigation measures and a monitoring program therefor have been
required in or incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan which avoid or substantially lessen such
effects; and
Ordinance No. 1850 Page 2
WHEREAS, the Agency and the City Council have each adopted a Statement of
Overriding Considerations for the remaining significant effects identified by the Final EIR which
cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance; and
WHEREAS, the City'Council and the Agency held a joint public heating in the City
Council Chambers, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, on June 19, 2000, to consider
adoption of the Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, a notice of said hearing was duly and regularly published in The Cupertino
Courier, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Cupertino, once a week for five
successive weeks prior to the date of said hearing, and a copy of said notice and affidavit of
publication are on file with the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, copies of the notice of joint public hearing and a statement concerning
acquisition of property by the Agency were mailed by first-class mail to the last known address
of each assessee of each parcel of land in the proposed Project Area as shown on the last
equalized assessment roll of the County of Santa Clara; and
WHEREAS, copies of the notice of joint public hearing were mailed by first-class mail to
all business owners or operators within the proposed Project Area; and
WHEREAS, copies of the notice of joint public hearing were mailed by certified mail
with remm receipt requested to the governing body of each taxing entity which receives taxes
from property in the Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Report of the Agency, the Report and
Recommendations of the Planning Commission, the Redevelopment Plan, and the Final EIR; has
provided an oppommity for all persons to be heard and has received and considered all evidence
and testimony presented for or against any and all aspects of the Redevelopment Plan;
WHEREAS, no written objections to the Redevelopment Plan were received, either
before or at the noticed public hearing, from an affected taxing entity or property owner; and
WHEREAS, all actions required by law have been taken by all appropriate public bodies;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the purpose and intent of the City Council with respect to the Project
Area is to accomplish the following: (a) the establishment, by effective use of the redevelopment
process, of a planning and implementation framework that will ensure the proper, long-term
development of the Project Area; Co) the elimination and prevention of the spread of blight and
deterioration, and the conservation and rehabilitation of the Project Area in accordance with the
City's General Plan, specific plans, and local codes and ordinances; (c) the replanning, redesign,
and redevelopment of underdeveloped or poorly developed areas that are underutilized or
Ordinance No. 1850 Page 3
improperly utilized; (d) the strengthening of the economic base of the Project Area by the
redevelopment and rehabilitation of structures and the installation of needed site improvements;
(e) the promotion of new private sector investment within the Project Area to facilitate the
revitalization of an important commercial center; (f) the elimination or amelioration of certain
environmental deficiencies, such as insufficient off- and on-street parking, and other public
improvements, facilities and utilities deficiencies adversely affecting the Project Area; (g) the
creation and development of local job opportunities and the preservation of the existing
employment base; and (h) the provision, by rehabilitation or new construction, of improved
housing for individuals and/or families of low or moderate income within the City limits.
Section 2. The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
(a) The Project Area is a blighted area, the redevelopment of which is necessary to
effectuate the public purposes declared in the California Community Redevelopment Law
(Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.). This finding is based upon the following facts,
as more particularly set forth in the Report of the Agency to the City Council:
(1) The Project Area is predominantly urbanized;
(2) The Project Area is characterized by and suffers from a combination of
blighting physical and economic conditions, including, among others: buildings which are
substandard in design and are functionally obsolescent; buildings of inadequate size; buildings
with inadequate access and circulation; lots of irregular form and shape and of inadequate size
for proper usefulness which are under multiple ownership; depreciated or stagnant property
values and impaired investmef~ts, evidenced by a decline in retail sales, decline in assessed
property values, high vacancy levels, and an inability to attract significant retail tenants; and
(3) The combination of the conditions referred to in paragraph (2) above is so
prevalent 'and so substantial that it causes a reduction of, or lack of, proper utilization of the
Project Area to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the
City which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise or
governmental action, or both, without redevelopment.
(b) The Redevelopment Plan will redevelop the Project Area in conformity with the
Community Redevelopment Law and in the interests of the public peace, health, safety, and
welfare. This finding is based upon the fact that redevelopment of the Project Area will
implement the objectives of the Community Redevelopment Law by aiding in the elimination
and correction of the conditions of blight; providing for planning, development, redesign,
clearance, reconstruction, or rehabilitation of properties which need improvement; improving,
increasing, and preserving the supply of low- and moderate-income housing within the
community; providing additional employment opportunities; and providing for higher economic
utilization of potentially useful land.
(c) The adoption and carrying out of the Redevelopment Plan is economically sound
and feasible. This finding is based on the facts, as more particularly set forth in the Report of the
Ordinance No. 1850 Page 4
Agency to the City Council, that under the Redevelopment Plan the Agency will be authorized to
seek and utilize a variety of potential financing resources, including tax increments; that the
nature and timing of public redevelopment assistance will depend on the amount and availability
of such financing resources, including tax increments generated by new investment in the Project
Area; and that no public redevelopment activity will be undertaken unless the Agency can
demonstrate that it has adequate revenue to finance the activity.
(d) The Redevelopment Plan is consistent with the General Plan of the City of
Cupertino, including, but not limited to, the housing element, which substantially complies with
state housing law. This finding is based upon the finding of the Planning Commission that the
Redevelopment Plan is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Cupertino.
(e) The carrying out of the Redevelopment Plan would promote the public peace,
health, safety, and welfare of the City of Cupertino and will effectuate the purposes and policy of
the Community Redevelopment Law. This finding is based upon the fact that redevelopment, as
contemplated by the Rede/,,elopment Plan, will benefit the Project Area by correcting conditions
of blight and by coordinating public and private actions to stimulate development and improve
the physical and economic conditions of the Project Area.
(f) The condemnation of real property, as provided for in the Redevelopment Plan, is
necessary to the execution of the Redevelopment Plan, and adequate provisions have been made
for the payment for property to be acquired as provided by law. This finding is based upon the
need to ensure that the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan will be carded out and to prevent
the recurrence of blight, and the fact that no property will be acquired unless the Agency can
demonstrate that it has adequate revenue for the acquisition.
(g) The Redevelopment Plan will not result in the temporary or permanent
displacement of any occupants of housing facilities in the Project Area and, therefore, will not
result in the need to relocate occupants of housing facilities or to ensure the availability of
comparable replacement dwellings. This finding is based on the fact that there are no housing
facilities currently located in the Project Area.
(h) There are no noncontiguous areas of the Project Area.
(i) Inclusion of any lands, buildings, or improvements in the Project Area which are
not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare is necessary for the effective
redevelopment of the entire area of which they are a part; and any area included is necessary for
effective redevelopment and is not included for the purpose of obtaining the allocation of tax
increment revenues from such area pursuant to Section 33670 of the Community Redevelopment
Law without other substantial justification for its inclusion. This finding is based upon the fact
that the boundaries of the Project Area were chosen as a unified and consistent whole to include
all properties contributing to or affected by the blighting conditions characterizing the Project
Area.
Ordinance No. 1850 Page 5
(j) The elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the Project Area could not
reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise-acting alone without the aid and
assistance of the Agency. This finding is based upon the facts, as more particularly set forth in
the Report of the Agency to the City Council, that because of the higher costs and more
significant risks associated with development of blighted areas, individual developers are unable
and unwilling to invest in blighted areas without substantial public assistance and that funds of
other public sources and programs are insufficient to eliminate the blighting conditions.
(k) The Project Area is a predominantly urbanized area as defined by subdivision (b)
of Section 33320.1. This finding is based upon the facts, as more particularly set forth in the
Report of the Agency to the City Council, that all of the properties within the Project Area have
been or are developed for urban uses and are an integral part of an area developed for urban uses.
(1) The time limitations in the Redevelopment Plan, which are the maximum time
limitations authorized under the Community Redevelopment Law, are reasonably related to the
proposed projects to be implemented in the Project Area and the ability of the Agency to
eliminate blight within the Project Area. This finding is based upon the facts that redevelopment
depends, in large part, upon private market forces beyond the control of the Agency and shorter
time limitations would impair the Agency's ability to be flexible and respond to market
conditions as and when appropriate and would impair the Agency's ability to maintain
development standards and controls over a period of time sufficient to assure area stabilization.
In addition, shorter time limitations would limit the revenue sources and financing capacity
necessary to carry out proposed projects in the Project Area.
Section 3. In order to implement and facilitate the effectuation of the Redevelopment
Plan, certain official actions must be taken by the City Council; accordingly, the City Council
hereby: (a) pledges its cooperation in helping to carry out the Redevelopment Plan; (b) directs
the various officials, depamn~nts, boards, and agencies of the City of Cupertino having
administrative responsibilities in the Project Area likewise to cooperate to such end and to
exercise their respective functions and powers in a manner consistent with the Redevelopment
Plan; (c) stands ready to consider and take appropriate action on proposals and measures
designed to effectuate the Redevelopment Plan; and (d) declares its intention to undertake and
complete any proceeding, including the expenditure of moneys, necessary to be carried out by
the City under the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan.
Section 4. Having received no written objections fi.om an affected taxing entity or
property owner either before or at the noticed public hearing, and having considered all evidence
and testimony presented for or against any aspect of the Redevelopment Plan, the Council hereby
overrules all written and oral objections to the Redevelopment Plan.
Section 5. The mitigation measures, as identified in Council Resolution No. 00-187,
adopted on June 19, 2000, and Agency Resolution No. RA-00-06, adopted on June 19, 2000,
making findings based upon consideration of the Final EIR on the Redevelopment Plan, are
incorporated and made part of the proposed Redevelopment Plan.
Ordinance No. 1850 Page 6
Section 6. That certain document entitled "Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project," a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk and attached
hereto, is hereby incorporated by reference herein and designated as the official "Redevelopment
Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project."
Section 7. The City of Cupertino Building Department is hereby directed for a period of
at least two (2) years after the effective date of this Ordinance to advise all applicants for
building permits within the Project Area that the site for which a building permit is sought for the
construction of buildings or for other improvements is within a redevelopment project area.
Section 8. The City Clerk is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to
the Agency, and the Agency is hereby vested with the responsibility for carrying out the
Redevelopment Plan.
Section 9. The City Clerk is hereby directed to record with the County Recorder of Santa
Clara County a notice of the approval and adoption of the Redevelopment Plan pursuant to this
Ordinance, containing a description of the land within the Project Area and a statement that
proceedings for the redevelopment of the Project Area have been instituted under the Community
Redevelopment Law.
Section 10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a copy of the description and
statement recorded pursuant to Section 9 of this Ordinance, a copy of this Ordinance, and a map
or plat indicating the boundaries of the Project Area, to the auditor and assessor of the County of
Santa Clara, to the governing body of each of the taxing entities which receives taxes from
property in the Project Area, and to the State Board of Equalization within thirty (30) days
following adoption of this Ordinance.
Section 11. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to certify to the passage of this
Ordinance and to cause the same to be published once in The Cupertino Courier, a newspaper of
general'circulation, 'published and circulated in the City of Cupertino.
Section 12. If any part of this Ordinance or the Redevelopment Plan which it approves is
held to be invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portion of this Ordinance or of the Redevelopment Plan, and this City Council hereby declares
that it would have passed the remainder of this Ordinance or approved the remainder of the
Redevelopment Plan if such invalid portion thereof had been deleted.
Section 13. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
adoption.
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the 19'h
day of June, 2000, and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino on the ~ day of ., 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
Ordinance No. 1850 Page 7
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
~UN-14-~000 15:2~ P.02
PROOF OF PUI~LI~TION
Fllinl Stamp
(~o:5.5 C,C.P.)
State of California
County of Santa Clara
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the
County aforesaid: I am over the age of ~8 years, and not
party to or interested in the adore entitled matter. I am
the principa~ clerk of the printer of the:
The Cupertino Courier, 20465 Silverado Ave.,
Cupertino Callfornla, 95ot4 a newspaper of general
circulation, printed every Wednesday in the City of 5an
Jose, State of Cagfornia, County of Santa Clara. and
whlcl~ newspaper has been adjudged a newspaper of
general circulation by the Superior Court of the County
of Santa Clara, State of California, Case Number
CVtoo637 that the notice of which the annexed [sa
printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has
been published in each regular and entire issue of said
Newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the
following dates, to wit:
May ~7. 2A, ~.t and lune 7, ta
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
Exhibit 1
all in the year of 2000
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing {$ true and correct.
Dated: .~
at San Jose, California
Stephanle Thompson
TOTAL P.02
aim the Cupelino
Ite~bpn~a M~(Y
~0, at ~4S p.m,. m the C~
Cound Cha~ k~JWl ~t
fl0ilfl"A' 011-800-0S'14"
I~GN. O~SClilqlCflto the smfIMffy be d SNwm
C.oertltio/Vltlco
[ITY sm.~T£ IN TH[ OIY M, · ~Nt# I0~-I00-~'00"
CU~ItTINO. COUNTY OF '
M CIMA MO STATE M '" (2) · TheKe
CJ~JFORNIA D(SCIIKO AS 00I.M04TM*
fO(LOWS: eelin/I a( the
Book 325 d Mal~ at I~e t2, (3) Thence
qanta ,C, brd Cou~ h(ML 891-800-1]'~'
nMlh 8tl*100*3&'00' eOSL be M Tract Ne.
$~N/~4 Io the Mhedy IN) 001-600~4' 30' wes~ 13Q ZO4
V/Me ~ ThoKi do~ smd Tf~(t No. ~)0
EXHIBIT; B -.- .,,-'--'"-
· wed. 4~.44 Is~ (4) lh~ce
26 THE CUPERTINO COURIER JUN£/4, 2000
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
(Notice to Property Owners and Business Owners/Operators
with Statement Regarding Acquisition of Property)
Exhibit 2
I, ~ /4/~whose business address is 10300 Torre Avenue,
Cupertino, California'95014, do hereby certify that I mailed a copy of the attached
Notice of Joint Public Hearing (the "Notice") and letter containing a statement regarding
acquisition of property by the Agency (the "Statement") to each assessee of land in the
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project Area, as shown on the last equalized
assessment roll, and to each known business owner/operator in the Cupertino Vall¢o
Redevelopment Project Area, according to the lists of such assessees and business
owners/operators and their addresses attached to this Certificate, and that I personally
mailed such Notice and Statement by depositing a copy of same, addressed to each
such listed last known assessee, first-class mail, postage prepaid, in the United States
mail at Cupertino, California, on ~ /~ ,2000.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
DATED:
~ /~, ,2000
Cupertino, California
-(Title)
ATTACHMENTS
(1) Notice of Joint Public Hearing
(2) Statement Regarding Acquisition of Property
(3) List of Assessees and Addresses
(4) List of Business Owners/Operators and Addresses
CU P/CertMailNotJ PHOwners
5/8/00
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
(Notice to Affected Taxing Entities)
Exhibit 3
I, C-,./C)o~¥ ~t,/o,~o4;uT-, whose business address is 10300 Torre Avenue,
Cupertino, California 95014, do hereby certify that I mailed a copy of the attached
Notice of Joint Public Hearing (the "Notice") to the governing body of each taxing entity
which receives taxes from property within the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project
Area, according to the list of taxing entities attached to this Certificate, and that I
personally mailed such Notice by depositing a copy of same, addressed to each such
taxing entity, certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, in the United
States mail at Cupertino, California, on J~IA-,~ ? G ,2000.
Copies of all returned receipts are on file in the office of the City Clerk.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true'and correct.
DATED:
Cupertinol California
ature)
(Title)
(2)
A'I-rACHMENTS
Notice of Joint Public Hearing
List of Affected Taxing Entities and Addresses
CUP/CertMailNotJPHTaxAgs
5/8/00
Exhibit 4
CERTIFICATION OF CERTAIN OFFICIAL ACTIONS
IN CONNECTION WITH THE PREPARATION OF
THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
I, Donald D. Brown, Executive Director of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency, do
hereby certify that pursuant to the provisions of the California Community Redevelopment Law
(Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.), the following official actions have been taken by
the City Council of the City Cupertino (the Council), the Planning Commission of the City of
Cupertino (the Planning Commission) and the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the Agency)
in connection with the preparation of the Redevelopment Plan for Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project:
1. Council Resolution No. 99-212, adopted on July 19, 1999: A Resolution of the
City Council of the City of Cupertino Designating a Redevelopment Survey Area.
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5054, adopted on July 19, 1999:
Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino Selecting the Boundaries of the
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project Within the Redevelopment Survey Area and
Approving a Preliminary Plan for the Redevelopment of the Project Area.
3. Agency Resolution No. RA-99-09, adopted on July 19, 1999: Resolution of the
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Accepting the Preliminary Plan for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project.
4. Agency Resolution No. RA-00-01, adopted on February 22, 2000: Resolution of
the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Approving and Adopting Rules Governing Participation
by Property Owners and the Extension of Reasonable Reentry Preferences to Business Occupants
in Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project.
5. Agency Resolution No. RA-00-02, adopted on February 22, 2000: Resolution of
the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Approving and Authorizing Transmittal of the
Preliminary Report to Affected Taxing Entities on the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project.
CUP/CertOffActs
6/12/00
6. Agency Resolution No. RA-00-03, adopted on February 22, 2000: Resolution of
the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Referring the Proposed R~development Plan for the
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project to the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino
for Report and Recommendation.
7. Agency Resolution No. RA-00-04, adopted on February 22, 2000: Resolution of
the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Accepting and Authorizing Circulation of the Draft
Environmental Impact Report on the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project.
8. A Notice of Completion of the Draft Environmental Impact Report on the
Redevelopment Plan was filed with the State Office of Planning and Research on February 28,
2000, and a notice inviting comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report was published
in The Cupertino Courier on February 16, 2000.
9. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6011, adopted on March 27, 2000:
Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino Making its Report and
Recommendation on Adoption of the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project.
10. Agency Resolution No. RA-00-05, adopted on May 15, 2000: Resolution of the
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Approving and Adopting the Report to the City Council on
the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, Submitting
Said Report and Proposed Redevelopment Plan to the City Council, and Consenting to a Joint
Public Hearing on Said Redevelopment Plan.
11. Council Resolution No. 00-143, adopted on May 15, 2000: A Resolution of the
City Council of the City of Cupertino Consenting to and Calling a Joint Public Hearing on the
Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project.
The documents reflecting the official actions referred to herein are contained in the
official records of the City Council, the Planning Commission and the Agency, and are
incorporated herein by reference with the same effect as though set forth in full in this
Certification.
2
Dated: June ~,, 2090
Donald 1~.. Bro'wn~Executive Director of the Cupertino
Redevelopment Agency
G:planning/misc/cupcert
Exhibit 5
[PROPOSED]
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE
· CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
Prepared by the
CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A.
B.
C_
D.
INTRODUCTION
DESCRIFrION OF PROJECT AREA
PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
[~301] General
[g302] Participation Opportunities; Extension of
Preferences for.Reentry Within Redeveloped
'Project Area
1. [~303] Opportunities for Owners and
Business Occupants
2. [~304] Rules for Participation Opportunities,.
Priorities, and Preferences
3. [~305] Participation Agreements
4. [g306] Conforming Owners
[~307]Coope. ration with Public Bodies
[g308]Property Acquisition
1. [g309] Real Property
2. [g310] Personal Property
[~311]Property Management
[~312]Payments to Taxing Agencies
[g313]Relocation of Persons, Business Concerns, and
Others Displaced by the Project
1. [~314] Assistance in Finding Other Locations
2. [g315] Relocation Payments
IV.
H. [§316] Demolition, Clearance, and Building and
Site Preparation
1. [~317] Demolition and Clearance
2. [~318] Preparation of Building Sites
I. [~319] Property Disposition and De~-elopment
1. [~320] Real Property Disposition and
Development
a. [~321] General
b. [~322] Disposition and Development
Documents
c. [§323] Development by the Agency
d. [~324] Development Plans
2. [~325]Personal Property Disposition
J. [~326] Rehabilitation, Conservation, and Moving
of Structures
1. [~327] Rehabilitation and Conservation
2. [§328] Moving of Structures
K. [~329] Low- and Moderate~Income Housing
[~2)0]USES PERMITTED IN THE PROJECT AREA
A. [~01] Redevelopment Land Use Map
B. [~Z)2] Other Land Uses
1. [~I(B] Public Rights-of-Way
2. [~104] Other Public, Semi-Public, Institutional,
and Nonprofit Uses
3. r.~2~] Interim Uses
4. · [~406] Nonconforming Uses
C. [~37] General Controls and Limitations
1. [~t08] Construction
2. [gt09] Rehabilitation and Retention
of Properties
3. [~410] Limitation on the Number of
Buildings.
4. [~411] Number .of Dwelling Units
5. [~412] Limitation on Type, Size, and
Height of Buildings
6. [~413] Open Spaces, Landscaping, Light,
Air, and Privacy
7. [.~4141 Signs
8. [~415] Utilities
9. [~416] IncomPatible Uses
10. [,~417] Nondiscrimination and Nonsegregation
11. [~418] Subdivision of Parcels
12. [,~419] Minor Variations
D. [~.0] Design for Development
E. [,~t21] Building Permits
[~930] METHODS OF FINANCING THE PROJECT
A. [~501] General Description of the Proposed
Financin§ Method
B. [,~D2] Tax Increment Funds
C. [~503] Other Loans and Grants
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
[~600] ACTIONS BY THE CITY
[§700] ENFORCEMENT
[~800] DURATION OF THIS PLAN
[§900] PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT
Attachment No. 1
Attachment No. 2
Attachment No. 3
Attachment No. 4
Legal DescriPtion of the Project Area Boundaries
Project Area Map
Redevelopment Land Use Map
Proposed Pubhc Improvements
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR TIlE
CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PRO~ECT '
I. [~100] INTRODUCTION
This is. the Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project (the "Project") in the City of Cupertino (the "City"), County
of Santa Clara, State of California; it consists of the text, the Legal Description of the
Project Area Boundaries (Attachment No. 1), the Project Area Map (Attachment No.
2), the Redevelopment Land Use Map (Attachment No. 3), and the Proposed Public
Improvements (Attachment. No..4). This Plan was prepared by. the Cupertino
Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") pursuant to the Community
Redevelopment Law of the State of' California (Health and Safety Code Section 33000
et seq.), the California Constitution, and all applicable local laws and ordinances.
The proposed redevelopment of the area within the boundaries of the .Project
(the "Project Area") as described in this Plan is consistent with the General Plan for
the City .of Cupertino (the "General Plan"). This Plan also acknowledges the
existence of that certain Development Agreement dated August 15, 1991, adopted by
the City Council of the City of Cupertino by Ordinance No. 1540 on July 15, 1991.
Nothing in this Plan shah be construed to impair or alter any of the rights or
obligations of the parties under said Development Agreement nor prevent the
Agency from assisting in the implementation of said Development Agreement.
This Plan is based upon a Preliminary Plan formulated and adopted by the
· Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino (the "Planning Commission") by
Resolution No. 5054, on July 19, 1999.
This Plan provides the Agency with powers, duties, and obligations to
implement and further the program generally formulated in this .Plan for the
redevelopment, rehabilitation, and revitalization of the area 'within the Project
Area. Because of the long-term nature of this Plan and the need to retain in the
Agency flexibility to respond to market and economic conditions, property owner
and developer interests, and opportunities from time to time presented for
redevelopment, this Plan does not present a precise plan or establish specific projects
for the redevelopment, rehabilitation, and revitalization of the Project Area.
Instead, this Plan presents a process and a .basic framework within which specific
plans will be presented, specific projects will be established, and specific solutions
will be proposed and by which tools are provided to the Agency to fashion, develop,
and Proceed with such specific plans, projects, and solutions.
The purposes of the Community Redevelopment
through, and the major goals of this Plan are:
be attained
Ao
The establishment, by effective use of the redevelopment
process, of a planning and implementation framework that will
ensure the proper, long-term redevelopment of the Project Area.
The elimination and prevention of the spread of blight and
deterioration, and the conservation and rehabilitation of the
Project Area in accordance with the City's General Plan, specific
plans, and local codes and ordinances.
Co
The replanning, redesign, and redevelopment of
underdeveloped or .poorly' developed areas that are
underutilized or improperly utilized.
The strengthening of the economic base of the Project Area by
the redevelopment and rehabilitation of structures and the
installation of needed site improvements.
The promotion of new private sector investment within the
Project Area to facilitate the revitalization of an important
commercial center.
The elimination, or amelioration of certain environmental
deficiencies~ such as insufficient off- and on-street, parking, and
other public improvements, facilities and utilities deficiencies
adversely affecting the Project Area.
Go
The creation and development of local job opportunities and the
preservation of the existing employment base.
He
The provisiOn, by rehabilitation or new construction;' of
improved housing for individuals and/or families of low or
moderate income within the City limits.
The provision of assistance to existing building owners in
financing renovations needed to bring their buildings up to
current codes and standards.
r~. [~200] DESCKIPTION OF PROIECT AREA
The boundaries of the Project Area are described in the "Legal Description of
the Project Area Boundaries," attached hereto as Attachment No. 1 and incorporated
herein by reference, and are shown on the "Project Area Map," attached hereto as
Attachment No. 2 and incorporated herein by reference.
[§300] PROPOSED REDEVELOPIVfENT ACTIONS
A. [~301] General
The Agency proposes to eliminate and prevent the spread of blight and
deterioration in the Project Area by:
Permitting participation in the redevelopment process by
owners of properties located in the Project Area consistent
with this Plan and rules adopted by the Agency;
2. The acqkisition of real property;
The management of property under the ownership and
control of the Agency;
Providing relocation assistance to displaced persons and
business concerns;
The demolition or removal of certain buildings and
imp.rovements;
Providing for participation by owners presently located ih
the project Area and the extension of preferences to
business occupants desiring to remain or reenter into
business within the redeveloped Project Area;
The installation, construction, or reconstruction of streets,
utilities, and other pUblic improvements;
The disposition of property for uses in accordance with
this Plan;
The redevelopment of land by private enterprise or public
agencies for uses in accordance with this Plan;
10.
The rehabilitation of structures and improvements by
present owners, their successors, and the Agency; and
11.
Providing for the retention of controls and the
establishment of restrictions or covenants running with
the land so that property will continue to be used in
accordance with this Plan.
In the accomplishment of these purposes and activities and in the
implementation and furtherance of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to use all the
powers provided in this Plan and ail the powers now or hereafter permitted by law.
[§302] Participation Opportunities; Extension of Preferences
for Reentry Within Redeveloved Proiect Area
1. [§303] Op. portunities for Owners and Business Occupants
In accordance with this Plan and the rules for participation
adopted by the Agency pursuant to this Plan and the Community Redevelopment
Law, persons who are owners of real property in the Project Area shall be given a
'reasonable opportunity to participate in the redevelopment of the Project Area
consistent with the objectives of this Plan.
The Agency shall extend reasonable preferences to persons who
are engaged in business in the Project Area to remain or reenter into business
within the redeveloped Project Area if they otherwise, meet the requirements
prescribed in this Plan and the rules adopted by the Agency.
[~304] Rules for Participation Op. portunities. Priorities.
and Preferences
In order to provide opportunities to owners to participate in the
redevelopment of the Project Area and to extend reasonable preferences to
businesses to reenter into business within the redeveloped Project Area, the Agency
shall promulgate rules for participation by owners and the extension of preferences
to business tenants for reentry within the redeveloped Project Area.
[~305] Particivation A~reements
The Agency may require that, as a condition to participation in
redevelopment, each participant shall enter into a binding agreement with the
Agency by which the participant agrees to rehabilitate, develop, and use and
maintain the property in conformance with this Plan and to be subject to the
provisions hereof. In such agreements, participants may be required to join in the
recordation of such documents as may be necessary to ensure the property will be
developed and used in accordance with this Plan and the participation agreement.
Whether or not a participant enters into a participation agreement with the Agency,
the provisions of this Plan are applicable to all public and private property in the
Project Area.
In the event a participant fails or refuses to rehabilitate, develop,
and use and. maintain its real property pursuant to this Plan and a participation
agreement, the real proper~y or any interest therein may be acquired by the Agency
and sold or leased for rehabilitation or development in accordance with this Plan.
.4. [~306] Conformin~ Owners
The Agency may, at its sole and absolute discretion, determine
that certain real property within the Project Area presently meets the requirements
of this Plan, and the owner of such property will be permitted to remain as a
conforming owner without a participation agreement with the Agency provided
such owner continues to operate, use, and maintain the real property within the
requirements of this Plan. However., a conforming owner shall be required by the
Agency to enter into a pai°dcipation agreement with the Agency in the event that
such owner desires to construct any additional improvements or substantially alter
or modify existing structures, on any of the real property described above as
conforming.
C. [~307] Cooperation with Public Bodies
Certain public bodies are authorized by state law to aid and cooperate,
with or without consideration, in the planning, undertaking, construction, or
operation of this Project. The Agency shall seek the aid and cooperation of such
public bodies and shah attempt to coordinate this Plan with the activities of such
public bodies in order to accomplish the purposes of redevelopment and the highest
public go. od.
The Agency, by law, is not authorized to acquire real property owned by
public bodies without the consent of such public bodies. The Agency, however, will
seek the cooperation of all public bodies which own or intend to acquire property in
the Project Area. Any public body which owns or leases property in the Project Area
will be afforded all the' privileges of owner and'tenant participation if such public
body is willing to enter into a participation agreement with the Agency. All plans
for development of property in the Project Area by a public body shall be subject to
Agency approval..
The Agency may impose on all public bodies the planning and design
controls contained in this Plan to insure that present uses and any future
development by public bodies will conform to the requirements of this Plan. To the
extent now or hereafter permitted by law, the Agency is authorized to financially
(and otherwise) assist any public entity in the cost of public land, buildings, facilities,
structures, or other improvements (within or without the Project Area), which
land, buildings, facilities, structures, or other improvements are or would be of
benefit to the Project.
D. [~308] property. Acquisition
1. [~309] Real Property
Except as specifically exempted herein, the Agency may acquire,
but is not required to acquire, any real property located in the Project Area by any
means authorized bY law.
It is in the public interest and is necessary in order to eliminate
the conditions requiring redevelopment and in order to execute this Plan for the
power of eminent domain to be employed by the Agency to acquire real property in
the Project Area which cannot be acquired by gift, devise, exchange, purchase, or any
other lawful method. Eminent domain proceedings, if used, must be commenced
within twelve (12) years from the date 'of adoption, of this Plan.
The Agency shall not acquire real property to be retained by an
owner pursuant to a participation agreement if the owner fully performs under the
agreement. The Agency is authorized to acquire structures without acquirh3, g the
land .upon which those structures are located. The Agency is authorized to acquire
either the entire fee or any other interest in real property less than a fee.
The Agency shah not acquire real property on which an existing
building is to be continued on its present site and in its present form and use
without the consent of the owner unless: (a) such building requires structural
alteration, improvement, modernization, or rehabilitation; (b) the site, or lot on
which the building is situated, requires modification in size, shape, or use; or (c) it is
necessary to impose upon such property any of the controls, limitations, restrictions,
and requirements of this Plan and the owner fails or refuses to execute a
participation agreement in accordance with the provisions of this Plan.
The Agency is not authorize(~ to acquire real property oWned by
public bodies which do not consent to such acquisition. The Agency is authorized,
however, to acquire public property transferred to private ownership before
redevelopment of the Project Area is completed, unless the Agency and the private
owner enter into a participation agreement and the owner completes his
responsibilities under the participation agreement.
2. [~310] Personal Property
Generally, personal property shall not be acquired. However,
where necessary in the execution of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to acquire
personal property in the Project Area by any lawful means, including eminent
domain.
E. [§311] Property. Management
During such time as property, if any, in the Project Area is owned by
the Agency, such property shall be under the management and control of the
Agency. Such property may be rented or leased by the Agency pending its
disposition for redevelopment, and such rental or lease shall be pursuant to such
policies as the Agency may adopt.
'F. [§312] Pa.vments to Taxin_e Agencio_~
Pursuant to Section 33607.5 of the Community Redevelopment Law,
the Agency is required to and shall make'payments to affected taxing entities to
alleviate the financial burkien and detriment that the affected taxing entities may
incur as a result of the adoption of this Plan. The payments made by the Agency
shall be calculated and paid in accordance with the requirements of Section 33607.5.
In any year during which it 'owns property in the Project Area, the
Agency is authorized, but not required, to pay directly to any dty, county, city and
county, district, including, but not limited to, a school district, or other public
corporation for whose benefit a tax would have been levied upon such property had
it not been exempt, an amount of money in lieu of taxes.
Go
[~313] Relocation of Person~, Business Concerns.
and Others Displaced by the Pro!ect
1. [,~314] Assistance in Finding Other Locations
The Agency shall' assist all persons, business .concerns, and
others displaced by the Project in finding other locations and facilities. In order to
carry out the Project with a minimum of hardship to persons, business concerns,
and others, if any, displaded by the Project, the Agency shall assist such persons,
business concerns and others in finding new locations that are within their
respective financial means, in reasonably convenient locations, and otherwise
suitable to their respective needs.
2. [~315] Relocation Payrnents
The Agency shall make relocation payments to persons, business
concerns, and others displaced by the Project for moving expenses and direct losses
of personal property and additional relocation payments as may be required by law.
Such relocation payments shall be made pursuant to the California Relocation
Assistance Law (Government Code Section 7260 et seq.) and Agency rules and
regulations a.dopted pursuant thereto. The Agency may make such other payments
as may be appropriate and for which funds are available.
[~316] Demolition. Clearance. and Building and Site Preparation.
1. [~317] Demcflition and Clearance
The Agency is authorized to demolish and clear buildings,
structures, and other improvements from any real property in the Project Area as
necessary to carry out the purposes of this Plan.
2. [~318] Preparation of Building Sites
The Agency is. authorized to prepare, or cause to be prepared, as
building sites any real property in the Project Area owned by the Agency. In
connection therewith, the Agency may cause, provide for, or undertake the
installation or construction of streets, utilities, parks, playgrounds, and' other Public
improvements necessary to carry out this Plan. The Agency is also authorized to
construct foundations, platforms, and other structural forms necessary for the
provision or utilization of air rights sites for buildings to be used for residential,
commercial, industrial, public, and other uses provided for in this Plan.
Prior consent of the. City Council is required for the Agency to
develop sites for commercial or industrial use by providing streets, sidewalks,
utilities, or other improvements, which an owner or operator of the site would
otherwise be obliged to p~:ovide.
[~319] Property. Disposition and Development
1. [§320] Real Property Dioposition and Development
a. [~321] General
For the purposes of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to
sell, lease, exchange, subdivide, transfer, assign, pledge, encumber by mortgage or
deed of trust, or otherwise dispose of any interest in real property. To the extent
permitted by law, the Agency is authorized to dispose of real property by negotiated
lease, sale, or transfer without public bidding. Property acquired by the Agency for
rehabilitation and resale, shall be offered for resale within one'(l) year after
completion of rehabilitation or an annual report concerning such property shall be
published by the Agency as required by law.
Real property acquired by the Agency may be conveyed 'by
the Agency without charge to the City and, where beneficial to the Project Area,
without charge to any public body. All real property acquired by the Agency in the
Project Area shall be sold or leased to public or private persons or entities for
development for the uses permitted in this Plan.
All purchasers or lessees of property acquired from the
Agency shall be obligated, to use the property for the purposes designated in this
Plan, to begin and complete development of the property within a period of time
which the Agency fixes as reasonable, and to comply with other conditions which
the Agency deems necessary to 'carry out the purposes of this Plan.
bo
[~322] Disposition and Development Docur~ents
To provide adequate safeguards to ensure that the
provisions of this Plan will be carried out and to prevent the recurrence of blight, all
real property sold, leased, or conveyed by the Agency, as well as all property subject
to participation agreements/is subject to the provisions of this Plan.
The Agency shall reserve such powers and controls in the
disposition and development documents as .may be necessary to prevent trm~sfer,
retention, or use of property for speculative purposes and to ensure that
development is carried out pursuant to this Plan.
Leases, deeds, contracts, agreements, and declarations of
restrictions of the Agency may contain restrictions, covenants, covenants· running
with the land, rights of reverter, conditions subsequent, equitable servitudes, or .any
other provisions necessary to carry out this Plan. Where appropriate, as determined
by the Agency, such documents, or portions thereof, shall be recorded in the office of
the Recorder of Santa Clara County.
· All property in the Project Area is hereby subject to the
restriction that there shah be no discrimination or segregation based upon race,
color, creed,'religion, sex, marital status, national origin, or anCestry in the sale,
lease, ·sublease, transfer, use, occupanOf, tenure, or'enjoyment of property in the
Project Area. All property sold, leased, conveyed, or subject to'a participation
agreement shall be expressly subject by appropriate documents to the restriction that
all deeds, leases, or contracts for the sale, lease, sublease, or other transfer of land in
the Project Area shall contain such nondiscrimination and nonsegregation clauses
as required by law.
[~323] Development by the Agency.
To the extent now or hereafter permitted by law, the
Agency is authorized to pay for, develop, or construct any publicly-owned building,
facility, structure, or other improvement either within or without the Project Area,
for itself or for any public body or entity, which buildings, facilities, structures, or
other improvements are or would be of benefit to the Project Area. Specifically, the
Agency may pay for, install, or construct the buildings, facilities, structures, and
other improvements identified in Attachment No. 4, attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference, and may acquire or pay for the land required
therefor.
In addition'to the public improvements authorized under
Section 318 and the specific publicly-owned improvements identified in Attachment
No. 4 of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to install and construct, or to cause to be
installed and constructed, within or without the Proiect Area, for itself or for any
public body or entity for the benefit of the Project Area, public improvements and
public utilities, including, but not limited to, the following: (1) over- and
underpasses; (2) sewers; (3) natural gas distribution systems; (4) water distribution
systems; (5) parks, plazas, and pedestrian paths; (6) playgroundS; (7) parking facilities;
(8) landscaped areas; and (9') street improvements.
The. Agency may enter into contracts, leases, and
agreements with the City or other public body or entity pursuant to this Section 323,
and the obligation of the Agency under such contract, lease, or agreement shall
constitute an indebtedness of the Agency which may be made payable out oF the
taxes levied in the Project Area and allocated to the Agency under subdivision (b) of
Section 33670 of the Community Redevelopment Law and Section 502 of this Plan
or out of any other available funds. ' ·
d. [~324] Development Plans
All development plans (whether public or private) shall
be submitted to the Agency for approval. All development in the Project Area must
conform to City design review standards.
2. [~325] Personal Property. Disposition
For the purposes of this Plan, the Agency is 'authorized to lease,
sell, exchange, transfer, assign, pledge, encumber, or otherwise dispose of personal
property which is acquired by the Agency.
[~326] Rehabilitation. Conservation. and Moving of Structures
1. [g3221 Rehabilitation and Conservation
The Agency is authorized to rehabilitate and conserve, or to
cause to be rehabilitated and conserved, any building or structure in the Project Area
owned by the Agency. The Agency is also authorized and directed to advise,
encourage, and assist in the rehabilitation and conservation of property in the
Project Area not owned by the Agency. The Agency is also authorized to acquire,
restore, rehabilitate, move, and conserve buildings of historic or architectural
sigrdficance.
2. [~328] Movin~ of StTucture~
As necessary in carrying out this Plan, the Agency is authorized
to move, or to cause to be moved, any standard structure or building or any
structure or building which can be rehabilitated to a location within or outside the
Proiect Area.
K. [,~329] Low- and Moderate-Incom~ Housin~
Pursuant to Section 33334.2 of the Community Redevelopment Law,
not less than twenty percent (20%).of all taxes which are allocated to the Agency
pursuant to Section 33670' of the Community Redevelopment Law and Section 502
of this Plan shah be used by the Agency for the purposes of increasing, improving,
and preserving the City's supply of housing for persons and families of very low,
low, or moderate income unless certain findings are made as required by that
section to lessen or exempt such requirement. In carrying out this purpose, the
Agency may exercise any or aH of its powers.
The funds for this purpose shall be held in a separate Low and
Moderate Income Housing Fund until used. Any interest earned by such Low and
Moderate Income Housing Fund shall accrue to the Fund.
IV. [~00] USES PERMITTED IN THE PROJECT AREA
A. [~.01] Redevelopment Land Use Map
The "Redevelopment Land Use Map," attached hereto as Attachment
· No. 3 and incorporated herein by reference,- illustrates the location of the Project
Area boundaries, major streets within the Project Area, and 'the land uses
authorized within the Project by the City's current' General Plan. The 'City will from
time to time update and revise the General Plan. It is the intention of this
Redevelopment Plan that the land uses to be permitted within the Project Area
shall be as provided within the City's General Plan, as it currently exists or as it may
from time to time be amended, and as implemented and applied by City ordinances,
resolutions and Other laws.
B. [~402] Other Land Uses
1. [,~031 Public Rights-of-Way
As illustrated on the Redevelopment Land Use Map
(Attachment No. 3), the major public streets within the Project Area include
Stevens Creek Boulevard, Wolfe Road and Vallco Parkway.
Additional public streets, alleys, and easements may be created in
the Project Area as needed for proper development. Existing streets, alleys, and
easements may be abandoned, dosed, or modified as necessary for proper
development of the Project.
Any changes in the existing interior or exterior street layout
shall be in accoi'dance with the General Plan, the objectives of this Plan, and the
City's design standards, shah be effectuated in the manner prescribed by state and
local law, and shall be guided by the following criteria:
The requirements imposed by such factors as
topography, traffic safety and aesthetics; and
bo
The potential need to serve not only the Project
Area and new or existing developments but to also
serve areas outside the Project by providing
convenient and efficient vehicular access and.
movement.
The public rights-of-way may be used for vehicular and/or
pedestrian traffic, as well as for public improvements, public and private utilities,
and activities typically found in public rights-of-way.
[~34] Other Public. Semi-public. Institutional. and
Nonprofit Uses
In any area shown on the Redevelopment Land Use Map
(Attachment No. 3), the Agency is authorized to l~ermit the maintenance,
establishment, or enlargement of public, semi-public, institutional, or nonprofit
uses, including park and recreational facilities, libraries, educational, fraternal,
employee, philanthropic, religious and charitable institutions, utilities, railroad
rights-of-way, and facilities of other similar associations or organizations. All such
uses shall, to the extent possible, confohn to the provisions of this Plan applicable to
the uses in the specific area involved. The Agency may impose such other
reasonable requirements and/or restrictions as may be necessary to protect the
development and use of the Project Area.
Pending the ultimate development of land by developers and
participants, the Agency is authorized to use or pdrmit the use of any land in the
Project Area for interim uses that are not in conformity with the uses permitted in
this Plan.
4. [~t06] Nondonformine Uses
The Agency may permit an existing use to remain in an existing
building in good condition which use does not conform to the provisions of this
Plan, provided that such use is generally compatible with existing and proposed
developments and uses in the Project Area. The owner of such a property must be
willing to enter into a participation agreement and agree to the imposition of such
reasonable restrictions as may be necessary to protect the development and use of
the Project Area.
The Agency may authorize additions, alterations, repairs, or
other improvements in the Proiect Area for uses which do not confo~-, to the
provisions oi this Plan where such improvements are within a portion of the
Proiect where, in the determination of the Agency, such improvements would be.
compatible with surrounding Proiect uses and development.
C. [~407] General Controls and Limitatiol~.~
All real property in the Proiect Area is made subject to the controls and
requirements of this Plan. No real property shall be developed, rehabilitated, or
otherwise changed after the date of the adoption of this Plan, except in conformance
with the provisions of this Plan.
1. [p~08] Construction
All construction in the Project Area shall comply with all
applicable state and local laws and codes in effect from time to time. In addition to
applicable codes, ordinances, or other requirements governing development in the
Project Area, additional specific performance and development standards may be
adopted by the Agency to control and direct redevelopment activities in the Project
Area.
'[~t09] Rehabilitation and R~t~ntion of Properties
Any existing structure within the Project Area approved by the
Agency for retention and rehabilitation shall be repaired, altered, reconstructed, or
rehabilitated in such a manner that it will be'safe and sound in all physical respects
and be attractive in appearance and not detaqmental to the surrounding uses.
[~410] Limitation on the Number of Buildines
The number of buildings in the Project Area shall not exceed the
number of buildings permitted under the General Plan.
[~11] Number of Dwe!!ine Units
At the time of adoption of this Plan, there are no dwelling units
within the 'Project Area. The number of dwelling units permitted in the Project
Area shall not exceed the number of dwelling units permitted under the General
Plan.
5. . [~412] Limitation on T.v?e. Size. and Height of B-ilding~
Except as set forth in other sections of this Plan, the type, size,
and height of buildings shah be as limited by applicable federal, state, and local
statutes, ordinances, and regulations.
[~413] Open Spaces. Landscaping. LiEht. Air. and Privacy.
The .approximate amount of open space to be provided in the
Project Area is the total of all areas which will be in the public rights-of, way, the
public ground, the space around buildings, and all' other outdoor areas not
permitted to be covered by buildings. Landscaping shah be provided to enhance
open spaces in the Project Area and create a high-quality aesthetic environment.
Landscaping may include, in addition to trees, shrubs and other living plant
materials, such materials as paving, landscape containers, plaza furniture, and
landscape and pedestrian lighting.
Sufficient space shall be maintained between buildings in ail.
areas to provide adequate light, air, and privacy.
7. [~414] Si_~ns
AH signs shall conform to City sign 'ordinances and other
requirements as they now exist or are hereafter amended. Design of all proposed
new signs shah be submitted to the Agency and/or the City prior to installation for
review and approval pursuant to the procedures of this Plan.
8. [~415] Utilities
The Agency shah require that aH utilities be placed underground
whenever physicaily and economically feasible.
9. [~416] Incompatible Use~
No use or structure which by reason of'appearance, traffic,
smoke, glare, noise, odor, or similar factors, as determined by the Agency, would be
incompatible with the surrounding areas or structures shall be permitted in any part
of the Project Area.
10. [~417] Nondiscriminatior~ and Nonse~e~ation
There shall be no discrimination or segregation based upon race,
color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, or ancestry permitted in the
sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of property in the
Project Area.
11. [~418] $~bdivision of Parcels
No parcel in the Project Area, including any parcel retained by a
participant, shall be subdivided without the approval of the Agency.
12. [~419] Minor Variations
Under exceptional circumstances, the Agency is authorized to
persadt a variation from the limits, restrictions, and controls established by this Plan.
In order' to permit such variation, the Agency must determine that:
ao
The application of certain provisions of this Plan
would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary
hardships inconsistent with the general purpose
and intent of this Plan;
There are exceptional circumstances or conditions
applicable to the property or to' the intended
.development of the property which do not apply
generally to other properties having the same
standards, restrictions, and controls;
Permitting a variation will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
property or improvements in the area; and
'Permitting a variation will not be contrary to the
objectives of this Plan or of the General Plan.
. No variation shall be granted which changes a basic land use or
which permits other than a minor departure from the provisions of this Plan. In
permitting any such variation, the Agency shall impose such 'conditions as are
necessary' to protect the public peace, health, safety, or welfare and to assure
compliance with the purposes of this Plan. Any variation permitted by the Agency
hereunder shall not supersede any other approval required under applicable City
codes and ordinances.
[~20] Desi_gn for Development
Within the !~rnits, restrictions, and controls established in this Plan,
the Agency is authorized to establish heights of buildings, land coverage, setback
requirements, design criteria, traffic circulation, traffic access, and other
development and design controls necessary for proper development of both private
and public areas within the Project Area.
No new improvement shall be 'constructed, and no existing
improvement shall be substantially modified, altered, repaired, or rehabilitated,
except in accordance with this Plan and any such controls and, in the case of
property which is the subject of a disposition .and development or participation
agreement with the Agency and any other property, in the discretion of the Agency,
in accordance, with architectural, landscape, and site plans submitted to and
approved in writing by the Agency. One of the objectives of this Plan is to create an
attractive and pleasant environment in the Project .Area. Therefore, such plans
shall give consideration to gbod design, open space, and other amenities to enhance
the aesthetic quality of the Project .Area. The Agency shall not approve any plans
that do not' comply with this Plan.
E. .[~421] Building Permits
No permit shall be issued for the construction of any new building or
for any construction on an existing building in the Project Area from the date of
adoption of this Plan until the application for such permit has been approved by the
Agency as consistent with this Plan and processed in a manner consistent with all
City requirements. An application shall be deemed consistent with this Plan if it is
consistent with the General Plan, applicable zoning ordinances and any adopted
design for development.
The Agency -is authorized to establish permit procedures and approvals
in addition to those set forth above where required for the purposes of this Plan.
Where such additional procedures, and approvals are established, a building permit
shall be issued only after the applicant for same has been granted all approvals
required by the City and the Agency at the time of application.
V. [§500] METHODS OF FINANCING THE PROJECT
A. [§501] General Description of the Proposed Financing Method
The Agency is authorized to finance this 'Project with financial
assistance from the City, the State of California, the federal government, tax
increment funds, interest income, Agency bonds, donations, loans from private
financial institutions, the 'lease or sale of Agency-owned property, or any other
available source, public or private.
The Agency is also authorized to obtain advances, borrow funds, and
create indebtedness in carrying out this Plan. The principal and interest on such
advances, funds, and indebtedness may be paid from tax increments or any other
funds available to the Agency. Advances and loans for survey and planning and for
the operating capital for nominal administration of this Project may be provided by
the City until adequate tax increment or other funds are available, or sufficiently
assured, to repay the advances and loans and to permit borrowing adequate working
capital from sources other than the City. The City, as it is able, may also supply
additional assistance through City loans and grants for various public facilities.
The City or any Other public agency may expend money to assist the
Agency in carrying out this Project. As available, gas tax funds from the state and
county may be used for street improvements and public transit facilities.
B. [~502] Tax Increment Funds
All taxes levied upon taxable property within the Project Area each
year, by or for the benefit of the State of California, the County of Santa Clara, the
City, any district, or any other public corporation (hereinafter sometimes called
"taxing agencies"), after the effective date of the ordinance approving this Plan shall
be divided as follows:
That portion of the taxes which would be produced by the
rate upon which the t'ax is levied each year by or for each
of said taxing agencies upon the total sum of the assessed
value of the taxable property in the Project as shown upon
the assessment roll used in connection with the taxation
of such property by such taxing agency, last equalized prior
to the effective date of such ordinance, shall be allocated to'
and when collected shall be paid into the funds of the
respective, taxing agencies as taxes by or for said taxing
agencies on all other property are paid (for the purpose of
allocating taxes levied by or for any taxing agency or
agencies which did not include the territory of the Project
on the effective date of such ordinance but to which such
territory is annexed or otherwise included after such
effective date, the assessment roll of the County of Santa
Clara, last equalized on the effective date of said
ordinance, shall be used in determining the assessed
valuation of the taxable property in the Project on said
effective date).
e
Except as provided in subdivision 3, below, that portion of
said levied taxes each year in excess of such amount shall
be allocated to and when collected shall be paid into a
special fund of the Agency to pay the principal of and
interest on .loans, moneys advanced to, or indebtedness
(whether funded, refunded, assumed, or otherwise)
incurred by the Agency to finance or refinance, in whole
or in part, this Project. Unless and until the' total assessed
valuation of the taxable property in the Project exceeds the
total assessed value of the taxable property in the Project
as shown by the last equalized assessment roll referred to
in subdivision 1 hereof, all of the taxes' levied and
collected upon the taxable property in the Project shall be
paid into the funds of the respective taxing agencies.
When said loans, advances, and indebtedness, if any, and
interest thereon, have been paid, all moneys thereafter
received from taxes upon the taxable property in the
Project shall be paid into the funds of the respective taxing
agencies as taxes on all other property are paid.
That Portion of the taxes in excess of th~ amount
identified in subdivision 1, above, which are attributable
to a tax rate levied by a taxing agency which was approved
by the voters of the taxing agency on or after January 1,
1989, for the purpose of producing revenues in an mount
sufficient to make annual repayments of the principal of,
and the interest on, any bonded indebtedness for the
acquisition or improvement of real property shall be
allocated to, and when collected shall be paid into, the
fund of that taxing agency.
'The portion of taxes mentioned'in subdivision 2, above, are hereby
irrevocably pledged for the payment of the principal of and interest on the advance
of moneys, or making of loans or the incurring of anY indebtedness (whether
funded, refunded, assumed, or otherWise) by the Agency to finance or refinance the
Project, in whole or in part. The Agency is authorized to make such pledges as to
specific advances, loans, and indebtedness as appropriate in carrying out the Project.
The Agency is authorized to issue bonds from time to time, if it deems
appropriate to do so, in order to finance all or any part of the Project. Neither the
members of the Agency nor any persons executing the ~onds' are liable personally on
the bonds by reason of their issuance.
The bonds and other obligations of the Agency are not a debt of the City
or the state, nor are any of its political subdivisions liable for them, nor in any event
shall the bonds or obligations be payable out of any funds or properties other than
those of the Agency, and such bonds and other obligations shall so state on their
face. The bonds do not ~onstitute an indebtedness within the meaning of any
constitutional 'or statutory debt limitation or restriction.
The amount of bonded indebtedness to be repaid in whole or in part
from the allocation of taxes described in subdivision 2 above which can
outstanding at any one time .shall not exceed FORTY-TWO MILLION
HUND~D TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($42,610,000.00).
The Agency shall not establish or incur loans, advances, or
indebtedness to finance in whole or in part the Project beyond twenty (20) years
from Lhe date of adoption of this ?lan. Loans, advances, or indebtednes may be
repaid over a period of time beyond said time limit. This time limit shall not
prevent the Agency from incurring debt to be paid from the Low and Moderate
Income Housing Fund. Further, this time limit shall not prevent the Agency from
refinancing, refunding, or restructuring indebtedness after the time limit if the
indebtedness is not increased and the time during which the indebtedness is to be
repaid is not extended beyond the time limit for 'repaying indebtedness set forth
immediately below in this Section 502.
The Agency &hall not receive, and shall not'repay loans, advances, or
other indebtedness to be paid with the proceeds of property taxes .from the Project
Area pursuant to Section 33670 of the Community Redevelopment Law and this
Section 502 beyond forty-five (45) years from the date of adoption of this Plan.
C. [§503] Other Loans and Grants
· Any other loans, grants, guarantees, or financial assistance from the
United States, the State of California, or any other public or private source will be
utilized if available.
VI. [~:DO] ACTIONS BY THE ~
The City shall aid and cooperate with the Agency in carrying out this Plan and
shall take all actions necessary to ensure the Continued fulfillment of the purposes
of this Plan and to prevent the recurrence or spread in the area of conditions causing
· blight. Actions by the City shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
,'A.
Institution and completion .of proceedings for opening, closing,
vacating, widening, or changing the grades of streets, alleys, and
other public rights-of-way and for other necessary modifications
of the streets, the street layout, and other public rights-of-way in
the Project Area. Such action by the City shall include the
requirement of abandonment, removal, and relocation by the
public utility companies of their operations of public rights-of-
way as appropriate to carry out this Plan provided that nothing
in this Plan shall be construed to require the cost of such
abandonment, removal, and relocation to be borne by others
than those legally required to bear such cost.
Provision of advances, loans, or grants to the Agency or the
expenditure of funds for projects implementing this Plan as
deemed appropriate by the City and to the extent funds are
available therefor.
C
Institution and completion of proceedings necessary' for changes.
and improvements in private and publicly owned public
utilities within or affecting the Project Area.
De
Revision of zoning (if necessary) within the Project Area to
per-Lit the land uses and development authorized by this Plan.
Eo
Imposition wherever necessary Coy conditional use permits or
other means) of appropriate controls within the limits of this
Plan upon parcels in the Project Area to ensure their proper
development and use.
Provision for administrative enforcement of this Plan-by the
City after development. The City and the Agency shall develop
and provide for enforcement of a program for continued
maintenance by owners of all real property, both public and
private, within the Project Area throughout the duration of this
Plan.
G. Preservation of historical sites.
Performance of the above actions and of all other functions and
services relating to public peace, health, safety, and physical
development normally rendered in accordance with a schedule
which will permit the redevelopment of the Project Area to be
commenced and carried to completion without unnecessary
delays.
The undertaking and completing of any other proceedings
necessary to carry out the Project.
The foregoing actions to be taken by the City do not involve or constitute any
commitment for .financial outlays by the City unless spedfically agreed to and
authorized by the City.
VII. ~700] ENFORCEMENT
The administration and enforcement of this Plan, including the preparation
and execution of any documents implementing this Plan, shall be performed by the
Agency and/or the City.
The provisions of this Plan or other documents entered into pursuant to this
Plan may also be enforced by court litigation instituted by either the Agency or the
City. Such remedies may include, but are not limited to, specific performance,
damages, reentry, injunctions, or any other remedies appropriate to the purposes of
II. EFFECTS OF CHANGE OF BASE YEAR FROM 1999/2000 TO 200012001
A. Effects on Physical and Economic Conditions
The change in the base year will have no effect on the physical and economic blight findings.
The blight analysis in the Report to Council that addresses "depreciated or stagnant property
values" was based on the revised assessed value as stated in the notification of the corrected
assessment from the County Auditor dated October 22, 1999.
B. Effects on Financial Feasibility of the Project and the Method of Financing
The Project Area's assessed value for the year 2000/2001 has been estimated based on the
revised assessment issued on October 22, 1999, adjusted for allowable Proposition 13
escalations, and building permit valuations that were not reflected in the revised 1999/2000
assessment.
The revised assessed value for the Project Area as stated in the October 22, 1999 statement
from the County is $116.14 million. To estimate the Project Area's assessed value for
2000/2001, the Project Area's real property value has been increased by a 1% Proposition 13
adjustment and $6.5 million of improvements made to Sears and Macy's. With these
adjustments, the Project Area's assessed value for 2000/2001 is estimated to be $123.6 million.
A revised tax increment projection for the Project Area is presented in Table 1. As shown, the
Project Area is projected to generate a total of $51.0 million of gross tax increment over the 30-
year life of the Plan. Over the 30-year period, statutory pass-throughs to taxing agencies are
estimated to total $17.1 million, housing set-aside funds are estimated to total $10.2 million, and
net increment to the Agency is estimated at $23.7 million. These amounts are approximately
3% less than the totals projected in the Report to City Council, which evaluated a base year of
1999/2000.
A revised Feasibility Cash Flow is presented in Table 2. As shown it is estimated that the
Agency's cash flow (exclusive of the housing set-aside) will be sufficient to fund approximately
$11.2 million of public improvements to be funded in the years 2003 to 2005. The public
improvements contemplated for the Project Area are as stated in the Report to City Council and
include a parking structure and the construction of a new "ring" road around the perimeter of the
shopping center. In the Report to Council, it was estimated that the tax increment would be
sufficient to support approximately $12.2 million of improvements, due to the smaller base year
value. Given that the required timing of the improvements precedes the availability of sufficient
tax increment, the feasibility projection provides for a third party loan of $5.5 million to advance
the funds for the improvements.
Supplement to the Report to Council
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Page 3
001-O01.doc
11413.004.001/6/02/00 /'~
this Plan. In addition, any recorded provisions which are expressly for the benefit of
owners of property in the Project Area may be enforced by such owners.
VIII. [§800] DURATION OF THIS PLAN
Except for the nondiscrimination and nonsegregation provisions which shall
run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shah be effective, and the provisions
of other documents formulated pursuant to this Plan may be made effective, for
thirty (30) years from the date of adoption of this Plan by the City Council; provided,
however, that subject to the limitations set forth in Section 502 of this Plan,. the
Agency may issue bonds and incur 0bligations pursuant to this Plan which extend
beyond the termination date, and in such event, this Plan shall continue in effect to
the extent necessary to permit the full repayment of such bonds or other obligations.
After the termination of this Plan, the. Agency shall have no authority to act
pursuant to this Plan except to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce
existing'covenants or contracts.
IX. [§900] PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT
This Plan may be amended by means of the procedure established in Sections
33354.6 and/or 33450 et seq. of the Community Redevelopment Law or by any other
procedure hereafter established by law.
/29/99
ATTACHMENT 1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
Cuper+J. no/Vallco Redevelopment Project
Legal Description
ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATE IN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA AND
STATE OF CALIFORNIA DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ..
BEGINNING ATTHE INTEi~SECTION OF THE ~ONUMENT LINE OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD, WITH THE
MONUMENT LINE OF WOLFE ROAD AS SHOW~ ON THAT CERTAIN PARCEL MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 325
OF MAPS AT PAGE 12, SANTA CLARA COUNTY P, ECORDS.
THENCE ALONG THE MONUMENT lINE OF STEVENs CREEK BOULEVARD NORTH 89°36'00" EAST, 53.96'
FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY lINE OF WOLFE ROAD;
THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION SOUTH 01'05'14" EAST, 75.01 FEET TO THE
SOUTHERLY LINE OF STEVENS CREEK BOULE~D (120 FEET WIDE) AND THE TRUE POINT'OF BEGINNING.
(1)
THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY UNE OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD SOUTH 80 ° 36.'0.0" WEST,
961.68 FEET;
(2)
(3)
THENCE NORTH 00°42'30" WEST, 1384.97 FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF TRACT NO.
2086 AND ITS SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION AS SAID EASTERL~LINE IS SHOWN IN BOOK 112 OF
MAPS AT PAGE 40, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS; ..
THENCE NORTH 89'13'29" EAST, 298.99 FEET;
(4)
THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 2086, NORTH 00'04'30" WEST, 1207.04
FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF TRACT No. 2860 RECORDED IN BOOK 138 OF MAPS AT PAGES
22 AND 23, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS;
(5)
(6)
THENCE ALONG S~JD SOUTHERLY UNE NORTH 83'47'30" WEST; 42.44 FEET;
THENCE ALONG THE EASY UNE OF TRACT NO. 2860 NORTH 00°17"2.0" WEST, 463.60 FEET
TO THE SOUTHERLY UNE OF JUNIPERO SERRA FREEWAY, INTERSTATE 280;
(7) THENCE SOUTH 43'49'16" EAST, 267.07 FEET;,
(8) THENCE SOUTH 57°03'27" EAST, 731.74 FEET;,
(9)
(10)
THENCE SOUTH 60°14'49" EAST, 699.00 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN
ON THAT CERTAIN PARCEL MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 325 OF MAPS OF PAGE 12, SANTA CLARA
COUNTY RECORDS;
THENCE ALONG SAID UNE SOUTH 01 °05'14" EAST, 1049.61 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY L/NE OF
VALLCO PARKWAY (110 FEET WIDE);
THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLy L/NE NORTH 88 °54'46" EAST, 79.99 FEET; ~. ~ .~/~
(12)
(13)
THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH HAVING A RADIUS OF
685.00 FEET, THROUGH a CENTRAL ANGLE Of 03"50'53" FOR a DISTANCE OF 46.00 FE.mr;
THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 01 "05'14" EA'ST, 414.46 FEET;
(14) THENCE SOUTH 88 °54'46" WEST, 835.00 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF WOLFE ROAD;
(15) THENCE ALONG SAID LINE SOUTH 01 °05'14" EAST, 112_12 FEET;
(16) THENCE SOUTH 89"36'00" WEST, 11.00 FEET;
(17) THENCE SOUTH 01 ° 05'14" EAST, 5~29~04 'FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
e
CONTAINING A TOTAL AREA QF 80.14 ACRES'MORE OR LESS.
THE BASIS 'OF BEARINGS FOR THIS DESCRIPTION IS THE MONUMENT L/NE OF WOLFE ROAD SHOWN AS
NORTH 01 "05'14" WEST ON THAT CERTAIN PARCEL MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 325 OF' MAPS AT PAGE 12,
SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS.
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 3
x
BOULEVARD
Legend
"'"":':':" ~ The City ~f Cupertino '"'"'":':':'
Land Use Map
Iii
Residential:
~ 'Very Low ~,-~ ~o ~
~ Very Low ~o r-~,~
~Low: 1-5 D.UJGr. Ac.
Commerdal I Residential
Office / ~ndustml / · '
Commerdal I Residential
~ Cemmerdal / Office / Residential
Industrial / ~e,~lential
~1 MedJLow: 5-10 D.UJGr. AC. : · '.:,:[;!.,{; · ~,. . .
· . ., .. . . ...'.i~'.~.
~ ~edJHigh:' 10-20 O.UJGr. Ac.; -.'."--",-~,~:,~.~lca'Area'Boundar7
~ u;,,~,. '~n_~5 ~ UJGr. Ac. - .~-" ~.i~-umitsBouncla.,y ·
Private Open Space
~ Public Open Space
r"~ Quasi-Public I InsUtutional
~ Private Recreational
~ Parks
~ Public Facilities O Fire Station
Special Planning Area
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
The following public improvements are anticipated to be provided in the
Project Area:
1. Streets and Roadways
The construction, reconstruction, widening or other
improvement of streets and roadways within or serving the
Project Area;
The installation or modernization of traffic signals on streets
and roadways within or serving the Project Area; and
The construction, reconstruction or other improvement of
curbs, gutters and sidewalks within or serving the Project Area.
2. Water. Sewer and Flood Control
ao
The iinstallation of new, or repair or replacement of existing,
water, sewer and storm drainage systems and lines within or
serving the Project Area.
3. Parking Facilities
a.' The construction; reconstructiOn'or other improvement
parking facilities within or serving the Project Area.
Streetscape and Street Lighting
of
The installation of new, or repair or replacement of existing,
landscaping and irrigation, street lighting, gateways and other
signage, street furniture, trash receptacles, planters, murals and
other amenities within or serving the Project Area.
Exhibit 7
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
SUPPLEMENT TO THE REPORT TO COUNCIL
on the
PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
for the
CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
PREPARED FOR:
THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
PREPARED BY:
KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.
JUNE 2000
SUPPLEMENT TO THE REPORT TO COUNCIL
on the
PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
for the
CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
PREPARED FOR:
THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
JUNE 2000
PREPARED BY:
KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC
500 South Grand Avenue, Suite 1480
Los Angeles, California 90017
1660 Hotel Circle North, Suite 716
San Diego, California 92108
Golden Gateway Commons
55 Pacific Avenue Mall
San Francisco, Califomia 94111
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction
A. Reasons for the Preparation of a Supplement to the RePort to Council
B. Content and Organization of the Supplement
II. Effects of Change of Base Yearfrom 1999/2000 to 2000/2001
A. Effects on Physical and Economic Conditions
B. Effects on the Financial Feasibility of the Project and Method of Financing
C. Effects on the County FiScal Officer's Report, Analysis of the County Fiscal Officer's
Report, and Consultations with Affected Taxing Agencies
Page
1
1
2
3
3
3
4
Table 1 -Tax Increment Revenue Projection
Table 2 - Feasibility Cash Flow - Project Fund
Table 3 - Estimate of Fiscal Officer's Report (Base Year 2000/2001)
September 20, 1999 Fiscal Officer's Report
Supplement to the Report to Council
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
0005060.CUP:CK:gbd
11413.004.001/6/02/00
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Page I
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Reasons for the Preparation of a Supplement to the Report to Council
As required by Section 33352 of the California Community Redevelopment Law ("CRL"), the
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") prepared a Report to the Cupertino City Council
("Report") for the proposed Redevelopment Plan ("Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project ("Project" or the "Project Area"). The Agency on May 15, 2000
approved the Report and authorized transmittal of the Report to the Cupertino City Council
("City Council"). The City Council received the Report on May 15"~, and will consider the
information within the Report at the time it considers adoption of the proposed Project. The City
Council is tentatively scheduled to hold a public hearing on the Project on June 19, 2000.
The Fiscal Officer's Report prepared by the Santa Clara County Auditor-Controller in
accordance with CRL Section 33328 and received by the Agency on September 20, 1999,
contained a total Project Area assessed valuation of $141,483,540. However, the Fiscal
Officer's Report did not reflect adjustments made in connection with successful assessment
appeals, which decreased the total Project Area assessed valuation to approximately
$116,135,000. The adjustments were reported by the County in letters of "Notification of
Corrected Assessment" to the property owner (Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of
America) dated October 22nd. The Agency requested and was expecting to receive a revised
Fiscal Officer's Report prior to the adoption of the proposed Project, which would reflect the
revised total Project Area assessed valuation of $116,135,000. However, the Agency has not
yet received the revised Fiscal Officer's Report. Because the Agency was aware of the
decreased assessed valuation, all of the economic and tax increment analysis within the Report
to Council is based upon the total Project Area assessed valuation of $116,135,000.
To ensure that the corrected value is reflected in the base year value for the Project, the Agency
is proposing a change in base year from 1999-2000 to 2000-2001. The Agency is proposing to
proceed as scheduled with the public hearing on the Plan on June 19th. However, adoption of
the ordinance approving and adopting the Plan will be delayed until sometime after August 19,
2000, which is the date the base year changes from 1999-2000 to 2000-2001.
CRL Section 33328.5 (c) requires that .... "At least 14 days prior to the public hearing on the
redevelopment plan for which the redevelopment agency proposes to use a different equalized
assessment roll, the redevelopment agency shall prepare and deliver to each taxing agency a
supplementary report analyzing the effect of the use of the different equalized assessment roll
which shall include those subjects required by subdivisions (b), (e), and (n) of Section 33352."
In lieu of a supplementary report, a redevelopment agency may include in the report required to
be prepared, pursuant to Section 33352, the information required to be included in the
Supplement to the Report to Council
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
001-001 .doc
11413.004.001/6/02/00
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Page 1
supplementary report. Sections (b), (e) and (n) of 33352 include the "blight analysis", the
proposed method of financing the Project and analysis of the Report of the County Fiscal Officer
including a summary of consultations with taxing agencies and responses to any written
objections submitted by the taxing agencies.
This supplement to the Report on the proposed Project ("Supplement") addresses the effects of
changing the base year for tax increment allocation purposes from 1999-2000 to 2000-2001. As
indicated above, the original report to the City Council (Section 33352) included information
based on the corrected assessed value for 1999/2000. To ensure full compliance with Health
and Safety Code Section 33328.5, the Agency has prepared this Supplement. In addition to the
requirement that the Agency prepare a Supplement, CRL Section 33328.5(a) also requires that
the Agency notify the taxing agencies, County officials and the State Board of Equalization of
the change in base year. Upon receipt of the notice of the change in base year the County
Fiscal Officer must prepare a new base year report. Alternatively, the Agency may prepare a
report containing the same information as contained in the County Fiscal Officer's Report. The
Agency has chosen the latter alternative and has prepared a new estimated base year report for
fiscal year 2000-2001. The new estimated base year rel~)ort is included in this Supplement. The
following section discusses the contents of this Supplement.
B. Content and Organization of the Supplement
As identified above, the Supplement must analyze the effects of the change in base year on the
physical and economic conditions (blight conditions), and financial feasibility of the Project.
Also, the Supplement must analyze the effects of the change in base year on the analysis of the
Report of the County Fiscal Officer and summary of consultations with taxing agencies including
responses to written objections.
Supplement to fl~e Report to Council
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
001-001 .doc
11413.004.001/6/02/00
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Page 2
In conclusion, the change in the base year does not have a material impact on the proposed
method of financing or the feasibility of the 'Project Area. It is likely that the Project Area will
generate slightly less tax increment and consequently support a smaller magnitude of public
improvements. The proposed project and programs will not change. The relatively minor
difference in revenues available for project funding ($1 million) will be paid for by the private
sector and/or by other public funds that may be available to the City.
C. Effects on the County's Fiscal Officer's Report, the Agency's Analysis Thereof, and
Consultations with Affected Taxing Agencies
Pursuant to Section 33352(n) of the CRL, the Report to City Council included an analysis of the
Fiscal Officer's Report and must include a summary of the consultations of the Agency, or
attempts to consult by the Agency, with each of the affected taxing agencies. This section of
the supplement analyzes the effects of the change in base year on the County Fiscal Officer's
Report and summary of consultations with the taxing agencies.
C. 1. The Report of the County Fiscal Officer and Analysis Thereof
Section 33328 of the CRL requires the County officials charged with the responsibility of
allocating taxes under Section 33670 and 33670.5 to prepare and deliver a report to the
Redevelopment Agency (the "Fiscal Officer's Report"). This Report shall include the following:
a. The total assessed valuation of all taxable property within the project area as shown on
the Base Value assessment roll.
b. The identifications of each taxing agency levying taxes in the project area.
Co
The amount of tax revenue to be derived by each taxing agency from the Base Value
assessment roll from the project area, including state subventions for homeowners,
business inventory, and similar subventions.
d. For each taxing agency, its total ad valorem tax revenues from all property within its
boundaries, whether inside or outside the project area.
e. The estimated first year taxes available to the redevelopment agency, if any, based upon
information submitted by the redevelopment agency, broken down by taxing agencies.
Supplement to the Report to Council
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project. Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Page 4
11413.004.001/6/02./00
fo
The assessed valuation of the project area for the preceding year, or, if requested by the
redevelopment agency, for the preceding five years, except for state assessed property
on the board roll.
C. 1.a. Report of the County Fiscal Officer
The Fiscal Officer's Report was prepared on September 20, 1999 by the Santa Clara County
Auditor-Controller and is attached to this Supplement. However, the Fiscal Officer's Report
contained an inaccurate assessed valuation, which did not reflect adjustments made in
connection with appeals from one of the property owners within the Project Area. These
successful property assessment appeals decreased the Project Area's assessed valuation from
$141,483,540 as shown in the September 20, 1999 Fiscal Officer's Report to approximately
$116,135,000. The revised assessment of $116,135,000 did not reflect the inclusion of
approximately $6.5 million of improvements made to Seam and Macy's. This amount should
have been included in the base year value. The Agency requested, but did not receive a
revised Fiscal Officer's Report reflecting the lower assessed value. To ensure that the base year
for the Project reflects the lower assessed value, the Agency is proposing a change in base
year from 1999-2000 to 2000-2001. Thus, adoption of the ordinance approving and adopting
the Plan will be delayed until after August 2000 when the base year value changes from 1999-
2000 to 2000-2001.
C. 1.b Analysis of Information
This section of the Supplement reviews the information provided in the original Fiscal Officer's
Report (base year 1999-2000), any differences between the original Fiscal Officer's Report and
the Agency's approximation of a new Fiscal Officer's Report (base year 2000-2001) as
presented in Table 3 and the effect of the differences (if any). This information is presented by
the required components of the Fiscal Officer's Report as defined in CRL Section 33328.
1. The total assessed valuation of all taxable property within the project area as shown on the
Base Value assessment roll.
The 1999-2000 Fiscal Officer's Report provided the assessed valuation of the Project Area by
assessment category for locally assessed secured and unsecured properties. There was no
value reported for public utility property by the State Board of Equalization. As previously stated
earlier, the total assessed value report by the County Fiscal Officer was $141,483,540 which did
not include the recent assessment appeals. The actual value later for 1999/2000 reported by
the County and is $116,135,000. This change in value had no effect on the analysis presented
in the Report to Council because it was based upon the revised $116,135,000 value.
Supplement to the Report to Council
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Page 5
OO1-O01.doc
11413.004.001/6/02/00
As discussed in the Financial Feasibility Section of this Supplement, the Agency has prepared
an estimate of the Project Area's 2000/2001 assessed value. As-presented, it is estimated to be
approximately $123.6 million, reflecting the inclusion of the Sears and Macy's improvements
and standard allowable annual escalations.
2. The identifications of each taxing agency levying taxes in the project area.
The 1999-2000 Fiscal Officer's Report identified 11 taxing agencies in the Project Area. These
same taxing agencies are identified in the new 2000-2001 base year report. A twelfth taxing
agency, the "Cupertino Sanitation District", was initially identified by KMA using Metroscan,
which is a database program which utilizes County data. KMA asked the County to verify
whether or not the Sanitation District is an affected taxing agency in the Project Area. Until this
information can be verified it is assumed that the County's Fiscal Officer's Report is correct and
that the Cupertino Sanitation District is not an affected taxing agency. The financial feasibility
analysis and tax increment projection provided in the Report to Council assumed that the 11
taxing agencies reported in the County Fiscal Officer's Report are the only affected taxing
agencies within the Project Area. Therefore, change in base years has no affect on the taxing
agencies levying taxes in the Project Area.
The amount of tax revenue to be derived by each taxing agency from the Base Value
assessment roll from the project area, including state subventions for homeowners,
business inventory, and similar subventions.
Table 3 presents the amount of tax revenue to be derived by each taxing agency from the Base
Value assessment roll. The allocations are summarized below:
Estimated 1999-2000 Base Year Estimated 2000-2001 Base Year
Revenues Revenues
County $289,417 $308,110
Library $52,012 $55,371
· Cupertino $27,020 $28,765
Cupertino ESD $298,515 $317,795
Fremont UHSD $201,596 $214,616
Foothill CCD $76,957 $81,927
County Education $37,549 $39,974
County Fire $182,361 $194,139
MPROSD $18,814 $20,029
SCVWD $21,914 $23,330
BAAQMD ~2,236 $2,380
Total $1,208,389 $1,286,436
As shown, the change in the base year is estimated to increase each taxing agency's revenues
from the Base Value assessment roll by approximately 6%.
Supplement to the Report to Council
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Page 6
001-001 .doc
4. For each taxing agency, its total ad valorem tax revenues from all property within its
boundaries, whether inside or outside the project area.
The total ad valorem tax revenue from all property within the boundaries of the taxing agencies
jurisdictions as presented in the original 1999-2000 base year report is $411,855,528. The
value for the year 2000/2001 has been estimated at $422,151,916, which reflects an assumed
growth of 2.5%.
5. The estimated first year taxes available to the redevelopment agency, if any, based upon
information submitted by the redevelopment agency, broken down by taxing agencies.
Based upon the 1999-2000 base year report the Agency would receive approximately $60,000
in the first year that tax increment would be available to the Agency (2000-2001). Based upon
the revised 2000-2001 base year estimates the Agency would receive approximately $19,000 in
the year 2001/2002. The breakdown by taxing entity is provided in Table 3.
The assessed valuation of the project area for the preceding year, or, if requested by the
redevelopment agency, for the preceding five years, except for state assessed property on
the board roll.
The 1999-2000 Fiscal Officer's Report did not provide the value for the preceding year. The
assessed valuation for 1999-2000 was stated to be $141,483,540, however, as indicated above,
that valuation did not reflect adjustments for the assessment appeals and did not include the
$6.5 million in improvements by Sears and Macy's. This information can only be provided by
the County and therefore, was not included in the 2000-2001 base year report.
C. 2 Summary of Consultations with Affected Taxing Agencies
Section 33328 of the CRL requires the Agency, prior to the publication of a notice of the joint
public hearing on the proposed Redevelopment Plan, to consult with each affected taxing
agency with respect to the Project and the allocation of tax increment revenues. The Agency
submitted Statements of Preparation of a Redevelopment Plan to all of the affected taxing
agencies on July 23, 1999. These notices included an offer to consult with each of the taxing
agencies. Agency staff has received telephoned responses to the Statements of Preparation,
and has consulted with the agencies that requested meetings (as described below). The
discussions with the taxing agencies were based on the lower assessed value ($116,135,000).
With the change in base year revenues to the taxing agencies will be higher and the tax
increment to the Agency will be somewhat less.
Supplement to the Report to Council
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc,
Page 7
001-001.doc
11413.004.001/6/02/00 ~ / 0 ~)
Date ContactJAgency Topic of Discussion
September 15, 1999 Michael Raffeto Discussed the tax~ncrement revenue projections. The
Fremont Union High School District's consultant will review information and contact the
District City for further consultations.
October 7, 1999 County of Santa Clare: Discussed impacts on County's tax revenues. The
Richard Wittenberg County Executive expressed the opinion that the County
Frank Lockfeld would not support the formation of a redevelopment area,
and they would be looking further at the figures provided.
Jane Decker
Deborah Couble
January 26, 2000 County of Santa Clara: The Discussion centered around the County's interest in
Richard Wittenberg sharing in the financial success of the shopping center.
Frank Lockfeld The County presented options for formulas for receiving
financial benefits, and the options were discussed. City
Jane Decker
representatives agreed to review the options and
Deborah Couble prepared a response.
January 27, 2000 Fremont Union High School The discussion focused on two issues: 1) potential
District: cooperation on using the affordable housing dollars for
Mike Raffeto teacher-supported housing; and 2) the processing of the
Cupertino Union School tax increments.
District:
Chuck Corr
The school district's consultants presented information on
County of Santa Clare:
a housing program model from Long Beach. Other ideas
Wendy Beadle were discussed, and the school districts agreed to return
Public Economics, Inc.: with some options for teacher-supported housing, in
Dante Gumucio partnership with the City.
Call Goodwin
FoothilI-DeAnza Community The school district's consultants had prepared a letter of
College: discussion items regarding processing the tax
Jim Keller increments, which was discussed. The City's consultant,
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc., will further review the
letter.
March 14, 2000 County of Santa Clare: Discussion revolved around the following: 1) estimated
Richard Wittenburg costs associated with serving urban pockets identified for
Jane Decker possible annexation; 2) 20 year economic benefit
Frank Locldeld analysis; and 3) County share of sales tax revenues. A
conceptual agreement was reached on a proposal that the
County staff could recommend to the Board of
Supervisors and City staff could recommend to the City
Council,
Supplement to the Report to Council
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
001-001 .doc
11413.004.00116/02/00
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Page 8
C. 3. Responses to Written Objections or Concerns of the Affected Taxing Agencies
As of the preparation of this Supplement, only one letter has been received by the Agency from
affected taxing entities. A letter from Public Economics, Inc. (consultant to Fremont Union High
School. District, Foothill-De Anza Community College District and Cupertino Union School
District; collectively, the "Districts") was received by the Agency on January 21, 2000. Although
this letter is not considered a written objection to the Project, Public Economics, Inc. raised
concerns regarding the allocation of taxes and the overall implementation of the AB 1290
payment process as it affects the Districts. As previously stated in the prior section, the Agency
has held consultation meetings with the Districts and their consultant to address the District
concerns. Furthermore, the Agency has prepared a written response to Public Economics,
Inc.'s January 21, 2000 letter, which addresses the District's concerns regarding the Project.
Supplement to the Report to Council
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Page 9
11413.004.001/6/O?JO0 '
Table 2
Feasibility Cash Flow. Project Fund
Vallco Fashion Park Redevelopment Project
City of Cupertino
(000's Omitted)
I. Beginning Balance
II.
Revenue:
Net Tax Increment (Table 1)
Future TA Bond Proceeds/Loan
Interest Earnings at 5%
Bond Reserve Earnings at 5%
Total Revenue
III.
1
2001-02
2
2002-03
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 15
2014-15 201~16
0 0
13 303 380 640 677 693 710 727 743 760 769 778 786 795 803
0 0 0 6,160 0 0 880 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 26 26 26 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28
13 303 380 6,800 702 719 1,616 755 772 789 797 806 815 823 831
Expenditures:
Existing TA Bond Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Future TA Bond Debt Service 0 0 0 0 512 512 512 568 568 568 568 568 568 568 568
Administration (1) 30 31 31 32 32 33 34 34 35 36 37 37 38 39 40
Identified Public Projects 0 0 0 5,600 5,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Expenditures 30 31 31 5,632 6,144 545 546 602 603 604 605 605 606 607 608
349 1,168 (5,442) 174 1,070 153 , 169 185 193 201 209 216 223
0 0 5,442 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 (174) (1,070) (153) (169) (185) (193) (201) (209) (216) (223)
349 1,168 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , 0 0
IV. Net Available Resources
Loan Advance
Loan Repayment (100% of Net)
Available for Discretionary Costs
100%
V. Discretionary Costs (0% of Net)
Discretionary Improvements
(17) 273
17 0
0
0 255
VI. Ending Balance
0 255 349 1,168 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(1) $30,000 annual administrative
expenses at 2% inflation.
Prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename~ TI Projections 6-3-00.xls; Cash_Sum; 6/5/00; 12:13 PM; RTK
Table 2
Feasibility Cash Flow - Project Fund
Vallco Fashion Park Redevelopment Project
City of Cupertino
(O00's OmittedI
I. Beginning Balance
II. Revenue:
Net Tax Increment (Table 1)
Future TA Bond Proceeds/Loan
Interest Earnings at 5%
Bond Reserve Earnings at 5%
Total Revenue
III. Expenditures:
Existing TA Bond Debt Service
Future TA Bond Debt Service
Administration (1)
Identified Public Projects
Total Expenditures
IV. Net Available Resources
Loan Advance
Loan Repayment (100% of Net)
Available for Discretionary Costs
V. Discretionary Costs (0% of Net)
Discretionary Improvements
VI. Ending Balance
100%
16 17 18
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
19 2O
2019-201 2020-21
0 0 0 0 0
810 818 831 851 871
0 0 0 0 1,760
0 0 0 0 0
28 28 28 28 28
839 846 859 879
2,659
0 0 0 0 0
568 568 568 568 568
40 41 42 43 44
0 0 0 0 0
608 609 610 611 612
I<-- Debtlncurrence Limit
21 22 23
2021-22 2022-23 2023-24
24
2024-25
25
202~26
26
2026-27
27
2027-28
28 29 30
2028-29 202~3012030-31
I<- Plan Limit
31 32
2031-32 2032-33
230 237 249 268 2,048
0 0 0 0 0
(230) (237) (249) (268) (2,,048)
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
891 912 934 955 978
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
35 35 35 35 35
926
0
697
45
0
741
185
0
(185)
0
947
0
697
45
0
742
2O5
0
(205)
0
968
0
697
46
0
743
225
0
(225)
0
990
0
697
47
0
744
246
0
(246)
0
1,012
0
697
48
0
745
267
0
(267)
0
1,000
0
0
35
1,035
0
697
49
0
746
289
0
(289)
0
1,023
0
0
35
1,058
0
697
50
0
747
311
0
, (311)
0
1,047
0
0
35
1,082
0
697
51
0
748
334
0
(334)
0
1,071
0
0
35
1,106
0
697
52
0
749
357
0
(357)
0
1,095
0
0
35
1,130
0
697
53
0
750
380
0
(380)
'0
0 0
1,113
0
0
35
1,147
0
697
0
O
697
451
O
(451 )
0
1,130
0
0
35
1,165
0
697
0
0
697
468
0
(468)
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(1) $30,000 annual administrative
expenses at 2% inflation.
Prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filename: TI Projections 6-3-00.xls; Cash_Sum; 6/5/00; 12:13 PM; RTK
Table 2
Feasibility Cash Flow - Project Fund
Vallco Fashion Park Redevelopment Project
City of Cupertino
(O00's Omitted)
33
2033-34
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45
2034-35 2035-36 2036-37 2037°38 2038-39 2039-40 2040-41 2041-42 2042-43 2043,44 2044-45 2045-46
I. Beginning Balance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
II. Revenue:
Net Tax Increment (Table 1)
Future TA Bond Proceeds/Loan
Interest Earnings at 5%
Bond Reserve Earnings at 5%
Total Revenue
III.
Expenditures:
Existing TA Bond Debt Service
Future TA Bond Debt Sen/ice
Administration (1)
Identified Public Projects
Total Expenditures
IV.
Net Available Resources
Loan Advance
Loan Repayment (100% of Net)
Available for Discretionary Costs
V. Discretionary Costs (0% of Net)
Discretionary Improvements 100%
1,148 1,166 1,185 1,204 1,224 1,243 1,264 1,284 1,305 1,327 1,349 1,371 540
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
35 9 9 9 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
1,183 1,176 1,194 1,213 1,230 1,250 1,270 1,291 1,312 1,333 ~ 1,355 1,377 546
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
697 185 185 185 129 129 129 129 129 129 129 · 129 129
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
697 185 185 185 129 129
486 991 1,009 1,029 1,101 1,121
0 0 0 0 0 0
(486) (991) (1,009) (1,029) (1,101) (1,121)
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
VI. Ending Balance
129 129 129 129 129 129 129
1,141 1,162 1,183 1,204 1,226 1,249 417
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(1,141) (1,162) (1,183) (1,204) (1,226) (1,249;
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(1) $30,000 annual administrative
expenses at 2% inflation.
Prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
Filenamc -' Projections 6-3-00.xls; Cash_Sum; 615/00; 12:13 PM; RTK
TABLE 3
ESTIMATE OF FISCAL OFFICER'S REPORT
VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
I. FY2000101 Assessed Value for the Project Area
Secured
Secured Secured Personal Homeowner Total Total
Land Improvements Property Exemptions Unsecured Assessed Value
$37,593,014 (1) $68,396,423 (1) $2,442,983 (2)
$0 $15,203,884 (2) $123,636,304
II. FY2000101 Base Year Project Area and Total Ad Valorem Tax and FY2000101 Taxes Available to Redevelopment Agency
Agency
Estimated Estimated
Share of FY2000/01 Base Net Total
Property Tax Year Tax from FY 2000/01 Prop
Revenue (3) Project Area Tax Revenues (4)
County 23.95% $308,110 $196,919,982
Library 4.30% $55,371 $9,852,816
Cupertino 2.24% $28,765 $2,855,594
Cupertiono ESD 24.70% $317,795 $34,652,225
Fremont UHSD 16.68% $214,616 $42,787,025
Foothill CCD 6.37% $81,927 $33,700,482
County Education 3.11% $39,974 $32,473,525
County Fire 15.09% $194,139 $26,080,545
MPROSD 1.56% $20,029 $9,419,997
SCVWD 1.81% $23,330 $30,525,849
BAAQMD 0.18% $2,380 $2,883,876
100.00% $1,286,436 $422,151,916
Estimated Estimated
Share of Less Estimated FY2001/02 Taxes
FY2001/02 Gross FY2001102 for RDA from
Increment (5) Pass-Through (5) Each A~]ency (6)
$6,467 $1,293 $5,173
$1,162 $232.43 $930
$604 $120.74 $483
$6,670 $1,333.99 $5,336
$4,504 $4,000 $504
$1,720 $343.90 $1,376
$839 $167.80 $671
$4,075 $814.93 $3,260
$420 $84.08 $336
$490 $97.93 $392
$50 $9.99 $40
$27,000 $8,499 $18,501
* Property Tax Rate: 1.0405%
(Includes pre-1989 property tax override: County Retirement
Levy (.0388%) and County Library Retirement (.0017%)).
(1) Santa Clara County Assessor Notifications of Corrected Assessment (10/22/99),
with land and improvements adjusted by a 1% assumed growth rate and $6.5 million of Macy's and Sears improvements.
(2) County Fiscal Officer's Report (9/20/99).
(3) Santa Clara County Controller-Treasurer (8/6/99)
(4) County Fiscal Officer's Report (9~20~99), adjusted by 2.5% assumed growth factor.
(5) Estimated by KMA
(6) Includes Housing Set-Aside
PREPARED BY: KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES. INC,
FILENAME: Fiscal Officer's Relxxt Esllmate 6-4-O0.xls; Sheell; 6/5/00; 12:11 PM; RTK
County of Santa Clara
Office' ¢)f tho Ct)unty Exc'cutive
September 20, 1999
Donald D. Brown
City Manager/Executive Director
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Dear Mr. Brown:
Re: Proposed Vallco Fashion Park Redevelopment Project
The FY1999-2000 Assessed Value for the project area is as follows:
Secured
Secured Secured Personal Home Owner Total
Land Improvements Property Exemptions Unsecured
Total Local
Assessed Value
$37,$60,808 $86,275,865 $2,442,983 0
$15,203,884 $141,483~540
The following agencies levy taxes in the project area:
County of Santa Clara
County Library
City of Cupertino
Cupertino Elementary School District
Fremont Union High School District
Foothill Community College District
County Office. of Education
County Fire Dep~ta~ent (Central Fire District)
Mid-Peninsula Regional Open Space District
Santa Clara Valley Water District
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
The amount of tax revenue to be derived by each taxing agency from the FY2000 base year
assessment roll fi:om the project area and the total ad valorem tax revenues from all property
within its boundaries for each taxing agency is shown in Table 1 below. Table 1 also reports
the estimated first Year property taxes available to the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
broken down by the taxing agencies, as required by Section 33328 Of the Health and Safety
Code.
B()i~r¢l ()f Supt-rvJ.~)r.~: IDon~l(I F. G~gt'. Blnn¢'n Alvnrc~(Io. P~'le ,%lcHugh. Jnm¢'s T. Be'~ll Jr.. $. Josel)ll $imifian
Agency
Table 1
FY2000 Base Year Project Area Tax amd Total l=Y2000 Ad Valorem Tax
and Estimated First Year Taxes Available to Redevelopment Agency
by Taxing Agency in Proposed Vallco Fashion Park Redevelopment Project
Estimated
FY2000 Base
Year Tax
From Project Area
EstimatectNet
Total FY2000
Property
Tax Revenue
Estimated First Year
Taxes for RDA
From Agency
County $33,886 $192,117,056 $6,040
Library 6,090 9,612,503 1,085
Cupertino 3,164 2,785,945 564
Cupertino ESE) 34,953. 33,807,049 6,229
Fremont UI-~D 23,604 41,743,439 4.207
Foothill CCD 9,010 32,878,519 1,606
County Education 4,397 31,681,488 783
County Fire 21,352 25,1!~,434 3,806
MPROSD 2,203 9,190,241 393
SCVWD 2,567 29,781,316 458
BA. AQMD 262 2,813,538 47
Total First Year Tax Available to Redevelopment Agency $25,217
Sincerely,
David Elledge
Auditor-Controller
Larry Stone, Assessor
Emma Rock, Tax Collector
Richard Wittenberg, County Executive
[PROPOSED]
Exhibit 9
RULES GOVERNING PARTICIPATION BY PROPERTY OWNERS
AND THE EXTENSION OF REASONABLE REENTRY PREFERENCES
TO BUSINESS OCCUPANTS IN THE
CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Prepared by the
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
CUP/OPR~es
October25, 1999
,,/~_
TABLE OF CONTENTS
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
Xe
[§100] PURPOSE AND INTENT
[~200] DEFINITIONS
[§300] ELIGIBILITY
[~100] TYPES OF PARTICIPATION
[§500] CONFORMING OWNERS
[~/)0] OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS
[§700] CONTENTS OF OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS
[§800] LIMITATIONS ON ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY BY THE AGENCY
[~900] REENTRY PREFERENCE TO BUSINESS OCCUPANTS WITHIN THE
PROJECT AREA
[§1000] AMENDMENT OF RULES
CUP/OPRules
10/25/99
RULES GOVERNING PARTICIPATION BY PROPERTY OWNERS
AND THE EXTENSION OF REASONABLE REENTRY PREFERENCES
TO BUSINESS OCCUPANTS IN THE
CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
I. [§100] PURPOSE AND INTENT
These rules are adopted pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law of
the State of California (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) in order to
implement the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco
Redevelopment Project regarding participation by property owners and the
extension of reasonable reentry preferences to business occupants within the Project.
These rules set forth the procedures governing such participation and preferences.
It is the intention of the Agency to encourage and permit participation in the
redevelopment of the Project Area by property owners and to extend reasonable
reentry preferences to business occupants of real property within the boundaries of
the Project Area to the maximum extent consistent with the objectives of the
Redevelopment Plan.
II. [§200] DEFINITIONS
As used herein, the following definitions apply:
(1) "Agency" means the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency.
(2) "Business Occupant" means any person, persons, corporation,
association, partnership, or other entity engaged in business within the Project Area
on or after the date of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City Council.
(3) "City Council" means the City Council of the City of Cupertino,
California.
(4) "Owner" means any person, persons, corporation, association,
partnership, or other entity holding title of record to real property in the Project
Area on or after the date of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City
Council.
(5) "Owner Participation Agreement" means an agreement entered into by
an Owner with the Agency in accordance with the provisions of the Redevelopment
Plan and these rules.
CUP / OPRules
10/25/99
(6) "Project Area" means the area described in the "Legal Description of
the Project Area Boundaries" (Attachment No. 1 of th~ Redevelopment Plan) and
shown on the "Project Area Map" (Attachment No. 2 of the Redevelopment Plan).
(7) "Redevelopment Plan" means the Redevelopment Plan for the
Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project as adopted by the City Council by
Ordinance No. on ,2000.
llI. [§3001 ELIGIBILITY
Owners shall be eligible t° participate in the redevelopment of property
within the Project Area in accordance with the provisions of the Redevelopment
Plan, these rules, and the limitations herein described.
Participation opportunities are necessarily subject to and limited by factors
such as the following:
(1) The appropriateness of land uses proposed and consistency with the
General Plan of the City of Cupertino and the Redevelopment Plan;
(2) The construction, widening, or realignment of streets;
(3) The ability of participants to finance redevelopment in accordance with
the Redevelopment Plan and development criteria adopted by the Agency in
implementation of the Redevelopment Plan;
(4) The construction or expansion of public facilities; and
(5) The fact that, other than public rights-of-way, the Project Area consists
of a single retail shopping center that is intended to be redeveloped as a uniform
and consistent whole.
The Agency presently contemplates that in carrying out the Redevelopment
Plan, certain portions of the Project Area may be acquired by the Agency for public
improvements, facilities, or utilities. Therefore, owner participatiOn opportunities
will not be available for such properties.
IV. [~230] TYPES OF PARTICIPATION
Subject to these rules and the limitations in Section 300 and this Section 400,
Owners shall be given a reasonable opportunity to participate in redevelopment by
retaining their properties and redeveloping or improving such property for use in
accordance with the Redevelopment Plan.
CUP/OPRules 2 lo/25 / 99
Each proposal for participation shall be reviewed by the Agency specifically
with respect to the following:
(1) Conformity with the land use provisions of the Redevelopment Plan;
(2) Compatibility with the standards, covenants, restrictions, conditions
and controls of the Redevelopment Plan; and
(3) The participant's ability to finance the redevelopment or improvement
in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan.
V. [§500] CONFORMING OWNERS
The Agency may, in its sole and absolute discretion, determine that certain
real property within the Project Area presently meets the requirements of the
Redevelopment Plan, and the Owners of such property will be permitted to remain
as conforming Owners without an Owner Participation Agreement with the
Agency, provided such Owners continue to operate, use, and maintain the real
property within the requirements of the Redevelopment Plan.
In the event that any of the conforming Owners desire to construct any
additional improvements or substantially alter or modify existing structures on any
of the real property described above as conforming, then, in such event, such
conforming Owners may 'be required by the Agency to enter into an Owner
Participation Agreement with the Agency.
VI. [fi600] OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS
Owners wishing to participate in redevelopment within the Project Area may
be required, as a condition to participation, to enter into an Owner Participation
Agreement with the Agency if the Agency determines it is necessary to impose upon
the property any of the standards, restrictions, and controls of the Redevelopment
Plan. The Agreement may require the participant to join in the recordation of such
documents as the Agency may require in order to ensure the property will be
developed and used in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan and the Owner
Participation Agreement.
VII. [§700] CONTENTS OF OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS
An Owner Participation Agreement shall obligate the Owner, his or her heirs,
successors and assigns, and tenants to devote the property to the uses specified in the
Redevelopment Plan, abide by all provisions and conditions of the Redevelopment
Plan for the period of time that the Redevelopment Plan is in force and effect, and
CUP/OPRules 3
10/25/99
comply with all the provisions of the Owner Participation Agreement according to
their terms, duration, and effect.
An Owner Participation Agreement may provide that if the Owner does not
comply with the terms of the Agreement, the Agency, in addition to other remedies,
may acquire such property or any interest therein by any lawful means, including
eminent domain, for its fair market value as of the date of the Owner Participation
Agreement, and the Agency may thereafter dispose of the property or interest so
acquired in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan.
An Owner Participation Agreement shall contain such other terms and
conditions which, in the discretion of the Agency, may be necessary to effectuate the
purposes of the Redevelopment Plan.
VIII. [§800] LIMITATIONS ON ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY BY THE AGENCY
The Agency shall not acquire real property to be retained and developed by an
Owner pursuant to a fully executed Owner Participation Agreement if the Owner
fully performs under the Agreement.
The Agency shall not acquire real property on which an existing building is to
be continued on its present site under the Redevelopment Plan and in its present
form and use without the consent of the Owner, unless:
(1) Such building requires
modernization, or rehabilitation;
structural alteration, improvement,
(2) The site or lot on which the building is situated requires modification
in size, shape, or use; or
(3) It is necessary to impose upon such property any of the controls,
limitations, restrictions, and requirements of the Redevelopment Plan, and the
Owner fails or refuses to participate in redevelopment by executing an Owner
Participation Agreement in accordance with the provisions of the Redevelopment
Plan.
ix. [§9oo]
REENTRY PREFERENCE TO BUSINESS OCCUPANTS WITHIN
THE PROJECT AREA
Business Occupants who desire to remain within the Project Area shall be
extended a reasonable preference to remain or reenter in business within the Project
CUP/OPRules 4 10/25/99
Area if they otherwise meet the requirements prescribed in these rules and the
Redevelopment Plan.
X. [§1000] AMENDMENT OF RULES
These rules may be modified or amended from time to time by the Agency at
any regular or duly called special meeting, provided, however, that no such
amendment shall retroactively impair the rights of Owners who have executed
Owner Participation Agreements with the Agency in reliance upon these rules as
presently constituted.
CUP/OPRules 5
10/25/99
PUBLIC ECONOMICS, INC
Public Finance
Urban Economia
Development Services
Exhibit 10
May 26, 2000
Mr. Don Brown
Director, Redevelopment Agency
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014
Subject:
Vallco Fashion Park Redevelopment Project: Consultation and Statutory
Payment Issues, Response to Agency Response to January 21, 2000 Consultation
Meeting Letter
Dear Mr. Brown:
This letter is submitted by Public Economics, Inc. ("PEI") on behalf of Fremont Union High
School District and Foothill-De Anza Community College District (collectively--"Districts") with
respect to the City of Cupertino's proposed Vallco Fashion Park Redevelopment Project. This
letter is in reply to the May 9, 2000 letter from the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency which
responds to issues raised by the Districts in the January 21, 2000 Consultation Meeting and in
various follow-up phone discussions regarding the proposed 'redevelopment'plan and the
implementation of statutory payments to the Districts for the proposed Project. It is requested
that this letter and attachment be entered into the record of the Joint Public Hearing for adoption
of the Project. Please note that this letter is to be considered a part of an ongoing dialogue
between the Districts and the Agency regarding processes and procedures relating to the
implementation of the Project and the statutory payments. This letter is not to be considered a
statement of concern or objection to the proposed Redevelopment Plan.
The following are responses to the Agency's May 9th point-by-point response to the issues raised
in the January 21, 2000 Consultation Meeting and in the letter submitted by the Districts at that
meeting regarding the implementation of the statutory payments.
820 W. Town and Country Road · Orange, CA 92868-4712
(714) 647-6242 * FAX (714) 647-6232
World Wide Web: hh~'.//www, t~ub-econ.com
May 26, 2000
Mr. Ron Brown
Page 2
% -
AB 1290 Payment Issues Not Addressed in Community Redevelopment Law
Responsibility for Calculating and Making Payments. While the District's agree that
if the County is willing to calculate the AB 1290 payments, it would be better for the
County to do so, given their access to the necessary information and their expertise in
these matters. The Districts do not know to what degree the Agency is able to release
itself from ultimate responsibility for the payments, given the way the relevant portions
of the Health and Safety Code are written (HSC Section 33607.5, et seq.). The Districts
will await further information from the Agency regarding responsibility for the payments,
subsequent to the adoption of the plan.
Frequency and Dates of Payments. That the pass-through payments be made at the
same time as the Agency receives tax increment installments is acceptable to the
Districts.
Documentation of Payment Calculations. Irrespective of whether the Agency or the
County calculate the payments, the Districts remain interested in receiving
documentation of payment calculations in sufficient detail to enable the Districts to
determine whether they have been paid according to ongoing understanding.
Interest Payments. The Districts agree that if payments are made per Item 2 above
(when Agency receives tax increment installments), then an interest provision is not a
concern over the normal course of payments. The Districts will consider the matter of an
interest provision for payments not made due to subordination of the payments to
Agency debt, if and when the Agency makes a request for subordination per HSC
Section 33607.5(e).
B. Issues Needing Further Clarification
Years of First and Last AB 1290 Payments. No response required because Agency
and Districts are in agreement on the timing of first and last payments. (Please see Item
B. 1 in the attached May 9, 2000 letter from the Agency to Districts and the January 21,
2000 letter from the Districts to the Agency for the actual exchange of comments.)
Deductions for Low and Moderate Income ("LMI") Housing Set-asides. No
response required because Agency and Districts are in agreement on the impact of LMI
set-aside deductions on the pass-through payments. (Please see Item B.2 in the attached
May 9, 2000 letter from the Agency to Districts and the January 21, 2000 letter from the
Districts to the Agency for the actual exchange of comments.)
M:\CMPR'T"IIqO~I,~A_p.~.~ p. SAM
May 26, 2000
Mr. Ron Brown
Page 3
Tax Overrides. The Agency letter of May 9th points out that currently only two tax
override amounts over the one percent basic levy exist within the project area one for
the County Library and one for County Retirement funding. Therefore, it will only be in
the eventuality that the Districts approve and implement future overrides that it will be
necessary for the Agency and the County to remain aware that per HSC 33676(a) and
33670(e), the Auditor/Controller is required to allocate to the Districts, not the Agency,
all tax override amounts Within the Project area for any new bonded indebtedness
incurred by the Districts.
C. AB 1290 Payment Issues Subject to Misinterpretation
Allocation of AB 1290 Payments after Accounting for Impact of Educational
Revenue Augmentation Fund ("ERAF")/"Tax Shift." The Districts also are in
discussions with the County regarding this matter and would request that the Agency
keep the Districts informed regarding the ongoing status of their discussions. The
Districts will do likewise for the Agency.
Sponsoring Community Share of Statutory Payments in Tiers 2 and 3. The
Districts do not believe that the Agency's position on this matter--that the
City-generated portion of the Tier 2 and Tier 3 statutory payment funds revert to the
AgencyMis correct. The Districts' position is that the funds created by applying the
specified payment percentages in each Tier to total tax increment generated by each Tier
are to be distributed among the affected taxing entities--the Redevelopment Agency is
not an 'affected taxing entity and is therefore ineligible to receive these pass-through
payments. The portion of the payments in Tiers 2 and 3 lef~ over, as a result of the
City's express ineligibility to receive these funds, should be distributed among all the
affected taxing entities in proportion to each entity's percentage share of property taxes
within the Project area. Because this matter will not affect the amount of AB 1290
payments until the start of the second tier of payments, beginning the 11 th year in which
the Agency is allocated tax increment, it is probable that this matter Will by that time
have been clarified by legal precedent or legislation. (With respect to a 1995 amendment
to Health and Safety Code Section 33607.5 to clarify this issue, mentioned in the
Agency's May 9th letter--if the Agency is referring to AB 1424---this legislation did
not, to our understanding, address this issue.)
May 26, 2000
Mr. Ron Brown
Page 4
D. Other Issues for Agency Consideration
AB 1290 Payments as a Debt of the Agency. The District's consultant PEI, who is
suggesting consideration of the point of view expressed in .the January 21st letter,
understands the Agency's opinion on this matter as expressed in the May 9th letter.
However, PEI's main point in bringing up this matter is to create additional
understanding by the Agency of aspects of the HSC Section 33607.5 payment formulas
that impinge on the long mn amount (and therefore usefulness) of these payments to the
Districts. Further, notwithstanding the Agency's comments in the May 9th letter, PEI
believes the at the right time in the future, if redevelopment law in this regard has not
changed, the possibility should be explored that an agency could, while at the same time
conforming to the requirements of the law, make a facilities financing commitment to a
district under HSC Section 33445, which if established as a debt of the agency could
make the maximum amount of the statutory payment stream available for use in
repayment of this debt by the agency. (The "property tax" portion of the payments
would, of course, need to be sent by the agency to the district, per the Code, for the
district to apply to its revenue limit.)
Subordination. The May 9th letter's response to this issue reflects a misunderstanding
of the intent of the subordination "Guidelines" submitted to the Agency with the January
21st letter. The District's are not requesting that the Agency commit in advance to
following the procedures set forth in the Guidelines. The purpose of the Guidelines is to
make the Agency aware that it is recommended that the Districts keep on file and apply
these Guidelines in evaluating whether, in the eventuality of future request for
subordination of the Districts' payments by the Agency, the Districts should approve or
disapprove the Agenfy's request based upon "substantial evidence." By requesting that
these Guidelines be placed in the public record of the Project adoption and be kept on
file by the Agency, the Districts are seeking to encourage the Agency to refer to these
Guidelines in the eventuality that the Agency does request subordination of the Districts'
payments. If the Agency were to choose to follow the Guidelines in preparing a request
for subordination, it would facilitate the Districts' evaluation and increase the chance for
approval of the request. (The Guidelines are included with this letter as Attachment 1.)
E. Item Not Covered in the Districts' January 21st Letter or the Agency's May 9th
Response Letter
"Basic Aid" Pass-Through Payments to Fremont Union High School District.
Fremont Union High School District is a "basic aid" school district, which means that the
District finances essentially all of its operations through local property taxes, and does
May 26, 2000
Mr. Ron Brown
Page 5
not receive any general apportionment from the State. For a basic aid district, loss of
property taxes to a redevelopment project represents a direct and irreplaceable loss of
revenue to the district.
Redevelopment law as amended by AB 1290 provides a mechanism (Health and Safety
Code Section 33676(b)) to at least partially offset this loss of revenue to a basic aid
school district. HSC Section 33676(b) provides formulas for additional payments to a
basic aid district to supplement the standard AB 1290 payments. (The standard AB 1290
payments are not nearly sufficient to mitigate a basic aid district's loss of revenue to a
redevelopment project.)
The Agency's redevelopment consultant, Keyser Marston, Associates and the Districts'
consultant, PEI, have discussed and reviewed implementation of the basic aid formulas.
Based on a review of Keyser Marston's basic aid portion of Tax Increment Projections
sent to PEI, PEI believes that, to the extent that the calculations remain consistent with
what was forwarded to PEI, the consultants are in agreement on the methodology for
calculating these payments. However, the High School District is advised to provide for
review of the actual calculations and payments when they begin to occur (at earliest,
January 2002), especially since the Agency has indicated the County
Controller-Treasurer may be contracted to make the payments. Initial payments will be
small. That is when any discrepancies in payment methodology should be identified.
Please do not hesitate to call Dante Gumucio at (714) 647-6242 or the undersigned at (949)
499-7676 to discuss any matters relating to this letter. The Districts and PEI thank the Agency
and its consultant for their time and consideration in the consultation process.
Sincerely yours,
Public Economics, Inc.
By:~
Cad Goodwin, Consultant
Attachment
CC~
Mr. Jim Keller, Vice Chancellor, Foothill-De Anza Community College District
Mr. Michael Raffetto, Associate Superintendent, Fremont Union High School District
Ms. Wendy Beadle, Tax Apportionment Manager, Santa Clara Co. Controller-Treasurer
Ms. Ciddy Wordell, City Planner, City of Cupertino
ATTACHMENT 1
Vallco Fashion Park Redevelopment Project
Guidelines Regarding Future Requests for Subordination
of AB 1290 Payments
Fremont Union High School District
Foothill-De Anza Community College District
The redevelopment agency ("Agency") is authorized pursuant to Health & Safety Code ("HSC") Section
33607.5(e) to request subordination of the Districts' AB 1290 payments to Agency bonds, loans, or other
indebtedness. Subordination is good for the Agency, the Districts, and the community because it allows the
Agency to issue bonds at lower interest rates and accomplish more with the available revenues. Subordination
is bad for the Districts in the event that the Agency does not have adequate funds to pay the District.
When requesting sUbordination, HSC 33607.5(e) requires the Agency to provide "substantial evidence" that
sufficient funds will be available to pay both debt service and AB 1290 payments to the Districts. The
Districts consider the following as constituting substantial evidence:
When requesting subordination from the Districts, the Agency should provide the following materials
(most of which are typically produced as documentation for a tax allocation bond financing), at least 30
days in advance of debt issuance;
a. Copy &the Preliminary Official Statement and related documents
b. Report explaining how RDA intends to repay indebtedness and still meet its obligations to the
Districts
c. Annual tax increment projections, including annual assessed valuation growth assumptions
d. Annual total debt service requirements of the RDA
2. In sizing its bonds, the Agency should utilize tax increment projections which assume an assessed
valuation growth of no more than 2.0 percent in any year, unless clearly justified.
3. The Agency should request subordination only if tax increment projections, net of payments to the
Districts and other affected taxing entities, are equal to or greater than debt service requirements in each
year.
4. The Agency should submit all documents to the Districts via certified mail, followed by phone contact.
5. Unless written consent to the contrary is provided by Districts, the Districts will not accept subordination
of its AB 1290 payments unless AB 1290 payments to all other affected taxing entities are also
subordinated
Any payments missed or deferred by the Agency due to subordination will be considered by the
Districts to be a loan to the Agency, which should be repaid to the Districts, with interest, from the
first tax increment available to the Agency.
M:\CUPRTINOLatTrAC:H_I.SAM
02-SP-00
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 6019 (Minute Order)
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING THAT
THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CUPEKTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY EVALUATE
ASPECTS OF THE VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ENSURE CONFORMITY WITH
THE GENERAL PLAN
The Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino recommends that the City Council and the
Cupertino Kedevelopment Agency evaluate traffic, air quality, height and setbacks pertaining to the
Vallco Redevelopment Area to ensure that they conform with the General Plan.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of March, 2000, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONEKS:
COMMISSIONEKS:
COMMISSIONEKS:
Corr, Doyle, Kwok, Stevens and Chairperson Harris
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/ Steve Piasecki
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
/s/ Andrea Harris
Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
g:planning/pdreport/res/vallcomo
MINUTES
CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Regular Meeting
Monday, May 15, 2000
CALL TO ORDER
At 7:02 p.m., Chairman John Statton called the meeting to order in the City Council
Chambers, 10300 Torte Avenue, Cupertino.
ROLL CALL
Redevelopment Agency members present: Chairman John Stat-ton, Vice-Chair Sandra
James, and Agency members Don Burnett, Michael Chang, and Richard Lowenthal.
Redevelopment Agency members absent: None.
Staff present: Executive Director Don Brown, General Counsel Charles Kilian, Finance
Director Carol Atwood, and Secretary Kimberly Smith.
CEREMONIAL MATTERS & PRESENTATIONS -None.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. February 22, 2000, regular meeting.
James moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Bumett seconded and the
motion carried 5-0.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None.
NEW BUSINESS
Approving and adopting the report to the City Council on the proposed
redevelopment plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, submitting
said report and proposed redevelopment plan to the City Council, and consenting
to a joint public heating, Resolution RA-00-05.
City Planner Wordell reviewed the report which recommended that the agency
adopt Resolution No. RA-00-05 to authorize the following: 1. Approval and
adoption of the report to the city council; 2. Submittal of the report and the
redevelopment plan to the city council; and 3. Consent to and call a joint public
hearing on the redevelopment plan on June 19.
Paul Anderson, a consultant with Keyser Marston, economic consultants,
discussed the Report to Council which he described as an information document
containing background information and required findings that the agency and
council will consider along with public testimony at the joint public heating. A
summary of the report will be presented at the joint public hearing in June.
Nicki Murphy, legal counsel for the redevelopment agency, said that in order to
use redevelopment as a tool, the law requires that the agency adopt a
redevelopment plan. She said the joint public hearing is the culmination of the
process. Following the hearing the agency will act to consider approval and
adoption of the redevelopment plan. She said the plan is a document that serves as
a charter of powers and authorities for the agency to carry out redevelopment in
the project area as well as a long-term planning document. She said the document
is general, flexible, and intended to be fluid.
Burnett explained that the object of the plan was to try to revitalize the Vallco
shopping area.
Chang moved to adopt Resolution No. RA-00-05. Bumett seconded and the
motion passed 5-0.
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:08 p.m., the Redevelopment Agency adjourned.
Kimberly Smith, Secretary
CITY OF
CUPE INO
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408) 777-3220
FAX: (408) 777-3366
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
SUMMARY
Agenda Item No. ~ /
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Meeting Date: June 19, 2000
Adoption of the 2000/01 City Budget.
BACKGROUND
The purpose of tonight's hearing is to give the public a final oppommity to ask questions
concerning City programs before adoption of the 2000/01 budget. A public hearing was held
during the Council meeting of June 5 to conduct a preliminary review of the annual budget.
An in-depth review of the budget document was presented to City Council at the budget work
session on June 1. Council discussed the general fund financial position, five-year projections,
departmental budgets, proposed new programs and the five-year capital improvement program.
RECOMMENDATION
· Receive public comments.
· Grant a negative declaration.
Adopt Resolution establishing an operating and capital budget for fiscal year 2000/01.
· Adopt Resolution establishing an appropriation limit for fiscal year 2000/01.
Submitted by:
Approved for submission:
Carol A. Atwood
Director of Administrative Services
Donald D. Brown
City Manager
~/-/
Printed on Recycled Paper
RESOLUTION NO. 00-189
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ADOPTING AN OPERATING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2000-01 BY RATIFYING ESTIMATES OF REVENUES TO BE
RECEIVED IN EACH FUND AND APPROPRIATING MONIES THEREFROM FOR
SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES AND ACCOUNTS AND SETTING FORTH
CONDITIONS OF ADMINISTERING SAID BUDGET
WHEREAS, the orderly administration of municipal government is dependent on the
establishment of a sound fiscal policy of maintaining a proper ration of expenditures within
anticipated revenues and available monies; and
WHEREAS, the extent of any project or program and the degree of its accomplishment,
as well as the efficiency of performing assigned duties and responsibilities, is likewise dependent
on the monies made available for that purpose; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has submitted his estimates of anticipated revenues and
fund balances, and has recommended the allocation of monies for specified program activities;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby adopt the
following sections as a part of its fiscal policy:
Section 1: The estimates of available fund balances and anticipated resources to be
received in each of the several funds during fiscal year 2000-01 as submitted by the City
Manager in his proposed budget and as have been amended during the budget study sessions are
hereby ratified.
Section 2. There is appropriated from each of the several funds the sum of money as
determined during the budget sessions for the purposes as expressed and estimated for each
department.
Section 3. The City Manager is hereby authorized to administer and transfer
appropriations between Budget Accounts within the Operating Budget when in his opinion such
transfers become necessary for administrative purposes.
Section 4. The Director of Administrative Services shall prepare and submit to City
Council quarterly a revised estimate of Operating Revenues.
Section 5. The Director of Administrative Services is hereby authorized to continue
unexpended appropriations for Capital Improvement projects.
Resolution No. 00-189 Page 2
Section 6. The Director of Administrative Services is hereby authorized to continue
appropriations for operating expenditures that are encumbered or scheduled to be encumbered at
year end.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Mayor, City of Cupertino
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 00-190
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ESTABLISHING AN APPROPRIATION LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR
2000-01
WHEREAS, the State of California has adopted legislation requiring local jurisdictions to
calculate their appropriation limits in complying with Article XIII B; and
WHEREAS, said limits are determined by a formula based upon change in population,
(city of county), combined with either the change in inflation (California per capita income) or
the change in the local assessment roll due to local nonresidential construction; and
WHEREAS, the local governing body is required to set an appropriation limit by
adoption of a resolution; and
WHEREAS, the county population percentage change 11.27% and the California per
capita personal income change is 4.91%.
In computing the 2000-01 limit, City Council has elected to use the city population
percentage change, and the California per capita income change was used, but the Council has a
right to change nonresidential assessed valuation percentage when the figure is available.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino
hereby approves a 2000-01 fiscal appropriation limit of $45,594,955.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Mayor, City of Cupertino
City Clerk
CITY OF
CUPEP TINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
Telephone: (408) 777-3308
FAX: (408) 777-3333
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SUMMARY
Agenda No. ,~- ~/~
Agenda Date: June 19, 2000
SUMMARY:
A. Apartments - Cupertino City Center Land (comer of Stevens Creek and De Anza
Boulevards), Lot 1, Tract 7953. Applications 2-GPA-99, 3-EXC-00, 6-U-00, and 9-EA-99.
Request to consider a General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet and to
project into the 1:1 setback ratio from Stevens Creek Boulevard; a Heart of the City Specific Plan
amendment and exception and use permit to construct a new 206-unit, 206,725 square foot
multifamily residential building and 6,775 square feet of retail space on a vacant parcel. Negative
Declarations are recommended. The General Plan amendment is recommended for denial. The
Heart of the City Specific Plan amendment and exceptions are recommended for approval.
B. Hotel - Kimpton Hotel and Restaurant Group, Lot 6, Tract 7953, (comer of Stevens
Creek and De Anza Boulevards), APN 369-01-037. Applications 2-GPA-99, 4-EXC-00, 5-U-00,
and 8-EA-99. Request to consider a General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75
feet; a Heart of the City Specific Plan amendment and exception to exceed the 40 foot height
limit and to allow hotel use; and a use permit to construct a new 224 room, 130,580 square foot
hotel on a vacant parcel. A Negative Declaration recommended, and this item is recommended
for approval. Continued from June 5.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends:
2.
3.
4.
Grant Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment, Use Permit,
Heart of the City amendment and exception
Deny General Plan Amendment per Planning Commission Resolution No.
6027
Approve Heart of the City exception per Planning Commission Resolution
No. 6028
Approve Use Permit per Planning Commission Resolution No. 6029
Bo
Hotel - Kimpton Hotel and Restaurant Group, Lot 6, Tract 7953, (comer of
Stevens Creek and De Anza Boulevards), APN 369-01-037. Applications 2-GPA-
99, 4~EXC-00, 5-U-00, and 8-EA-99. Request to consider a General Plan
amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet; a Heart of the City Specific
Plan amendment and exception to exceed the 40 foot height limit and to allow
hotel use; and a use permit to construct a new 224 room, 130,580 square foot
hotel on a vacant parcel. A Negative Declaration recommended, and this item is
recommended for approval. Continued from dune 5.
Actions to be taken:
1. Grant Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment, Use Permit,
Heart of the City amendment and exception
2. Approve General Plan Amendment per Planning Commission Resolution
No. 6031
3. Approve Heart of the City exception per Planning Commission Resolution
No. 6032
4. ApproveUse Permit per Planning Commission Resolution No. 6033
Project Data:
General Plan Designation:
Zoning Designation:
Specific Plan:
Commercial/Office/Residential
Planned Development (Residential/Commercial/Office and
Hotel)
Heart of the City
Project Consistency with:
General Plan:
Zoning:
Specific Plan:
No Amendment required
Yes
No Amendment and Exception required
Environmental Assessment:
Mitigated Negative Declaration
DISCUSSION:
Section A provides specific information on the apartment project. Section B provides specific
information on the hotel project.
SECTION A
APARTMENT PROJECT
At its June 5, 2000 meeting, the City Council identified two issues of concern, including public
access to the podium and adequate bicycle facilities.
Podium Access
The applicant proposes gates at the Stevens Creek Boulevard and fountain accesses to the
podium courtyard (plan L-1.3). They are concerned about safety of their residents and security
2
of the courtyard. The City Council is interested in open public access to this area. The gates can
remain open at all times, but if the City Council chooses an alternative, staff proposes that
limited hours could be set for public access, such as 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. Automatic locking gates
could allow the gates to be unlocked in the morning and automatically locked at night. Residents
could gain access with a card key. For security of the apartment units, when the podium is open
to the public, the applicant could include card key access into corridors or elevators leading from
the courtyard to the units. Conditions No. 5 and 21 could be modified accordingly, should the
Council so choose.
Bicycle Locking Facilities
Condition No. 4 requires one secured bicycle locking facility for every 6,500 square feet of
building area or 47 secured and separated bicycle spaces in the parking garage. This allows 22%
of the tenants to have a secured bicycle parking space.
SECTION II
HOTEL PROJECT
BACKGROUND:
The hotel site is located on South De Anza Boulevard, 220' from the intersection of Stevens
Creek and North De Anza Boulevards. It will be accessed from South De Anza Boulevard and
Cali Avenue. Adjacent uses are office and commercial, and residential to the southeast.
PROJECT DATA AND DESCRIPTION:
Net Parcel Size:
Building Sq. Ft.
Restaurant Sq. Ft.:
Kitchen Sq. Ft.:
Bar Sq. Ft.:
Meeting Rooms Sq. Ft:
Board Room Sq. Ft.:
Hotel Rooms:
Parking:
Height:
1.3 acres
130,583 (excluding parking garage)
2,100 (approximately 75 seats, plus 30-40 outside weather
permitting)
1,350
930 (45 seats)
2,950 (3 rooms)
660
224
171 spaces
108' to top of north tower
91'4" to top of parapet of main guest room section
The proposal hotel has eight stories above grade and two levels below grade, with a full
restaurant, bar, meeting rooms and parking garage.
The Planning Commission held two study sessions and three public meetings on the application.
3
DISCUSSION:
GENERAL PLAN
The General Plan designation is Commercial/Office/Residential. The following matrix addresses
compatibility with the General Plan and Heart of City standards:
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY
HOTEL Required Proposed Conformity: C/NC
Development Allocation 585 rooms available 224 C
Use Commercial/Office/ Commercial/ C
Residential Residential
Height 75 feet maximum 108' north tower, NC. Mitigation is
(landmark building) 91'4" guest rooms stepping back from
street and superior
design.
Setback to Height Ratio 1:1 > 1:1 C The hotel falls
below the setback
line.
Other relevant General Plan Policies:
Heart of the City: The General Plan (Policy 2-2) states that the "design plan shall contain
guidelines that foster pedestrian activity, a sense of arrival and neighborhood protection," and
that "the Crossroads intersection should be developed with a distinct signature to mark its City
prominence. Such improvements may include the siting of landmark buildings, street monuments
or other public art works, landscaping and special paving." This project incorporates these
strategies by creating a landmark hotel building and restaurant, including a patio and pedestri .an
sidewalk adjacent to the Four Seasons Plaza.
General Plan Conformance
As shown in the matrix above, a General Plan amendment is required to accommodate the
proposed height. There are seven stories of guest rooms (each at 9'6") and three stories of
parking (each at 10'6" and 9'6"). There is also a level of outdoor parking on low-rise parking
structure. The first level of the parking garage is below grade. The eight-story office tower east
of the proposed hotel is 125' 10" high. The Portal building to the south is 54' to the roof and
68'9" to the mechanical screen. The Armadillo Willy's building to the west is 30' high.
The proposed hotel has lower elements (restaurant, high "living room" ceiling, mechanical
equipment and parking structure) that provide a transition to the higher guest room section and
the two towers. These elements range from 19' to 28'6". The Armadillo Willy's building
provides a transition from De Anza Boulevard, and should the site redevelop, the height might
be increased to 40' to reflect the same building stepping incorporated into the apartment
building.
4
The elevations and perspective indicate that the penthouse of theexisting office tower and a
portion of the tower will be visible from ground level at De Anza Boulevard. Staff believes that
the hotel height is needed for the project to be successful, and that the building design benefits of
lowering the height by one story would not be significant.
HEART OF THE CITY SPECIFIC PLAN
The Heart of the City Specific Plan was developed to guide future development along Stevens
Creek Boulevard. The Specific Plan provides development standards and design guidelines for
various land uses including: commercial, multi-unit residential and mixed use residential and
retail. It appears that these standards have been developed with a lower density, low profile
building in mind, which would be expected of the smaller sized lots along Stevens Creek
Boulevard. These standards may not be appropriate for a large, high density development, as
would be expected at City Center. The following matrix is a comparison between the various
development standards and the projects.
HEART OF THE CITY CONFORMITY
HOTEL Required Proposed Conformity: C/NC
Use Office, Retail Hotel NC The hotel was
and/or Residential anticipated on
parcel 29, and was
switched to this
site.
Height 40 feet 108' north tower, NC. Mitigation is
91 '4" guest rooms stepping back from
street and superior
design.
Setbacks
Front 9 ft. from easement 20' C
Sides ~ height of bldg. or 2' - 20' on north, 0' NC Reduced
10' on south setbacks are
Rear " 0' NC required to
build hotel.
Streetscape 26' landscape 11 '6 planting strip, NC The proposed
easement: 5' sidewalk, 9' streetscape matches
10' planting strip, landscape strip the existing strip
6' sidewalk, 10 and sidewalk to the
planting strip north.
Parking City Code: 1 per 171 C Shared parking
room, 1 per provided with
employee: 275 adjacent garage
spaces at peak time.
5
There is one amendment and there are two exceptions to the Heart of the City plan: the hotel
height requires an amendment and the use and setbacks require the exceptions. Hotel use is
designated and was approved for the proposed apartment site, but is equally appropriate at this
site. The 40 foot height limit is exceeded, and the rationale for accepting greater height is the
same as the General Plan rationale.
Regarding setbacks, the street setback is met, and the remaining setbacks are not. The low-rise
parking structure has an 18" setback from the west property line (adjacent to Armadillo Willy's).
The required north side setback is met only for the building adjacent to the outdoor seating on the
north elevation. The east and south elevations are on the property line. The hotel site is fully
utilized for this development. Staff is satisfied with the distances from the adjacent buildings:
South to Portal building: 50 feet
Diagonally south to Park Center Apts. 75 feet
East to 8-story office tower 40 feet
These are similar to the distances between other buildings in City Center, e.g., the distance
between the Park Center Apartments and the Portal office building is 45 feet. Perhaps the most
sensitive relationship is that between the hotel and the 8 story office tower, for two reasons: 1)
the views from the offices will blocked and 2) the office and hotel windows will have direct
views of each other. However, this is a typical situation for an intensely developed area, which is
designated as high activity center in the General Plan.
There is very little distance between west facing edge of the parking garage and the Armadillo
Willy's parcel, resulting in a small space for the applicant to access the structure for
maintenance. Also, the canopies of the existing pine trees on the Armadillo Willy's parcel
extend significantly into the parking structure area. The applicant states that maintenance can be
performed within the setback area. See the landscaping section below for further discussion on
tree protection.
The Heart of the City Streetscape standards are not met because the applicant is matching the
sidewalk and landscape strip directly north. Staff believes this is acceptable because the standard
is more pertinent to Stevens Creek Boulevard than De Anza, and there is no consistent standard
along the east side of De Anza Boulevard (e.g., the Portal site has a 7 foot landscaping strip).
Exception Findings: The hotel is a high-intensity project, as anticipated by the General Plan for
this area. It is unlikely that all the standards could be met for a large hotel. The high quality
design and the identification of this location as a high activity center go toward meeting the
findings necessary to grant the exception. The hotel contributes toward the goal of promoting.
pedestrian activity and will complement the adjacent plaza as a gathering place. The finding
regarding "involving the least modification" was raised as an issue. The resolutions address this
issue by amending the Heart of the City Plan as well as approving exceptions, and adding
findings that describe the merits of the project as proposed.
6
Fire Equipment Access
The Santa Clara County Fire Department was involved in developing acceptable site access and
water supply. A significant element of this design is that 20 feet of the Four Seasons Plaza will
be utilized for emergency access. The cross-section on the hotel landscaping plan shows a 12'
sidewalk and 8' of turfblock. The Fine Arts and Parks and Recreation subcommittee that is
reviewing the plans for the Plaza concur that this is an appropriate use of the plaza perimeter, as
does staff. Fire trucks can access the hotel through the front entry and through the emergency
access corridors as shown on Sheet L 1.1.
Relationship to Plaza
The mixed-use development promotes pedestrian activity in and around the Plaza. The outdoor
patio area outside the restaurant provides outdoor seating. Lot line adjustments will be required
for the property lines proposed for these projects, which will encompass portions of the common
parcel. However, the license agreement for the "park" defined the park as the grass area, which
will not be affected, except for emergency access as described above
Traffic:
The minimum acceptable level of service (LOS) for Cupertino is LOS D, with two exceptions:
Stevens Creek Boulevard/De An= Boulevard and De Anza Boulevard/Bollinger Road can be
E+. A transportation impact analysis was performed, and the results show that no intersection
falls below LOS D. (The cumulative impact - future growth - scenario shows De Anza
Boulevard/I-280 north ramp decreasing to E+, but this is for future development.) The
conclusion of the report was that the most affected intersections by this project will be the left
mm from east bound Stevens Creek Boulevard at Torre Avenue/Vista and the left turn from
south bound De Anza Boulevard at Rodrigues. South-bound hotel guests/customers will need to
make a u-mm at the De Anza/Rodrigues intersection to enter the hotel. Apartment
residents/guests and retail customers will exit the apartment on Stevens Creek Boulevard,
complete a u-mm at the intersection, in order to go northbound on De Anza Boulevard. These
two left-turn queues will exceed their storage length. Additional green time from other turning
movements will be reallocated to increase the amount of green time for these turning
movements.
Sanitary Sewer:
Sanitary sewer service is available, but the current City Center users exceed the allotted gallons
per acre. In order to determine if improvements are required to the system, the Cupertino
Sanitary District is conducting a study. The applicants, like other users of the system, will be
required to pay for appropriate mitigation costs to provide the required capacity and shall' enter
into a reimbursement agreement with the District prior to obtaining a building permit.
Drainage
The building coverage of the hotel site is 71%. The increase in impervious surface will result in
the storm drain line under Stevens Creek Boulevard to exceed its capacity. A connection to
divert storm water from Stevens Creek Boulevard to De Anza Boulevard will be required; the
applicants will pay for storm drain improvements on De Anza Boulevard.
Crosswalk Improvements
The Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard intersection is-very difficult for pedestrians to
cross, and the City is interested in making it more pedestrian friendly. Suggestions to accomplish
this include paving distinctions and median treatments.. The applicants will be required to
contribute to these improvements.
Amenities
The hotel includes a fitness room. In addition, the existing pool and amphitheater located on
parcel #23, which is currently available to all tenants within the City Center will also be available
to the hotel guests.
Building Form/Mass
The hotel is L-shaped, to fit the shape of the lot. It consists of a lower section where the
restaurant, meeting rooms and common guest areas are located, and a higher section where the
guest rooms are located. The tower is offset three feet from the mid-section, and the mid-section
on the west elevation is set off 18".
The hotel building form and mass have evolved throughout the heating process. The basic style
changed from a traditional style during the pre-application process, to a more contemporary style
at the formal submittal time. The style recommended by the Planning Commission returned to
the traditional version, with pitched roofs on the tower elements. Other changes that occurred
were:
· The south tower was lowered to the same height as the mid-section
· The raised roof in the restaurant area was relocated toward the west, and lowered by three
feet.
· The main tower elements were set off more from the mid-section (3' vs. 1.5'), and an
additional offset was located in the mid-section (as discussed above).
Orientation
The primary orientation (the entrance and the main expanse) of the proposed hotel is toward
South De Anza Boulevard. It would be most visible from the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza
Boulevard intersection and from De Anza Boulevard. The restaurant is closest to South De Anza
Boulevard, and the main guest room section is located behind the Armadilly Willy's parcel. The
north facing elevation of the restaurant and other support activities are oriented toward the Four
Seasons Comer/Plaza. The restaurant will open into an outdoor patio, which will relate well to
the plaza. The hotel "living room" also will open onto the courtyard and plaza. The applicant's
intent is to make the restaurant distinct from the hotel, so that it does not appear to be a "hotel
restaurant." Parking is accessible through the front entry and south parking garage entrances;
loading occurs at the south garage entry.
Architecture/Design
The architectural style of this submittal has evolved throughout the review process. The pre-
application style was traditional with pitched roofs, and the style at the time of application was
8
more contemporary. The applicant returned to the traditional style, and the Planning
Commission recommends it to the City Council.
The material for most of the building is synthetic stucco. The building materials in the
entry/restaurant area are tile and plaster. The main body of the building is two tones of light
beige; the darker beige is on the base. Roof material is terra cotta colored composite tile.
Burgundy awnings for the hotel section and yellow awnings for the restaurant are proposed. A
materials board will be available at the meeting.
Many design changes occurred as a result of comments from the Planning Commission, staff and
the City's architectural consultant, Larry Cannon. In general, the comments involved providing a
cleaner, richer design that make the building more distinctive and memorable. Some of the
changes were:
· Creating a stronger base by adding lintels to the windows of the second and third stories
· Adding belt course moldings around the entire building
· Simplying window design
· Providing greater window depth
· Coordinating the shutter effect between the tower element and the raised roof over the
restaurant
· Providing more integrated, substantial trellises
· Adding an arcade and extending the water feature at the main entry
· Subduing the color contrasts
A remaining recommendation of Larry Cannon, the City's architectural consultant, is to have
more substantial bands around the two lower tower elements; a condition of approval reflects this
recommendation.
Landscape and Hardscape Features
The Heart of the City landscape scheme will be implemented along the De Anza Boulevard
frontage. As noted, the dimensions are slightly different from the standards, but staff supports
them because they align with the existing dimensions and there are no consistent dimensions in
that area. Trees are proposed along the south and east perimeter as well. A hedge, including
outdoor lighting, is proposed between the outdoor restaurant patio and the plaza.
Pavement treatment at the entrances and outdoor patio is indicated on the landscape plan. A
water feature is shown on the south entry wall. Details of the pavement and water feature should
be included in a future architectural review application, which will encompass other architectural
features as well.
The Public Works Department recommends that sidewalks and landscaping occur on both sides
of the entry driveway. Loading, but not parking, will be allowed in the driveway. Detailed
driveway plans are part of future design review.
9
The acacia trees on the Armadillo Willy's parcel play a role in screening the blank parking
garage wall and hotel. They are very close to the property line, and their branches will interfere
with the parking structure. The applicant provide an arborist's report that will assess the trees,
and if they can not be retained, analyze the possibility of receiving permission to remove and
replace them with trees more appropriate to the narrow planting space. A landscaped trellis is
proposed along the parking garage fagade, as well.
The conditions of approval already require review of landscaping, lighting, the water feature,
paving, sidewalks and landscaping along Cali Avenue and signs.
P.a. rking
On-site parking is 171 spaces. Shared parking is proposed with the adjacent office building.
Exhibit A, Table Al, indicates that the maximum additional parking required is 141 spaces at
9:00 p.m., and 315 are available in the office building garage. The time when the available
parking is the tightest is the noon hour, when the restaurant and conference rooms would be
busy; there are 55 spaces to spare. Staffis concerned that if the hotel parking garage is full, that
the hotel or restaurant guest could be forced to pay for valet parking. A parking management
plan will be prepared to demonstrate how valet and self-parking will be implemented, to be
approved at staff level.
Planning Commission Issues:
The height of the hotel was an issue for several Planning Commissioners. Only three
commissioners were present for the f'mal vote, which was 2-1 in favor. Commissioner Harris
stated that she wants the parking structure submerged more to reduce the height.
Public Issues:
One member of the public, who lives on Scofield Drive, spoke regarding concerns about noise
from the loading dock area.
Other Issues:
Signs: The conceptual signs shown on the tower was changed from a vertical to horizontal
orientation. Larry Cannon recommends that the sign be integrated more into the building design.
Additional sign review is required.
A. Apartment Enclosures:
City Council Resolution 00-191 (General Plan amendment for both apartments and hotel)
City Council Resolution 00-I92 (Heart of the City Amendment and exception)
Planning Commission Resolutions 6027 (General Plan Amendment), 6028 (Heart of the City
amendments and exceptions), 6029(use permit)
Staff recommendation for use permit conditions 6-U-00
Initial Study
Negative Declaration
Plan Set
10
B. Hotel Enclosures:
City Council Resolution 00-193
Planning Commission Resolutions 6031 (General Plan), 6032 (Heart of the City amendments
and exceptions), 6033 (use permit).
Exhibit A - Shared parking analysis
Initial Study
Negative Declaration
Plan Set
Planning Commission minutes, April 24 and May 22, 2000.
Prepared by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner and Michele Rodriguez, Planner II
t-~Steve~ia~Cki
Director of Community Development
Approved by:
City Manager
G:planning/pdrepo~¢c/5 uO061900
II
Planning Commission Minutes 2 April 24, 2000
PUBLIC HE.adllNG
Application Nos.:
Applicant:
Location:
6-U-00, 2-GPA-99, 3-EXC-00, 9-EA-00
Cupertino City Center Land
Lot 1, Tract 7953, Comer of Stevens Creek and DeAnza
Use permit to construct a 205 unit, 293,137 square foot multi-family residential building and 7,000
square foot of retail space on a vacant parcel (Stevens Creek Boulevard at City Center).
Various exceptions to the Heart of the City Specific Plan which may include allowing an
apartment use, maximum height of building and side and rear setbacks.
General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet and to penetrate the 1:1 setback
ratio from Stevens Creek Boulevard.
Tentative City Council hearing date of May 8, 2000
Application Nos.:
Applicant:
Location:
5-U-00, 4-EXC-00, 2-GPA-99, 8-EA-00
Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group
Lot 6, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center
Use permit to construct a new 217 room, 130,580 square foot hotel, restaurant and bar on a semi-
vacant parcel and operate 24 hours.
General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet.
Heart of the City specific plan exception to exceed the 40-foot height limit and allow hotel use.
Tentative City Council hearing date May 8, 2000
Staff presentation: The video presentation briefly reviewed Items 2 and 3, the applications for the
hotel development and the apartment complex at City Center, noting that both developments
would orient and relate to the Four Seasons Plaza to create an integrated project and vital center.
Item 2 is a request by Cupertino City Center Land for a use permit to construct a multi-family
residential building with retail space, providing for 205 residential units and 7,000 square feet of
retail space. Item 3 is a request by Kimpton Hotel and Restaurant Group for a use permit for a
217 room hotel on So. DeAnza Boulevard, with a full restaurant and bar. Details of each project
are outlined in the attached staff report.
Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, provided an overview of the format for
the presentation of both applications. He said he would provide an overview of the General Plan
amendment and the Heart of the City exception, Michele Rodriguez would discuss the apartment
development, and Ciddy Wordell would discuss the hotel proposal. The applicant's presentation
will then be given, followed by questions from the Planning Commission, concluding with the
Planning Commission decide if there is consensus on the broad issues and/or specific issues.
Mr. Piasecki reviewed that the applications were for a project in the City Center, proposed by City
Center Land Limited, for 206 apartment units and Kimpton's proposal for a 217 room hotel. He
said the application consisted of 5 components: General Plan amendment, Heart of the City Plan,
use permits and the environmental assessment, and a staff function which takes place afterwards
should the first four be approved. In addition to proposing to build the apartments and hotel, as
part of the application, for Four Seasons comer will be reconstructed. The apartment developer
will also build approximately 7,000 square feet of retail under the residential podium facing the
Four Seasons comer, and the hotel developer will construct a one story full service restaurant,
Planning Commission Minutes 3 April 24, 2000
with a bar and meeting rooms. Parking will be shared with the adjacent office developments. The
General Plan amendment will allow building heights of between 91.5 to 105 feet for the hotel and
106 feet for the south tower of the residential, and as stated 75-feet is permitted by the General
Plan. Under the General Plan amendment the hotel conforms to the 1:1 'slope requirement; the
residential encroaches slightly approximately 20 feet into the 1:1 slope line. The General Plan
encourages the maximum number of dwelling units; the General plan allows up to 500 in the Heart
of the City; and housing is strongly encouraged along Stevens Creek Boulevard. The Heart of the
City Specific Plan requests up to 106 feet; it allows references for commercial uses as stated in the
General Plan, which would be 75 feet for landmark buildings; otherwise 40 feet is the limit in the
Heart of the City Plan. In addition, they hope to switch the location of the hotel and the
apartments; the Commission is familiar with the idea that the hotel was to occur on the 1.8 acre
site fronting on 'Stevens Creek Boulevard, and the other use' on what is now the hotel site was not
specified, presumably to be office. There is an environmental assessment, and the major, impact
that staff focused on was the traffic.
Ms. Michele Rodriguez, Planner II, reviewed the apartment project, a 1.88 acre site, with a
proposed FAR of 3.67; located along Stevens Creek Blvd., accessible from Stevens Creek Blvd.
with the exception of the internal circulation within City Center; the total square footage of
300,137 square feet, with 7,000 sq. f~. for retail space facing the Four Seasons Plaza. She said the
Planning Commission's past concern with the application was the overall height of the buildings
and the encroachment into the 1:1 setback, for every one foot of building height, one foot of
setback from the curb line at Stevens Creek Blvd. Referring to the perspectives and the model
provided, she said what they determined is that in order to comply with the 1:1 setback, one
dwelling unit would have to be removed, and the ceiling height of one of the units lowered. She
illustrated the relationship between the existing Sun Microsystems building and showed the
stepping that exists through the sheer design of the building shown. She noted that the varied roof
lines do a g0odjob of creating the stepping transition. Relative to the 1:1, she said she felt they
could comply through some modifications, and the applicant .would discuss it further. She
indicated that the model illustrates that if an entire floor or two floors were removed to reduce the
overall building height, the difference in overall building height would not be significant and does
not necessarily yield anything positive. Referring to the site plan, she reviewed the location of the
Four Seasons Plaza, the surface parking lot, the proposed 7,000 feet of retail, and the outdoor
seating area proposed for the retail users. She noted that the applicants agreed to a pedestrian
accessway, and a condition of approval sets forth the 'requirement that they come back not only
with the redesign of that centrally located pathway, but also the details on the building. She said
the majority of parking is available onsite, 2-1/2 floors of at-grade and below-grade parking; they
are required to provide additional 35 to 37 parking spaces on the surface parking lot on the
adjoining lot to the east, and a parking survey indicates that it will not be overly encumbered. Ms.
Rodriguez said that the beautiful design of the building was a reason they were recommending
approval of the General Plan amendment.
Ms. Ciddy Wordell, City Planner, illustrated the perspective of the hotel, noting that the tower was
visible from one perspective, and pointed out that coming from So. DeAnza Blvd. from the
opposite direction, the towers could be seen, which shows the relationship between the proposed
hotel on the right and the existing towers. She illustrated the location of the Four Seasons plaza,
the proposed apartments, the existing office towers and Armadillo Willy's, the restaurant located
fronting out on the plaza; the entry way offDeAnza Blvd.,_and the main body of the hotel.
Planning Commission Minutes 4 April 24, 2000
Ms. Rodriguez pointed out that as part of the project, the parking supplied onsite is 142 parking
spaces, and as noted in the report, does not meet code requirements. A shared parking analysis
showed that in sharing the parking spaces with the office center riext door, during peak times there
is adequate opportunity to share the spaces. She pointed out that they felt a parking management
study was needed because if they were to utilize their own building parking area for valet parking,
and if a customer came in and was having difficulty parking, they might be forced to use valet,
which would create a difficult situation if charging for it. She showed an additional perspective
of the building from across the street, illustrating the lower elements of the restaurant with one of
the restaurant entrances, also opening up onto the plaza on the north elevation. As discussed
earlier, it was important to the applicant to make a distinction between the restaurant and hotel, so
that the restaurant would have a distinct identity. Ms. Rodriguez reported that there have been
additional discussions and meetings with the applicant find also with the city's architectural
consultant about some of the issues, and the applicant will discuss how they are actively
responding to staff's and consultant's suggestions about ways to make the architecture more
interesting and acceptable.
Staff is not recommending approval of the proposal until some of the issues have been addressed;
such as building offsets which relate to the two tower elements not being set off enough from the
rest of the building; the inset of the windows and also some additional belt course details that
could help set off and break off some of the building expanse. Staff has discussed the possibility
of changing some of the materials, particui~ly the window treatment, using more substantial
materials to give it a higher quality feel. The treatment of the tower is a major issue because it is
so prominent and the idea is to make it distinctive. Staff feels more work is needed, and Larry
Cannon feels that many of the changes are headed in the right direction, but still need more work.
Concerns about the color, and the entry to the hotel are issues that still need to be addressed, as
well as the water feature to the side. One of the other suggestions on balconies was that it be
extended around the building more to provide more interest; another recommendation is that they
provide some information on lighting, some softuplighting, under the tower elements, under the
cornices for an interesting look. Relative to landscaping, it is suggested that additional
landscaping be provided on the parking structure fo soften the view not only from the street, but
also from people looking down into guest rooms. Retention of the trees on Armadillo Willy's
property and building the parking structure as close to the parking structure is also a concern. Staff
recommends that if the Planning Commission could provide direction on some of the basic
decisions regarding the form, height and placement, they would be satisfied to act on the General
Plan amendment and the exception, to review any use permit operational issues regarding the
restaurant or the parking, and then continue the use permit to deal with some of the architectural
details.
Mr. John Moss, Pegasus Development, said that the presentation was a culmination of
approximately two years of planning with staff and a year working with the Kimpton Group. He
said the goal of the mixed use project is to provide a sense of place, vitality and a sense of
community that they feel is lacking currently at the Cupertino City Center. To date plans have
b~en discussed in three different study sessions with the Planning Commission and City Council,
with several design review meetings with Planning staff as well. As a result of feedback received,
they have made several modifications to the drawings, and believe the project has benefited
significantly from that input.
Mr. Moss addressed the requests and issues. He said the physical model was provided, which
allows for review of the project architecturally in the context of the entire City Center with all the
Planning Commission Minutes 5 April 24, 2000
existing buildings shown on the model. There was also a request for a computer model simulation
and the architect will provide an overview of the computer model simulation. A comprehensive
traffic report was put together which concludes that there are rio significant adverse impacts to
traffic as a result of this project. As requested at one of the City Council study sessions, Pegasus
Development has formally offered to have the project participate in the Teachers' Moving in for
Less Program. In addition to this project, they have also pledged all 710 of the existing apartment
units owned in the City of Cupertino to be included in the same program. A tour was provided for
the Planning Commission and City Council of similar projects of higher density in the Silicon
Valley. They also studied at length the issue of emergency vehicle access and have reviewed the
plan with the fire department, which was approved. Also as requested by the Planning
Commission in a study session, a fitness center originally located adjacent to the plaza was moved
to within the confines of the apartment building and conve?ted the former fitness center space to
retail space. Also requested was parking at the Portico share for the apartment project, and
outdoor balconies requested by the City Council. There has also been discussion regarding
specific materials such as roof tiles, and ground floor exterior materials and there is a condition of
approval that gives the city the opportunity to review those details before moving forward with the
project. Bike racks have also been introduced to the project; and also due to significant popular
demand, the pitched roof elements to the project have been reintroduced to replace some of the
fiat roof areas. More pedestrian access to the site is encouraged, by way of crosswalk
improvements at intersection of DeAnza and Stevens Creek Blvd. which is a step toward a more
walkable Cupertino. Access has also been provided to apartment residents and hotel guests to the
existing pool at the existing City Center. Research revealed the use of the existing pool and
concluded that there is capacity for the hotel guests and apartment residents given the lack of
current demand for those improvements or amenities at the site. He reported that they spent a lot
of time and carefully looked at the issue of building height and the architect will review it in detail.
As requested by Planning staff, outdoor seating and dining area adjacent to the existing fountain
has been provided which is effectively an extension to the retail space as a means of creating
activity at this important location. The Fine Arts Commission and the Parks andRec Committee
have reviewed the project and have endorsed it from a conceptual design standpoint. Also as
requested, the Plaza is going to be enlivened with lighting, public arts seating and outdoor dining
to invite people to this particular area. Also at the environmental review meeting, there were
issues of tree planting and additional tree planting over at the existing parking lot and it will be
provided as a condition of approval. The FAR data requested project and' the entire, city centerwas
provided. He reported that they are planning on having a centrally located pedestrian connection
from the garage to the retail area; the architect will show conceptually where it is planned to go;
and will be done as a condition of approval. Lastly, they focused on the details of trash bins and
have relocated those per the direction from one of the study sessions, to get them back further off
Stevens Creek and further away from the retail area. Mr. Moss said that he felt they had
successfully responded to all of the feedback received at the study sessions, and he felt the
development meets and exceeds all the goals of the city and community of Cupertino and will
result in a world class mixed used project.
Mr. Paul Lettire, Ga~.zardo & Associates, landscape architect, said that part of their goal was to
provide the meshing together of all three sites, including emphasizing the pedestrian connections
that partially exist in City Center, which are the horizontal walkway along the bottom of the
apartments, and the vertical behind the hotel adjacent to the office building. He illustrated where
the existing fountain was and Said that they were providing a connection from DeAnza Blvd
leading to the plaza area. He noted that the continuity of street trees remained and said it was
important that it continue around the entire site. A hedge planting under the trees will screen the
Planning Commission Minutes 6 April 24, 2000
pavements and will provide a suitable relationship to the street. The other place that was important
as an edge relationship, is the retail edge and the restaurant edge, which are similar conditions. He
reported that there was a proposed 15 foot wide zone ofpavemefit along that space and in front of
the restaurant; which can be paving to place pots, furnishings, tables, chairs, seatings, all related to
restaurant and retail uses. He said there was also 20 feet of required fire lane which has been
disguised. Mr. Lettire discussed the changes in the podium plan, the major change being the spa
moved to a central location, above street grade, with stair access, and surrounded by landscape
treatments.
Mr. C. Tang, of McLaren, Vasquez & Partners, presented an overview of the project. He stated
that they were a proponent of the Specific Plan established for the Heart of the City. He said the
Specific Plan refers to the linkages of commercial and resid6ntial development, pedestrian friendly
or oriented community planning to promote active outdoor space and outdoor activities in the
activity centers; having greater synergy between residential and commercial development; and are
visions to strive to meet. Referring to the site plan, he said it was evident that the intent was
already beginning to be established by the Specific Plan having a commercial development with
some mixed used already occurring, mostly by zone with residential as part of this development
with open spaces'being part of the overall organization of the master plan. He said the changes
would be reviewed.
Mr. Tang said that because the Four Seasons Plaza was the focal point for both the apartments and
the hotel, they respected the landscape improvements already in place and planned for the area;
and tried to minimize the amount of curb cut required in order to get into the project, both for the
retail side as well as for the apartment side. Input from other agencies, .staff and the fire
department was considered for proposals on trash container locations, loading, etc. Efforts were
made to create an active and pedestrian friendly edge along the park, with outdoor 'seating areas,
and also a gateway between the two projects into the office complex and open space and
residential areas beyond. He reviewed the access areas to the residential and retail spaces. He
illustrated the current scheme, which was basically 3 stories of residential, termed Iow rise type of
residential piece, and on the other side, an 8 story mid rise portion on top of retail on the park, then
a 2-1/2 level parking garage. In terms of the height, the relationship with the height between the
existing office building and the apartment project, there is actually a 17 to 28 foot differential
between the typical parapet condition vs. the apartment. He pointed out the spa in the middle of
the podium as the focal point of the community, and the shared courtyard between the Iow rise
apartment and the mid rise apartment on the other side.
Mr. R. Mackley, Perma Real Estate Group, said he was retained for brokering the tenants in the
project. He reported that the project is comprised of approximately 7,000 sq. ff. perpendicular to
Stevens Creek Blvd. and illustrated a variety of retail building signs, which included blade signs,
mural signs for the inside of the garage, facia signs, and kioske signs.
Mr. Jim Whelan, Kimpton Hotel and Restaurant Group, said they were committed to the City of
Cupertino to create a high end, four star, high vitality, high service level, boutique oriented hotel
and restaurant; upscale in performance and service orientation, design, and articulation. He
showed various photos of hotels and restaurants which were handled by their company, which
illustrated the type of environment they wanted to create on the ground floor level of the proposed
project. He expressed enthusiasm for the proposed Cupertino hotel and asked for feedback on the
overall project so that they could focus on the areas that the Planning Commission felt still needed
work.
Planning Commission Minutes ? April 24, 2000
Mr. Ginsler, Ginsler Architects, said that he would review the most recent changes made and
which would be incorporated in the near future. In terms of access, he pointed out the Calli Street
access down to the courtyard which is the main entrance into the complex, with the main lobby to
the north. He illustrated the other access for the restaurant and bar; the pedestrian access through
the main entrance, and access from the fountain area into the focal point of the living room of the
hotel. He illustrated the parking areas from 1-1/2 levels below grade to 1-1/2 levels above grade,
which consist of approximately 142 cars. He said the proposal for the guestroom wing was to
break it up into three elements, with a north tower, a south element and a field in the center. He
said that they agreed with staff that the colors were too dark in terms of what is on the base. He
said other issues to be addressed are the need for major planting elements; overhangs; window
sills; and installation of a railing around the top floor.
Mr. Ginsler reviewed issues discussed with staff; the changes to the tower planes for a stronger
rhythm of planer element on the overall massing of the guest wing; addition of railings across the
top floor of the guest unit; installation of awnings on the top floor as well as around the entire
building, introduction of a belt at the top of the third floor line; introduction of elongated windows
on the north elevation; come up with an icon significant for the hotel; mimic or repeat the slope
form with a raised roof element that is now over the restaurant area and bar, and also add pilasters
to the elements; and raising the height of the parapet and mass which houses the conference rooms
on another level.
Com. Kwok asked Mr. Tang to elaborate on the pros and cons of meeting or not granting
exception to the variance, relating to the I: 1 slope. Mr. Tang said that they wanted to see
articulation on the building, but emphasized that how it occurs is an important issue. He said the
proposal was for a more sophisticated way of transitioning a scale from a 4 story up to an 8 story
condition He said the eave lines were varied which added interest to the roofline. He pointed out
that the model was an accurate rendition, and it is clear at the point between the 3rd and4th story
vs.the mid-rise portion of the building. He said they were still working on the detail of the
elements, and in a project such as this, especially with long frontage along a street, it was
important to have a variety of eaves, where ifa straight eave line condition is created, the building
becomes uneventful.
Chair Harris said that she was not disagreeing about the eaves; however, originally they were told
that the project would be only 4 stories high along Stevens Creek Blvd., and then stepped back,
and in reality it has a higher element on Stevens Creek.
Mr. Tang said that the Specific Plan proposed one way to go and theY were proposing an
alternative approach while still respecting the setback condition and yet having a more gradual
transition from the 4 story to the higher massing. Com. Stevens said that it was a matter of
viewpoint, and that he was attempting to find a terrace going all the way from the street up both
sides of the building, and could not'see it because of the 8 story structure. Mr. Tang pointed out
that the midrise portion of the project was a concrete structure and there were limitations in
economy of building a concrete structure that prevents them from literally doing a sheet back type
of setback addition.
Chair Harris reiterated that they were originally told they were going to be Iow rise apartments in
the front 4 stories and high rise in the back, yet in reality from the front, some are iow rise and
some are significantly higher, particularly the units to the letL
Planning Commission Minutes 8 April 24, 2000
Mr. Moss noted that the plans were identical to those shared in the study session. He said the
intent was to show a stepping up and not just have it jump up from 4 to 8 stories, which was
consistent with what was presented. Responding to Chair Harris' question relative to why there
are 8 stories in the back instead of the building being a 4, 5 or 6 story project, Mr. Moss said that
the 8 stories were originally designed to be similar in height to the hotel as far as the overall height
was concerned; and also as far as the viability of the project at the inception. He reported that
there was a total of 2-1/2 levels of parking; 1-1/2 levels subterranean and one level almost fully
out of the grqund at the front half of the site and almost at grade at the back of the site because of
the significant grade change in elevation from the front to the back, and the guest parking at the at-
grade lot as well. He pointed out since the parking is fully at subterranean level at one portion of
the site, even having the parking fully at subterranean, the 6verall height of the project would not
change because it is subterranean at one portion, and is at grade at the back half of the site. He
said the 59 feet was the 3 stories of apartments above the retail space, up to the top of the roof.
Mr. Tang said the ceiling heights in the retail space were 14 foot, and residential were ! 0 foot; and
the 59 foot height includes the tower elements on the comers.
The applicants answered questions about access, parking, and grading, Mr. Moss said that the
amphitheater and swim pool were available for hotel guests and apartment residents. He said the
Four Seasons Plaza was fully accessible to the public; the city has development rights and the
applicant will be maintaining the parcel. Ms. Rodriguez explained that the towers met city parking
requirements and had joint parking agreements. Com. Corr expressed concern about possible
further changes after approval of the project. Mr. Tang said that the only proposed change as part
of the condition of approval was the passageway between the retail parking to the retail frontage.
Chair Harris commented on the changes made in the relocation of the spa to the podium area,
noting that prior to the relocation of the spa, the podium area was an area in which to congregate,
an area to provide some sense of green, and the new placement of the spa in the center appeared to
take the whole podium and mm it into just an area around the spa. Mr. Lettire said that he did not
feel that was the case, but that they tried to create pleasant inviting seating areas, and there were
other seating areas available. He said he felt the area chosen was not a compromise.
Com. Kwok said that relative to the overall landscape plan, he had indicated at a previous meeting
that there was a sense of imbalance in terms of the landscape plan, and appeared to be very heavy
on the Stevens Creek side, with three rows of shrubs in one area and' two in anOther. He
questioned whether any consideration was given to creating a sense 'of balance in the overall
landscape. Mr. Lettire responded that there were two different spaces being addressed. The
perimeter of Cupertino City Center is a significant edge that relates to the street and there are triple
rows of trees further down Stevens Creek. The space, the entry drive and the walkway are now
similar to other spaces in Cupertino City Center, and are all single rows of trees, it is a row of
trees on one side, and a row of trees that are not rendered, that exist on the other side of the street,
so they are lined, but are not two rows thick. There aren't any conditions in Cupertino City Center
with double rows of trees, and it is balanced 'from that perspective. Relative to changing the trees,
Mr. Lettire said that consideration would be given to changing only the backdrop trees; the
foreground trees should remain pear trees. There is the potential that the spaces closer to the
building with opportunities for smaller scale trees can have some evergreen character; it would not
be a continuous row of trees.
Planning Commission Minutes 9 April 24, 2000
Com. Stevens asked what the mitigations for privacy were to take into account people in the
apartments looking up at the offices and vice versa, since the trees would only cover the area of
one floor. Mr. Lettire said that they were not planting trees to cover an area of 8 floors, and that
the privacy issue would be dealt with at the window level of the buildings.
Com. Doyle asked for clarification on the comment that mitigation was stepping back from the
street and superior design. Mr. Piasecki said he felt there was a fundamental concept in the
application that would need buy-in to accept the concept, and that is that the stepping is not taking
place from the street to this site and then to the existing Sun Microsystems buildings; it is now
going to take place on the residential portion within the residential project itself', stepping from the
4 story up to the 8 story; therefore, the stepped forms have been shifted if the logic is accepted that
is being presented here into the foreground buildings. The'same thing occurs with the hotel; the
hotel stepping will occur with future development on the Armadillo Willy's site to the hotel
building, and it is not necessarily going to be reliant on the hotel stepping to the Sun Microsystems
building; one would have to be a great distance to see that step on that side of the site; therefore it
needs to be viewed from that standpoint. In terms of superior design, he said that on the
residential side there is a lot of variation going on in that building~ which is a complex building
form. He said there was a condition of approval that the applicant has to return with demonstration
of superior materials and design.
Mr. Piasecki said that relative to superior design, specifically to the hotel, staff was not convinced
they were there yet, and are not suggesting that the Planning Commission take any action on the
specifics of that this evening. Staff suggests continuing the use permit on the hotel until at least
the next meeting giving the applicant a chance to develop the concepts discussed this evening.
The applicant met with the city's architectural advisor and are making progress in many areas that
have yet to be demonstrated. He said that staff felt the objectives on the residential have been met.
Com. Kwok referred to the environmental checklist relative to the sewer and water quality and
questioned if the Cupertino Sanitary District had been contacted to see if there is adequate
capacity to carry the sewage generated as a result of the hotel and apartment project.
Ms. Rodriguez said they had met on several occasions with the Cupertino Sanitary District and the
situation is that at this particular intersection with these two proposed projects, it exceeds the
master plan limit for this particular intersection; and it was stated thatonly through a study can
they conclude that in fact it exceeds the maximum capacity of' the lines in the field, and it is
mitigatable by the increase in the line size. The result will be that a study will be conducted,
concluding wliat needs to be done, and the physical improvements will occur in the field prior to,
and in conjunction with, the construction of one or both of the projects. Prior to occupancy, the
improvements will be completed.
Mr. Bert Viskovich, Director of Public Works, said that the capacity of the sanitary plant and the
main line were sufficient to carry all of the General Plan; stating that it is just a line on Stevens
Creek Blvd., and studies will take place to see if they can reroute that through some of the
residential area that may be under capacity, and if that occurs Cupertino may not have to add a
parallel line. If another capacity cannot be found where they can divert the sewer, there is the
potential that another line would have to be added on Stevens Creek Blvd. He said that once up in
the Pruneridge and Wolfe area, capacity was plentiful. He said it would be completed within 30
days. It was noted that there were conditions on the applicant to deal with the sewage issue.
Planning Commission Minutes l0 April 24, 2000
Com. Stevens addressed the issue of the change in location between the original proposed hotel
and apartments and questioned if public works had addressed the traffic issue for the future.
Mr. Viskovich said the studies indicated with the current proposal the traffic does work and meets
the standards. He said the hotel and apartments are of the same character, and represent more
housing, leaving in the morning, and returning in the evening, as opposed to the office space
which attracts traffic in the morning and leaves in the evening. The difference is the trip
generation factor, there are going to be u-turns either way, and a comparison has not been made
since the proposal does work and meets the General Plan standards.
Chair Harris questioned what makes each of the two buildings a landmark. Mr. Piasecki said the
foreground buildings are becoming foreground landmark buildings and the other ones are
background landmark buildings; they are not going to be as prominent as they are today. They will
be background buildings, you will still see the stepped forms from the side, the tower elements.
He said what designates them as landmark buildings is the fact that they are on the Four Seasons
Plaza and will interact with the Plaza, the background buildings won't. They are mixed use
essentially with the commercial and residential, and will stand out first and foremost in everyone's
mind, and without them you may not have the level of activity anticipated on that comer.
Chair Harris said that the consultants advised that caution be exercised when planning future
development to step the buildings, because once they lost the opportunity, it would not return. If
the foreground is filled with landmark tall buildings, there won't be another opportunity unless
Stevens Creek Blvd. is sunk underground. Mr. Piasecki said that as stated earlier, the Planning
Commissioners need to feel comfortable that stepping is occurring on the residential, it will occur
in the future, with future development on Armadillo Willy's. He said a lot of hotels don't
typically have the restaurant element sitting out in the front fagade, or front portion of the hotel
creating an interesting drop ~ff plaza space for the hotel. He reiterated that they were headed in
the right direction relative to the stepping elements, and they clearly needed the amendments to the
General Plan to make the plan work.
Chair Harris asked staff to clarify the conformity issue under the proposed hotel column relative to
setbacks. Ms. Wordell explained that the front of the hotel off So. DeAnza Blvd. conforms to the
Heart of the City Plan; the easement and setback are conforming; the other setbacks are required
to be 20 feet and do not conform. She said it was the nature of the hotel that it needs toenvelope
that space. She said that staff did not have concerns about the property line setbacks or near
property line setbacks, except for the one interfering with the trees next to Armadillo Willy's.
Ms. Wordell said that the restaurant patio on the north side has a20 foot setback, and on the south
side, and east side, zero; on the parking structure one foot; the entry part and restaurant part is full
setback from the property, line. She said that staff was not certain if one foot setback was
sufficient. Chair Harris suggested that the -issue of one foot and zero feet be discussed further
when the application returns. Mr. Piasecki stated the need to focus on the issue and whether or not
the Planning Commission accepted the basic form, so that they could move onto other details,
such as is there enough setback.
The applicant was questioned about how much parking of the hotel is above grade and how much
is below, and number of stories. He reported that underneath the tower of the building there is one
surface level parking directly at grade and there is one level Of parking directly above that,
9-1/2 to 10 feet. Adjacent to the tower of the hotel betweenthe Armadillo Willy's lot and the
face of the hotel is a 3 level parking structure; one level half below grade, one level half above
Planning Commission Minutes il April 24, 2000
grade, the top level is 1-1/2 stories above; roughly 15 feet from where the tires would touch the
parking strips. He said there would be a screening wall, some trellis activity, and some plantings
on the top level of the parking since there was no ceiling. He ac~,nowledged that there was only a
one foot setback up against Armadillo Willy's parking lot and said they could work with the
property owner to do some suitable landscaping. He said the other area of zero foot setback is a 40
foot wide right of way interior circulation. He said some of the early studies were looking at
excavating the entire site, trying to get as much parking undemeath; but one issue was access and
how to get people in, but then go below grade at the same level.
The applicant said that if the parking was all below grade, the design would be completely
different than what was presented and because of the many different factors, there may possibly
be some shortening of the building height, but most likely n6t the entire 15 feet. Ms. Wordeli said
that it was 4-1/2 feet below and 14 feet above, plus the third level is an open parking.
Chair Harris opened the meeting for pUblic input; there was no one present who wished to speak.
The issues for discussion were summarized: determine if the placement and height is acceptable,
including setback issues, the height issue, addition of mass and form and design; restaurant and
bar hours; parking; give general direction; let them know if they are on the right track; let them
know if the Planning Commission feels it is appropriate; does it need tweaking or a major
overhaul.
Com. Stevens said he felt the building was too high; the tower above the living room would be
better placed on the south side, so that there is some similarity between the building behind and
the hotel in front; he said he felt the top part of the hotel (the highest point) should be at the other
end to have a slant toward Stevens Creek Blvd. He said his comments relative to height also
applied to the other structure. Com. Stevens said the form was very thin, and should have more
character, instead of having a long thin type of hotel, arrive at the same amqunt of mass by coming
out over the parking structure. The bar hours and restaurant is something that can be discussed
later; standard hours are not applicable at this point in time unless it is proposed to be other than
standard in Cupertino. He said that if the Director of Public Works was content with the traffic
pattern, it was not an issue; however, he was concerned about a possible deficit.
Ms. Wordell responded that the parking study was based on actual availability of spaces and on
real situations relative to extra spaces being available. She said as a result of a previous parking
study with another building, the building owner had to make up for any parking that was lost by a
surface lot at that time.
Chair Harris said that when the application returns, it should include the study on parking,
including how many employees they are considering, how many people they are anticipating in
the conference center on a given day in full use; numbers for the hotel and bar; and how many
coming and going morning and at~emoon which is a different use of the hotel use; and also some
estimate on the retail and on the apartments.
Ms. Wordell said that in talking with the traffic consultant, the hotel demand was based on a
model of a standard source for that particular use. She said she was not certain if it was preferred
that they look at their particular hotel and do demands based on that, or just know the assumptions
that the traffic study used. Chair Harris said the hotel developer had experience and would have
Planning Commission Minutes 12 April 24, 2000
real estimates rather than a model, since the model would vary whether itbe urban or suburban in
terms of traffic.
Com. Con' said that he was comfortable with the building placement, and was pleased to hear that
not all were happy with the fagade and design, as he was eoncemed with it. He said he liked the
path the new design was taking, and was confident that they could be able to address some of the
concerns discussed. He said the placement of the hotel was appropriate; he concurred that the
hours could be addressed later; and as long as the mitigations are available for the parking, he had
no objections.
Com. Kwok said that in general he was in support of staff's recommendation in terms of form,
mass, bulk, and density. He expressed concern with the btiilding height, and recommended that
the applicant work with staff on reducing the height. He said if the parking was more depressed it
could reduce the height another 10 feet.
Com. Doyle said that the buildings were too high; he said he felt the Heart of the City guidelines
were fair in that they called for 1:1 setback. He said the 2:1 ratio could be used to go up to the 75
foot level; and if they were made landmarks, could go up to the 2:1 ratio at that level, with
submerged parking. He said 10% to 20% shared spaces were acceptable; however, he did not feel
it was reasonable to expect half of the people to go elsewhere to park. He said the apartments had
a good design, but needed more work to blend into the surrounding buildings. The hotel appeared
to be a vertical box and work was needed to break it up significantly and bring the height down.
He said he felt there should be a compelling argument to giving them an entire street for the
property, which was unusual.
Chair Harris said she was pleased to have a quality hotel for the area. She said the buildings were
too high; she suggested that the parking be submerged even if it required a redesign. She said she
was not opposed to the idea of changing the form from a vertical box to tearing it upward and
bringing' it forward over the parking. She said she was aware that the concept was to have an
easily serviceable corridor, but said that it is a suburban area, and may call for a different design
than a vertical box. She said she was appreciative of the applicant's efforts, and would like them
to have the number of moms they were counting on; however, it may be a question of removing a
floor or two because of the height. She said it was a matter of economics, and a question of
balancing the developer's hope to maximize the development potential, and balancing that against
the aesthetic needs of the community. She said she was excited about the proposed hotel, and that
it would be of benefit to the community to have a conference hotel and a quality restaurant. She
said the window trim was suitable; the restaurant and bar should have specific hours, and staff
would make a recommendation other than a 24 hour operation. She requested that a parking study
be completed so that she would have a better feeling about the parking issue; she expressed
concern about the one foot setback, but if it was adjacent a common area it was not such a major
concern. She noted that there was a lot of common area in this development, as it was designed
to have common area, and she felt the setbacks should be relaxed.
Chair Harris summarized that at least four members felt the building was too high; she said she did
not agree with Com. Stevens about moving the main feature from the Stevens Creek Blvd. and
DeAnza intersection, as it is the prominent intersection and should have a tower element.
Mr. Piasecki said that it would be helpful to have the applicant know whether he is going back to
redesign to try to eliminate 10 feet which may be doable given the plan they have being asked to
Planning Commission Minutes 13 April 24, 2000
take off one to two floors. Chair Harris said that the height was too high, and the applicant was
left with the design responsibility as there were numerous option_s. She said the equivalent of two
stories (20 to 30 feet) could be removed; submerge the building into the ground; change the
architecture or give up rooms.
Com. Kwok said he felt the project would be a very good project for the community. He said he
understood the concern about the quality of the building and also the appearance of the project,
but economics need to be taken into consideration in terms of the project. He said that if the
direction is for a 40 foot height limit, he did not feel the project would move forward, because the
hotel has to have ample rooms for the development to move forward in this project. He said he
would not compromise the Heart of the City, but felt that economics was the driving force for the
developer to come forward with the project. He suggested reducing the height by 10 feet.
Com. Stevens said that he was not in favor of putting a number; but preferred the 1:1 setback,
with the possibility of going to 2:1. Com. Doyle said he preferred 40 feet in the 1:1 plane, and 2:1
up to 75 feet, to produce a stair step back.
Chair Harris said she felt 'that there was support for the hotel, and not opposed to the number of
rooms, but concerned about how and where it is placed.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Doyle moved to continue Application 5-U-99, 2-GPA-99, 4-EXC-00,
8-EA-00 to the May 8, 2000 Planning Commission 'meeting
Com. Kwok
Passed 5-0-0
6. Application Nos: 'N6-U-98, 43-EA-98
Applicant: . A~zich Properties ·
Location: 102~ Pasadena Avenue
\
Use permit to demolish an existing hou'~x and construct four single-family detached residences on
a net 12,480 square foot lot. ~
Continued from Planning Commission meet~ofAprillO, 2000
MOTION: Com. Kwok moved to c0ntinueX~pplication 16-U-98, 43-EA-98 to the
May 8, 2000 Planning Commissi~ meeting
SECOND: Com. Corr ~
VOTE: Passed 5-0-0Nx ~
\
Chair Harris declared a recess from .... 9:50 p.m. to 10:00 p./~ .
Chair Harris moved the agenda back to Item 2
Discussion of Application 6-U-00, 2-GPA-99, 3-EXC-00, 9-EA-00
Mr. Piasecki pointed out that the same fundamental issues related to the apartment project, namely
height, mass, bull and mass. Details include the architecture, landscape plan, and parking.
Ms. Rodriguez clarified that the reduction of one dwelling unit and the lowering of a ceiling in
another unit was necessary in order to meet the setback on Stevens Creek. Mr. Tang said that
Planning Commission Minutes 14 April 24, 2000
initially it was felt that it would involve a reduction of 4 units, but options were being addressed.
Chair Harris added the issue of landscaping the apartments on Stgvens Creek with evergreen trees
so that when the pear trees are deciduous there is still some foundation planting. She suggested
moving the spa as she felt the podium area was compromised as a public space since the spa
location was moved. Added to the list of issues were height, setbacks, bulk, mass, color, and roof
tile.
Relative to the active areas supporting the units, Mr. Tang said that the project had a unique
feature of the corner plaza, which is meant to be an active space. The secondary active space
would be the courtyard atop the podium on top of the garage which is a more passive, quieter,
contemplative open space. He said that the pool was open to the apartment residents as well. He
said the fitness center was adjacent to the leasing office; th~ podium spa which may be relocated
per suggestion; and a proposed spa inside the health club. Mr. Tang said that with the exception
of the landscape planter around the edge of the garage, there was no wall around the project. He
answered questions regarding the landscaping, and moving van loading area for the units. He
reviewed the color board for the stucco area of the buildings, accent colors for the trellises, and
accent color for trims.
Mr. Lettire and Mr. Tang answered questions regarding the landscape plan for the podium area
and the signage and graphics. Mr. Tang said that the signage and graphics designs were not yet
finalized. Ms. Rodriguez said that she would like a higher degree of material; relative to
landscaping, she said that they have approved conceptual landscape plans in the past and looked at
a more refined state even at the building permit stage and not even come back before the Planning
Commission on a refined landscape, but do feel that the signage and other details are important to
look at.
Chair Harris said questioned the correct format to have the Design Review Committee work on the
proposal. Mr. Piasecki suggested that the wording be inserted that the Design Review Committee
is to review the proposal with a recommendation made to the full Planning Commission.
Chair Harris addressed the BMR units, stating that the number of units to be provided are
generally specified. Ms. Rodriguez said that 21 BMR units can be specified. Chair Harris
referred to the bathroom requirement in Condition 12, and said that the requirement should be for
a unisex bathroom or 2 bathrooms.
Chair Harris also commented that the performance requirsment should be firmed up and
questioned the security camera operation.
Com. Kwok asked staffto clarify loft parking, identifying 113 spaces in the first level, and offsite
parking of 30 stalls. Ms. Rodriguez stated that it was on the surface parking lot directly east of the
parcel and along Stevens Creek Blvd.,and met the minimum requirements of 483. The applicant
clarified that the parking was primarily guest parking that would be used at grade existing lot,
which is a minimal amount of the overall parking. He said they met the city's requirement of 2.0
overall, and 1.7 below the buildings; the remaining parking which is guest parking is going to be
used on the grade lot, therefore it isn't anticipated that there will be an overflow of parking onto
the street.
The applicant said that access to the apartments was through the garage in the basement level, and
from Stevens Creek Boulevard. He said the retail parking was through the garage and the non
Planning Commission Minutes ~s April 24, 2000
residents would have to access the garage and return to the Stevens Creek entry into the shops.
Residents could access the shopping area through a gate.
Chair Harris commented on the language to the exception, contained on Page 25 of staff report for
3-EXC-00, and said that she felt it was absurd to make a finding that it is the least modification to
accomplish reasonable use, as it appeared to be a gross overstatement. She questioned if they
were required to make a finding or could the finding be removed. Ms. Rodriguez responded that it
was a required finding by the resolution for the Heart of the City Specific Plan. Chair Harris said
that she preferred the word "appropriate" rather than "ideal" as the language would set precedence
for the future.
The issues relative to the apartment proposal were summarized: height, bulk, mass; landscaping
on SC Blvd. with evergreens; spa and podium area; setbacks including 1:I; color, roof tile;
apartment project; overall project - number of units; and parking.
Com. Doyle said that relative to height, bulk and mass, the first 40 feet should be I:1, and run as
high as 75 feet, but make it a 2:1 setback, make sure the 75 feet includes the top of the service
parapets. It should try to come into conformance with the Heart of the City requirements;
landscaping with evergreens on Stevens Creek; spa location is acceptable as is; setbacks including
1:1 addressed earlier; building color and roof tile per staff recommendation. Mr. Piasecki
commented that the architectural advisor was comfortable with the color palette being presented,
and staff suggested that a clay roof material be used. He said he liked the apartment project, it had
good articulation; work is needed on a few things; submerging it; the parking is important; get rid
of the wall if possible; move the loading dock and unloading to out in front of the building;
upgrade first floor building materials so it looks better than stucco and limestone. He said if the
parking was dropped, there might be opportunities to get rid of that boundary around it
Chair Harris clarified submerged parking, stating that the building would be lowered for
submerged parking.
Com. Kwok said that he was not opposed to the submerged parking; eliminate the encroachment
1:1; lower the height, however, he said he would not dictate 75 foot height, but would prefer it to
be below 100 feet. He said he was concerned about the density and would prefer to retain the
density; evergreens for the landscaping was suitable; leave spa as is; color per staff
recommendation; remove loading dock. He said he concurred with Com. Doyle on the other
issues.
Com. Corr said the height, bulk and mass were appropriate; evergreen landscaping is suitable;
leave spa as is; comply with 1:1 setback even if it meant losing one unit; staff recommendation on
color of tile is suitable. He said he was in favor of the project; however, he did not feel they
should remove the loading dock since it just a space that becomes a loading dock when the truck is
there. He said the lower wall and planter were appropriate, but he was not in favor of a massive
wall that gives the feeling of walking against a large building in San Francisco. He said he agreed
with the upgrade materials, and submerged parking only to adjust the height.
Com. Stevens said he concurred with Com. Doyle regarding the height, 40 + 75, 2:1 is the same
thing and would be appropriate but he would like it to correlate with the hotel to be the same;
evergreens appropriate; spa location is suitable where it is, but the applicant should decide the
most appropriate location for it; setbacks of 1:1 comply and on that because the tower buildings
Planning Commission Minutes 16 April 24, 2000
have a step function on both arms. He said he viewed the tower stepping function as being a
characteristic of Cupertino's downtown when it happens, and because everything else has that
stepping function he preferred to see 1:1 on both of the high ri~es. He said he felt the tile color
should be gray, but would agree with staff recommendation. Com. Stevens said he liked the
concept of the apartment project; the loading dock should be a requirement; the wall as a planer is
an excellent idea, however color may be needed to break up the massiveness of the wall. He said
he concurred with upgrading the materials; he was opposed to the height for the parking and
suggested pushing it further into the ground for the mass if needed.
Chair Harris said she liked the project and felt the applicant took great pains to make it attractive
and effective. She said that the colors were suitable; the height too high; and eyergreens were
appropriate. She said she would be willing to forfeit one imit to get the 1:1 ratio, and felt they
should submerge the parking and lower the height in the back. She said that she was overruled on
her suggestion to move the location of the spa; would like to see the parking submerged twofloors
which is a compromise of one floor. She said she felt the parking was 2 stories too high but
because there is a need for the apartments, it was a tradeoff. She suggested that relative to height,
bulk and mass,'No. 2, it state "reduce the height". She said she was not in favor of the high part
on Stevens Creek Blvd., and would really like to see a development that is 59 feet across the front
and not have anything higher. She said she was in favor of the 1:1 comply; and did not like the
high part on the left hand side. She suggested mitigating the loading area, which meant there
would not be trucks on Stevens Creek Blvd. Unloading or moving vans; therefore it needs to be
either screened with landscaped areas high enough to cover a moving van or a delivery truck or it
needs to be placed elsewhere. She said she did not care what mitigation was used, but felt that
Stevens Creek Blvd. should not look like a loading area. Chair Harris said that the 3 foot high
planters were appropriate, and she favored upgraded materials for the ground floor. She said that
the directions to the applicant on height should note that several members have said 1 :! and 2:1;
with a height range of 75 to 100 feet. She said that she would also like to see stepping.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Doyle moved to continue Application 6-U-00, 2-GPA-99, 3-EXC-00,
and 9-EA-00 to the May 8, 2000 Planning Commission meeting
Com. Corr
Passed 5-0-0
4. Application No.: ~2fASA-98(M)
Applicant: XCrosvenor International
Location: 6~esults Way
Referral to Planning Commission of~ Director's minor modification to add windows to the first
and second floors of an existing buillt~ng and to convert 8,194 square feet of amenity space to
office space in building nine. ~,
Planning Commission decision_fi..~al_unle~ealed- _
Staff presentation: Mr. Peter .Gilli, Plann~er I, .h~ted corrections to the staff report, in that buildings
3 and 4 had been converted from manufacturin~to office, which had architectural site approvals
that dealt with adding windows to the second stor~. He said that there would be windows added to
three sides of the building. He not. e.d th.at a sectionX~f the second floor was being converted from
amenity space to office space r~'n.g in an addi_t'm .i~o.f a dormer type element with the windows.
He outlined the background of the item as set forth in the staff report. Mr. Gilli distributed a
Planning Commission Minutes 2 May 22, 2000
Chair Harris moved the agenda to Item 5.
NEW BUSINESS
5. Set joint meeting dateXf~r Planning Commission and Telecommunications Commission to
address antenna master pl~
Staff presentation: Ms. Ciddy W~rdell, City Planner, explained that the Telecommunications
Committee requested a meeting be h(heduled with the Planning Commission to receive direction
on master planning for wireless communications for the city. Following a brief discussion, there
was consensus that the joint meeting'X¥ scheduled for the June 26th Planning Commission
meeting
agenda.
MOTION: Com. Kwok moved to scheah~e a joint meeting with the Telecommunications
Committee on June 26, 2000, toXa~dress the antenna master plan.
SECOND: Com. Stevens ~
VOTE: Passed 5-0-0 \
Chair Harris moved the agenda back to Item 3.
Application Nos.:
Applicant:
Location:
6-U-00, 2-GPA-99, 3-EXC-00, 9-EA-00
Cupertino City Center Land
Lot 1, Tract 953, comer of Stevens Creek and DeAnza
Use permit to construct a 205 unit, 293,137 square foot multi-family residential building and 7,000
square foot of retail space on vacant parcel (Stevens Creek Blvd. At City Center)
Various exceptions to the Heart of the City Specific Plan, which may include allowing an
apartment use, maximum eight of building and side and rear setbacks.
General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet and to penetrate the 1:1 setback
ratio from Stevens Creek Blvd.
Continued from meeting of May 8, 2000
Staff presentation: Ms. Wordell presented a brief overview of the hotel application and the
apartment application. She referred to the City Center Site Plan and reviewed the location of the
apartment and hotel. She reviewed the General Plan amendment, and Heart of City height and use
amendments/exceptions. Ms. Wordell noted that the flip/flop placement of the hotel and
apartments would be covered in the amendment.
Ms. Michele Rodriguez, Planner II, reviewed the issues relating to the Stevens Creek apartments,
including building and design. She said the Planning Commission direction was to reduce the
overall'building height to between 75 and 100 feet to maintain the 1:1 setback ratio from the
Stevens Creek Blvd. curbline; and to add pedestrian access from the retail area into the parking
garage, to upgrade ground floor building materials, complete dock screening, and to limit the
height of the planter around the base of the building.
Relating to the building height, Ms. Rodriguez noted that the drawings on the wall illustrated the
comparison between the April l0th. Planning Commission plans and the updated plans submitted
to address issues. She explained that to address the building height concern, the applicant graded
Planning Commission Minutes 3 May 22, 2000
more to drop the building pad by approximately 4.5 feet, and also redesigned a portion of the top
floor and added mass to other portions of the building in order to reduce the building height. The
majority of the building is 93 feet high, and there has been an addition to the center loft area center
units which reaches 102 feet, which is almost 4 feet less than the overall building height presented
at the previous meeting. Staff feels that the applicant has complied because the majority of the
building height is at the 93.1 feet. To address the 1:1 setback, the applicant has replaced a unit
that was encroaching into the 1:1 setback, and has kept the trellis to balance the elevation.
Because the 1:1 setback states that it is to reduce building mass, staff did not feel that the
maintenance of the trellis was building mass, and is in conformance. Relative to pedestrian access
and dock screening; (architectural design), she said a condition of approval was added to allow the
design to be reviewed more carefully before the Planning Commission. To address the concern of
the dock being buffered, she illustrated the area for planting the evergreen shrubs to buffer the
dock.
Ms. Rodriguez reported that the building materials were upgraded; and a condition of approval
added to allow the detail of all the building materials at ground level to be reviewed by the
Planning Commission. Also added were findings in the conditions of approval stating that the
highest design material was being sought, which would allow the Planning Commission to have
leverage in their material review later. They also stepped down and reduced the height around the
entire building and included in the plan set a section showing how they will maintain the height
between 3 and 4 feet.
To address Chair Harris' question regarding the exception for the outdoor space and the issue of
the subsurface garage, on Page 4-4, the two exceptions were reviewed. Relative to the outdoor
space, she questioned if the Specific Plan delineated between hard and softscape and to what
degree did the project comply with that. She said the square footage comparison per dwelling unit
was included, and the Specific Plan requires that between 70% and 80% of the landscape should
be softscape and the remaining 20% to 30% should be hardscape. She said the applicant cannot
comply with that since they have such a high building coverage ratio; hence it is the outdoor space
exception. Ms. Rodriguez said that another question dealt with the subsurface garage area on Page
14 of the Plan set. She said that the east/west section of the parking garage is substantially above
grade, and the Specific Plan states that parking garages may not exceed 5 feet above grade, and
the proposal exceeds that 5 feet requirement.
Staff recommends approval of he General Plan amendments and the amendment to the Heart of
the City Specific Plan according to the model resolutions and the updated amendment resolution.
Ms. Rodriguez referred to wall drawings and explained changes to building height discussed
earlier. She also clarified that the reduction in retail space from 7,000 sq. ft. to 6,775 sq. ft. was
for the pedestrian access. She reported that Condition 6 requires that a bike rack be made
available near the retail use in the plaza. Alternative wording has also been developed in
Condition 4 to allow additional spaces for bikes.
In response to Chair Harris' questions, Ms. Rodriguez stated that there was no reciprocal parking
agreement with the hotel for the retail users to use the hotel parking. She said that relative to the
issue of security cameras in the garage, a condition required that conduit be installed and if the
sheriff's department determined it was needed, it would be done at that time. It was determined
that the condition should state that the Planning Commission in conjunction with the sheriff's
department determine whether the security cameras were needed. She said that the height of the
Planning Commission Minutes 4 May 22, 2000
planter box could be stated as 3 feet; the stone tile base for the ground floor has been added, with a
condition of approval for more specific review; and the applicant was requesting that an alternate
material be added for flexibility relative to the clay tile roof. - Ms. Rodriguez explained that
although the retail space and height were decreased, the increase in building area was a result of
the flat wallplane which was previously offset, the addition of loft units, and the increase in
building height.
Mr. Larry Cannon, architect, said he reviewed the application in its early stages, and felt it was
well designed with variety. He said that he had not reviewed the updated plans in depth.
Mr. Raymond Chong, Traffic Engineer, reviewed the traffic impacts for the apartments, retail and
full service hotel during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, including the week days. He reviewed
intersections level of service, which determined operation at LOS D or better for existing
conditions; for background conditions at LOS D or better; for project conditions at LOS D or
better; and under expected growth conditions at LOS D or better. He noted the only exception
was LOS E+ at DeAnza Blvd. at northbound 1-280 ramp. Mr. Chong said the consultant raised
concerns about queue spillbacks, specifically at DeAnza and Rodriguez during a.m. and p.m. peak
hours, and at the eastbound left mm at Stevens Creek and Torre; and suggested mitigation would
be to extend the left turn pocket or increase the green time. Staff's proposal is to increase the
green time for the proper allocation of the left turn 'movements. He reviewed the summary table
of trip generation estimates, summary of left mm storage queuing analysis, and matrix table of
intersection level of service. Mr. Chong explained that LOS A was free flowing traffic conditions,
and F was gridlock; and that the city maintained that below LOS D was the maximum for the city,
except for DeAnza and Stevens Creek and DeAnza and Bollinger Roads.
Mr. Chong answered questions about traffic impacts, trip generation, and level of service. He
said that the traffic study conducted by the consultant was a fair study. Mr. Jason Pack, Fehr and
Peers Associates, answered questions about the analysis for the traffic impacts.
Mr. Paul Lettire, Gazzardo and Associates, explained the mitigation for the loading dock, stating
that a 3 foot hedge would be continued for the purpose of blocking out the paving level of cars,
not to make the entire first floor of the building disappear. He said that shrubs could also be
planted across the front. In response to Chair Harris' question about increasing the softscape and
the need for an exception because it does not meet the outdoor landscape requirements for the
General Plan, Mr. Lettire said that he was not certain if they could reach the numbers needed. He
said that the overall landscape plan is designed for a good balance between usable open space and
landscaped areas. He said he did not feel miniscule adjustments to the podium plan and increase
of the softscape would materially benefit the project in terms of the appearance or feel of the final
project; but it would only make it less usable.
Com. Stevens referred to the architectural model, and said there was a dominant architecture
starting with the landmark towers and the surrounding buildings, denoting they all have steps; a
uniform stepping consistency all around; in addition to having similar colors and materials. He
said the two proposed projects do not have either and questioned the architect's viewpoint if it
appeared to be something that would look quite different or be acceptable.
Mr. Cannon said that the issue was discussed with staff at the beginning of the project, and he felt
the stepping would not amount to much. He said he felt the quality of the building itself was strong
and he was not concerned that it was not stepping more, as the building located behind is in a
Planning Commission Minutes 5 May 22, 2000
certain form. He said he felt the building should be left to be what it is, and let it have its richness,
whether or not it was stepped.
Com. Stevens said that the two proposed buildings would overshadow the landmark building
which is 110 feet high. He said he felt the buildings were too high. Mr. Cannon said that he
wished there was more space between the office and the apartment building. He said he felt the
office building in the background was a standard office building without much richness of fagade;
the proposed building has richness and a lot of form which is one type of architecture played
against the simple form of the office building which is acceptable.
Staff answered questions about the parking requirements, and noted that shared parking was
proposed with the adjacent office building, and because of different peak hours of need for the
hotel, apartment and office building, it would not be a problem.
Chair Harris addressed the condition for the developer to contribute 25% of the cost of a
pedestrian crossing project. Ms. Carmen Lynaugh, Public Works, clarified that at this time there
was not a full plan for it, but it would entail some features of enhancing the crosswalks and
changing the radiuses of the curb returns. Ms. Rodriguez said that Condition 30 specified a
maximum of $60,000 'for pedestrian crossing reimbursement, which would amount to the known
of 25% of $60,000, divided between the two projects. Staff said that a bond could be part of the
improvement agreement to ensure payment in the future.
Chair Harris said that the mitigation outline in the Fehr and Peers Associates report should be
completed prior to the occupancy of the building, and asked what it was and what it is mitigating.
Mr. Chong said that the only proposal was to adjust the green time, and is being corrected;
therefore the mitigation condition could be deleted.
Com. Kwok referred to Condition 17 relative to the applicant complying with the Cupertino
Sanitary District's conditions set forth at no cost to the City of Cupertino. Ms. Rodriguez reported
that the Sanitary District is conducting a study to determine if the current lines are maximized or
overused, and if wider lines need to be installed, applicants developing within their sphere of
influence would be required to pay a mitigation fee. It was determined that the condition should
state that the applicant may be required to pay a mitigation fee to provide the required capacity.
Chair Harris asked for clarification on parking - 59 spaces for retail and guests of the apartments.
She questioned if it was a reasonable number or whether a reciprocal parking agreement should be
considered with the hotel for overflow; what the peak times would be; and what type of retail uses
they would be in terms of drawing customers.
Mr. Randall Mackley, Retail Real Estate Group, said that typically retail ratios are 4 parking stalls
per 1,000. He said he saw a parking demand increase, which is an indication of how much food
goes into a project. He said when considering eateries, there are different peak times, such as early
morning for a donut shop, whereas a traditional sit- down restaurant would have greater demand in
the evening. He said he felt the needs would be greater than 4 per 1,000, but certainly less than 7
per 1,000; and with less than 7,000 square feet, it would be important to have the parking as close
to the retail as possible. He said he anticipated 3 or 4 tenants; that 70% of the market is food,
leaving the ability to solicit 30% of the market; and that food essentially becomes the defacto
anchor, and they were considering looking for more of a lifestyle director, something trendy, but
enduring.
Planning Commission Minutes 6 May 22, 2000
In response to Com. Doyle's request for clarification on the building height, Mr. Chuck Tang, of
McLarand Vasquez and Partners, illustrated where the building h~ight had been decreased, noting
that the majority of the project had been dropped down 8 feet from the previous profile. He
explained the areas where the building profile had been lowered, namely compressing the building
down in pad elevation; some articulation in the garage podium area to allow lowering one part of
the garage podium area, and minimizing some of the top floor, floor to floor conditions in order to
reduce some of the building heights. He said they literally pushed the building down further in
grade so the new elevations were at 226; the combination of this drop in the podium between the
low rise and the mid rise and the combination of lowering the pad elevation, in addition to
dropping some of the ceiling heights on the 8th floor, created the 8 foot differential between the
previous scheme and present proposal. He said the eave line in the new elevation is at 317.5, a
difference of 8 feet. He said that the unit counts were not increased; by creating some loft
conditions on the low rise condition as well as on the mid-rise condition, it created some additional
square footage into the program.
Mr. Tang explained how the 1:1 ratio was achieved, stating that they set up a series of lines
dictating where the 1: I setback would occur. At the fifth floor, everything is in conformance, and
on the sixth floor, where there was previously an encroachment at this condition, it created a
smaller unit plan, eliminating the encroachment. He said a comparison of the original program to
the present submittal, would realize a higher percentage of one bedroom plans in the current
submittal, as some of the two bedrooms were removed to create the l:l setback. The loft
conditions are well beyond the line of the l:l setback. He said that the garage was not sunk into
the ground as it is an essential part of retail to have parking adjacent to it. He said he felt the
parking was successfully screened from the busiest street, with the only areas of exposure on the
south side of the project, and on the east side of the project where planters will enhance the edge.
John Moss, Pegasus Development, said due to the extensive discussion and presentations, he
would not make an additional presentation, but was available for questions.
Chair Harris opened the meeting for public comment; there was no one present who wished to
speak.
Chair Harris closed the public hearing.
Ms. Rodriquez referred to Page 14, and said it was important to note that they were claiming that
the 1 :l has been dealt with by the units being removed in the trellis area being kept or maintained;
but she noticed by their illustration that they were not actually illustrated with a dash, and is
proposed to be maintained.
Mr. Tang said that they were considering architectural projection in order to enhance the corner
icon of the project. He said they were attempting to look at this as architectural projection similar
to what is happening with the trellises, because it does add to the architecture instead of taking
away from the architecture.
Com. Corr expressed concern about how the project would actually look when it is built. He
· asked what steps were forthcoming to ensure that the look would be what they were striving for.
Planning Commission Minutes 7 May 22, 2000
Mr. Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, said that was the intent of separating the
details encompassed in Condition 6 which is a lengthy list, but that if there were additional
concerns, the list could be added to. He said they needed to look fit the large set of plans in greater
detail to the point where they are the design built construction drawings. He saidthe applicant
needs to work 'the details out. Mr. Piaseeki said it was fairly certain that there would be
modifications and changes because once they start putting together the construction drawings, they
will find problems, and the intent of the condition is that they will be seen.
Com. Kwok said that they hoped to approve it in concept and have the architect work out the
details, which could go through the design review process for a final product for approval at the
Planning Commission level.
Chair Harris questioned if it was the architect's intent to have flags on the building. Mr. Tang said
it was their intent to have a unified vibrant theme graphic throughout the project, and those
graphics should tie in with the signage program and building colors and should be compatible with
each other. He said he felt it would add to the project but the graphics were not finalized yet, but
would be addressed in more detail later along with other issues.
Chair Harris said that a key issue was building height and asked for input before outlining the
other issues.
Com. Doyle said that it was still too high, and should be more in the range of 40 feet, 1:1 setback,
and then up to 75 feet if2:l setback. The General Plan and Heart of the City state 40 feet, not
100+ feet, hence height is a problem.
Com. Kwok said that he supported the current proposal.
Com. Stevens said he felt it was too tall; 70 feet instead of the Heart of the City 40; he concurred
with Com. Doyle's comment on the 2:1 ratio; and said he wanted to see the buildings behind them,
and the architecture should reflect those buildings.
Com. Con' said that in terms of the stacking, the building behind was taller, and the north elevation
of the Sun Building was a flat, uninteresting structure, and the new building would cover it up. He
said because it was stair stepped, he was not opposed to it.
Chair Harris said that she concurred with Corns. Doyle and Stevens that the building was too high.
She said that she was previously involved when a consultant on the Stevens Creek Plan said that
the towers needed to have an intermediate building placed so that it steps to it, and the proposed
building takes the tower and moves it forward. She said there was an issue with the back building
and it was too high; the front building is ok; the tower element is too high and she said she would
prefer to have it dropped a floor at 75 feet. Chair Harris said she liked the addition of the slightly
higher area in the one tower section and would be amenable to that being reduced
commensurately, but could not approve the proposal. She said that if the height could not be
reduced by sinking the garage into the ground, it would have to be accomplished by reducing it by
a floor. She said it was dense and would impact the traffic and create a giant mass at the
intersection. She said it did not depict the character seen in the last General Plan; she liked the
present towers and the way they step and are set back with lawn area. She said the character of the
city would be changed and all the buildings would be that high; and although there was a need for
housing, the project was too dense.
Planning Commission Minutes 8 May 22, 2000
Chair Harris said that a specific plan was written for the area that said 40 foot height at the
intersection, and 75 feet in the General Plan for landmark buildings in the city. She said because
of the overriding need for apartments, she was willing to approve 75 feet and the staff
recommendation for changing the Specific Plan, since she could not make the required findings in
the Specific Plan if the change is not made. She said she could not make the required finding that
75 or 90 feet is the least modification of a 40 foot requirement, whereas changing the Specific
Plan to allow exceeding it, would not require making such an absurd finding.
In response to Chair Harris' question of how much of the building has an encroachment in the 1:I,
the architect said that the two trellises on the mid-rise portionwas the encroachment. He said they
overlooked that a portion of the low-rise portion is also an encroachment of the 1:1, approximately
15 feet.
Chair Harris asked for input on the 1:1 setback.
Com. Con' said that he felt the 1:1 setback was appropriate to keep the continuity of the building
and the tower. Com. Kwok said that it was appropriate, as the concept of the encroachment was to
enhance the appearance of the building; and he did not want to penalize the applicant because they
want to enhance the building. Com. Doyle said that he felt it was too high. Com. Stevens said
that since the trellises were not considered part of it, he was willing to support it. He said the
tower was unique, was located on the comer only next to the park, and is on the outside L and
gives uniqueness, which he would support. Chair Harris said that she liked it and would support
it.
Chair Harris said that 3-EXC-00 would amend the Specific Plan to allow an apartment use and
exceed the 40 foot height limit, and allow high density on Lot 1, Tract 7953. She said they would
have to make a finding that said that whatever height was decided, was the least modification of
the 40 foot requirement. She questioned if there was any dissention to the amendment.
Com. Doyle said there were issues relative to the development other than height. Chair Harris
said that it was to change the Specific Plan for height and to allow high density housing because
previously in the Specific Plan there was not housing at the intersection. She said there would be
two issues in the eXCeption, and would change the Stevens Creek Specific Plan for the one parcel
to change the height requirement and to allow high density housing. Ms. Rodriguez clarified that
under Condition 3, since a G had been added (1:I), an H would be added to X feet. She said an
amendment to the General Plan would also be required.
Com. Kwok said he would prefer to grant the exception. Com. Stevens said that he would support
6 floors or 75 feet. Mr. Piasecki said that it would need to be specified what the acceptable height
would be, and whether it would be the one floor referred to earlier or the 75 feet. Later, Chair
Harris said that she would support 75 feet which is the landmark size specified in the General
Plan. Following a brief discussion, Corns. Stevens and Kwok said they would support 75 feet.
Com. Kwok stated for the record that if Cupertino is going to have affordable housing, sometime
and somewhere things have to give. If the height goes to 75 feet, two floor units would be lost and
would add to the cost of the buildings and also the cost of each unit. He said he would prefer the
height of 102 feet as proposed, but it was important to endorse affordable housing in
Planning Commission Minutes 9 May 22, 2000
Cupertino. Chair Harris said that the city has made great strides in the housing and there has to be
a balance between the needs of the community and the needs of the existing residents for traffic
and mass, and the observance of the General Plan. -
Mr. Piasecki said that he felt the applicant would prefer a decision so that the application could be
moved along.
Com. Corr said he concurred with Com. Kwok's comment that reducing the number of units cuts
out the number of affordable units. He said that he preferred that if they choose to support 75 feet,
that it should have been done the last time around, rather than give a wider range and have the
applicant return time after time. He said he felt the applicant should be given a number to work
with. He said he would support the 75 foot height.
There was consensus that reducing the height to 75 feet would eliminate other issues of concern.
Mr. Moss said that he preferred that a vote be rendered, with conditions, and not a continuance,
assuming it would be conditioned on the height.
Ms. Rodriguez summarized the proposed changes to conditions for 6-U-00. Condition 5: adding
that the loading dock shall be screened with evergreen shrubs; Condition 6: (residential) roof
material to be authentic clay tile, mission style, or material that looks similar, or other roofing of'
an equal quality that has the same appearance as clay tile, to be approved; Add planter box height
and details for review; Design Review: architecture and landscaping to be approved (unit mix and
total number); Condition 9: Change to 10% of the number; Condition 17: Add "Prior to obtaining
a permit for occupancy, the applicant shall pay the appropriate mitigation fee to provide required
capacity."; Condition 21: Add to second line: "The City in consultation with the sheriff's
department may require installation of cameras;" Condition 34: A bond required in the
improvement agreement for 25% of ...; Condition 35: delete the condition; Use of wording
"based on the concept of the plan;" Delete size of residential and state "high density;" Delete No,
206, and state "residential unit shall have designated parking;" Item 10: amend as needed.
Relative to Heart of the City amendment, Mr. Piasecki clarified that under Item 3, Heart of the
City amendment, it should state: "This approval grants an amendment to the Heart of the City
Specific Plan to allow up to a maximum building height of 75 feet."
Ms. Rodriguez clarified that the remainder of the items would move to the exception.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Kwok moved to recommend approval of Application 9-EA-00
Com Corr
Passed 5-0-0
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Corr moved to recommend denial of Application 2-GPA-99 as it
relates to the apartments
Com. Kwok
Passed 5-0-0
MOTION:
Com. Corr moved to recommend approval of Application 6-U-00 as
amended and 3-EXC-00, an amendment to the Specific Plan to allow up
to 75 feet
Planning Commission Minutes ~o May 22, 2000
SECOND: Com. Kwok
VOTE: Passed 5-0-0
Chair Harris declared a recess from 10:00 p.m. to 10:15 p.m.
Application Nos.:
Applicant:
Location:
5-U-00, 4-EXC-00, 2-GPA-99, 8-EA-00
Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group
Lot 6, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center
Use permit to construct a new 217 room, 130,580 square foot hotel, restaurant and bar on a semi-
vacant parcel and operate 24 hours.
General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet.
Heart of the City specific plan exception to exceed the 49 foot height limit and allow hotel use.
Continued from meeting of May 8, 2000
Staff presentation: Ms. Wordell illustrated the perspective, which differed from the previous
rendition. She reviewed changes made by the applicant, including pitched roofs, higher north
tower, lower south tower, restaurant raised roof, and increased offsets in the guest wing. Ms.
Wordell also reviewed architectural changes including belt courses around the building, increased
balconies/awnings, windows simplified and inset, wooden trellises, colors and materials, and a
horizontal sign rather than vertical sign. Landscape changes included parking structure planter
box, trees on west property line, and relocation of the fountain. She said that the architect wants
more design interest on the second and third floors to make it more distinctive; the main tower and
restaurant tower elements needs more detail; restaurant trellis next to the plaza could be better
integrated into the fagade; south elevation mentioned earlier; and other elements such as
landscaping, lighting, Cali Avenue signs, etc. coming back for review. Staff recommends
approval of the General Plan .amendment, the Heart of the City amendment and exception, and
mitigation negative declaration.
Ms. Wordell noted that the remaining issues to address were: building form/mass;
architecture/design; parking; landscaping; and signs.
Mr. Cannon reviewed the updates and changes to the hotel proposal. He said the treatment along
the top combined with the awnings and balcony fronts was positive; the consistent cornice line and
the way it kicks out and the continuity it provides seems quite positive and the treatment of this
which is consistent with the detailing that is going on in other places also seems to be positive; the
building now has a classic breakdown of a top, a middle and a bottom. He said he was still
concerned, and staff had eluded to, the fact that the building still does not seem to have enough
variety and richness in the window treatment. Mr. Cannon said that the building was beginning to
get back to the integrity that the original design had, but was still boxy with things attached to it,
and there are some minor things to be done that would begin to make the trellis seem more
integrated into the basic restaurant box. He said the architect and developer want to make the
restaurant appear different from the hotel, so it does not appear to look like a hotel restaurant, but
he said he felt the portion above the meeting rooms could have more richness of detail on the
lower portion since it is a rather plain building. He expressed concern about the signage panels
and said he would like to work with the architect. Mr. Cannon indicated that more work needed to
be done to make the entryway a more welcome area. He reiterated that because of the prime
location, the building needed more richness in design.
Planning Commission Minutes 11 May 22, 2000
Mr. Jim Lepitich, resident, expressed concern about the issue of escalating noise in the downtown
area. He said there were problems with noise from pickups at nighthours, and deliveries at 5 a.m.
He said that he has reported the concern previously, however, no sound meters have been
available to measure the noise level. He said he felt that the General Plan goals were not being
met in light of the problems that existed. He urged the city to address the issues.
Mr. Cannon addressed staff's comments on the height which does not conform to the Heart of the
City requirements. He said the building sets far back from the street, but the height would be a
Planning Commission judgment; he said it still was not a superior design but had potential. He
said that his preference would be to have an entry from the hotel into the park, otherwise it would
require a lot of landscaping to soften up the wall.
Mr. Jim Whelan, Kimpton Hotel, requested that a decision be made on the application. He
summarized the changes made since the last presentation, which included making the hotel design
more complementary with the apartment; the fagade was more interesting and less boxy; reduction
of the building height; keeping the 1:1 ratio to 40 feet, and the 2:1 ratio at 75 feet; stepped the
structure north to south; moved the penthouse to the south; made the entryway and roofline more
interesting; color; signage; and parking. He noted the addition of one level of parking below
grade; said the overall height of the project varied slightly; it is below a 1:2 setback although
above 75 feet, since it is so far back from the street, it is well within the 1:2 setback; there has
been significant articulation along the side of the building and he said he felt it would be the most
attractive hotel built in the Bay Area this year and next. He reported there were 3 foot and 1-I/2
foot offsets along the western fagade; 1-1/2 foot offsets along the eastern fagade; increase in the
use of cornice materials, horizontal.bandings, balconies and awnings; main entryway has been
completely reconfigured, it is pedestrian oriented; restaurant fagade has warmth and interest; the
arbor along northern fagade and western fagade are intended to be of substance; the wooden
columns and beams across the top reminiscent of the Mission campus of Santa Clara University
are taller and allow for interaction between the restaurant and park, providing a sense of action;
there are a significant amount of entries to the park; all doors cannot open to the outside since it is
a high end hotel; significant landscaping; major changes to the roofline; reduced the height of the
cave on the crown, but peak went up to create a better design. Mr. Whelan said that the 75 foot
height limit would impose a loss of 3 floors out of 7 of the. hotel. He said it was fundamentally the
same design presented in November when they asked for an indication of whether or not they
should continue with the process. He said he felt they were responsive to the comments, and they
intended on presenting and operating the highest caliber hotel, and conference center, and
restaurant in the area.
Mr. Bob Wheatley, Ginsler, addressed Mr. Cannon's earlier comment about requiring more
articulation on the building. He said that they were concerned about putting layer upon layer
because he recalled that they earlier had articulation on two stories around the elements and
because the consensus was that it was inappropriate they moved away from it. He said they
increased the depth of the window so they are now 6 inches, and are getting strong shadow lines
around them; there are sills as well as head cornice pieces on them, and sills on all the other
windows, garbage and receiving services are directly opposite the receiving area and the adjacent
City Center building. Porticos also have been added; a portico loggia front entry has been added
to the front of the building; the bike rack area will return to the lower level; a full level of below
ground parking has been added for an additional 30 parking spaces; addition of awning on the top
floor. He continued to outline the modifications and changes made since the last presentation to
the Planning Commission.
b- 37
Planning Commission Minutes 12 May 22, 2000
Chair Harris explained the importance of the project to the city, and getting public input from the
community. She apologized that the item would have to be continued to another meeting in order
to provide the time necessary to review and discuss the proposal.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Doyle moved to continue Application 5-U-00, 2-GPA-99,
4-EXC-00 and 8-EA-00 to the June 12, 2000 Planning
Commission meeting
Com. Kwok
Passed 5-0-0
OLD BUS,SS: None
REPORT 0F xk~:IE PLANNING COM3~SSION: Com. Corr reported on his attendance at the
recent Housing (3~mmittee meeting, discussing the impending issues relative to the Santa Barbara
Grill and its redevelopment. He reported that the City Manager's position was down to 2
applicants and shoul~ be filled by mid-June. He reminded everyone of the community event at
Blackberry Farm for'l~)on Brown, retiring City Manager on June 17th. He also reported that
Mayor Statton would bXconvening a community congress in late fall to deal with community
issues. Com. Corr revieW,ed other reports provided at the meeting including Public Safety, Parks
and Recreation, Fine Arts C~mmission, and Telecommunications.
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Mr. Piasecki
reported on two appeals to City~ouncil, including the denial of the oak tree which City Council
upheld; and the appeal on the electronic security gate on Balboa Road which the City Council
upheld the Planning Commission de~ision, and denied the appeal.
Com. Kwok requested that staff look i~nt,o the setback requirement for the dayeare center by the
YMCA.. IPP~
DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CL S: None
\
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned }t 11:20 p.m. to the special Planning Commission
meeting at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 24, 2000, in Conference Room
C/D.
Respectfully Submitted,
Elizabeth Ellis
Recording Secretary
RESOLUTION NO. 00-191
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY CUPERTINO APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE TO EXCEED THE ALLOWED
HEIGHT OF 75 FEET.
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino initiated applications for a General Plan Amendment
as described in this resolution; and
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices were given in accordance with the procedure
ordinance of the City of Cupertino and the City Council has held at least one public hearing on
the matter; and
WHEREAS, Application No. 2-GPA-99 requests to amend the general plan land use
element to exceed the 75-foot height limit;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Cupertino
that after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted
in this matter, the application for General Plan Amendment, Application No. 2-GPA-99 is hereby
approved as shown below;
Policy 2-24, Strategy 2:
The hotel (File 5-U-00) and hotel (File 6-U-00) are specifically exempted from the height
limitations, to allow heights up to 108 feet. This height exception applies to the current
use permit and any permit extension granted by the City.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are
based on and contained in the public heating record concerning Application No. 2-GPA-99, as
set forth in the minutes of the City Council Meeting of June 19, 2000, and incorporated by
reference as though fully set forth herein.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 19th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
VOTE:
· AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
planning/cc2gpa996500
Mayor, City of Cupertino
RESOLUTION NO. 00-192
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF-CUPERTINO
APPROVING AN EXCEPTION AND AN AMENDMENT TO THE HEART OF THE CITY
SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW AN APARTMENT USE, EXCEED THE 40' HEIGHT LIMIT,
ENCROACHMENT INTO THE 1:1 SETBACK, AND TO ALLOW HIGH DENSITY
HOUSING ON LOT 1, TRACT 7953, CUPERTINO CITY CENTER
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
3-EXC-00
Cupertino City Center Land
Lot 1, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center
SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR HEART OF THE CITY AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Cupertino received an application for an
amendment to the Heart of the City Specific Plan, as described in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the apartment fulfills the Heart of the City goal of creating a high quality and
distinct community image and a functional and vibrant heart for Cupertino.
WHEREAS, the apartment provides superior design and is stepped back from the street.
WHEREAS, the Heart of the City amendment consists of allowing a maximum height of 75 feet,
allowing an apartment use and to exceed the Heart of the City maximum dwelling units;
WHEREAS, the apartment slightly encroaches into the 1:1 setback with a trellis feature and a
turret. These design elements are needed to balance the design and are not considered a
significant mass of the building; and
SECTION III: FINDINGS FOR EXCEPTION
WHEREAS, in order to provide design flexibility in situations when unique surrounding land
uses make it difficult to adhere to the development standards, an applicant for development may
file an exception request to seek approval to deviate from the standards; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds the following with regards to the Exception for this
application:
1. The proposed development is otherwise consistent with the City's General Plan and
with the goals of this specific plan.
2. The proposed development will not be injurious to property or improvements in the
area nor be detrimental to the public health and.safety.
3. The proposed development will not create a hazardous condition for vehicular
traffic.
4. The proposed development has legal access to public streets and public services are
available to serve the development.
Resolution No.
Page 2
3-EXC-00
June 19, 2000
5. The building design is superior in that it steps back from Stevens Creek Boulevard,
has significant wall and roof articulation and its use c;f materials and colors.
6. The use provides day and nighttime pedestrian activity to the plaza.
7. The approval of housing on this site is consistent with General Plan policy 3-29:
Housing on Employment Center Sites to locate housing units on employment center
sites or in areas that could be designated for higher density housing, such as City
Center area.
8. The apartment fulfills the Heart of the City goals of creating a high quality and
distinct community image and a functional and vibrant heart of Cupertino.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted
in this matter, application no. 3-EXC-00 is hereby recommended for approval; 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 3-EXC-00, as set forth
in the Minutes of the City Council Meeting of June 19, 2000, and are incorporated by reference
herein.
SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
APPROVED EXHIBITS
The recommendation of approval is based on the plans drawn by McLarand Vasquez &
Partners, dated May 15, 2000, and consisting of the Project Summary, Retail/Parking Level
1, Level 1 (Podium Level), Parking Level 2, Parking Level 3, Midrise & Stevens Creek Blvd.
Elevation, Four Season and South Elevation, the North-South/East-West, Site Section, and
Levels 2-8 Floor Plans, Mid-Rise Loft Floor Plans. The McLarand Vasquez & Partners
Partial Elevation plan date March 31, 2000, (in concept), except not the precast concrete
base. The Guv~zardo & Associates L-1.4 Landscape plan dated April 5, 2000, and the L-1.2
and L-1.3 dated March 30, 2000. The Creegan and D'Angelo Proposed Lot Line Adjustment,
Sheet 3 of 3 and dated 1/5/00. The material board dated February 3, 2000. As 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.
Resolution No.
Page 3
3-EXC-00
June 19, 2000
3. HEART OF THE CITY EXCEPTION
This approval grants an exception to the Heart of the City Specific Plan for the following:
Setbacks: 0' (east side), and (rear).
Garage setback: 0' (east).
Subsurface garage: 8' above grade.
Garage doors: 33' width.
Traffic flow: 2 two-way driveways off Stevens Creek Blvd.
Landscape frontage along Stevens Creek Boulevard
Evergreen trees.
Shrubs instead of lawn.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19~ day of June, 2000, at a Regular Meeting of the City Council
of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
VOTE:
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
Carol Atwood
Acting City Manager
g:/planning/pdreport/res/3 exc00cc
2-GPA-99
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014 -
RESOLUTION NO. 6027 (Denial)
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING
DENIAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN TO EXCEED THE ALLOWED
HEIGHT OF 75 FEET
SECTION I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino initiated an application for General Plan Amendment 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 at least one hearing on
the matter; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the potential environmental impacts of the
proj eot and found they were not mitigated to a level of insignificance.
WI-IEREAS, the application 2-GPA-99, requests approval for the following in the City Center:
building heights of up to 102'. The land uses significantly contribute to the activity desired in City
Center, and the building designs and materials are superior;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in
this matter, the application for General Plan Amendment, application no.(s) 2-GPA-99 and 6-U-00,
revising the text of the General Plan, is hereby recommended for denial as shown below:
Policy 2-24, Strategy 2:
The apartment (File 6-U-00) project is not specifically exempted from the height
limitations.
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are
based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application 2-GPA-99 and
6-U-00 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 22, 2000 and are
incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No:
Applicant:
Property Owner:
Project Location:
' 2-GPA-99
Pegasus Development Company
Cupertino City Center Land
Lot 1, Tract 7953, City of Cupertino, CA
Resolution No. 6027 (Denial)
Page 2
2-GPA-99
May22,2000
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of May 2000, 'at a Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Doyle, Kwok, Stevens and Chairperson Harris
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
/s/ Steve Piasecki
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Developmem
g:/planning/r~.~2gPa99denial
/si Andrea Harris
Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
3-EXC-00
RESOLUTION NO. 6028
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN EXCEPTION AND AN AMENDMENT TO THE
HEART OF THE CITY SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW AN APARTMENT USE, EXCEED
THE 40' HEIGHT LIMIT AND TO ALLOW HIGH DENSITY HOUSING ON LOT 1, TRACT
7953, CUPERTINO CITY CENTER
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
3-EXC-00
Cupertino City Center Land
Lot 1, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center
SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR HEART OF THE CITY AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for an
amendment to the Heart of the City Specific Plan, as described in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the apartment fulfills the Heart of the City goal of creating a high quality and
distinct community image and a functional and vibrant heart for Cupertino.
WHEREAS, the apartment provides superior design and is stepped back from the street.
WHEREAS, the Heart of the City amendment consists of allowing a maximum height of 75 feet,
allowing an apartment use and exceeds the Heart of the City maximum dwelling units; and
SECTION III: FINDINGS FOR EXCEPTION
WHEREAS, in order to provide design flexibility in situations when unique surrounding land
uses make it difficult to adhere to the development standards, 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 Exception for this
application:
1. The proposed development is otherwise consistent with the City's General Plan and
with the goals of this specific plan.
2. The proposed development will not be injurious to property or improvements in the
area nor be detrimental to the public health and safety.
3. The proposed development will not create a hazardous condition for vehicular
traffic.
4. The proposed development has legal access to public streets and public services are
available to serve the development.
Resolution No. 6028
Page 2
3-EXC-00
May 22, 2000
5. The building design is superior in that it steps back ~om Stevens Creek Boulevard,
has significant wall and roof articulation and its use of materials and colors.
6. The use provides day and nighttime pedestrian activity to the plaza.
7. The approval of housing on this site is consistent with General Plan policy 3-29:
Housing on Employment Center Sites to locate housing units on employment center
sites or in areas that could be designated for higher density homing, such as City
Center area.
8. The apartment fulfills the Heart of the City goals of creating a high quality and
distinct community image and a functional and vibrant heart of Cupertino.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted
in this matter, application no. 3-EXC-00 is hereby recommended for approval; 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 3-EXC-00, as set forth
in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 22, 2000, and are incorporated by
reference herein.
SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
APPROVED EXHIBITS
The recommendation of approval is based on the concepts encompassed in the McLarand
Vasquez & Partners plans dated May 15, 2000 and consisting of the Project Summary, East
Retail/Parking Level 1, Level 1 (Podium Level), Parking Level 2, Parking Level 3, Midrise
& Stevens Creek Blvd. Elevation Four Season and South Elevation, the North-South/East-
West, Site Section, and Levels 2-8 Floor Plans, Mid-Rise Loft Floor Plans. The McLarand
Vasquez & Partners Partial Elevation plan date March 31, 2000, except not the precast
concrete base. The Guzzardo & Associates L-1.4 Landscape plan dated April 5, 2000, and the
L-1.2 and L-1.3 dated March 30, 2000.
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 fi:om later challenging such
exactions.
Resolution No. 6028
Page 3
3-EXC-00
May 22, 2000
3. HEART OF THE CITY EXCEPTION
This approval grants an exception to the Heart of the City Specific Plan for the following:
a. Setbacks: 0' (east side), and (rear).
b. Garage setback: 0' (east).
c. Subsurface garage: 15' above grade.
d. Garage doors: 33' width.
e. Traffic flow: 2 two-way driveways off Stevens Creek Blvd.
f. Landscape frontage along Stevens Creek Boulevard 1. Evergreen trees.
2. Shrubs instead of lawn.
g. Setback from curb: equal to 1 foot setback for every 1 foot of
building height, measured f~om the curb line.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of May, 2000, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
Corr, Doyle, Kwok, Stevens and Chairperson Harris
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/ Steve Piasecki
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
g:/plarming/pdreport/res/3 exc00
/si Andrea Harris
Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
6-U-O0
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 6029
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING
A USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A NEW HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING AND 6,775 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE ON A
VACANT PARCEL (STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD AT CITY CENTER).
SECTION I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application
for a Use Permit, as described on Page 1 of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said
application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the application meets the following
requirements:
a) The project is consistent with General Plan policy 3-29 to "locate housing units on
employment center sites and in higher density sites such as City Center".
b) Helps to achieve the residential development priorities in the General Plan by
providing high density housing units in the Heart of the City Specific Plan area.
c) The new building may partially obstruct the view of the Towers. The building design
incorporates positive elements to address this impact including limiting the height of
the building to 5-stories adjacent to the Towers, and designing the Southwest comer
of the building in a 45-degree angle.
d) The housing units and retail shops will promote pedestrian activity onto the park and
along Stevens Creek Boulevard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, the application for use permit is hereby recommended for
approval, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on
Page 2 thereof; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this
resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application as
set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 22, 2000 and are
incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
Resolution No. 6029
Page-2-
6-U-O0
May 22, 2000
SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
6-U-00
Pegasus Development Company
Lot 1, Tract 7953, City of Cupertino
CUpertino City Center - Vacant Lot Adjacent to Comer Green
Space
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
APPROVED EXHIBITS
The recommendation of approval is based on the concept of the plans drawn by
McLarand Vasquez & Partners, dated May 15, 2000, and consisting of the Project
Summary, East Retail/Parking Level 1, Level 1 (Podium Level), Parking Level 2, Parking
Level 3, Midrise & Stevens Creek Blvd. Elevation Four Season and South Elevation, the
North-South/East-West, Site Section, and Levels 2-8 Floor Plans, Mid-Rise Loft Floor
Plans. The McLarand Vasquez & Partners Partial Elevation plan date March 31, 2000,
except not the precast concrete base. The Guzzardo & Associates L-1.4 Landscape plan
dated April 5, 2000, and the L-1.2 and L-1.3 dated March 30, 2000. The Creegan and
D'Angelo Proposed Lot Line Adjustment, Sheet 3 of 3 and dated 1/5/00 and site sections
undated. The material board dated February 3, 2000. As amended by the conditions
contained in this Resolution.
HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND 6,775 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL
The approval is granted for high density residential and 6,775 square feet of retail space
and subsurface parking garage. The uses within the retail space shall comply with the
General Commercial Zoning District with regard to permitted and conditional uses and
the Parking Ordinance for all uses.
PARKING GARAGE STRIPING PLAN
The parking garage striping plan shall comply with the following standards:
a. The residential units shall have a designated parking area containing standard or
unisize parking stalls.
b. The regular/compact ratio for the balance of the garage may not exceed 50% compact
ratio.
c. The aisle widths and back up spaces shall be approved by the Directoi of Public
Works based upon the City's "standard details".
The two dead-end parking spaces shall be removed in the parking garage. The exact
location of the removal shall be determined by the cities Traffic Engineer. The two
spaces shall be made available on the surface lot located on Parcel
o
°
Resolution No. 6029 6-U-00 May 22, 2000
Page-3-
BICYCLE PARKING
Class I, bicycle parking shall be provided as outlined in 197100.040(O). A minimum of
one secured bicycle locking facility for every 6,500 square feet of residential building
area is required or a secured area (chainlink or similar) in the parking garage where
tenants can secure their bicycles.
LANDSCAPING
The applicant shall submit a comprehensive landscape planting and irrigation plans in
conformance with chapter 14.15, Xeriscape Landscaping, of the Cupertino Municipal
Code with the building permit. All trees shall be a m'mimum of 24" box and the shrubs
shall be 15 gallon. This landscape plan shall incorporate a minimum of four 24" box
trees in the surface parking lot. The planting location shall be along the east side of the
Stevens Creek entry drive and along with most Northern drive aisle within the lot. A
landscape easement for planting on lot # 7, 5 & 9 shall be submitted with the building
permit. The text shall be approved by staff after review by the City Attorney and recorded
in conjunction with the building permit. A pedestrian access easement shall be recorded
for the sidewalk along Stevens Creek Boulevard. The easement wording shall be
approved by staff, after review by the City Attorney and recorded in conjunction with the
building permit. The final landscape plan shall incorporate evergreen trees along the
Stevens Creek Boulevard frontage. The loading dock shall be partially screened with
evergreen shrubs.
DESIGN REVIEW
Design review is required in order to assure that the final design materials, elements and
fixtures are of the highest quality. The Planing Commission shall decide on the
following:
Residential
- Bicycle locking facility or secured area in parking garage.
- Dwelling unit mix.
- Dwelling unit number.
Commercial
- The 2' retaining wall separating the Plaza and the retail patio shall include a seat and
shall extend the full length of the retail frontage. The material may be concrete but
shall include the following treatments: pigment color, special aggregate, special
scoring pattern or ornamental insets, such as tile.
Accent plants in planters or terracotta pots in front of retail businesses.
A bicycle rack which shall be made available near the retail use and Plaza.
Retail awning and exterior flag design, color and material. Material shall be chosen
for longevity.
Pedestrian entry from retail area to the parking garage.
Building or Site Design
Light fixtures on the building to complement design of the building.
Pedestrian down lighting for the patio area and around four sides of the building.
o
Resolution No. 6029 6-U-00 May 22, 2000
Page-4-
Paving materials for pedestrian paths around the building, including the retail patios,
Porte Cochere and area around the kiosk. The materials shall be stone (slate or
granite), or brick pavers.
The sign program shall include tenant distinct signage, which are low profile but
classic in style. The use of neon is discouraged.
Exterior flag design, color and material for long term viability.
Building glass color. The goal is to reduce reflectivity bm complement the building
design
Window fi:ames, to be a minimum 3" depth.
Roof material to be authentic clay tile, Mission .style, or other material of equal
quality that has the same appearance.
Roof overhang shall incorporate a finished cave soffit detail to hide the roof joists and
rafters.
Color assessment of balcony railings and subsurface garage ventilation openings to
compliment the primary building color.
Stone tile base with the highest quality of material.
Architecture.
Landscaping.
Building -base landscape planter details (maximum height of 3 feet to 4 feet).
Stone tile base with the highest quality of material.
NOISE ANALYSIS
The applicant shall have an acoustical consultant make recommendations to demonstrate
compliance with the Cupertino General Plan. All residential units shall be subject to
good quality construction practices and installation of equipmem which may include
sealing of doors, window~ and fi:ames and casings and mechanical ventilation to ensure
that the interior average day/night noise level does not exceed 45-dBA Lcha.
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 exaction's. 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
exaction's. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you
may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exaction's, 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 exaction's.
BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING PROGRAM
The applicant shall participate in the City's Below Market Rate (BlVlR) Housing Program
by dedicating 10% of the units. The applicant shall record a covenant to be recorded
simultaneously with the filing for a building permit and shall be subject to review and
approval by the City Attorney.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Resolution No. 6029 6-U-00
Page-5-
May 22, 2000
SHARED PARKING: The CC & R's shall be amended as needed, and a grant of
easement or similar agreement for overflow parking on the adjoining surface lot (fi4)
shall be written, in order to meet the minimum parking requirements. In addition, parking
shall be made available for Plaza users in City Center. The text of the easement and]or
agreement shall be approved by staff, after City Attorney review.
FOUR SEASONS PLAZA
Amend the June 26, 1997, License Agreement between the Cupertino City Center
Owners Association and the City of Cupertino to incorporate a new Exhibit A, which is
the map depicting the Property involved in the agreement. The new Exhibit shall
accurately reflect the proposed lot line adjusmaent. The recordation of this Agreement
shall be in conjunction with the Lot Line Adjustment recordation for this project. The text
of the amended Agreement shall be approved by City staff, after City Attorney review.
Provide a unisex bathroom or two bathrooms accessible from the outside of the retail
space, and Visible from the Plaza, The bathroom shall be maintained by one or more of
the retail lessees but shall be available to Plaza users.
An amendment to the June 26, 1997, License Agreement shall occur to incorporate this
parcel into the Cupertino City Center Owners Association, for the maintenance of the
Plaza.
KECYCLING FACILITIES
The developer shall make provisions for recycling facilities which shall be accessible to
the Los Altos Garbage Company. The recycling and garbage project shall reviewed and
approved in writing by the Los Altos Garbage Company prior to issuance of building
permits.
PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS
Submit written proof by the affected public utilities of their relocation requirements. This
written proof is required prior to the issuance of building permits. Further, the
adjustments necessary must be incorporated in the improvement plans.
RECIPROCAL INGRESS/EGRESS
An amendment to the existing Ingress/Egress, Maintenance Agreement and C.C. & R's
for access on common Lot #5 and #9 shall be submitted with the building permit. The
Agreement wording shall be approved by staff, after review by the City Attorney and
recorded in conjunction with the building permit.
FIRE PREYENTION AND SUPPRESSION EQUIPMENT
The applicant shall incorporate specialized fire prevention and suppression equipment, as
approved by the City staff, after review by the Santa Clara County Fire Department, as
required in their letter of March 2000.
Resolution No. 6029 6-U-00 May 22, 2000
?age-6-
16.
17.
18.
19.
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT REQUIRED
The lot line adjustments depicted in the plan set are required to be recorded prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
SANITARY DISTRICT
Prior to obtaining a permit for occupancy, the applicant shall pay the appropriate
mitigation fee to provide the required capacity.
AMENITY SPACE
Amend the Agreement for the amphitheater and pool located on parcel #23 or
demonstrate that provisions exist to allow use by the apartment tenants. The Agreement
shall be provided with the building permit. The Agreement wording shall be approved by
s~ff, after review by the City Attorney and recorded in conjunction with the building
permit.
DEVELOPMENT PHASING
In order to ensure that the construction of the hotel (on parcel 6 of Tract 7953) is initiated
in a timely fashion, the commencement of its construction shall occur prior to, or
simultaneously with, the issuance of building permits for any multi-family residential
units on Parcel 1 of Tract 7953. As used herein, "commencement of construction" means:
1) all plans for the construction of the hotel (foundations and structure) must be submitted
to, and approved by the City and 2) all foundations for the hotel (including the
installation of footings, and f~rst floor slab) must be completed and inspected by the City.
If the commencement of construction of the hotel has not occurred when the application
requests issuance of building permits for any multi-family residential units on Parcel 1,
the applicant may elect to proceed with construction of said units, prior to the
commencement of construction of the hotel by immediately tendering the sum of
$1,000,000 to the City to be retained by the City as security for the timely
commencement of construction of the hotel. If application tenders such amount to the
City, then commencement of construction of the hotel shall not be required prior to, or
simultaneously with, the issuance of building permits for any multi-family residential
units on parcel 1 and the condition set forth herein shall be deemed satisfied to the extent
that it affects the development of Parcel 1.
Said sum shall be deposited with the City Treasurer and shall earn interest at the same
rate as other City short term investments. If the commencement of construction of the
hotel occurs within 360 days of the tender of said sum to the City, than, in that event, said
sum together with interest, shall be returned to the applicant. If commencement of
construction does not occur within said 360 days; then, in that event, said sum together
with interest, shall be retained by the City as liquidated damages. The specific
proceduures for tender, retention, and return said sum will be memorialized in an
agreement between the applicant and the City to be fully executed prior to close of
escrow on the subject property.
20.
21.
Resolution No. 6029 6-U-00
Page-7-
May22,2000
SANTA CLARA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Prior to the issuance of the f'mal occupancy permit provide broof fi-om the Authority. that
the shelter pad has been installed as required in their letter of March 21, 2000.
SECURITY PROGRAM
The construction drawings shall incorporate conduit necessary for the installation of
closed circuit television cameras in the parking garage. The City, in consultation with the
Sheriff's Department, may require installation of these cameras or other security
measures in the future if they determine' their necessity.
SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Street improvements shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and
specifications and as required by the City Engineer.
CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS
Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with
grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer.
FIRE HYDRANT
Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City.
TRAFFIC SIGNS
Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City.
STREET TREES
Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type
approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125.
GRADING
Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with
Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code.
DRAINAGE
Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Surface flow across
public sidewalks may be allowed in the R-I, R-2 and R-3 zones unless storm drain
facilities are deemed necessary by the City Engineer. Development in all other zoning
districts shall be served by on site storm drainage facilities connected to the City storm
drainage system. If City storm drains are not available, drainage facilities shall be
installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A storm drain line shall be installed
along De Anza Blvd. and connected to the existing 39" RCP located approximately 400'
north of Stevens Creek Blvd.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
Resolution No. 6029 6-U-00 May 22, 2000
Page-8- '
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities
Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino,
and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility
devices. The developer shall submit detailed plato showing utility underground
provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider
and the City Engineer.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of
Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and
inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of
utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits.
Fees:
a. Checking & Inspection Fees:
$1,975.00 minimum
b. Development Maintenance Deposit:
c. Storm Drainage Fee:
d. Power Cost:
e. Map Checking Fees:
f. Park Fees:
g. Grading Permit:
$460.00 min.
h. Street Improvement Reimbursement:
i. Pedestrian Crossing Reimbursement:
$ 6% of Improvement Cost or
$ 3,000.00
$ 926/acre + ($70'No. Units)
N/A
N/A
$ 6,420/unit
$ 6% of on-site improvement Cost or
$ 6,750.00
See item 35 - Not to exceed
$60,000.00 for both the hotel and apartment projects
-The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council.
However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map or issuance of
a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then
current fee schedule.
TRANSFORMERS
Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures
shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said
equipment is not visible from public street areas.
DEDICATION OF WATERLINES
The developer shall execute a quitclaim deed for underground water rights to San Jose
Water and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water Company for water service to
the subject development.
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State Water Resources
Control Board, for construction activity which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included
in your grading and street improvement plans.
Resolution No. 6029 6-U-00 May 22, 2000
Page-9-
34.
35.
PEDESTRIAN CROSSING -
A bond shall be established in the improvement agreement for twenty-five percent (25%)
of the total cost (not to exceed $60,000.) of Architectural and Pedestrian Crossing Project
at the intersection of Stevens Creek Blvd. and De Anza Blvd.
CONSTRUCTION STAGING PLAN
The applicant shall submit with the grading permit a construction staging and grading
plan to minimize impacts on adjoining property and streets. The site must be kept clean
and dust free at all times. Staff shall approve this plan.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of May, 2000, at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll
call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIO~:
COMMISSIONERS:
Corr, Doyle, Kwok, Stevens and Chairperson Harris
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/ Steve Piasecki
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
g/planning/res/6u00
/s/ Andrea Harris
Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
6-U-O0
STAFF RECOMlVIENDATIO~
APPROVING A USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A NEW 206 UNIT, 299,950 SQUARE
FOOT, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING AND 6,775 SQUARE FEET OF
RETAIL SPACE ON A VACANT PARCEL (STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD AT CITY
CENTER).
SECTION I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use Permit,
as described on Page 1 of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the application meets the following requirements:
a) The project is consistent with General Plan policy 3-29 to "locate housing units on
employment center sites and in higher density sites such as City Center".
b) Helps to achieve the residential development priorities in the General Plan by providing 206
housing units in the Heart of the City Specific Plan area.
c) The new building may partially obstruct the view of the Towers. The building design
incorporates positive elements to address this impact including limiting the height of the
building to 5-stories adjacent to the Towers, and designing the Southwest comer of the
building in a 45-degree angle.
d) The housing units and retail shops will promote pedestrian activity onto the park and along
Stevens Creek Boulevard.
e) The maximum building height of 75' will be exceeded, but the building height is appropriate
for City Center, which is considered the downtown or higher density area of the city.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted
in this matter, the application for use permit is hereby recommended for approval, subject to the
conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are
based and contained in the public heating record concerning Application as set forth in the
Minutes of the City Council Meeting of June 19, 2000, and are incorporated by reference as
though fully set forth herein.
SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.: 6-U-00
Applicant: Pegasus Development Company
Location: Lot 1, Tract 7953, City of Cupertino~
Cupertino City Center - Vacant Lot Adjacent to Comer Green Space
Resolution No. 6-U-00 June 19, 2000
Page-2-
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
o
o
DEPT.
APPROVED EXHIBITS
The recommendation of approval is based on the plans drawn by McLarand Vasquez & Partners,
dated May 15, 2000, and consisting of the Project Summary, Retail/Parking Level 1, Level 1
(Podium Level), Parking Level 2, Parking Level 3, Midrise & Stevens Creek Blvd. Elevation,
Four Season and South Elevation, the North-South/East-West, Site Section, and Levels 2-8 Floor
Plans, Mid-Rise Loft Floor Plans. The McLarand Vasquez & Partners Partial Elevation plan date
March 31, 2000, (in concept), except not the precast concrete base. The Guzzardo & Associates
L-1.4 Landscape plan dated April 5, 2000, and the L-1.2 and L-1.3 dated March 30, 2000. The
Creegan and D'Angelo Proposed Lot Line Adjustment, Sheet 3 of 3 and dated 1/5/00. The
material board dated February 3, 2000. As amended by the conditions contained in this
Resolution.
299,950 SQUARE FEET OF RESIDENTIAL AND 6,775 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL
The approval is granted for 299,950 square feet of high density apartment building and 6,775
square feet of retail space and subsurface parking garage. The uses within the retail space shall
comply with the General Commercial Zoning District with regard to permitted and conditional
uses and the Parking Ordinance for all uses.
PARKING GARAGE STRIPING PLAN
The parking garage striping plan shall comply with the following standards:
a. The residential units shall have a designated parking area containing standard or unisize
parking stalls.
b. The regular/compact ratio for the balance of the garage may not exceed 50% compact ratio.
c. The aisle widths and back up spaces shall be approved by the Director of Public Works based
upon the City's "standard details".
The two dead-end parking spaces shall be removed in the parking garage. The exact location of
the removal shall be determined by the cities Traffic Engineer. The two spaces shall be made
available on the sUrface lot located on Parcel #4.
BICYCLE PARKING
Class I, bicycle parking shall be provided as outlined in 19.100.040(O). A minimum of one
secured bicycle locking facility for every 6,500 square feet of building area is required or a
secured area (chainlink or similar) with separations for each bicycle in the parking garage where
tenants can secure their bicycles.
LANDSCAPING
The applicant shall submit a comprehensive landscape planting and irrigation plans in
conformance with chapter 14.15, Xeriscape Landscaping, of the Cupertino Municipal Code with
the building permit. All trees shall be a minimum of 24" box and the shrubs shall be 15 gallon.
This landscape plan shall incorporate a minimum of four 24" box trees in the surface parking lot.
The planting location shall be along the east side of the Stevens Creek entry drive and along with
Resolution No.
Page-3-
6-U-00 June 19,2000
most Northern drive aisle within the lot. A landscape easement for planting on lot # 7, 5 & 9
shall be submitted with the building permit. The text shall be approved by staff after review by
the City Attorney and recorded in conjunction with the building permit. A pedestrian access
easement shall be recorded for the sidewalk along Stevens Creek Boulevard. The easement
wording shall be approved by staff, after review by the City Attorney and recorded in
conjunction with the building permit. The final landscape plan shall incorporate evergreen trees
along the Stevens Creek Boulevard frontage. The loading dock shall be partially screened with
evergreen shrubs.
DESIGN REVIEW
Design revxew lS required in order to assure that the f'mal design materials, elements and fixtures
are of the highest quality. The Planning Commission shall decide on the following:
Residential
- Bicycle locking facility or secured area in parking garage.
- Light fixtures on the building to complement design.
- Pedestrian down lighting for the patio area and around four sides of the building.
- Paving materials for pedestrian paths around the building, including the retail patios,
Porte Cochere and area around the kiosk. The materials shall be stone (slate or
granite), or brick pavers.
- The sign program shall include tenant distinct signage, which are low profile but
classic in style. The use of neon is discouraged.
- Exterior flag design, color and material for long term viability.
- Building glass color. The goal is to reduce reflectivity buy complement the building
design.
- Window frames to be a minimum 3" in depth.
Roof material to be authentic clay tile, Mission style or other material of equal quality that has
the same appearance.
- Roof overhang shall incorporate a finished cave soffit detail to hide the roof joists and
rafters.
- Color assessment of balcony railings and subsurface garage ventilation openings to
complement the primary building color.
Stone tile base with the highest quality of material.
- Design of the area between the lofts on the Porte-Cochere elevation.
Commercial
Light tlxtures to complement the design of the building.
Pedestrian down lighting for the patio area and around four sides of the building.
Paving materials for pedestrian paths around the building, including the retail patios,
Porte Coehere and area around the kiosk. The materials shall be stone (slate or
granite), or brick pavers.
The 2' retaining wall separating the Plaza and the retail patio shall include a seat and
shall extend the full length of the retail frontage. The material may be concrete but
shall include the following treatments: pigment color, special aggregate, special
scoring pattern or ornamental insets, such as tile.
o
Resolution No. 6-U-00 June 19, 2000
Page-4-
- Accent plants in planters or terracotta pots in front of retail businesses.
- A bicycle rack which shall be made available near the retail use and Plaza.
- Retail awning and exterior flag design, color and material. Material shall be chosen
for longevity.
- Building glass color. The goal is to reduce reflectivity but complement the building
design.
- Window frames to be a minimum of 3' in depth.
- Stone tile base with the highest quality of materials.
Pedestrian entry from retail area to the parking garage.
Building or Site Design
Light fixtures on the building to complement design of the building.
Pedestrian down lighting for the patio area and around four sides of the building.
Paving materials for pedestrian paths around the building, including the retail patios, Porte
Cocher.e and area around the-kiosk. The materials shall be stone (slate or granite), or brick
pavers.
- The sign program shall include tenant distinct signage, which are low profile but classic in
style. The use of neon is discouraged.
- Exterior flag design, color and material for long term viability.
- Building glass color. The goal is to reduce reflectivity but complement the building design
- Window frames, to be a minimum 3" depth.
- Roof material to be authentic clay tile, Mission style, or other material of equal quality that
has the same appearance.
- Roof overhang shall incorporate a finished cave soffit detail to hide the roof joists and rafters.
- Color assessment of balcony railings and subsurface garage ventilation openings to
compliment the primary building color.
- Stone tile base with the highest quality of material.
- Final landscape and irrigation plans.
- Building -base landscape planter details (maximum height of 3 feet to 4 feet).
- Stone tile base with the highest quality of material.
NOISE ANALYSIS
The applicant shall have an acoustical consultant make recommendations to demonstrate
compliance with the Cupertino General Plan. All residential units shall be subject to good
quality construction practices and installation of equipment which may include sealing of doors,
windows and frames and casings and mechanical ventilation to ensure that the interior average
day/night noise level does not exceed 45 dBA Ldn.
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 exaction's. 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 exaction's. You are
hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees,
dedications, reservations, and other exaction's, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a),
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Resolution No. 6-U-00 June 19, 2000
Page-5-
has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day pe_riod complying with all of the
requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exaction's.
BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING PROGRAM
The applicant shall participate in the City's Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Program by
providing 21 units. The applicant shall record a covenant to be recorded simultaneously with the
filing for a building permit and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney.
SHARED PARKING: The CC & R's shall be amended as needed, and a grant of easement or
similar agreement for overflow parking on the adjoining surface lot (#4) shall be written, in order
to meet the minimum parking requirements. In addition, parking shall be made available for
Plaza users in City Center. The text of the easement and/or agreement shall be approved by staff,
after City Attorney review.
FOUR SEASONS PLAZA
Amend the June 26, 1997, License Agreement between the Cupertino City Center Owners
Association and the City of Cupertino to incorporate a new Exhibit A, which is the map
depicting the Property involved in the agreement. The new Exhibit shall accurately reflect the
proposed lot line adjustment. The recordation of this Agreement shall be in conjunction with the
Lot Line Adjustment recordation for this project. The text of the amended Agreement shall be
approved by City staff, after City Attomey review.
Provide a unisex bathroom or two bathrooms accessible from the outside of the retail space, and
visible from the Plaza. The bathroom shall be maintained by one or more of the retail lessees but
shall be available to Plaza users.
An amendment to the June 26, 1997, License Agreement shall occur to incorporate this parcel
into the Cupertino, City Center Owners Association, for the maintenance of the Plaza.
RECYCLING FACILITIES
The developer shall make provisions for recycling facilities which shall be accessible to the Los
Altos Garbage Company. The recycling and garbage project shall reviewed and approved in
writing by the Los Altos Garbage Company prior to issuance of building permits.
PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS
Submit written proof by the affected public utilities of their relocation requirements. This written
proof is required prior to the issuance of building permits. Further, the adjustments necessary
must be incorporated in the improvement plans.
RECIPROCAL INGRESS/EGRESS
An amendment to the existing Ingress/Egress, Maintenance Agreement and C.C. & R's for
access on common Lot #5 and #9 shall be submitted with the building permit. The Agreement
wording shall be approved by staff, after review by the City Attorney and recorded in
conjunction with the building permit.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
Resolution No. 6-U-00 June 19, 2000
Page-6-
FIRE PREVENTION AND SUPPRESSION EQUIPMENT
Prior to obtaining a building permit, the applicant shall pay for the appropriate mitigation costs to
provide the required capacity and shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the District
for reimbursement by other property owners for other than their proportionate share.
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT REQUIRED
The lot line adjustments depicted in the plan set are required to be recorded prior to the issuance
of a building permit.
SANITARY DISTRICT
Prior to obtaining a permit for occupancy, the applicant shall pay the appropriate mitigation fee
to provide the required capacity and shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the District
for reimbursement by other property owners for other than their proportionate share.
AMENITY SPACE
Amend the Agreement for the amphitheater and pool located on parcel #23 or demonstrate that
provisions exist to allow use by the apartment tenants. The Agreement shall be provided with the
building permit. The Agreement wording shall be approved by staff, after review by the City
Attorney and recorded in conjunction with the building permit.
DEVELOPMENT PHASING
In order to ensure that the construction of the hotel (on parcel 6 of Tract 7953) is initiated in a
timely fashion, the commencement of its construction shall occur prior to, or simultaneously
with, the issuance of building permits for any multi-family residential units on Parcel 1 of Tract
7953. As used herein, "commencement of construction" means: 1) all plans for the construction
of the hotel (foundations and structure) must be submitted to, and approved by the City and 2) all
foundations for the hotel (including the installation of footings, and first floor slab) must be
completed and inspected by the City.
If the commencement of construction of the hotel has not occurred when the application requests
issuance of building permits for any multi-family residential units on Parcel 1, the applicant may
elect to proceed with construction of said units, prior to the commencement of construction of
the hotel by immediately tendering the sum of $1,000,000 to the City to be retained by the City
as security for the timely commencement of construction of the hotel. If application tenders such
amount to the City, then commencement of construction of the hotel shall not be required prior
to, or simultaneously with, the issuance of building permits for any multi-family residential units
on parcel 1 and the condition set forth herein shall be deemed satisfied to the extent that it affects
the development of Parcel 1.
Said sum shall be deposited with the City Treasurer and shall earn interest at the same rate as
other City short term investments. If the commencement of construction of the hotel occurs
within 360 days of the tender of said sum to the City, than, in that event, said sum together with
interest, shall be returned to the applicant. If commencement of construction does not occur
within said 360 days, then, in that event, said sum together with interest, shall be retained by the
City as liquidated damages. The specific proceduures for tender, retention, and remm said sum
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
Resolution No. 6-U-00 June 19, 2000
Page-7-
will be memorialized in an agreement between the applicant and the City to be fully executed
prior to close of escrow on the subject property. -
SANTA CLARA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Prior to the issuance of the final occupancy permit provide proof from the Authority that the
shelter pad has been installed as required in their letter of March 21, 2000.
SECURITY PROGRAM
The construction drawings shall incorporate conduit necessary for the installation of closed
circuit television cameras in the parking garage. The City, in consultation with the SherifFs
Departmem, may require installation of these cameras or other security measures in the future if
they determine their necessity. The applicant may install locking devices from the podium to the
corridor areas and elevators leading to the apartment units.
SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Street improvements shall be provided in accordance with City Standards 'and specifications and
as required by the City Engineer.
CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS
Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades
and standards as specified by the City Engineer.
FIRE HYDRANT
Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City.
TRAFFIC SIGNS
Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City.
STREET TREES
Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by
the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125.
GRADING
Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter
16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code.
DRAINAGE
Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Surface flow across public
sidewalks may be allowed in the R-l, R-2 and R-3 zones unless storm drain facilities are deemed
necessary by the City Engineer. Development in all other zoning districts shall be served by on
site storm drainage facilities connected to the City storm drainage system. If City storm drains
are not available, drainage facilities shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A
storm drain line shall be installed along De Anza Blvd. and connected to the existing 39" RCP
located approximately 400' north of Stevens Creek Blvd.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
Resolution No. 6-U-00 June 19, 2000
Page-8-
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Unde~rground Utilities Ordinance No.
331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate
with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shall
submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to
prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino
providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm
drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be
executed prior to issuance of construction permits.
Fees:
a. Checking & Inspection Fees:
minimmn
b. Development Maintenance Deposit:
c. Storm Drainage Fee:
d. Power Cost:
e. Map Checking Fees:
f. Park Fees:
g. Grading Permit:
$460.00 min.
h. Street Improvement Reimbursement:
i. Pedestrian Crossing Reimbursement:
$ 6% of Improvement Cost or $1,975.00
$ 3,000.00
$ 926/acre + ($70'No. Units)
N/A
N/A
$ 6,420/unit
$ 6% of on-site improvement Cost or
$ 6,750.00
See item 35 -Not to exceed $60,000.00 for
both the hotel and apartment projects
The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City
Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final
map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at
that time will reflect the then current fee schedule.
TRANSFORMERS
Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be
screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not
visible from public street areas.
DEDICATION OF WATERLINES
The developer shall execute a quitclaim deed for underground water rights to San Jose Water and
shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water Company for water service to the subject
development.
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State Water Resources Control
Board, for construction activity which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in your grading
and street improvement plans.
;4.
35.
Resolution No. 6-U-00 June 19, 2000
Page-9-
PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
A bond shall be established in the improvement agreement for t~venty-five percent (25%) of the
total cost (not to exceed $60,000.) of Architectural and Pedestrian Crossing Project at the
intersection of Stevens Creek Blvd. and De Anza Blvd.
CONSTRUCTION STAGING PLAN
The applicant shall submit with the grading permit a construction staging and grading plan to
minimize impacts on adjoining property and streets. The site must be kept clean and dust free at
all times. Staff shall approve this plan.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of June, 2000, at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
VOTE
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
Carol Atwood
Acting City Manager
g/plarming/res/6u00cc
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Department of Community Development
10300 Torrt Avenue
Cupertino, Ca 95014
408-7'/7-3308
PRO/ECT DESCRIPTION:
Project Title Stevens Creek
Apartments
ISImffUse Only
EA File No.
Case File N~--.
Avmchmen~s ~
Project L0cation Lot 1 - Tract 7953. Cupertino City
ProjectDescfiption205 Residential Units w/ Ancillary Recreat%on
Leasing Space and ~'Dproximately 7000 c~qF of Retai
and
Environmenlml SeRing
Located within Cupertino City Center, Lot 1, Tract 7953
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
N/A 300,
Site Area (ac.) 2.1 5 Building Coverage 5 5 % Exist, Building_s.f. Proposed Bldg.
Zone G.1~. DesignationC°m/°~ Assessor's Parcel No. 369 - 01 - 29
P ( Res/com/ofs/ind/hotel )
If Residential, Units/Gross Acre 95
137
s.f.
(Iot 1)
(excl.
Total//. ~e~tal/Own Bdrms Total s.f. Price
Unit
Type
#1
Unit
Type
#2
Unit
Type
#3
Unit
Type
Unit
Type
#5
Applicable Special Area Plans: (Check)
(See Att2dusd q~ble)
[----[ Monta Vista D~si~n Guidelines ~ S. De Anza Conceptual
N. D~ Anza Conceptual
Stevens Crk Blvd. Conceptual [---]
S. Sara-Sunny Conceptual
Stevens Cr~k Blvd. SW & L'scape
If Non-Residential, Building Area s,f. FAR Max. Employees/Shift
Parking Required Parking Provided
Project Site is Within Cupertino Urban Service Area YES NO
gar~
INITIAL STUDY SOURCELIST.
GENERAL PLAN SOURCES D) OUTSIDE
1) Cupertino C~n~l Plan~ L~nd U~ Elcmen! 23)
2) Cupertino C~ncral Plan, Public Safety Element 24)
3) Cupertino General Plan, Housing El~ncnt 25)
4) Cupertino General Plan. Transpm~.ion Element 26)
5) Cupertino C-eneral Plan, Environmental Resources 27)
6) Cupertino C~ncral Plan, Appendix A- Hillside Development 28)
7) Cupertino C~ncr~l Plan. Land Use Map 29)
8) Noise Element Amendment 30)
9) City Ridgelinc Policy 31)
10) Cupertino General Plan Consua/nt lvlaps 32)
33)
34)
35)
36)
B) Cm).~Rl'InO SOURCE DOC't~F2q:FS
11) T~c ~c~on o~inn~ 778
12) Ci~ A~ Photo.by
13) ~upc~ino C~nicic' (C~ifomia ~m~ C~, 1976)
14) ~ologJ~ ~ (si~ ~cific)
1 S) P~ing ~din~ 1277
! 6) ~ning M~
17) Zoning ~d~ific Pin
18) Ci~ No~c
AGENCIF..S
19) Cupertino Community Development D~pt.
20) Cupertino Public Works Dept.
21) Cupertino Parks & R~o'e. afion Department
22) Cupertino Water Utility
AGENCIES
County Planning D~tmcn!
Adjacent City's Planning Depenmcnt
County D~pattmental of Environmental Health
Midpenin~ula Regional Open Space Disuict
County ratios md Recreation D~pattment
Cupertino Sanitary Disa'ic!
Fremont Union High School District
Cupertino Union School Dismct
Pacific Ctas and Elc,.-nxi¢
Santa Clara County Fire Deparuncnt
County Sh,a'iff
CALTRANS
County Transpottatiun Agency
Santa Clara Valley Water District
E) OUTSIDE AGENCY DOCUbiENTS
37) BAAQMD Survey of Contaminant Excesses
38) FEMA Flood Maps/S~ Flood Maps
39) USDA, "Soils of Santa Clara County"
40) County H,r~nlom Waste Management Plan
41) County Heritage Resources Inventory
42) Santa Clara Valley Water District Fuel
Leak Site
43) CalF. PA Ha?*rdoos Waste and Substances
Site List
F) OTHER SOURCES 44) Pmjcct Plan SeV Applic~on M~cri~s
45) Field RecoanaL~mce
46) F_.xp~enc~ wifll Project of s~ii~ s
4~ ~AG ~j~o~ S~
1) Complete all information requested on
the Initial Study Cover page. I.F. AVE
BLANK SPACES ONLY WI~.N A
SPECIFIC ITEM IS NOT
APPLICABI
2) Consult the Initial Study Source List; use
the. materials listed therein to complete, the
checklist information in Categories A
through O.
You are encouraged to cite other relevant
sources; if such sources are used, job in their
rifle(s) in the "Source" column next to the
quest/on to which they relate.
3) If you check any of the "YES" response
to any questions, you must attach a sheet
explaining the potential impact and suggest
mitigation if needed.
4) When explaining any yes response, label
your answer clearly (Example "N - 3
Historical") Please try to respond concisely,
and place as many explanatory responses as
possible on each page.
5) Upon completing the checklist, sign and
date the Preparer's Affidavit.
6) Please attach the following materials
before submitting the Initial Study to the
City.
- Project Plan Set ofLcgialmiv¢ Do~nnent (1) copy
- l.~oa map with sile deady madred (when
applicable)
IMPACT
YES
WILL THE PROJECT... Not Significant Significant r'umulafive SOURCE
Significant (Mitigation (No
NO Proposed) Mitigation
Proposed)
A) LAND USE GENERAL PLAN
1) Require a change from thc land usc [~ O [222] O O ,.7.8
designation for thc subject site in thc
-
General Plan?
3) Require a change of an adopted
specific plan or other adopted policy O O O 17,18
statement?
4) Result in substantial change in the
present land usc of thc sit, or that of O O [~ [~ O ?,12
adjoining properties?
S) Disrupt or divide thc physical [~ O O O O 7,12,22.41
configuration of an established
neighborhood?
B) GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC HAZARD
1) Bc located in an area which has
notcntial for major geologic hazard? 0 0 0 0 2,14
2) B, located on or adjacent to,
~mown carthqunke fault? 2,14
Zone? 2
4) Be located in nn area of soil
i~tability (subsidence. iand~lid,.
shrinkdswcll, soil creep or severe 2,5.10
erosions)?
$) Cause substantial erosion or
6) Cause substantial disruption, O O 2,14.39
displacement, compaction or
ovcrcovering of soil either on-site or off-
site
7) Cause substantial change in
topography or in a ground surface
feature? 10,39
8) Involve construction ora building,
,ad or septiC system on a slope Of 10% [~ O O O O 6.12~9
or ~ater?
C~ RZSOURCES/I'AlUf~
1, Increase the existin$ removal flee. or [~ O O O O $.!0
result in the removal of a natmal resource
for commercial purposc~ (including items
such ~s rock, md, 8ravel. uee~. mincral~
or tol~soil)?
2) Result in thc substantial depletion Of
any non-renewable natural rc~ourcc?
.Cl~ I or II soil.~) m non-~ticultmal u.~
or impair thc agricultural productivity of
nearby prime agricultmal land?
under the Williamson Act or any Open
Space easement?
IMPACT
YES
-WILL THE PROJECT... Not Significant Significant Cumulative SOURCE
Significanl [Mitigation (No
NO Proposed) Mitigation
Proposed)
5) Substantially afl'~ct any existing ~/ O ~/ O O 7, 23
agricultural uses?
6) Be located on, within orneara O [~ O O 5, 10, 12.21.26
public or private recreation facility, park.
wildlife preserve, public trail either in
cxistenc,' already or planned for future
implementation7
D) SL:%VAG~ATER QUALITY
1) Result in a septic field being
co.=ctedo, so. wi seve d . eld ZF .O O U] O' 6.9
performance limitations.'?
2) Result in a septic fiifld being
located within 50 feet ora drainage swale ~ O O O O 36,39,42
or within 100 feet of any well, wamr
course or wagr body?
3) Result in extension ora sewer main
development.'?
4)Substantially degrade surface or
groundwater quality, or the public water 20,.36.37
typical stormwater pollu~tants (c.~.
sediment from construction,
hydrocarbons and metals from vehicle
usc, nutrients and pesticides from
.landscaping maintenance, metals and
cidity from mining operations)?
lo.ted in an ofw, ,upply
oncem (such as iow fire flows)?
waters through infiltration of reclaimed
water or storm water mnoffthat has
contacmd pollutants from urban,
industrial or agricultural activities?
'/)Require a NPDES lgrmit for 20
ac~s or more?]?
K) DRAINAGE/]~LOODING
1) interfere substantially with ground 20,36
2) Substantially change thc direction,
rate or flow or quantity of ground-
waters, or wetlands either through direct ~ 0~]~ 0 0 20.36.42
additions or withdrawals, or excavations?
;])Change thc abso~tion rates, drainage
patmms or thc ram/amount of smfam ~' 0 [~ 0 0 20,.36
runoff or wetland?
or s~reambed or water cou~c such as to
alter the locations, course or flow of its
warms?
5) Be Ioca~d in a ~loodway or
F) FLORA AND I~AUNA
.) Significantly aR'eot fcsh, wildlife,
reptiles or plant life by changing the
diversity or numbers of existing species,
or by introducing new species, or by
reacting migr~on or movcmen~
2) Substantially reduce thc habitat area
for fis]~, animals or plants?
iMPACT -
YES '
WILL THE PRO,TECT... No, Significant Significant 2umuia~ivc SOURCE
Significant(Mitigation (No
NO Proposed) Mitigation
Proposed)
3) Change the existing habitat food
endangered spocics of plant or animal?
4) Involve cu~ing, removal of
to thc sRc or in~oduccd?
G) TRANSPORTATION
I) Cause an increase in mu~'ic which
is substantial in r~lation to thc existing ~' I~
traffic load and capacity of thc su'cct ~* '~'L:.J 0 0 4.20.3,
system?
2) Cause any public or private s~cct
intencction to function below Level of 4,20
se. iceD? D O O 0:3
3) lncr~ase uaffic hazards to
pcdestriam, bicyclists and vehicles7 [~ 0 0 0 0 20,3,
4) Adversely affect access to
commercial establishments, public
b-ildin .sc ools, p. oroth r ES ES ES E3 4.,0
pedestrian oriented acdvi~ areas?
5) Cause a reduction in public .
project site?
6) Incrgase demand upon existing
parking facilities, or engender demand for O [~ O O O 15,16
new parking space?
'7) Inhibit usc of alternative modes of
I-I) IlOU$ING
1) Redu~ the supply of affordable
housing in thc communi,, or rgsult in the ~ O O O O 3.16
displacement of pc~sons fi'om their
present home?
2) Increase the cost of housing in ~he 3. 16
area, or substantially change thc variety [~ O O O O
of housin~ t~cs found in thc
community?
housing?
I) HEALTH AND SAFETY
disposal or manufacru~ of potcntinlly
forms of uncon~'oiicd micasg of
hazardous substances?
3) involve thc p-'n,.owl or con~ued ~ 0 0 0 0 33,4/.43
u~c of any cx~'~g, or b~i~on of
~y ngw under,md c~mic~ or ~uel
sto. rage ra~?
ngc~.
5) ~mpioy ~dmology which could
adversely affect public safety in thc [~ 0 0 0 0 40.43
event of a breakdown?
WILL THE PROJECT... SOURCE
Not Significant Significant Cumulative
Significant (Mitigation (No
- NO Proposed) Mitigation
Propos,d)
6) Provide brccdin, grounds for ~ O O O O 25
mosquitos or other disease vectors?
J) Am QUALITY
2) Violate any ambient air quality
standards, contribute substanfiaily to an [~ O O O 'O 5, 37,42
existing or proj,ctcd air quality violation,
or expose sensitive receptors to
substantial concentrations of pollutants?
K) NOISE
1) Increase substantially the ambient
during con~u'uction of thc project?
2) Result in sustained increase in ~:~[.._.~
vicinity following ¢omu'uction of th,
project
3) Result in sustained noise levels
and duration iimim contained in the
City's Noise Ordinance.* '
*",) AESTHETICS
) Be at variance with applicable f~
~tesign guidelines?~ O~ O O 17
2) Create an aesthetically offcnsi~'c
Site open to public vi,w.* 0 0 0 0 1.17
3) ¥isually intrud, upon an area of
4) Obstruct view of asccnic ridgelin,
visible froro the valley floo~
2, ob, , vi.ws of th, city.s
hillsides ~rom r~.sidential areas or public I0. 21, 24. 41
lands?
6) Advencly ~t'e~ thc m-chitecmral
character of an es~llsh nci~rhood or
business district? l, 17,19
lighting sources upon adjacent prope~ies 1,16
or public roadways?
M) ENERGY
I ) Involve the U~e of unusually lathe [~ O O O O ,.31
quantities of fossil fuels or non-
renewable energy sour. esT
2) R~nov¢ v¢~ation providing
existing or proposed building?
3) Significantly reduce soim' n m
space or priv~ yard?
'~ itLSTORICAL/
.RCtlAEOLO~ICAL
nr~hacoiogic~l or
resource?
] IMPACT
Il;ES
vVILL THE PROJECT... Not Significant Signifl~C-m-lati~e -SOURCE
Significant (Mitigation No
NO Proposed)~4itigation !
Proposed)l
2) Affect adversely a property of historic ~ [~ [~] [~ [~] 1,10.41
or cultural significance to thc community,
except as part of a scientific study?
O) PUBLIC SERVICES AND
UTILITIES
1) Produce solid waste in substantial
2) Induce substantial growth, or alter ~~/ ~] [] [~ 1, 46,47
the location, distribution, or density of
the human population of an area?
3) Cause substantial impact upon, or
increase the need for: ·
a) Fire Protection Services? [~ [] [] [] [] 19.32
b) Police Services? [~ [] [] [] [] 33
c) Pub.cS,hoois? [~ [] [] [] [] 29~o
d) Park~Rccrcation Facilities? [~ [] [] [] [] $, 17, 19.21
e) Maintenance of Public Facilities.'? [~ [] [] [] [] 19,20,21
4) Cause substantial impact upon
existing utilities or infrastructure in thc
following categories:
b) Natural Gas? {~ [] [] [] [] 31
5) Generate demand for use of any
public fa~'ility which causes that facility ~/ O ~-J ~l ~ 19,20,22,28,31
to reach or exceed its capacity?
MANDATORY ~'INDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
(To Be Completed by City Staff)
V/ILL THE PROJECT...
YES
NO
Have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, to
substantially diminish the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; to cause a fish
or wildlife population to drop below self-sustainable levels; to threaten or
eliminate a plant or animal communiw; to reduce the number of or
restrict the range ora rare or endangered plant or animal; to eliminate
important examples of the major periods, of. California's history or
prehistory?
Have the potential to achieve short term environmental goals to the
disadvantage of long term environmental goals?
Have environmental impacts which are individually limited, but nre
cumulatively considerable7 ("Curnulatively considerable: means that the
incremental effects of an individual project are substantive when viewed in
conjunction with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and
probable future projects)
4. Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse impacts
- on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
I hereby certify that the information provided in this Initial Study is tree and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief; I certify that I have used proper diligence in responding accurately to all questions herein, and have consulted
appropriate source references when necessary to ensure full and complete disclosure of relevant environmental data. I
hereby acknowledge than any substantial errors dated within this Initial Study may cause delay or discontinuance of
related project review procedures, and hereby agree to hold harmless/t~e City of Cupertino, its staff and authorized
agents, fi'om the consequences of such delay or discontinuance. /I / /I,,
Pr~p, .a~ 's Signature .
Print Preparer's Name 11
EN¥IRONMENTAL EVALUATION
(To be Completed by City Staff)
IMPACT AREAS:
· ~Land Use/General Plan
~Sewage/Water Quality
.~Geologic/Seismic H.~nrd ~Resources/Parks
~DrainagefFlooding [] Flora & Fauna
[] Historical/Archaeological [] Health & Safety
~Public Services/Utilities ergy
[] Air Quality.
[] Aesthetics
STAFF EVALUATION
[] Housing
~Transportation
Noise
On the basis of this Initial Study, the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) Finds:
.That the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and recommends
ahat a NEGATIVE DECLARATION be granted.
That although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, no significant effect will occur
because mitigation measures are included in the project. ERC recommends that a NEGATIVE DECLARATION
be granted.
That the proposed MAY have a significant effect on the environment and recommends that an
Select Oue
~phnningfintstdy4.doc
CITY OF CUPERTINO
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure adopted by the City Council of the
City of Cupertino on May 27, 1973, and amended on March 4, 1974, January 17 1977, May l,
1978, and July 7, 1980, the following described project was granted a Negative Declaration
by the City Council of the City of Cupertino on June 19, 2000.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
9-EA-00
Application No.(s):
Applicant:
Location:
6-U-00, 2-GPA-99, 3-EXC-00
Cupertino City Center Land
Lot 1, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center
DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST
Use permit to construct a new 206 trait, 209,950 square foot multi-family residential and
6,775 square foot retail building on a vacant parcel (Lot 1), Stevens Creek Boulevard at
Cupertino City Center.
General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet.
Various exceptions and an amendment to the Heart of the City Specific Plan, which may
include exceeding the maximum height of building and side and rear setbacks, and allowing
an apartment use.
FINDINGS OF DECISIONMAKING BODY
The City Council granted the Negative Declaration since the environmental impacts are
mitigated.
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
CERTIFICATE OF THE CITY CLERK
This is to certify that the above Negative Declaration was filed in the Office of the City Clerk
of the City of Cupertino on 2000.
City Clerk
g:/planning/erc/neneggea00
CITY OF
CUPEI iNO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
Telephone: (408) 777-3308
FAX: (408) 777-3333
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SUMMARY
Agenda No. ~
Agenda Date: June 19, 2000
SUMMARY:
A. Apartments - Cupertino City Center Land (comer of Stevens Creek and De Anza
Boulevards), Lot 1, Tract 7953. Applications 2-GPA-99~.'3-EXC-00, 6-U-00, and-9-EA-99.
Request to consider a General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet and to
project into the 1:1 setback ratio from Stevens Creek Boulevard; a Heart of the City Specific Plan
amendment and exception and use permit to construct a new 206-unit, 206,725 square foot
multifamily residential building and 6,775 square feet of retail space on a vacant parcel. Negative
Declarations are recommended. The General Plan amendment is recommended for denial. The
Heart of the City Specific Plan amendment and exceptions are recommended for approval.
B. Hotel - Kimpton Hotel and Restaurant Group, Lot 6, Tract 7953', (comer of Stevens
Creek and De Anza Boulevards), APN 369-01-037. Applications 2-GPA-99, 4-EXC-00, 5-U-00,
and 8-EA-99. Request to consider a General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75
feet; a Heart of the City Specific Plan amendment and exception to exceed the 40 foot height
limit and to allow hotel use; and a use permit to construct a new 224 room, 130,580 square foot
hotel on a vacant parcel. A Negative Declaration recommended, and this item is recommended
for approval. Continued from June 5.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends:
Ae
2.
3.
4.
Grant Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment, Use Permit,
'Heart of the City amendment and exception
Deny General Plan Amendment per Planning Commission Resolution No.
6027
Approve Heart of the City exception per Planning Commission Resolution
No. 6028
Approve Use Permit per Planning Commission Resolution No. 6029
Hotel - Kimpton Hotel and Restaurant Group, Lot 6, Tract 7953, (comer of
Stevens Creek and De Anza Boulevards), APN 369-01-037. Applications 2-GPA-
99, 4-EXC-00, 5-U-00, and 8-EA-99. Request to consider a General Plan
amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet; a Heart of the City Specific
Plan amendment and exception to exceed the 40 foot height limit and to allow
hotel use; and a use permit to construct a new 224 room, 130,580 square foot
hotel on a vacant parcel. A Negative Declaration recommended, and this item is
recommended for approval. Continued from June 5.
Actions to be taken:
1. Grant Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment, Use Permit,
Heart of the City amendment and exception
2. Approve General Plan Amendment per Planning Commission Resolution
No. 6031
3. Approve Heart of the City exception per Planning Commission Resolution
No. 6032
4. Approve Use Permit per Planning Commission Resolution No. 6033
Project Data:
General Plan Designation:
Zoning Designation:
Specific Plan:
Commercial/Office/Residential
Planned Development (Residential/Commercial/Office and
Hotel)
Heart of the City
Project Consistency with:
General Plan:
Zoning:
Specific Plan:
No Amendment required
Yes
No Amendment and Exception required
Environmental Assessment:
Mitigated Negative Declaration
DISCUSSION:
Section A provides specific information on the apartment project. Section B provides specific
information on the hotel project.
SECTION A
APARTMENT PROJECT
At its June 5, 2000 meeting, the City Council identified two issues of concern, including public
access to the podium and adequate bicycle facilitiesl
Podium Access
The applicant proposes gates at the Stevens Creek Boulevard and fountain accesses to the
podium courtyard (plan L-1.3). They are concerned about safety of their residents and security
2
of the courtyard. The City Council is interested in open public access to this area. The gates can
remain open at all times, but if the City Council chooses an alte-mative, staff proposes that
limited hours could be set for public access, such as 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. Automatic locking gates
could allow the gates to be unlocked in the morning and automatically locked at night. Residents
could gain access with a card key. For security of the apartment units, when the podium is open
to the public, the applicant could include card key access into corridors or elevators leading from
the courtyard to the units. Conditions No. 5 and 21 could be modified accordingly, should the
Council so choose.
Bicycle Locking Facilities
Condition No. 4 requires one secured bicycle_locking facility for every 6,500 square feet of
building area or 47 secured and separated bicycle spaces in the parking garage. This allows 22%
of the tenants to have a secured bicycle parking space.
SECTION H
HOTEL PROJECT
BACKGROUND:
The hotel site is located on South De Anza Boulevard, 220' from the intersection of Stevens
creek and North De Anza Boulevards. It will be accessed from South De Anza Boulevard and
Cali Avenue. Adjacent uses are office and commercial, and residential to the southeast.
PROJECT DATA AND DESCRIPTION:
Net Parcel Size:
Building Sq. Ft.
Restaurant Sq. Ft.:
Kitchen Sq. Ft.:
Bar Sq. Ft.:
Meeting Rooms Sq. Ft:
Board Room Sq. Ft.:
Hotel Rooms:
Parking:
Height:
1.3 acres
130,583 (excluding parking garage)
2,100 (approximately 75 seats, plus 30-40 outside weather
permitting)
1,350
930 (45 seats)
2,950 (3 rooms)
660
224
171 spaces
108' to top of north tower
91'4" to top of parapet of main guest room section
The proposal hotel has eight stories above grade and two levels below grade, with a full
restaurant, bar, meeting rooms and parking garage.
The Planning Commission held two study sessions and three public meetings on the application.
DISCUSSION:
GENERAL PLAN
The General Plan designation is Commercial/Office/Residential. The following matrix addresses
compatibility with the General Plan and Heart of City standards:
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY
HOTEL Required Proposed Conformity: C/NC
Development Allocation 585 rooms available 224 C
Use Commercial/Office/ Commercial/ C
Residential Residential
Height 75 feet maximum 108' north tower, NC. Mitigation is
.(landmark building) 91 '4" guest rooms stepping back from
street and superior
design.
Setback to Height Ratio 1:1 >1:1 C The hotel falls
below the setback
line.
Other relevant General Plan Policies:
Heart of the City: The General Plan (Policy 2-2) states that the "design plan shall contain
guidelines that foster pedestrian activity, a sense of arrival and neighborhood protection," and
that "the Crossroads intersection should be developed with a distinct signature to mark its City
prominence. Such improvements may include the siting of landmark buildings, street monuments
or other public art works, landscaping and special paving." This project incorporates these
strategies by creating a landmark hotel building and restaurant, including a patio and pedestri .an
sidewalk adjacent to the Four Seasons Plaza.
General Plan Conformance
As shown in the matrix above, a General Plan amendment is required to accommodate the
proposed height. There are seven stories of guest rooms (each at 9'6") and three stories of
parking (each at 10'6" and 9'6"). There is also a level of outdoor parking on low-dsc parking
structure. The first level of the parking garage is below grade. The eight-stOry office tower east
of the proposed hotel is 125' 10" high. The Portal building to the south is 54' to the roof and
68'9" to the mechanical screen. The Armadillo Willy's building to the west is 30' high.
The proposed hotel has lower clements (restaurant, high "living room" ceiling, mechanical
equipment and parking structure) that provide a transition to thc higher guest room section and
thc two towers. These elements range from 19' to 28'6". The Armadillo Willy's building
provides a transition from De Anza Boulevard, and should thc site redevelop, the height might
be increased to 40' to reflect the same building stepping incorporated into thc apartment
building.
4
The elevations and perspective indicate that the penthouse ofthk existing office tower and a
portion of the tower will be visible from ground level at De Anza Boulevard. Staff believes that
the hotel height is needed for the project to be successful, and that the building design benefits of
lowering the height by one story would not be significant.
HEART OF THE CITY SPECIFIC PLAN
The Heart of the City Specific Plan was developed to guide future development along Stevens
Creek Boulevard. The Specific Plan provides development standards anddesign guidelines for
various land uses including: commercial, multi-unit residential and mixed use residential and
retail. It appears that these standards have been developed with a lower density, Iow profile
building in mind, which would be expected of the smaller sized lots along Stevens Creek
Boulevard. These standards may not be appropriate for a large, high density development, as
would be expected at City Center. The following matrix is a comparison between the various
development standards and the projects.
HEART OF THE CITY CONFORMITY
HOTEL Required Proposed Conformity: C/NC
Use Office, Retail Hotel NC The hotel was
and/or Residential anticipated on
parcel 29, and was
switched to this
site.
Height 40 feet 108' north tower, NC. Mitigation is
91'4" guest rooms stepping back from
street and superior
design.
Setbacks
Front 9 fk from easement 20' C
Sides ½ height of bldg. or 2' - 20' on north, 0' NC Reduced
10' on south setbacks are
Rear " 0' NC required to
build hotel.
Streetscape 26' landscape 11'6 planting strip, NC The proposed
easement: 5' sidewalk, 9' streetscape matches
10' planting strip, landscape strip the existing strip
6' sidewalk, 10 and sidewalk to the
planting strip north.
Parking City Code: 1 per 171 C Shared parking
room, 1 per provided with
employee: 275 adjacent garage
spaces at peak time.
5
There is one amendment and there are two exceptions to the Heart of the City plan: the hotel
height requires an amendment and the use and setbacks require~the exceptions. Hotel use is
designated and was approved for the proposed apartment site, but is equally appropriate at this
site. The 40 foot height limit is exceeded, and the rationale for accepting greater height is the
same as the General Plan rationale.
Regarding setbacks, the street setback is met, and the remaining setbacks are not. The low-rise
parking structure has an 18" setback from the west property line (adjacent to Armadillo Willy's).
The required north side setback is met only for the building adjacent to the outdoor seating on the
north elevation. The east and south elevations are on the property line. The hotel site is fully
utilized for this development. Staff is satisfied with the distances from the adjacent buildings:
South to Portal building: 50 feet
Diagonally south to Park Center Apts. 75 feet
East to 8-story office tower 40 feet
These are similar to the distances between other buildings in City Center, e.g., the distance
between the Park Center Apartments and the Portal office building is 45 feet. Perhaps the most
sensitive relationship is that between the hotel and the 8 story office tower, for two reasons: 1)
the views from the offices will blocked and 2) the office and hotel windows will have direct
views of each other. However, this is a typical situation for an intensely developed area, which is
designated as high activity center in the General Plan.
There is very little distance between west facing edge of the parking garage and the Armadillo
Willy's parcel, resulting in a small space for the applicant to access the structure for
maintenance. Also,-the canopies of the existing pine trees on the Armadillo Willy's parcel
extend significantly into the parking structure area. The applicant states that maintenance can be
performed within the setback area. See the landscaping section below for further discussion on
tree protection.
The Heart of the City Streetscape standards are not met because the applicant is matching the
sidewalk and landscape strip directly north. Staff believes this is acceptable because the standard
is more pertinent to Stevens Creek Boulevard than De Anza, and there is no consistent standard
along the east side of De Anza Boulevard (e.g., the Portal site has a 7 foot landscaping strip).
Exception Findings: The hotel is a high-intensity project, as anticipated by the General Plan for
this area. It is unlikely that ail the standards could be met for a large hotel. The high quality
design and the identification of this location as a high activity center go toward meeting the
findings necessary to grant the exception. The hotel contributes toward the goal of promoting
pedestrian activity and will complement the adjacent plaza as a gathering place. The finding
regarding "involving the least modification" was raised as an issue. The resolutions address this
issue by amending the Heart of the City Plan as well as approving exceptions, and adding
findings that describe the merits of the project as proposed.
6
Fire Equipment Access
The Santa Clara County Fire Department was involved in developing acceptable site access and
water supply. A sigrfifieant element of this design is that 20 feet of the Four Seasons PlaTa will
be utilized for emergency access. The cross-section on the hotel landscaping plan shows a 12'
sidewalk and 8' of turfblock. The Fine Arts and Parks and Recreation subcommittee that is
reviewing the plans for the Plaza concur that this is an appropriate use of the plaza perimeter, as
does staff. Fire trucks can access the hotel through the front entry and through the emergency
access corridors as shown on Sheet L 1.1.
Relationship to Plaza
The mixed-use development promotes pedestrian activity in and around the Plaza. The outdoor
patio area outside the restaurant provides outdoor seating. Lot line adjustments will be required
for the property lines proposed for these projects, which will encompass portions of the common
parcel. However, the license agreement for the "park" defined the park as the grass area, which
will not be.affected, except for emergency access as described above
Traffic:
The minimum acceptable level of service (LOS) for Cupe ino is LOS D, with two exceptions:
Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard and De Anza Boulevard/Bollinger Road can be
E+. A transportation impact analysis was performed, and the results show that no intersection
falls below LOS D. (The cumulative impact - future growth - scenario shows De Anza
Boulevard/I-280 north ramp decreasing to E+, but this is for future development.) The
conclusion of the report was that the most affected intersections by this project will be the left
mm from east bound Stevens Creek Boulevard at Torre Avenue/Vista and the left turn from'
south bound De Anza Boulevard at Rodrigues. South-bound hotel guests/customers will need to
make a u-mm at the De Anza/Rodrigues intersection to enter the hotel. Apartment
residents/guests and retail customers will exit the apartment on Stevens Creek Boulevard,
complete a u-mm at the intersection, in order to go northbound on De Anza Boulevard. These
two left-mm queues will exceed their storage length. Additional green time from other turning
movements will be reallocated to increase the amount of green time for these turning
movements.
Sanitary Sewer:
Sanitary sewer service is available, but the current City Center users exceed the allotted gallons
per acre. In order to determine if improvements are required to the system, the Cupertino
Sanitary District is conducting a study. The applicants, like other users of the system, will be
required to pay for appropriate mitigation costs to provide the required capacity and shall-enter
into a reimbursement agreement with the District prior to obtaining a building permit.
Drainage
The building coverage of the hotel site is 71%. The increase in impervious surface will result in
the storm drain line under Stevens Creek Boulevard to exceed its capacity. A connection to
divert storm water from Stevens Creek Boulevard to De Anza Boulevard will be required; the
applicants will pay for storm drain improvements on De Anza Boulevard.
7
Crosswalk Improvements
The Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard intersection is very difficult for pedestrians to
cross, and the City is interested in making it more pedestrian friendly. Suggestions to accomplish
this include paving distinctions and median treatments.' The applicants will be required to
contribute to these improvements.
Amenities
The hotel includes a fitness room. In addition, the existing pool and amphitheater located on
parcel #23, which is currently available to all tenants within the City Center will also be available
to the hotel guests.
Building Form/Mass
The hotel is L-shaped, to fit the shape of the lot. It consists of a lower section where the
restaurant, meeting rooms and common guest areas are located, and a higher section where the
guest rooms are located. The toWer is .offset three feet from the mid-section, and the mid-section
on the west elevation is set off 18".
The hotel building form and mass have evolved throughout the hearing process. The basic style
changed from a traditional style during the pre-application process, to a more contemporary style
at the formal submittal time. The style recommended by the Planning Commission returned to
the traditional version, with pitched roofs on the tower elements. Other changes that occurred
were -'
The south tower was lowered to the same height as the mid-section
· The raised roof in the restaurant area was relocated toward the west, and lowered by three
feet.
· The main tower elements were set off more from the mid-section (3' vs. 1.5'), and an
additional offset was located in the mid-section (as discussed above).
Orientation
The primary orientation (the entrance and the main expanse) of the proposed hotel is toward
South De Anza Boulevard. It would be most visible from the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza
Boulevard intersection and from De Anza Boulevard. The restaurant is closest to South De Anza
Boulevard, and the main guest room section is located behind the Armadilly Willy's parcel. The
north facing elevation of the restaurant and other support activities are oriented toward the Four
Seasons Comer/Plaza. The restaurant will open into an outdoor patio, which will relate well to
the plaza. The hotel "living room" also will open onto the courtyard and plaza. The applicant's
intent is to make the restaurant distinct from the hotel, so that it does not appear to be a "hotel
restaurant." Parking is accessible through the front entry and south parking garage entrances;
loading occurs at the south garage entry.
Architecture/Design
The architectural style of this submittal has evolved throughout the review process. The pre-
application style was traditional with pitched roofs, and the style at the time of application was
8
more contemporary. The applicant returned to the traditional style, and the Planning
Commission recommends it to the City Council. -
The material for most of the building is synthetic stucco. The building materials in the
entry/restaurant area are tile and plaster. The main body of the building is two tones of light
beige; the darker beige is on the base. Roof' material is terra cotta colored composite tile.
Burgundy. awnings for the hotel section and yellow awnings for the restaurant are proposed. A
materials board will be available at the meeting.
Many design changes occurred as a result of comments from the Planning Commission, staff and
the City's architectural consultant, Larry Cannon. In general, the comments involved providing a
cleaner, richer design that make the building more distinctive and memorable. Some of the
changes were:
* Creating a stronger base by adding lintels to the windows of the second and third stories
· Adding belt course moldings around the entire building
· Simplying window design
· Providing greater window depth
· Coordinating the shutter effect between the tower element and the raised roof over the
restaurant
· Providing more integrated, substantial trellises
· Adding an arcade and extending the water feature at the main entry
· Subduing the color contrasts
A remaining recommendation of Larry Cannon, the City's architectural consultant, is to have
more substantial bands around the two lower tower elements; a condition of approval reflects this
recommendation.
Landscape and Hardscape Features
The Heart of the City landscape scheme will be implemented along the De Anza Boulevard
frontage. As noted, the dimensions are slightly different from the standards, but staff supports
them because they align with the existing dimensions and there are no consistent dimensions in
that area. Trees are proposed along the south and east perimeter as well. A hedge, including
outdoor lighting, is proposed between the outdoor restaurant patio and the plaza.
Pavement treatment at the entrances and outdoor patio is indicated on the landscape plan. A
water feature is shown on the south entry wall. Details of the pavement and water feature should
be included in a future architectural review application, which will encompass other architectural
features as well.
The Public Works Department recommends that sidewalks and landscaping occur on both sides
of the enU'y driveway. Loading, but not parking, will be allowed in the driveway. Detailed
driveway plans are part of future design review.
9
The acacia trees on the Armadillo Willy's parcel play a role in screening the blank parking
garage wall and hotel. They are very close to the property line,-and their branches will interfere
with the parking structure. The applicant provide an arborist's report that will assess the trees,
and if they can not be retained, analyze the possibility of receiving permission to remove and
replace them with trees more appropriate to the narrow planting space. A landscaped trellis is
proposed along the parking garage faqade, as well.
The conditions of approval already require review of landscaping, lighting, the water feature,
paving, sidewalks and landscaping along Cali Avenue and signs.
Parking
On-site parking is 171 spaces. Shared parking is proposed with the adjacent office building.
Exhibit A, Table Al, indicates that the maximum additional parking required is 141 spaces at
9:00 p.m., and 315 are available in the office building garage. The time when the available
parking is the tightest is the noon hour, when the restaurant and conference moms would be
busy; there are 55 spaces to spare. Staff is concerned that if the hotel parking garage is full, that
the hotel or restaurant guest could be forced to pay for valet parking. A parking management
plan will be prepared to demonstrate how valet and self-parking will be implemented, to be
approved at staff level.
Planning Commission Issues:
The height of the hotel was an issue for several Planning Commissioners. Only three
commissioners were present for the final vote, which was 2-1 in favor. Commissioner Harris
stated that she wants the parking structure submerged more to reduce the height.
Public Issues:
One member of the public, who lives on Scofield Drive, spoke regarding concerns about noise
from the loading dock area.
Other Issues:
Signs: The conceptual signs shown on the tower was changed from a vertical to horizontal
orientation. Larry Cannon recommends that the sign be integrated more into the building design.
Additional sign review is required.
A. Apartment Enclosures:
City Council Resolution 00-191 (General Plan amendment for both apartments and hotel)
City Council Resolution 00-192 (Heart of the City Amendment and exception)
Planning Commission Resolutions 6027 (General Plan Amendment), 6028 (Heart of the City
amendments and exceptions), 6029(use permit)
Staff recommendation for use permit conditions 6-U-00
Initial Study
Negative Declaration
Plan Set
I0
B. Hotel Enclosures:
City Council Resolution 00-193
Planning Commission Resolutions 6031 (General Plan), 6032 (Heart of the City amendments
and exceptions), 6033 (use permit).
Exhibit A - Shared parking analysis
Initial Study
Negative Declaration
Plan Set
Planning Commission minutes, April 24 and May 22, 2000.
Prepared by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner and Michele Rodriguez, Planner II
c--"'Steve~Sia~eki
Director of Community Development
Approved by:
City Manager
O:planning/pdreportdce/Su0061900
II
Planning Coraraission Minutes 2 April 24, 2000
PUBLIC I~EARI~G
Application Nos.:
Applicant:
Location:
6-U-00, 2-GPA-99, 3-EXC-00, 9-EA-00
Cupertino City Center Land
Lot 1, Tract 7953, Comer of Stevens Creek and DeAnza
Use permit to construct a 205 unit, 293,137 square foot multi-family residential building and 7,000
square foot of retail space on a vacant parcel (Stevens Creek Boulevard at City Center).
Various exceptions to the Heart of the City Specific Plan which may include allowing an
apartment use, maximum height of building and side and rear setbacks.
General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet and to penetrate the 1:1 setback
ratio fi.om Stevens Creek Boulevard.
Tentative City Council hearing date of. May 8, 2000
3. Application Nos.: 5-U-00, 4-EXC-00, 2-GPA-99, 8-EA-00
Applicant: Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group
Location: Lot6, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center
Use permit to construct a new 217 room, 130,580 square foot hotel, restaurant and bar on a semi-
vacant parcel and operate 24 hours.
General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet.
Heart of the City specific plan exception to exceed the 40-foot height limit and al Iow hotel use.
Tentative City Council hearing date May 8,. 2000
Staff presentation: The video presentation briefly reviewed Items 2 and 3, the applications for the
hotel development and the apartment complex at City Center, noting that both developments
would orient and relate to the Four Seasons Plaza to create an integrated project and vital center.
Item 2 is a request by Cupertino City Center Land for a use permit to construct a multi-family
residential building with retail space, providing for 205 residential units and 7,000 square feet of
retail space. Item 3 is a request by Kimpton Hotel and Restaurant Group for a use permit for a
217 room hotel on So. DeAnza Boulevard, with a full restaurant and bar. Details of each project
are outlined in the attached staff report.
Mr. Steve Piasecki~ Community Development Director, Provided an overview of the format for
the presentation of both applications. He said he would provide an overview of the General Plan
amendment and the Heart of the City exception, Michele Rodriguez would discuss the apartment
development, and Ciddy Wordell would discuss the hotel proposal. The applicant's presentation
will then be given, followed by questions from the Planning Commission, concluding with the
Planning Commission decide if there is consensus on the broad issues and/or specific issues.
Mr. Piasecki reviewed that the applications were for a project in the City Center, proposed by City
Center Land Limited, for 206 apartment units and Kimpton's proposal for a 217 room hotel. He
said the application consisted of 5 components: General Plan amendment, Heart of the City Plan,
use permits and the environmental assessment, and a staff function which takes place afterwards
should the first four be approved. In addition to proposing to build the apartments and hotel, as
part of the application, for Four Seasons comer will be reconstructed. The apartment developer
will also build approximately 7,000 square feet of retail under the residential podium facing the
Four Seasons comer, and the hotel developer will construct a one story full service restaurant,
Planning Commission Minutes 3 April 24, 2000
with a bar and meeting rooms. Parking will be shared with the adjacent office developments. The
General Plan amendment will allow building heights of between_ 91.5 to 105 feet for the hotel and
106 feet for the south tower of the residential, and as stated 75 feet is permitted by the General
Plan. Under the General Plan amendment the hotel conforms to the l:l 'slope requirement; the
residential encroaches slightly approximately 20 feet into the 1:1 slope line. The General Plan
encourages the maximum number of dwelling units; the General plan allows up to :500 in the Heart
of the City; and housing is strongly encouraged along Stevens Creek Boulevard. The Heart of the
City Specific Plan requests up to 106 feet; it allows references for commercial uses as stated in the
General Plan, which would be 75 feet for landmark buildings; otherwise 40 feet is the limit in the
Heart of the City Plan. In addition, they hope to switch the location of the hotel and the
apartments; the Commission is familiar with the idea that the hotel was to occur on the 1.8 acre
site fronting on Stevens Creek Boulevard, and the other use' on what is now the hotel site was not
specified, presumably to be office. There is an environmental assessment, and the major, impact
that staff focused on was the traffic.
Ms. Michele Rodriguez, Planner II, reviewed the apartment project, a 1.88 acre site, with a
proposed FAR of 3.67; located along Stevens Creek Blvd., accessible from Stevens Creek Blvd.
with the exception of the internal circulation within City Center;, the total square footage of
300,137 square feet, with 7,000 sq. fi. for retail space facing the Four Seasons Plaza. She said the
Planning Commission's past concern with the application was the overall height of the buildings
and the encroachment into the 1:1 setback, for every one foot of building height, one foot of
setback from the curb line at Stevens Creek Blvd. Referring to the perspectives and the model
provided, she said what they determined is that in order to comply with the 1:1 setback, one
dwelling unit would have to be removed, and the ceiling height of one of the units lowered. She
illustrated the relationship between the existing Sun Microsystems building and showed the
stepping that exists through the sheer design of the building shown. She noted that the varied roof
lines do a g0od job of creating the stepping transition. Relative to the 1:1, she said she felt they
could comply through some modifications, and the applicant .would discuss it further. She
indicated that the model illustrates that if an entire floor or two floors were removed to reduce the
overall building height, the difference in overall building height would not be significant and does
not necessarily yield anything positive. Referring to the site plan, she reviewed the location of the
Four Seasons Plaza, the surface parking lot, the proposed 7,000 feet of retail, and the outdoor
seating area proposed for the retail users. She noted that the applicants agreed to a pedestrian
accessway, and a condition of approval sets forth the 'requirement that they come back not only
with the redesign of that centrally located pathway, but also the details on the building. She said
the majority of parking is available onsite, 2=1/2 floors of at=grade and below-grade parking; they
are required to provide additional 35 to 37 parking spaces on the surface parking lot on the
adjoining lot to the east, and a parking survey indicates that it will not be overly encumbered. Ms.
Rodriguez said that the beautiful design of the building was a reason they were recommending
approval of the General Plan amendment.
Ms. Ciddy Wordell, City Planner, illustrated the perspective of the hotel, noting that the tower was
visible from one perspective, and pointed out that coming from So. DeAnza Blvd. from the
opposite direction, the towers could be seen, which shows the relationship between the proposed
hotel on the right and the existing towers. She illustrated the location of the Four Seasons plaza,
the proposed apartments, the existing office towers and Armadillo Willy's, the restaurant located
fronting out on the plaza; the entry way offDeAnza Blvd.,.and the main body of the hotel.
Planning Commission Minutes 4 April 24, 2000
Ms. Rodriguez pointed out that as part of the project, the parking supplied onsite is 14:2 parking
spaces, and as noted in the report, does not meet code requirements. A shared parking analysis
showed that in sharing the parking spaces with the office center next door, during peak times there
is adequate opportunity to share the spaces. She pointed out that they felt a parking management
study was needed because if they were to utilize their own building parking area for valet parking,
and if a customer came in and was having difficulty parking, they might be forced to use valet,
which would create a difficult situation if charging for it. She showed an additional perspective
of the. building from across the street, illustrating the lower elements of the restaurant with one of
the restaurant entrances, also opening up onto the plaza on the north elevation. As discussed
earlier, it was important to the applicant to make a distinction between the restaurant and hotel, so
that the restaurant would have a distinct identity. Ms. Rodriguez reported that there have been
additional discussions and meetings with the applicant ~ind also with the city's architectural
consultant about some of the issues, and the applicant will discuss how they are actively
responding to staff's and consultant's suggestions about ways to make the architecture more
interesting and acceptable.
Staff is not recommending approval of the proposal until some of the issues have been addressed;
such as building offsets which relate to the two tower elements not being set off enough from the
rest of the building; the inset of the windows and also some additional belt course details that
could help set off and break off some of the building expanse. Staff has discussed the possibility
of changing some of the materials, particul~ly the window treatment, using more substantial
materials to give it a higher quality feel. The treatment of the tower is a major issue because it is
so prominent and the idea is to make it distinctive. Staff feels more work is needed, and Larry
Cannon feels that many of the changes are headed in the right direction, but still need more work.
Concerns about the color, and the entry to the hotel are issues that still need to be addressed, as
well as the water feature to the side. One of the other suggestions on balconies was that it be
extended around.the building more to provide more interest; another recommendation is that they
provide some information on lighting, some soi~ uplighting, under the tower elements, under the
cornices for an interesting look. Relative to landscaping, it is suggested that additional
landscaping be provided on the parking structure to soften the view not only from the street, but
also from people looking down into guest rooms. Retention of the trees, on Armadillo Willy's
property and building the parking structure as close to the parking structure is also a concern. Staff
recommends that if the Planning Commission could provide directioia on some of the basic
decisions regarding the form, height and placement, they would be satisfied to act on the General
Plan amendment and the exception, to review any use permit operational issues regarding the
restaurant or the parking, and then continue the use permit to deal with some of the architectural
details.
Mr. John Moss, Pegasus Development, said that the presentation was a culmination of
approximately two years of planning with staff and a year working with the Kimpton Group. He
said the goal of the mixed use project is to provide a sense of place, vitality and a sense of
community that they feel is hcking currently at the Cupertino City Center. To date plans have
bgen discussed in three different study sessions with the Planning Commission and City Council,
with several design review meetings with Planning staff as well. As a result of feedback received,
they have made several modifications to the drawings, and believe the project has benefited
significantly from that input.
Mr. Moss addressed the requests and issues. He said the physical model was provided, which
allows for review of the project architecturally in the context of the entire City Center with all the
Planning Commission Minutes 5 April 24, 2000
existing buildings shown on the model. There was also a request for a computer model simulation
and the architect will provide an overview of the computer model simulation. A comprehensive
traffic report was put together which concludes that there are no significant adverse impacts to
traffic as a result of this project. As requested at one of the City Council study sessions, Pegasus
Development has formally offered to have the project participate in the Teachers' Moving in for
Less Program. In addition to this project, they have also pledged all 710 of the existing apartment
units owned in the City of Cupertino to be included in the same program. A tour was provided for
the ?lanning Commission and City Council of similar projects of higher density in the Silicon
Valley. They also studied at length the issue of emergency vehicle access and have reviewed the
plan with the f'u'e department, which was approved. Also as requested by the Planning
Commission in a study session, a fitness center originally located adjacent to the plaza was moved
to within the confines of the apaxtix~ent building and converted the former fitness center space to
retail space. Also requested was parking at the Portico share for the apartment project, and
outdoor balconies requested by the .City Council. There has also been discussion regarding
specific materials such as roof tiles, and ground floor exterior materials and there is a condition of
approval that gives the city the opportunity to review those details before moving forward with the
project. Bike racks have also been introduced to the project; and also due to significant popular
demand, the pitched roof elements to the project have been reintroduced to replace some of the
fiat roof areas. More pedestrian access to the site is encouraged, by way of crosswalk
improvements at intersection of DeAnza and Stevens Creek Blvd. which is a step toward a more
walkable Cupertino. Access has also been provided to apartment residents and hotel guests to the
existing pool at the existing City Center. Research revealed the use of the existing pool and
concluded that there is capacity for the hotel guests and apartment residents given the lack of
current demand for those improvements or amenities at the site. He reported that they spent a lot
of time and carefully looked at the issue of building height and the architect will review it in detail.
As requested by Planning staff, outdoor seating and dining area adjacent to the existing fountain
has been provided which is effectively an extension to the retail space as a means of creating
activity at this important location. The Fine Arts Commission and the Parks and Rec Committee
have reviewed the project and have endorsed it from a conceptual design standpoint. Also as
requested, the Plaza is going to be enlivened with lighting, public arts seating and outdoor dining
to invite people to this particular area. Also at the environmental review meeting, there were
issues of tree planting and additional tree planting over at the existing parking lot and it will be
provided as a condition of approval. The FAR data requested project and' the entire, city centerwas
provided. He reported that they are planning on having a centrally located pedestrian connection
from the garage to the retail area; the architect will show conceptually where it is planned to go;
and will be done as a condition of approval. Lastly, they focused on the details of trash bins and
have relocated those per the direction from one of the study sessions, to get them back further off
Stevens Creek and further away from the retail area. Mr. Moss said that he felt they had
successfully responded to all of the feedback received at the study sessions, and he felt the
development meets and exceeds all the goals of the city and community 'of Cupertino and will
result in a world class mixed used project.
Mr. Paul Lettire, G~ardo & Associates, landscape architect, said that part of their goal was to
provide the meshing together of all three sites, including emphasizing the pedestrian connections
that partially exist in City Center, which are the horizontal walkway along the bottom of the
apartments, and the vertical behind the hotel adjacent to the office building. He illustrated where
the existing fountain was and Said that they were providing a connection from DeAnza Bird
leading to the plaza area. He noted that the continuity of street trees remained and said it was
important that it continue around the entire site. A hedge planting under the trees will screen the
Planning Commission Minutes 6 April 24, 2000
pavements and will provide a suitable relationship to the street. The other place that was important
as an edge relationship, is the retail edge and the restaurant edg~, which are similar conditions. He
reported that there was a proposed 15 foot wide zone of pavement along that space and in front of
the restaurant; which can be paving to place pots, furnishings, tables, chairs, seatings, all related to
restaurant and retail uses. He said there was also 20 feet of required fire lane which has been
disguised. Mr. Lettire discussed the changes in the podium plan, the major change being the spa
moved to a central location, above street grade, with stair access, and surrounded by landscape
treatments.
Mr. C. Tang, of McLaren, Vasquez & Partners, presented an overview of the project. He stated
that they were a proponent of the Specific Plan established for the Heart of the City. He said the
Specific Plan refers to the linkages of commercial and resid6ntial development, pedestrian friendly
or oriented community planning to promote active outdoor space and outdoor activities in the
activity centers; having greater synergy between residential and commercial development; and are
visions to strive to meet. Referring to the site plan, he said it was evident that the intent was
already beginning to be established by the Specific Plan having a commercial development with
some mixed used already occurring, mostly by zone with residential as part of this deyelopment
wi.th open spaces'being part of the overall organization of the master plan. He said the changes
would be reviewed.
Mr. Tang said that because the Four Seasons Plaza was the focal point for both the apartments and
the hotel, they respected the landscape improvements already in place and planned for the area;
and tried to minimize the amount of curb cut required in order to get into the project, both for the
retail side as well as for the apartment side. Input from other agencies, .staff and the fire
depaCunent was considered for proposals on trash container locations, loading, etc. Efforts were
made to create an active and pedestrian friendly edge along the park, with outdoor 'seating areas,
and also a gateway between the two projects into the office complex and open space and
residential areas beyond. He reviewed the access areas to the residential and retail spaces. He
illustrated the current scheme, which was basically 3 stories of residential, termed iow rise type of
residential piece, and on the other side, an 8 story mid rise portion on top of retail on the park, then
a 2-1/2 level parking garage. In terms of the height, the relationship with the height between the
existing office building and the apartment project, there is actually a 17 to 28 foot differential
between the typical parapet condition vs. the apartment. He pointed out the spa in the middle of
the podium as the focal point of the community, and the shared courtyard between the iow rise
apartment and the mid rise apartment on the other side.
Mr. R. Mackley, Perma Real Estate GrouP, said he was retained for brokering the tenants in the
project. He reported that the project is comprised of approximately 7,000 sq. ff. perpendicular to
Stevens Creek Blvd. and illustrated .a variety of retail building signs, which included blade signs,
mural signs for the inside of the garage, facia signs, and kioske signs.
Mr. Jim Whelm, Kimpton Hotel and Restaurant Group, said they were committed to the City of
Cupertino to create a high end, four star, high vitality, high service level, boutique oriented hotel
and restaurant; upscale in performance and service orientation, design, and articulation. He
showed various photos of hotels and restaurants which were handled by their company, which
illustrated the type of environment they wanted to create on the ground floor level of the proposed
project. He expressed enthusiasm for the proposed Cupertino hotel and asked for feedback on the
overall project so that they could focus on the areas that the Planning Commission felt still needed
work.
Planning Commission Minutes ? April 24, 2000
Mr. Ginsler, Ginsler Architects, said that he would review the most recent changes made and
which would be incorporated in the near future. In terms of access, he pointed out the Calli Street
access down to the courtyard which is the main entrance into the complex, with the main lobby to
the north. He illustrated the other access for the restaurant and bar; the pedestrian access through
the main entrance, and access from the fountain area into the focal point of the living room of the
hotel. He illustrated the parking areas from 1-1/2 levels below grade to 1-1/2 levels above grade,
which consist of approximately 142 cars. He said the proposal for the guestroom wing was to
break it up into three elements, with a north tower, a south element and a field in the center. He
said that they agreed with staff that the colors were too dark in terms of what is on the base. He
said other issues to be addressed are the need for major planting elements; overhangs; window
sills; and installation of a railing around the top floor.
Mr. Ginsler reviewed issues discussed with staff; the changes to the tower planes for a stronger
rhythm of planer element on the overall massing of the guest wing; addition of railings across the
top floor of the guest unit; installation of awnings on the top floor as well as around the entire
building, introduction of a belt at the top of the third floor line; introduction of elongated windows
on the north elevation; come up with an icon significant for the hotel; mimic or repeat the slope
form with a raised roof element that is now over the restaurant area and bar, and also add Pilasters
to the elements; and raising the height of the parapet and mass which houses the conference rooms
on another level.
Com. Kwok asked Mr. Tang to elaborate on the p,ros and cons of meeting or not granting
exception to the variance, relating to the l:! slope. Mr. Tang said that they wanted to see
articulation on the building, but emphasized that how it occurs is an important issue. He said the
proposal was for a more sophisticated way of transitioning a scale from a 4 story up to an 8 story
condition He said the cave lines were varied which added interest to the mofline. He pointed out
that the model was an accurate rendition, and it is clear at the point between the 3rd and4th story
vs.the mid-rise portion of the building. He said they were still working on the detail of the
elements, and in a project such as this, especially with long frontage along a street, it was
important to have a variety of eaves, where ifa straight cave line condition is created, the building
becomes uneventful.
Chair Harris said that she was not disagreeing about the eaves; however, originally they were told
that the project would be only 4 stories high along Stevens Creek Blvd., and then stepped back,
and in reality it has a higher element on Stevens Creek.
Mr. Tang said that the Specific Plan proposed one way to go and they were proposing an
alternative approach while still respecting the setback condition and yet having a more gradual
transition from the 4 story to the higher massing. Com. Stevens said that it was a matter of
viewpoint, and that he was attempting to find a terrace going all the way from the street up both
sides of the building, and could notsee it because of the 8 story structure. Mr. Tang pointed out
that the midrise portion of the project was a concrete structure and there were limitations in
economy of building a concrete structure that prevents them from literally doing a sheet back type
of setback addition.
Chair Harris reiterated that they were originally told they were going to be Iow rise apartments in
the front 4 stories and high rise in the back, yet in reality from the front, some are Iow rise and
some are significantly higher, particularly the units to the le~.
Planning Commission Minutes s April 24, 2000
Mr. Moss noted that the plans were identical to those sharedqn the study session. He said the
intent was to show a stepping up and not just have it jump up from 4 to g stories, which was
consistent with what was presented. Responding to Chair Harris' question relative to why there
are 8 stories in the back instead of the building being a 4, 5 or 6 story project, Mr. Moss said that
the 8 stories were originally designed to be similar in height to the hotel as far as the overall height
was concerned; and also as far as the viability of the project at the inception. He reported that
there was a total of 2-1/2 levels of parking; 1-I/2 levels subterranean and one level almost fully
out of the .gro. und at the front half of the site and almost at grade at the back of the site because of
the significant grade change in elevation from the front to the back, and the guest parking at the at-
grade lot as well. He pointed out since the parking is fully at subterranean level at one portion of
the site, even having the parking fully at subterranean, the 6verall height of the project would not
change because it is subterranean at one portion, and is at grade at the back half of the site. He
said the 59 feet was the 3 stories of apartments above the retail space, up to the top of the roof.
Mr. Tang said the ceiling heights in the retail space were 14 foot, and residential were 10 foot; and
the 59 foot height includes the tower elements on the comers.
The applicants answered questions about access, parking, and grading, Mr. Moss said that the
amphitheater and swim pool were available for hotel guests and apartment residents. He said the
Four Seasons Plaza was fully accessible to the public; the city has development rights and the
applicant will be maintaining the parcel. Ms. Rodriguez explained that the towers met city parking
requirements and had joint parking agreements. Com. Con' expressed concern about possible
further changes after approval of the project. Mr. Tang said that the only proposed change as part
of the condition of approval was the passageway between the retail parking to the retail frontage.
Chair Harris commented on the changes made in the relocation of the spa to the podium area,
noting that prior to the relocation of the spa, the podium area was an area in which to congregate,
an area to provide some sense of green, and the new placement of the spa in the center appeared to
take the whole podium and turn it into just an area around the spa. Mr. Lettire said that he did not
feel that was the case, but that they tried to create pleasant inviting seating areas, and there were
other seating areas available. He said he felt the area chosen was not a compromise.
Com. Kwok said that relative to the overall landscape plan, he had indicated at a previous meeting
that there was a sense of imbalance in terms of the landscape plan, and appeared to be very heavy
on the Stevens Creek side, with three rows of shrubs in one area and' two in another. He
questioned whether any consideration was given to creating a sense 'of balance in the overall
landscape. Mr. Lettire responded that there were two different spaces being addressed. The
perimeter of Cupertino City Center is a significant edge that relates to the street and there are triple
rows of trees further down Stevens Creek. The space, the entry drive and the walkway are now
similar to other spaces in Cupertino City Center, and are all single rows of trees. It is a row of
trees on one side, and a row of trees that are not rendered, that exist on the other side of the street,
so they are lined, but are not two rows thick. There aren't any conditions in Cupertino City Center
with double rows of trees, and it is balanced 'from that perspective. Relative to changing the trees,
Mr. Lettire said that consideration would be given to changing only the backdrop trees; the
foreground trees should remain pear trees. There is the potential that the spaces closer to the
building with opportunities for smaller scale trees can have some evergreen character; it would not
be a continuous row of trees.
Planning Commission Minutes 9 April 24, 2000
Com. Stevens asked what the mitigations for privacy were to take into account people in the
apartments looking up at the offices and vice versa, since the trees would only cover the area of
one floor. Mr. Lettire said that they were not planting trees to cover an area of 8 floors, and that
the privacy issue would be dealt with at the window level of the buildings.
Com. Doyle asked for clarification on the comment that mitigation was stepping back from the
street and superior design. Mr. Piasecki said he felt there was a fundamental concept in the
application that would need buy-in to accept the concept, and that is that the stepping is not taking
place from the street to this site and then to the existing Sun Microsystems buildings; it is now
going to take place on the residential portion within the residential project itself, stepping from the
4 story up to the 8 story; therefore, the stepped forms have been shii~ed if the logic is accepted that
is being presented here into the foreground buildings. The'same thing occurs with the hotel; the
hotel stepping will occur with future development on the Armadillo Willy's site to the hotel
building, and it is not necessarily going to be reliant on the hotel stepping to the Sun Mierosystems
building; one would have to be a great distance to see that step on that side of the site; therefore it
needs to be viewed from that standpoint. In terms of superior design, he said that on the
residential side there is a lot of variation going on in that buildingl which is a complex building
form. He said there was a condition of approval that the applicant has ~o return with demonstration
of superior materials and design.
Mr. Piasecki said that relative to superior design, specifically to the hotel, staff was not convinced
they were there yet, and are not suggesting that the Planning Commission take any action on the
specifics of that this evening. Staff suggests continuing the use permit on the hotel until at least
the next meeting giving the applicant a chance to develop the concepts discussed this evening.
The applicant met with the city's architectural advisor and are making progress in many areas that
have yet to be demonstrated. He said that staff felt the objectives on the residential have been met.
Com. Kwok referred to the environmental checklist relative to the sewer and water quality and
questioned if the Cupertino Sanitary District had been contacted to see if there is adequate
capacity to carry the sewage generated as a result of the hotel and apartment project.
Ms. Rodriguez said they had met on several occasions with the Cupertino Sanitary District and the
situation is that at this particular intersection with these two proposed projects, it exceeds the
master plan limit for this particular intersection; and it was stated thatonly through a study can
they conclude that in fact it exceeds the maximum capacity of the lines in the field, and it is
mitigatable by the increase in the line size. The result will be that a study will be conducted,
concluding what needs to be done, and the physi'cal improvements will occur in the field prior to,
and in conjunction with, the construction of one or both of the projects. Prior to occupancy, the
improvements will be completed.
Mr. Bert Viskovich, Director of Public Works, said that the capacity of the sanitary plant and the
main line were sufficient to carry all of the General Plan; stating that it is just a line on Stevens
Creek Blvd., and studies will take place to see if they can reroute that through some of the
residential area that may be under capacity, and if that occurs Cupertino may not have to add a
parallel line. If another capacity cannot be found where they can divert the sewer, there is the
potential that another line would have to be added on Stevens Creek Blvd. He said that once up in
the Pruneridge and Wolfe area, capacity was plentiful. He said it would be completed within 30
days. It was noted that there were conditions on the applicant to deal with the sewage issue.
?lanning Commission Minutes 10 April 24, 2000
Com. Stevens addressed the issue of the change in location between the original proposed hotel
and apartments and questioned if public works had addressed the traffic issue for the future.
Mr. Viskovich said the studies indicated with the current proposal the traffic does work and meets
the standards. He said the hotel and apartments are of the same character, and represent more
housing, leaving in the morning, and returning in the evening, as opposed to the office space
which attracts traffic in the morning and leaves in the evening. The difference is the trip
generation factor, there are going to be u-tums either way, and a comparison has not been made
since the proposal does work and meets the General Plan standards.
Chair Harris questioned what makes each of the two buildings a landmark. Mr. Piasecki said the
foreground buildings are becoming foreground landmark buildings and the other ones are
background landmark buildings; they are not going to be as prominent as they are today. They will
be background buildings, you will still see the stepped forms from the side, the tower elements.
He said what designates them as landmark buildings is the fact that they are on the Four Seasons
Plaza and will interact with the Plaza, the background buildings won't. They are mixed use
essentially with the commercial and residential, and will stand out first and foremost in everyone's
mind, and without them you may not have the level of activity anticipated on that corner.
Chair Harris said that the consultants advised that caution be exercised when planning future
development to step the buildings, because once they lost the opportunity, it would not return. If
the foreground is filled with landmark tall buildings, there won't be another opportunity unless
Stevens Creek Blvd. is sunk underground. Mr. Piasecki said that as stated earlier, the Planning
Commissioners need to feel comfortable that stepping is occurring on the residential, it will occur
in the future, with future development on Armadillo Willy's. He said a lot of hotels don't
typically have the restaurant element sitting out in the front fagade, or front portion of the hotel
creating an interesting drop off plaza space for the hotel. He reiterated that they were headed in
the right direction relative to the stepping elements, and they clearly needed the amendments to the
General Plan to make the plan work.
Chair Harris asked staff to clarify the conformity issue under the proposed hotel column relative to
setbacks. Ms. Wordell explained that the front of the hotel offSo. DeAnza Blvd. conforms to the
Heart of the City Plan; the easement and setback are conforming; the other setbacks are required
to be 20 feet and do not conform. She said it was the nature of the hotel that it needs toenvelope
that space. She said that staff did not have concerns about the property line setbacks or near
property line setbacks, except for the one interfering with the trees next to Armadillo Willy's.
Ms. Wordell said that the restaurant patio on the north side has a20 foot setback, and on the south
side, and east side, zero; on the parking structure one foot; the entry part and restaurant part is full
setback from the property, line. She said that staff was not certain if one foot setback was
sufficient. Chair Harris suggested that the .issue of one foot and zero feet be discussed further
when the application returns. Mr. Piasecki stated the need to focus on the issue and whether or not
the Planning Commission accepted the basic form, so that they could move onto other details,
such as is there enough setback.
The applicant was questioned about how much parking of the hotel is above grade and how much
is below, and number of stories. He reported that underneath the tower of the building there is one
surface level parking directly at grade and there is one level Of parking directly above that,
9-1/2 to 10 feet. Adjacent to the tower of the hotel betweenthe Armadillo Willy's lot and the
face of the hotel is a 3 level parking structure; one level half below grade, one level half above
Planning Commission Minutes 11 April 24, 2000
grade, the top level is 1-1/2 stories above; roughly 15 feet from where the tires would touch the
parking strips, lie said there would be a screening wall, some trellis activity, and some plantings
on the top level of the parking since there was no ceiling. He acknowledged that there was only a
one foot setback up against Armadillo Willy's parking lot and said they could work with the
property owner to do some suitable landscaping. He said the other area of zero foot setback is a 40
foot wide right of way interior circulation. He said some of the early studies were looking at
excavating the entire site, trying to get as much parking underneath; but one issue was access and
how to get people in, but then go below grade at the same level.
The applicant said that if the parking was all below grade, the design would be completely
different than what was presented and because of the many different factors, there may possibly
be some shortening of the building height, but most likely n6t the entire 15 feet. Ms. Wordeli said
that it was 4-1/2 feet below and 14 feet above, plus the third level is an open parking.
Chair Harris opened the meeting for public input; there was no one present who wished to speak.
The issues for discussion were summarized: determine if the placement and height is acceptable,
including setback issues, the height issue, addition of mass and form and design; restaurant and
bar hours; parking; give general direction; let them know if they are on the right track; let them
know if the Planning Commission feels it is appropriate; does it need tweaking or a major
overhaul.
Com. Stevens said he felt the building was too high; the tower above the living room would be
better placed on the south side, so that there is some similarity between the building behind and
the hotel in front; he said he felt the top part of the hotel (the highest point) should be at the other
end to have a slant toward Stevens Creek Blvd. He said his comments relative to height also
applied to the other structure. Com. Stevens said the form was very thin, and should have more
character, instead of having a long thin type of hotel, arrive at the same amount of mass by coming
out over the parking structure. The bar hours and restaurant is something that can be discussed
later; standard hours are not applicable at this point in time unless it is proposed to be other than
standard in Cupertino. He said that if the Director of Public Works was content with the traffic
pattern, it was not an issue; however, he was concerned about a possible deficit.
Ms. Wordell responded that the parking study was based on actual availability of spaces and on
real situations relative to extra spaces being available. She said as a result of a previous parking
study with another building, the building owner had to make up for any parking that was lost by a
surface lot at that time.
Chair Harris said that when the application returns, it should include the study on parking,
including how many employees they are considering, how many people they are anticipating in
the conference center on a given day in full use; numbers for the hotel and bar; and how many
coming and going morning and afternoon which is a different use of the hotel use; and also some
estimate on the retail and on the apartments.
Ms. Wordell said that in talking with the traffic consultant, the hotel demand was based on a
model ora standard source for that particular use. She said she was not certain if it was preferred
that they look at their particular hotel and do demands based on that, or just know the assumptions
that the traffic study used. ~ Chair Harris said the hotel developer had experience and would have
Planning Commission Minutes 12 April 24, 2000
real estimates rather than a model, since the model would vary whether itbe urban or suburban in
terms of traffic.
Com. Con' said that he was comfortable with the building placement, and was pleased to hear that
not all were happy with the fagade and design, as he was concerned with it. He said he liked the
path the new design was taking, and was confident that they could be able to address some of the
concerns discussed. He said the placement of the hotel was appropriate; he concurred that the
hours could be addressed later; and as long as the mitigations are available for the parking, he had
no objections.
Com. Kwok said that in general he was in support of staff's recommendation in terms of form,
mass, bulk, and density. He expressed concern with the btiilding height, and recommended that
the applicant work with staff on reducing the height. He said if the parking was more depressed it
could reduce the height another 10 feet.
Com. Doyle said that the buildings were too high; he said he felt the Heart of the City guidelines
were fair in that they called for 1:1 setback. He said the 2:1 ratio could be used to go up to the 75
foot level; and if they were made landmarks, could go up to the 2:1 ratio at that level, with
submerged parking. He said 10% to 20% shared spaces were acceptable; however, he did not feel
it was reasonable to expect half of the people to go elsewhere to park. He said the apartments had
a good design, but needed more work to blend into the surrounding buildings. The hotel appeared
to be a vertical box and work was needed to break it up significantly and bring the height down.
He said he felt there should be a compelling argument to giving them an entire street for the
property, which was unusual.
Chair Harris said she was pleased to have a quality hotel for the area. She said the buildings were
too high; she suggested that the parking be submerged even if it required a redesign. She said she
was not opposed to the idea of changing the form from a vertical box to tearing it upward and
bringing' it forward over the parking. She said she was aware that the concept was to have an
easily serviceable corridor, but said that it is a suburban area, and may call for a different design
than a vertical box. She said she was appreciative of the applicant's efforts, and would like them
to have the number of rooms they were counting on; however, it may be a question of removing a
floor or two because of the height. She said it was a matter of economics, and a question of
balancing the developer's hope to maximize the development potential, and balancing that against
the aesthetic needs of the community. She said she was excited about the proposed hotel, and that
it would be of benefit to the community to have a conference hotel and a quality restaurant. She
said the window trim was suitable; the restaurant and bar should have specific hours, and staff
would make a recommendation other than a 24 hour operation. She requested that a parking study
be completed so that she would have a better feeling about the parking issue; she expressed
concern about the one foot setback, but if it was adjacent a common area it was not such a major
concern. She noted that there was a lot of common area in this development, as it was designed
to have common area, and she felt the setbacks should be relaxed.
Chair Harris summarized that at least four members felt the building was too high; she said she did
not agree with Com. Stevens about moving the main feature from the Stevens Creek Blvd. and
DeAnza intersection, as it is the prominent intersection and should have a tower element.
Mr. Piasecki said that it would be helpful to have the appl~icant know whether he is going back to
redesign to try to eliminate 10 feet which may be doable given the plan they have being asked to
Planning Commission Minutes 13 April 24, 2000
take off one to two floors. Chair Harris said that the height was too high, and the applicant was
left with the design responsibility 'as there were numerous options. She said the equivalent of two
stories (20 to 30 feet) could be removed; submerge the building into the ground; change the
architecture or give up rooms.
Com. Kwok said he felt the project would be a very good project for the community. He said he
understood the concern about the quality of the building and also the appearance of the project,
but economics need to be taken into consideration in terms of the project. He said that if the
direction is for a 40 foot height limit, he did not feel the project would move forward, because the
hotel has to have ample rooms for the development to move forward in this project. He said he
would not compromise the Heart of the City, but felt that economics was the driving force for the
developer to come forward with the project. He suggested reducing the height by 10 feet.
Com. Stevens said that he was not in favor of putting a number; but preferred the 1: I setback,
with the possibility of going to 2:1. Com. Doyle said he preferred 40 feet in the !:1 plane, and 2:1
up to 75 feet, to produce a stair step back.
Chair Harris said she felt 'that there was support for the hotel, and not opposed to the number of
rooms,'but e°ncerned about h°w and Where it is placed.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Doyle moved to continue Application 5-U-99, 2-GPA-99, 4-EXC-00,
8-EA-00 to the May 8, 2000 Planning Commission 'meeting
Com. Kwok
Passed 5-0-0
6. Application Nos: X,~6-U-98, 43-EA-98
Applicant: A~zich Properties
Location: 102q~ pasadena Avenue
\
Use permit to demolish an existing hou'S~ and construct four single-family detached residences on
a net 12,480 square foot lot.
Continued from Planning Commission meet~of April 10, 2000
MOTION: Com. Kwok m_?ved to ¢OntinueX~pplication 16-U-98, 43-EA-98 to the
· May 8, 2000 Planning Commissi~bq meeting
SECOND: Com. Corr
VOTE: Passed 5-0-0Nk
Chair Harris declared a recess from 9:50 p.m. to 10:00 p.fl~ .
Chair Harris moved the agenda back to Item 2
Discussion of Application 6-U-00, 2-GPA-99, 3-EXC-00, 9-EA-00
Mr. Piasecki pointed out that the same fundamental issues related to the apartment project, namely
height, mass, bulk, and mass. Details include the architecture, landscape plan, and parking.
Ms. R. odriguez clarified that the reduction of one dwelling unit and the lowering of a ceiling in
another unit was necessary in order to meet the setback on Stevens Creek. Mr. Tang said that
Planning Commission Minutes 14 April 24, 2000
initially it was felt that it would involve a reduction of 4 units, but options were being addressed.
Chair Harris added the issue of landscaping the apartments on Stevens Creek with evergreen trees
so that when the pear trees are deciduous there is still some foundation planting. She suggested
moving the spa as she felt the podium area was compromised as a public space since the spa
location was moved. Added to the list of issues were height, setbacks, bulk, mass, color, and roof
tile.
Relative to the active areas supporting the units, Mr. Tang said that the project had a unique
feature of the corner plaza, which is meant to be an active space. The secondary active space
would be the courtyard atop the podium on top of the garage which is a more passive, quieter,
contemplative open space. He said that the pool was open to the apartment residents as well. He
said the fitness center was adjacent to the leasing office; th~ podium spa which may be relocated
per suggestion; and a proposed spa inside the health club. Mr. Tang said that with the exception
of the landscape planter around the edge of the garage, there was no wall around the project. He
answered questions regarding the landscaping, and moving van loading area for the units. He
reviewed the color board for the stucco area of the buildings, accent colors for the trellises, and
accent color for trims.
Mr. Lettire and Mr. Tang answered questions regarding the landscape plan for the podium area
and the signage and graphics. Mr. Tang said that the signage and graphics designs were not yet
finalized. Ms. Rodriguez said that she would like a higher degree of material; relative to
landscaping, she said that they have approved conceptual landscape plans in the past and looked at
a more refined state even at the building permit stage and not even come back before the Planning
Commission on a refined landscape, but do feel that the signage and other details are important to
look at.
Chair Harris said questioned the correct format to have the Design Review Committee work on the
proposal. Mr. Piasecki suggested that the wording be inserted that the Design Review Committee
is to review the proposal with a recommendation made to the full Planning Commission.
Chair Harris addressed the BMR units, stating that the number of units to be provided are
generally specified. Ms. Rodriguez said that 21 BMR units can be specified. Chair Harris
.referred to the bathroom requirement in Condition 12, and said .that the requirement should be for
a unisex bathroom or 2 bathrooms.
Chair Harris also commented that the performance requirement should be firmed up and
questioned the security camera operation.
Com. Kwok asked staff to clarify loft parking, identifying 113 spaces in the first level, and offsite
parking of 30 stalls. Ms. Rodriguez stated that it was on the surface parking lot directly east of the
parcel and along Stevens Creek Blvd.,and met the minimum requirements of 483. The applicant
clarified that the parking was primarily guest parking that would be used at grade existing lot,
which is a minimal amount of the overall parking. He said they met the city's requirement of 2.0
overall, and 1.7 below the buildings; the remaining parking which is guest parking is going to be
used on the grade lot, therefore it isn't anticipated that there will be an overflow of parking onto
the street.
The applicant said that access to the apartments was through the garage in the basement level, and
from Stevens Creek Boulevard. He said the retail parking was through the garage and the non
Planning Commission Minutes 1~ April 24, 2000
residents would have to access the garage and return to the Stevens Creek entry into the shops.
Residents could access the shopping area through a gate.
Chair Harris commented on the language to the exception, contained on Page 25 of staff' report for
3-EXC-00, and said that she felt it was absurd to make a finding that it is the least modification to
accomplish reasonable use, as it appeared to be a gross overstatement. She questioned if they
were required to make a finding or could the finding be removed. Ms. Rodriguez responded that it
was a required finding by the resolution for the Heart of the City Specific Plan. Chair Harris said
that she preferred the word "appropriate" rather than "ideal" as the language would set precedence
for the future.
The issues relative to the apartment proposal were summarized: height, bulk, mass; landscaping
on SC Blvd. with evergreens; spa and podium area; setbacks including l:l; color, roof tile;
apartment project; overall project - number of units; and parking.
Com. Doyle said that relative to height, bulk and mass, the first 40 feet should be 1:1, and run as
high as 75 feet, but make it a 2:1 setback, make sure the 75 feet includes the top of the service
parapets. It should try to come into conformance with the Heart of the City requirements;
landscaping with evergreens on Stevens Creek; spa location is acceptable as is; setbacks including
1:1 addressed earlier; building color and roof tile per staff recommendation. Mr. Piasecki
commented that the architectural advisor was comfortable with the color palette being presented,
and staff suggested that a clay roof material be used. He said he liked the apartment project, it had
good articulation; work is needed on a few things; submerging it; the parking is important; get rid
of the wall if possible; move the loading dock and unloading to out in front of the building;
upgrade first floor building materials so it looks better than stucco and limestone. He said if the
parking was dropped, there might be opportunities to get rid of that boundary around it
Chair Harris clarified submerged parking, stating that the building would be lowered for
submerged parking.
Com. Kwok said that he was not opposed to the submerged parking; eliminate the encroachment
1:1; lower the height, however, he said he would not dictate 75 foot height, but would prefer it to
be below 100 feet. He said he was concerned about the density and would prefer to retain the
density; evergreens for the landscaping was suitable; leave spa as is; color per staff
recommendation; remove loading dock. He said he concurred with Com. Doyle on the other
issues.
Com. Corr said the height, bulk and mass were appropriate; evergreen landscaping is suitable;
leave spa as is; comply with 1:1 setback even if it meant losing one unit; staff recommendation on
color of tile is suitable. He said he was in favor of the project; however, he did not feel they
should remove the loading dock since it just a space that becomes a loading dock when the truck is
there. He said the lower wall and planter were appropriate, but he was not in favor of a massive
wall that gives the feeling of walking against a large building in San Francisco. He said he agreed
with the upgrade materials, and submerged parking only to adjust the height.
Com. Stevens said he concurred with Com. Doyle regarding the height, 40 + 75, 2:1 is the same
thing and would be appropriate but he would like it to c_orrelate with the hotel to be the same;
evergreens appropriate; spa location is suitable where it is, but the applicant should decide the
most appropriate location for it; setbacks of 1:1 comply and on that because the tower buildings
Planning Commission Minutes 16 April 24, 2000
have a step function on both arms. I-Ie said he viewed the tower stepping function as being a
characteristic of Cupertino's downtown when it happens, anct because everything else has that
stepping function he preferred to see 1:1 on both of the high rises. He said he felt the tile color
should be gray, but would agree with staff recommendation. Com. Stevens said he liked the
concept of the apartment project; the loading dock should be a requirement; the wall as a planer is
an excellent idea, however color may be needed to break up the massiveness of the wall. He said
he concurred with upgrading the materials; he was opposed to the height for the parking and
suggested pushing it further into the ground for the mass if needed.
Chair Harris said she liked the project and felt the applicant took great pains to make it attractive
and effective. She said that the colors were suitable; the height too high; and eyergreens were
appropriate. She said she would be willing to forfeit one ianit to get the 1:1 ratio, and felt they
should submerge the parking and lower the height in the back. She said that she was overruled on
her suggestion to move the location of the spa; would like to see the parking submerged twofloors
which is a compromise of one floor. She said she felt the parking was 2 stories too high but
because there is a need for the apartments, it was a tradeoff. She suggested that relative to height,
bulk and mass,'No. 2, it state "reduce the height". 'She said she was not in favor of the high part
on Stevens' Creek Blvd., and would really like to see a development that is 59 feet across the front
and not have anything higher. She said she was in favor of the 1:1 comply; and did not like the
high part on the left hand side. She suggested mitigating the loading area, which meant there
would not be trucks on Stevens Creek Blvd. Unloading or moving vans; therefore it needs to be
either screened with landscaped areas high enough to cover a moving van or a delivery truck or it
needs to be placed elsewhere. She said she did not care what mitigation was used, but felt that
Stevens Creek Blvd. should not look like a loading area. Chair Harris said that the 3 foot high
planters were appropriate, and she favored upgraded materials for the ground floor. She said that
the directions to the applicant on height should note that several members have said I: 1 and 2:1;
with a height range of 75 to 100 feet. She said that she would also like to see stepping.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Doyle moved to continue Application 6-U-00, 2-GPA-99, 3-EXC-00,
and 9-EA-00 to the May 8, 2000 Planning Commission meeting
Com. Corr
Passed 5-0-0
4. Application No.: ~x2_-ASA-98(M)
Applicant: ~rosvenor Intemational
Location: 6~esul~ Way
Referral to Planning Commission ot~q Director's minor modification to add windows to the first
and second floors of an existing buil~4ng and to convert 8,194 square feet of amenity space to '
office space in building nine. ~
\
Staff presentation: Mr. Peter Gilli, Planner I, b.~ted corrections to the staff report, in that buildings
3 and 4 had been converted from manufacturing, to office, which had architectural site approvals
that dealt with adding wind0_ws to the second stor~. He said that there would be windows added to
three sides of the building. He no[ed that a sectionk,~f the second floor was being converted from
amenity space to office space re, s.ul. tin. g in an addi_tio .i~o.f a dormer type element with the windows.
He outlined the background of the item as set forth in the staff report. Mr. Gilli distributed a
Planning Commission Minutes 2 May 22, 2000
Chair Harris moved the agenda to Item 5.
NEW BUSINESS
5. Set joint meeting date\f~r Planning Commission and Telecommunications Commission to
address antenna master pl~
Staff presentation: Ms. Ciddy W, Qrdell, City Planner, explained that the Telecommunications
Committee requested a meeting be ~heduled with the Planning Commission to receive direction
on master planning for wireless communications for the city. Following a brief discussion, there
was consensus that the joint meeting"~e scheduled for the June 26th Planning Commission
meeting agenda. ~
MOTION: Com. Kwok moved to sched~e a joint meeting with the Telecommunications
Committee on June 26, 2000, to'~dress the antenna master plan.
SECOND: Com. Stevens ~
VOTE: Passed 5-0-0 \
Chair Harris moved the agenda back to Item 3.
Application Nos.:
Applicant:
Location:
6-U-00, 2-GPA-99, 3-EXC-00, 9-EA-00
Cupertino City Center Land
Lot 1, Tract 953, comer of Stevens Creek and DeAnza
Use permit to construct a 205 unit, 293,137 square foot multi-family residential building and 7,000
square foot of retail space on vacant parcel (Stevens Creek Blvd. At City Center)
Various exceptions to the Heart of the City Specific Plan, which may include allowing an
apartment use, maximum eight of building and side and rear setbacks.
General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet and to penetrate the 1:1 setback
ratio from Stevens Creek Blvd.
Continued from meeting of May 8, 2000
Staff presentation: Ms. Wordell presented a brief overview of the hotel application and the
apartment application. She referred.to the City Center Site Plan and reviewed the location of the
apartment and hotel. She reviewed the General Plan amendment, and Heart of City height and use
amendments/exceptions. Ms. Wordell noted that the flip/flop placement of the hotel and
apartments would be covered in the amendment.
Ms. Michele Rodriguez, Planner II, reviewed the issues relating to the Stevens Creek apartments,
including building and design. She said the Planning Commission direction was to reduce the
overall'building height to between 75 and 100 feet to maintain the l:l setback ratio from the
Stevens Creek Blvd. curbline; and to add pedestrian access from the retail area into the parking
garage, to upgrade ground floor building materials, complete dock screening, and to limit the
height of the planter around the base of the building.
Relating to the building height, Ms. Rodriguez noted that the drawings on the wall illustrated the
comparison between the April l0th. Planning Commission plans and the updated plans submitted
to address issues. She explained that to address the building height concern, the applicant graded
Planning Commission Minutes 3 May 22, 2000
more to drop the building pad by approximately 4.5 feet, and also redesigned a portion of the top
floor and added mass to other portions of the building in order to reduce the building height. The
majority of the building is 93 feet highs and there has been an addition to the center loft area center
units which reaches 102 feet, which is almost 4 feet less than the overall building height presented
at the previous meeting. Staff feels that the applicant has complied because the majority of the
building height is at the 93.1 feet. To address the 1:1 setback, the applicant has replaced a unit
that was encroaching into the 1:I setback, and has kept the trellis to balance the elevation.
Because the 1:1 setback states that it is to reduce building mass, staff did not feel that the
maintenance of the trellis was building mass, and is in conformance. Relative to pedestrian access
and dock screening; (architectural design), she said a condition of approval was added to allow the
design to be reviewed more carefully before the Planning Commission. To address the concern of
the dock being buffered, she illustrated the area for planting the evergreen shrubs to buffer the
dock.
Ms. Rodriguez reported that the building materials were upgraded; and a condition of approval
added to allow the detail of all the building materials at ground level to be reviewed by the
Planning Commission. Also added were findings in the conditions of approval stating that the
highest design material was being sought, which would allow the Planning Commission to have
leverage in their material review later. They also stepped down and reduced the height around the
entire building and included in the plan set a section showing how they will maintain the height
between 3 and 4 feet.
To address Chair Harris' question regarding the exception for the outdoor space and the issue of
the subsurface garage, on Page 4-4, the two exceptions were reviewed. Relative to the outdoor
space, she questioned if the Specific Plan delineated between hard and softscape and to what
degree did the project comply with that. She said the square footage comparison per dwelling unit
was included, and the Specific Plan requires that between 70% and 80% of the landscape should
be soffscape and the remaining 20% to 30% should be hardseape. She said the applicant cannot
comply with that since they have such a high building coverage ratio; hence it is the outdoor space
exception. Ms. Rodfiguez said that another question dealt with the subsurface garage area on Page
14 of the Plan set. She said that the east/west section of the parking garage is substantially above
grade, and the Specific Plan states that parking garages may not exceed 5 feet above grade, and
the proposal exceeds that 5 feet requirement.
Staff recommends approval of ~e General Plan amendments and the amendment to the Heart of
the City Specific Plan according to the model resolutions and the updated amendment resolution.
Ms. Rodriguez referred to wall drawings and explained changes to building height discussed
earlier. She also clarified that the reduction in retail space from 7,000 sq. ff. to 6,775 sq. ft. was
for the pedestrian access. She reported that Condition 6 requires that a bike rack be made
available near the retail use in the plaza. Alternative wording has also been developed in
Condition 4 to allow additional spaces for bikes.
In response to Chair Harris' questions, Ms. Rodriguez stated that there was no reciprocal parking
agreement with the hotel for the retail users to use the hotel parking. She said that relative to the
issue of security cameras in the garage, a condition required that conduit be installed and if the
sheriff's department determined it was needed, it would be done at that time. It was determined
that the condition should state that the Planning Commission in conjunction with the sheriff's
department determine whether the security cameras were needed. She said that the height of the
Planning Commission Minutes 4 May 22, 2000
planter box could be stated as 3 feet; the stone tile base for the ground floor has been added, with a
condition of approval for more specific review; and the applicant was requesting that an alternate
material be added for flexibility relative to the clay tile roof. Ms. Rodriguez explained that
although the retail space and height were decreased, the increase in building area was a result of
the fiat wallplane which was previously offset, the addition of loft units, and the increase in
building height.
Mr. Larry Canno~, architect, said he reviewed the application in its early stages, and felt it was
well designed with variety. He said that he had not reviewed the updated plans in depth.
Mr. Raymond Chong, Traffic Engineer, reviewed the traffic impacts for the apartments, retail and
full service hotel during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, including the week days. He reviewed
intersections level of service, which determined operation at LOS D or better for existing
conditions; for background conditions at LOS D or better; for project conditions at LOS D or
better; and under expected growth conditions at LOS D or better. He noted the only exception
was LOS E+ at DeAnza Blvd. at northbound 1-280 ramp. Mr. Chong said the consultant raised
concerns about queue spillbacks, specifically at DeAnza and Rodriguez during a.m. and p.m. peak
hours, and at the eastbound left mm at Stevens Creek and Torre; and suggested mitigation would
be to extend the left mm pocket or increase the green time. Staff's proposal is to increase the
green time for the proper allocation of the left turn 'movements. He reviewed the summary table
of trip generation estimates, summary of left mm storage queuing analysis, and matrix table of
intersection level of service. Mr. Chong explained that LOS A was free flowing traffic conditions,
and F was gridlock; and that the city maintained that below LOS D was the maximum for the city,
except for DeAnza and Stevens Creek and DeAnza and Bollinger Roads.
Mr. Chong answered questions about traffic impacts, trip generation, and level of service. He
said that the traffic study conducted by the consultant was a fair study. Mr. Jason Pack, Fehr and
Peers Associates, answered questions about the analysis for the traffic impacts.
Mr. Paul Lettire, Gazzardo and Associates, explained the mitigation for the loading dock, stating
that a 3 foot hedge would be continued for the purpose of blocking out the paving level of cars,
not to make the entire first floor of the building disappear. He said that shrubs could also be
planted across the front. In response to Chair Harris' question about increasing the softscape and
the need for an exception because it does not meet the outdoor landscape requirements for the
General Plan, Mr. Lettire said that he was not certain if they could reach the numbers needed. He
said that the overall landscape plan is designed for a good balance between usable open space and
landscaped areas. He said he did not feel miniscule adjustments to the podium plan and increase
of the softscape would materially benefit the project in terms of the appearance or feel of the final
project; but it would only make it less usable.
Com. Stevens referred to the architectural model, and said there was a dominant architecture
starting with the landmark towers and the surrounding buildings, denoting they all have steps; a
uniform stepping consistency all around; in addition to having similar colors and materials. He
said the two proposed projects do not have either and questioned the architect's viewpoint if it
appeared to be something that would look quite different or be acceptable.
Mr. Cannon said that the issue was discussed with staff at the beginning of the project, and he felt
the stepping would not amount to much. He said he felt the quality of the building itself was strong
and he was not concerned that it was not stepping more, as the building located behind is in a
Planning Commission Minutes 5 May 22, 2000
certain form. He said he felt the building should be left to be what it is, and let it have its richness,
whether or not it was stepped. _
Com. Stevens said that the two proposed buildings would overshadow the landmark building
which is 110 feet high. He said he felt the buildings were too high. Mr. Cannon said that he
wished there was more space between the ~ffice and the apartment building. He said he felt the
office building in the background was a standard office building without much richness of fagade;
the proposed building has richness and a lot of form which is one type of architecture played
against the simple form of the office building which is acceptable.
Staff answered questions about the parking requirements, and noted that shared parking was
proposed with the adjacent office building, and because of different peak hours of need for the
hotel, apartment and office building, it would not be a problem.
Chair Harris addressed the condition for the developer to contribute 25% of the cost of a
pedestrian crossing project. Ms. Carmen Lynaugh, Public Works, clarified that at this time there
was not a full plan for it, but it would entail some features of enhancing the crosswalks and
changing the radiuses of the curb returns. Ms. Rodriguez said that Condition 30 specified a
maximum of $60,000 ~for pedestrian crossing reimbursement, which would amouflt to the known
of 25% of $60,000, divided between the two projects. Staff said that a bond could be part of the
improvement agreement to ensure payment in the future.
Chair Harris said that the mitigation outline in the Fehr and Peers Associates report should be
completed prior to the occupancy of the building, and asked what it was and what it is mitigating.
Mr. Chong said that the only proposal was to adjust the green time, and is being corrected;
therefore the mitigation condition could be deleted.
Com. Kwok referred to Condition 17 relative to the applicant complying with the Cupertino
Sanitary District's conditions set forth at no cost to the City of Cupertino. Ms. Rodriguez reported
that the Sanitary District is conducting a study to determine if the current lines are maximized or
overused, and if wider lines need to be installed, applicants developing within their sphere of
influence would be required to pay a mitigation fee. It was determined that the condition should
state that the applicant may be required to pay a mitigation fee to provide the required capacity.
Chair Harris asked for clarification on parking - 59 spaces for retail and guests of the apartments.
She questioned if it was a reasonable number or whether a reciprocal parking agreement should be
considered with the hotel for overflow; what the peak times would be; and what type of retail uses
they would be in terms of drawing customers.
Mr. Randall Mackley, Retail Real Estate Group, said that typically retail ratios are 4 parking stalls
per 1,000. He said he saw a parking demand increase, which is an indication of how much food
goes into a project. He said when considering eateries, there are different peak times, such as early
morning for a donut shop, whereas a traditional sit- down restaurant would have greater demand in
the evening. He said he felt the needs would be greater than 4 per 1,000, but certainly less than 7
per 1,000; and with less than 7,000 square feet, it would be important to have the parking as close
to the retail as possible. He said he anticipated 3 or 4 tenants; that 70% of the market is food,
leaving the ability to solicit 30% of the market; and that food essentially becomes the defacto
anchor, and they were considering looking for more of a lifestyle director, something trendy, but
enduring.
Planning Commission Minutes 6 May 22, 2000
In response to Com. Doyle's request for clarification on the building height, Mr. Chuck Tang, of
McLarand Vasquez and Parmers, illustrated where the building height had been decreased, noting
that the majority of the project had been dropped down 8 feet from the previous profile. He
explained the areas where the building profile had been lowered, namely compressing the building
down in pad elevation; some articulation in the garage podium area to allow lowering one part of
the garage podium area, and minimizing some of the top floor, floor to floor conditions in order to
reduce some of the building heights. He said they literally pushed the building down further in
grade so the new elevations were at 226; the combination of this drop in the podium between the
low rise and the mid rise and the combination of lowering the pad elevation, in addition to
dropping some of the ceiling heights on the 8th floor, created the 8 foot differential between the
previous scheme and present proposal. He said the cave line in the new elevation is at 317.5, a
difference of 8 feet. He said that the unit counts were not increased; by creating some loft
conditions on the low rise condition as well as on the mid-rise condition, it created some additional
square footage into the program.
Mr. Tang explained how the 1:1 ratio was achieved, stating that they set up a series of lines
dictating where the 1:.1 setback would occur. At the fifth floor, everything is in conformance, and
on the sixth floor, where there was previously an encroachment at this condition, it created a
smaller unit plan, eliminating the encroachment. He said a comparison of the original program to
the present submittal, would realize a higher percentage of one bedroom plans in the current
submittal, as some of the two bedrooms were removed to create the 1:1 setback. The loft
conditions are well beyond the line of the 1:1 setback. He said that the garage was not sunk into
the ground as it is an essential part of retail to have parking adjacent to it. He said he felt the
parking was successfully screened from the busiest street, with the only areas of exposure on the
south side of the project, and on the east side of the project where planters will enhance the edge.
John Moss, Pegasus Development, said due to the extensive discussion and presentations, he
would not make an additional presentation, but was available for questions.
Chair Harris opened the meeting for public comment; there was no one present who wished to
speak.
Chair Harris closed the public hearing.
Ms. Rodriquez referred to Page 14, and said it was important to note that they were claiming that
the 1:1 has been dealt with by the units being removed in the trellis area being kept or maintained;
but she noticed by their illustration that they were not actually illustrated with a dash, and is
proposed to be maintained.
Mr. Tang said that they were considering architectural projection in order to enhance the corner
icon of the project. He said they were attempting to 10ok at this as architectural projection similar
to what is happening with the trellises, because it does add to the architecture instead of taking
away from the architecture.
Com. Corr expressed concern about how the project would actually look when it is built. He
asked what steps were forthcoming to ensure that the look would be what they were striving for.
Planning Commission Minutes ? May 22, 2000
Mr: Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director, said that was the intent of separating the
details encompassed in Condition 6 which is a lengthy list, but that if there were additional
concerns, the list could be added to. He said they needed to look at the large set of plans in greater
detail to the point where they are the design built construction drawings. He said the applicant
needs to work 'the details out. Mr. Piasecki said it was fairly certain that there would be
modifications and changes because once they start putting together the construction drawings, they
will find problems, and the intent of the condition is that they will be seen.
Com. Kwok said that they hoped to approve it in concept and have the architect work out the
details, which could go through the design review process for a final product for approval at the
Planning Commission level.
Chair Harris questioned if it was the architect's intent to have flags on the building. Mr. Tang said
it was their intent to have a unified vibrant theme graphic throughout the project, and those
graphics should tie in with the signage program and building colors and should be compatible with
each other. He said he felt it would add to the project but the graphics were not finalized yet, but
would be addressed in more detail later along with other issues.
Chair Harris said that a key issue was building height and asked for input before outlining the
other issues.
Com. Doyle said that it was still too high, and should be more in the range of 40 feet, 1:1 setback,
and then up to 75 feet if2:l setback. The General Plan and Heart of the City state 40 feet, not
100+ feet, hence height is a problem.
Com. Kwok said that he supported the current proposal.
Com. Stevens said he felt it was too tall; 70 feet instead of the Heart of the City 40; he concurred
with Com. Doyle's comment on the 2:1 ratio; and said he wanted to see the buildings behind them,
and the architecture should reflect those buildings.
Com. Corr said that in terms of the stacking, the building behind was taller, and the north elevation
of the Sun Building was a flat, uninteresting structure, and the new building would cover it up. He
said because it was stair stepped, he was not opposed to it.
Chair Harris said that she concurred with Coms. Doyle and Stevens that the building was too high.
She said that she was previously involved when a consultant on the Stevens Creek Plan said that
the towers needed to have an intermediate building placed so that it steps to it, and the proposed
building takes the tower and moves it forward. She said there was an issue with the back building
and it was too high; the front building is ok; the tower element is too high and she said she would
prefer to have it dropped a floor at 75 feet. Chair Harris said she liked the addition of the slightly
higher area in the one tower section and would be amenable to that being reduced
commensurately, but could not approve the proposal. She said that if the height could not be
reduced by sinking the garage into the ground, it would have to be accomplished by reducing it by
a floor. She said it was dense and would impact the traffic and create a giant mass at the
intersection. She said it did not depict the character seen in the last General Plan; she liked the
present towers and the way they step and are set back with lawn area. She said the character of the
city would be changed and all the buildings would be that high; and although there was a need for
housing, the project was too dense.
Planning Commission Minutes 8 May 22, 2000
Chair Harris said that a specific plan was written for the area that said 40 foot height at the
intersection, and 75 feet in the General Plan for landmark buildings in the city. She said because
of the overriding need for apartments, she was willing to approve 75 feet and the staff
recommendation for changing the Specific Plan, since she could not make the required findings in
the Specific Plan if the change is not made. She said she could not make the required finding that
75 or 90 feet is the least modification of a 40 foot requirement, whereas changing the Specific
Plan to allow exceeding it, would not require making such an absurd finding.
In response to Chair Harris' question of how much of the building has an encroachment in the 1:1,
the architect said that the two trellises on the mid-rise portionwas the encroachment. He said they
overlooked that a portion of the low-rise portion is also an encroachment of the 1:I, approximately
15 feet.
Chair Harris asked for input on the 1:1 setback.
Com. Corr said that he felt the 1:1 setback was appropriate to keep the continuity of the building
and the tower. Com. Kwok said that it was appropriate, as the concept of the encroachment was to
enhance the appearance of the building; and he did not want to penalize the applicant because they
want to enhance the building. Com. Doyle said that he felt it was too high. Com. Stevens said
that since the trellises were not considered part of it, he was willing to support it. He said the
tower was unique, was located on the comer only next to the park, and is on the outside L and
gives uniqueness, which he would support. Chair Harris said that she liked it and would support
it.
Chair Harris said that 3-EXC-00 would amend the Specific Plan to allow an apartment use and
exceed the 40 foot height limit, and allow high density on Lot 1, Tract 7953. She said they would
have to make a finding that said that whatever height was decided, was the least modification of
the 40 foot requirement. She questioned if there was any dissention to the amendment.
Com. Doyle said there wire issues relative to the development other than height. Chair Harris
said that it was to change the Specific Plan for height and to allow high density housing because
previously in the Specific Plan there was not housing at the intersection. She said there would be
two issues in the eXCeption, and would change the Stevens Creek Specific Plan for the one parcel
to change the height requirement and to allow high density housing. Ms. Rodriguez clarified that
under Condition 3, since a G had been added (1:1), an H would be added to X feet. She said an
amendment to the General Plan would also be required.
Com. Kwok said he would prefer to grant the exception. Com. Stevens said that he would support
6 floors or 75 feet. Mr. Piasecki said that it would need to be specified what the acceptable height
would be, and whether it would be the one floor referred to earlier or the 75 feet. Later, Chair
Harris said that she would sUpport 75 feet which is the landmark size specified in the General
Plan. Following a brief discussion, Corns. Stevens and Kwok said they would support 75 feet.
Com. Kwok stated for the record that if Cupertino is going to have affordable housing, sometime
and somewhere things have to give. If the height goes to 75 feet, two floor units would be lost and
would add to the cost of the buildings and also the cost of each unit. He said he would prefer the
height of 102 feet as proposed, but it was important to end6rse affordable housing in
Planning Commission Minutes 9 May 22, 2000
Cupertino. Chair Harris said that the city has made great strides in the housing and there has to be
a balance between the needs of the community and the needs of the existing residents for traffic
and mass, and the observance of the General Plan.
Mr. Piasecki said that he felt the applicant would prefer a decision so that the application could be
moved along.
Com. Corr said he concurred with Com. Kwok's comment that reducing the number of units cuts
out the number of affordable units. He said that he preferred that if they choose to support 75 feet,
that it should have been done the last time around, rather than give a wider range and have the
applicant return time after time. He said he felt the applicant should be given a number to work
with. He said he would support the 75 foot height.
There was consensus that reducing the height to 75 feet would eliminate other issues of concern.
Mr. Moss said that he preferred that a vote be rendered, with conditions, and not a continuance,
assuming it would be conditioned on the height.
Ms. Rodriguez summarized the proposed changes to conditions for 6-U-00. Condition 5: adding
that the loading dock shall be screened with evergreen shrubs; Condition 6: (residential) roof
material to be authentic clay tile, mission style, or material that looks similar, or other roofing of
an equal quality that has the same appearance as clay tile, to be approved; Add planter box height
and details for review; Design Review: architecture and landscaping to be approved (unit mix and
total number); Condition 9: Change to 10% of the number; Condition 17: Add "Prior to obtaining
a permit for occupancy, the applicant shall pay the appropriate mitigation fee to provide required
capacity."; Condition 21: Add to second line: "The City in consultation with the sheriff's
department may require installation of cameras;" Condition 34: A bond required in the
improvement agreement for 25% of ...; Condition 35: delete the condition; Use of wording
"based on the concept of the plan;" Delete size of residential and state "high density;" Delete No.
206, and state "residential unit shall have designated parking;" Item 10: amend as needed.
Relative to Heart of the City amendment, Mr. Piasecki clarified that under Item 3, Heart of the
City amendment, it should state: "This approval grants an amendment to the Heart of the City
Specific Plan to allow up to a maximum building height of 75 feet."
Ms. Rodriguez clarified that the remainder of the items would move to the exception.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Kwok moved to recommend approval of Application 9-EA-00
Com Corr
Passed 5-0-0
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Corr moved to recommend denial of Application 2-GPA-99 as it
relates to the apartments
Com. Kwok
Passed 5-0-0
MOTION:
Com. Con' moved to recommend approval of Application 6-U-00 as
amended and 3-EXC-00, an amendment to the Specific Plan to allow up
to 75 feet
Planning Commission Minutes lo May 22, 2000
SECOND: Com. Kwok
VOTE: Passed 5-0-0
Chair Harris declared a recess from 10:00 p.m. to 10:15 p.m.
Application Nos.:
Applicant:
Location:
5-U-00, 4-EXC-00, 2-GPA-99, 8-EA-00
Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group
Lot 6, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center
Use permit to construct a new 217 room, 130,580 square foot hotel, restaurant and bar on a semi-
vacant parcel and operate 24 hours.
General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet.
Heart of the City specific plan exception to exceed the 49 foot height limit and allow hotel use.
Continued from meeting of May 8, 2000
Staff presentation: Ms. Wordell illustrated the perspective, which differed from the previous
rendition. She reviewed changes made by the applicant, including pitched roofs, higher north
tower, lower south tower, restaurant raised roof, and increased offsets in the guest wing. Ms.
Wordell also reviewed architectural changes including belt courses around the building, increased
balconies/awnings, windows simplified and inset, wooden trellises, colors and materials, and a
horizontal sign rather than vertical sign. Landscape changes included parking structure planter
box, trees on west property line, and relocation of the fountain. She said that the architect wants
more design interest on the second and third floors to make it more distinctive; the main tower and
restaurant tower elements needs more detail; restaurant trellis next to the plaza could be better
integrated into the fagade; south elevation mentioned earlier; and other elements such as
landscaping, lighting, Call Avenue signs, etc. coming back for review. Staff recommends
approval of the General Plan amendment, the Heart of the City amendment and exception, and
mitigation negative declaration.
Ms. Wordell noted that the remaining issues to address were: building form/mass;
architecture/design; parking; landscaping; and signs.
Mr. Cannon reviewed the updates and changes to the hotel proposal. He said the treatment along
the top combined with the awnings and balcony fronts was positive; the consistent cornice line and
the way it kicks out and the continuity it provides seems quite positive and the treatment of this
which is consistent with the detailing that is going on in other places also seems to be positive; the
building now has a classic breakdown of a top, a middle and a bottom. He said he was still
concerned, and staff had eluded to, the fact that the building still does not seem to have enough
variety and richness in the window treatment. Mr. Cannon said that the building was beginning to
get back to the integrity that the original design had, but was still boxy with things attached to it,
and there are some minor things to be done that would begin to make the trellis seem more
integrated into the basic restaurant box. He said the architect and developer want to make the
restaurant appear different from the hotel, so it does not appear to look like a hotel restaurant, but
he said he felt the portion above the meeting rooms could have more richness of detail on the
lower portion since it is a rather plain building. He expressed concern about the signage panels
and said he would like to work with the architect. Mr. Cannon indicated that more work needed to
be done to make the entryway a more welcome area. He reiterated that because of the prime
location, the building needed more richness in design.
Planning Commission Minutes Il May 22, 2000
Mr. Jim Lepitich, resident, expressed concern about the issue of escalating noise in the downtown
area. He said there were problems with noise from pickups at nighthours, and deliveries at 5 a.m.
He said that he has reported the concern previously, however, no sound meters have been
available to measure the noise level. He said he felt that the General Plan goals were not being
met in light of the problems that existed. He urged the city to address the issues.
Mr. Cannon addressed staff's comments on the height which does not conform to the Heart of the
City requirements. He said the building sets far back from the street, but the height would be a
Planning Commission judgment; he said it still was not a superior design but had potential. He
said that his preference would be to have an entry from the hotel into the park, otherwise it would
require a lot of landscaping to soften up the wall.
Mr. Jim Whelan, Kimpton Hotel, requested that a decision be made on the application. He
summarized the changes made since the last presentation, which included making the hotel design
more complementary with the apartment; the fagade was more interesting and less boxy; reduction
of the building height; keeping the 1:1 ratio to 40 feet, and the 2:1 ratio at 75 feet; stepped the
structure north to south; moved the penthouse to the south; made the entryway and roofline more
interesting; color; signage; and parking. He noted the addition of one level of parking below
grade; said the overall height of the project varied slightly; it is below a 1:2 setback although
above 75 feet, since it is so far back from the street, it is well within the 1:2 setback; there has
been significant articulation along the side of the building and he said he felt it would be the most
attractive hotel built in the Bay Area this year and next. He reported there were 3 foot and l-1/2
foot offsets along the western fagade; 1-1/2 foot offsets along the eastern fagade; increase in the
use of cornice materials, horizontal, bandings, balconies and awnings; main entryway has been
completely reconfigured, it is pedestrian oriented; restaurant fagade has warmth and interest; the
arbor along northern fagade and western fagade are intended to be of substance; the wooden
columns and beams across the top reminiscent of the Mission campus of Santa Clara University
are taller and allow for interaction between the restaurant and park, providing a sense of action;
there are a significant amount of entries to the park; all doors cannot open to the outside since it is
a high end hotel; significant landscaping; major changes to the roofline; reduced the height of the
cave on the crown, but peak went up to create a better design. Mr. Whelan said that the 75 toot
height limit would impose a loss of 3 floors out of 7 of the.hotel. He said it was fundamentally the
same design presented in November when they agked for an indication of whether or not they
should continue with the process. He said he felt they were responsive to the comments, and they
intended on presenting and operating the highest caliber hotel, and conference center, and
restaurant in the area.
Mr. Bob Wheatley, Ginsler, addressed Mr. Cannon's earlier comment about requiring more
articulation on the building. He said that they were concerned about putting layer upon layer
because he recalled that they earlier had articulation on two stories around the elements and
because the consensus was that it was inappropriate they moved away from it. He said they
increased the depth of the window so they are now 6 inches, and are getting strong shadow lines
around them; there are sills as well as head cornice pieces on them, and sills on all the other
windows, garbage and receiving services are directly opposite the receiving area and the adjacent
City Center building. Porticos also have been added; a portico loggia front entry has been added
to the front of the building; the bike rack area will return to the lower level; a full level of below
ground parking has been added for an additional 30 parking spaces; addition of awning on the top
floor. He continued to outline the modifications and changes made since the last presentation to
the Planning Commission.
t b-- 37
Planning Commission Minutes 12 May 22, 2000
Chair Harris explained the importance of the project to the city,_and getting public input from the
community. She apologized that the item would have to be continued to another meeting in order
to provide the time necessary to review and discuss the proposal.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Doyle moved to continue Application 5-U-00, 2-GPA-99,
4-EXC-00 and 8-EA-00 to the June 12, 2000 Planning
Commission meeting
Com. Kwok
Passed 5-0-0
OLD BUS, SS: None
REPORT 0FX~'HE PLA_NNI~G COMMISSION: Com. Corr reported on his attendance at the
recent Housing Et~mmittee meeting, discussing the impending issues relative to the Santa Barbara
Grill and its red~elopment. He reported that the City Manager's position was down to 2
applicants and shoul~ be filled by mid-June. He reminded everyone of the community event at
Blackberry Farm for'l~on Brown, retiring City Manager on June 17th. He also reported that
Mayor Statton would b'~.convening a community congress in late fall to deal with community
issues. Com. Corr revievked other reports provided at the meeting including Public Safety, Parks
and Recreation, Fine Arts C~k,mmission, and Telecommunications.
REPORT OF ~ DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPIVIENT: Mr. Piasecki
reported on two appeals to City"~;ouncil, including the denial of the oak tree which City Council
upheld; and the appeal on the ele'tktronic security gate on Balboa Road which the City Council
upheld the Planning Commission de~ision, and denied the appeal.
Com. Kwok requested that staff look i~n~o the setback requirement for the daycare center by the
YMCA. IPP~G
DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CL S: None
.\
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned ~'t 11:20 p.m. to the special Planning Commission
meeting at 6:00 p.m. on WednesdaY, May 24, 2000, in Conference Room
C/D.
Respectfully Submitted,
Elizabeth Ellis
Recording Secretary
RESOLUTION NO. 00-193
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE HEART OF THE CITY SPECIFIC PLAN TO
EXCEED THE 40 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT AND AN EXCEPTION TO THE HEART OF THE
CITY SPECIFIC PLAN TO REDUCE SETBACKS AND TO ALLOW HOTEL USE AT LOT
6, TRACT 7953, CUPERTINO CITY CENTER
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
4-EXC-00
Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group
Lot 6, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center
SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR EXCEPTION
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino received an application for an exception
to the Heart of the City Specific Plan, as described in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, in order-to provide design flexibility in situations when small lot size, unusually
shaped parcels, or unique surrounding land uses make it difficult to adhere to the development
standards and where all efforts to meet the standards have been exhausted, an applicant for
development may file an exception request to seek approval to deviate from the standards; and
WHEREAS, the City Council fmds the following with regard to this application:
1. The proposed development is otherwise consistent with the City's General Plan and
with the goals of this specific plan and meets one or more of the criteria described
above.
2. The proposed development will not be injurious to property or improvements in the
area nor be detrimental to the public health and safety.
3. The proposed development will not create a hazardous condition for pedestrian or
vehicular traffic.
4. The proposed development has legal access to public streets and public services are
available to serve the development.
Resolution No. 4-EXC-00
Page 2
June 19, 2000
5. The proposed development reqmres an exception which involves the least modification
of, or deviation from, the development regulations prescribed in this chapter
necessary to accomplish a reasonable use of the parcel.
6. The hotel fulfills the Heart of the City goals of creating a high quality and district
community image and a functional and vibrant heart for Cupertino.
SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR HEART OF THE CITY AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Cupertino received an application for an
amendment to the Heart of the City Specific Plan, as described in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the hotel fulfills the Heart of the City goal of creating a high quality and distinct
community image and a functional and vibrant heart for Cupertino.
WHEREAS, the hotel provides superior design and is stepped back from the street.
WHEREAS, the Heart of the City amendment consists of allowing a maximum height of 108
feet.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted
in this matter, application no. 4-EXC-00 is hereby approved: and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are
based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application 4-EXC-00, as set forth
in the Minutes of the City Council Meeting of June 19, 2000, are incorporated by reference
herein.
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on Sheets C-1 and Sheets L1.2, Site Plan, Floor Plans (4), Elevations (4),
Walls Details, Sections (3), Rendering all dated June 5, 2000, Colored Elevation and
submitted material board except as amended by conditions contained in this Resolution.
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
Resolution No.
Page 3
4~EXC-00
June 19, 2000
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 ba~rred from later challenging such
exactions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of June, 2000, at a Regular Meeting of the City Council
of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
VOTE:
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
Carol Atwood
Acting City Manager
g:/planning/pdreport/res/4exc00cc
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Tot're Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
2-GPA-99
RESOLUTION NO. 6031 -
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING
THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN TO EXCEED THE
ALLOWED HEIGHT OF 75 FEET
SECTION'I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino initiated an application for General Plan Amendment 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 at least one hearing
on the matter; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the potential environmental impacts of the
hotel project and found they were mitigated to a level of insignificance, but that the
environmental impacts of the apartment project were not mitigated to a level of insignificance;
and
WHEREAS, the application 2-GPA-99, requests approval for the following in the City Center:
building heights of up to 108'. The land uses significantly contribute to the activity desired in
City Center, and the building desi~.q and materials are superior;
NOW, THEREFORE', BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted
in this matter, the application for General Plan Amendment, application no.(s) 2-GPA-99 and 5-
U-00, revising the text of the General Plan, is hereby recommended for approval as shown
below:
Policy 2-24, Strategy 2:
The hotel (File 5-U-00) project is specifically exempted from the height limitations, to
allow heights up to 108 feet. This height exception applies to the current use permit and
any permit extension granted by the City.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are
based are contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application 2-GPA-99, 5-U-00, as
set forth in the Planning Commission minutes of June 12, 2000, and are incorporated by
reference as though fully set forth herein.
Resolution No. 6031 2-GPA-99
Page 2
SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No: 2-GPA-99
Applicant: Kimpton Hotel and Restaurant Group
Property Owner: Cupertino City Center Land
Project Location: Lot 6, Tract 7953, City of Cupertino, CA
June 12, 2000
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June, 2000, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
Corr, Kwok and Chairperson Harris
Doyle, Stevens
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/ Steve Piasecki
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
/s/ Andrea Harris
Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
g:/planning/res/2gpaO0
4-EXC-00
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 6032
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO EXCEED THE 40 FOOT
HEIGHT LIMIT AND AN EXCEPTION TO THE HEART OF THE CITY SPECIFIC PLAN
TO REDUCE SETBACKS AND TO ALLOW HOTEL USE AT LOT 6, TRACT 7953,
CUPERTINO CITY CENTER
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
4-EXC-00
Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group
Lot 6, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center
SECTION Ih FINDINGS FOR EXCEPTION
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for an
exception to the Heart of the City Specific Plan, as described in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, in order to provide design flexibility in situations when small lot size, unusually
shaped parcels, or unique surrounding land uses make it difficult to adhere to the development
standards and where all efforts to meet the standards have been exhausted, an applicant for
development may file an exception request to seek approval to deviate from the standards; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission f'mds the following with regard to this application:
1. The proposed development is otherwise consistent with the City's General Plan and
with the goals of this specific plan and meets one or more of the criteria described
above.
2. The proposed development will not be injurious to property or improvements in the
area nor be detrimental to the public health and safety.
3. The proposed development will not create a hazardous condition for pedestrian or
vehicular traffic.
4. The proposed development has legal access to public streets and public services are
available to serve the development.
Resolution No. 6032
Page 2
4-EXC-00
June 12, 2000
5. The proposed development requires an exception which involves the least modification
of, or deviation from, the development regulations prescribed in this chapter
necessary to accomplish a reasonable use of the parcel.
6. The hotel fulfills the Heart of the City goals of creating a high quality and district
community image and a functional and vibrant heart for Cupertino.
SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR HEART OF THE CITY AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for an
amendment to the Heart of the City Specific Plan, as described in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the hotel fulfills the Heart of the City goal of creating a high quality and distinct
community image and a functional and vibrant heart for Cupertino.
WHEREAS, the hotel provides superior design and is stepped back from the street.
WHEREAS, the Heart of the City amendment consists of allowing a maximum height of 108
feet.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony, and other evidence submitted
in this matter, application no. 4-EXC-00 is hereby recommended for approval; 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 4-EXC-00, as set forth
in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 12, 2000, are incorporated by
reference herein.
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on Sheets C-1 and Sheets L 1.2, Site Plan, Floor Plans (4), Elevations (4),
Walls Details, Sections (3), Rendering all dated June 5, 2000, Colored Elevation and
submitted material board except as amended by conditions contained in this Resolution.
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
Resolution No. 6032
Page 3
4-EXC-O0
June 12, 2000
66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this ¢0-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 12th day of June, 2000, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Kwok
COMMISSIONERS: Chairperson Harris
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS: Doyle, Stevens
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/ Steve Piasecki
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
/s/ Andrea Harris
.Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
g:/planning/pdreport/res/4exc00
5-U-O0
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 6033
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A NEW 224 ROOM,
130,580 SQUARE FOOT HOTEL, RESTAURANT, AND BAR ON A VACANT PARCEL AT
LOT 6, TRACT 7953, CUPERTINO CITY CENTER
SECTION I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use
Permit, as described in Section II. of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural
Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public
hearings on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has
satisfied the following requirements:
1) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general
welfare, or convenience;
2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino
Comprehensive General Plan, as amended, and the purpose of this title.
3) The hotel fulfills Policy 2-2 of the General Plan by creating a community focal point that serves
City residems and is scaled for pedestrians. It fulfills Policy 2-3 by providing a full-service hotel.
4) The hotel fulfills the Heart of the City goals of creating a high quality and district community image
and a functional and vibrant heart for Cupertino.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this
matter, the application for Use Permit is hereby recommended for approval, subject to the conditions
which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and
contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. 5-U-00 as set forth in the Minutes of the
Planning Commission of June 12, 2000, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
Resolution No. 6033
Page -2-
5-U-00
Jtm~ 12, 2000
SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
5-U-00
Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group
Lot 6, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
o
o
o
APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on Sheets C-1 and Sheets L1.2, Site Plan, Floor Plans (4), Elevations (4), Walls
Details, Sections (3), Rendering all dated June 5, 2000, Colored Elevation and submitted material
board except as amended by conditions contained in this Resolution.
WINDOW MATERIALS
Window lintels and sills shall consist of hard-troweled foam.
PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN
A parking management plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by staff prior to final
occupancy that describes the parking system used by hotel guests, restaurant customers, staff and valet
parking. The purpose of the study is to ensure that guests/customers will not have parking problems or
undue parking costs because of the on-site parking shortage.
SECURITY PLAN FOR PARKING GARAGE
A security plan for the parking garage shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Sheriff's
Department prior to occupancy.
ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL
The outdoor patio hedge area, all outdoor lighting, balconies, awnings, landscape pots (including
landscaping in the upper parking garage), the water feature, paving design and materials, and
sidewalks/landscaping along Cali Avenue shall receive architectural and site approval from the
Planning Commission prior to issuance of building permits. The lower tower elements shall have
more substantial bands.
SIGNS
The sign locations and design are not included in this approval. Signs shall receive architectural and
site approval and a sign exception, if applicable, prior to construction.
CALI ROAD AND ENTRYWAY
That portion of Cali Road that terminates adjacent to the rear of APN 369-01-001 shall be abandoned.
There shall be no parking on Cali Road or the private entry courtyard. Short-term loading is allowed.
TREE PROTECTION
An arborist's report shall be prepared that will assess the acacia trees at the rear of APN 369-01-001 to
determine if they can retained due to their close proximity to the parking structure. If they can not be
retained, the report shall analyze the possibility of receiving permission to remove and replace them
Resolution No. 6033
Page -3-
5-U-00 June 12, 2000
with trees more appropriate to the nan'ow planting space. If permission is not granted, the applicant
shall provide climbing plants along the face of the parking structure.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT
A grant of easement for parking and amendment to the CC & R's shall be submitted with the building
permit for use of parking spaces in the below-grade parking structure located on the adjoining parcel
located to the East. The text of the easement shall be approved by staff, after City Attorney review.
FOUR SEASONS PLAZA
Amend the June 26, 1997, License Agreemem between the Cupertino City Center Owners Association
and the City of Cupertino to incorporate a new Exhibit A, which is the map depicting the Property
involved in the agreement. The new Exhibit shall accurately reflect the proposed lot line adjustment.
The recordation of this Agreement shall be in conjunction with the Lot Line Adjustment recordation
for this project. The text of the amended Agreement shall be approved by City staff, after City Attorney
review.
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
The developer shall make provisions for recycling facilities, which shall be accessible to the Los Altos
Garbage Company. The recycling and garbage areas shall reviewed and approved in writing by the Los
Altos Garbage Company prior to issuance of building permits.
LOT LINE ADR3STMENT REQUIRED
The lot line adjustments depicted in the plan set are required to be recorded prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
SANITARY DISTRICT
Prior to obtaining a building permit, the applicant shall pay for the appropriate mitigation costs to
provide the required capacity and shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the District for
reimbursement by other property owners for other than their proportionate share.
AMENITY SPACE
Amend the Agreement for the amphitheater and pool located on parcel #23 to allow use by the hotel
guests. The Agreement shall be provided with the building permit. The Agreement wording shall be
approved by staff, after review by the City Attorney and recorded in conjunction with the building
permit.
BICYCLE STORAGE
A plan for bicycle storage shall be provided, approved by staff, prior to issuance of building permits.
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 exaction's. 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 exaction's. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day
approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exaction's,
Resolution No. 6033 5-U-00
Page -4-
Jm~e 12, 2000
pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you-fail to file a protest within this 90-
day period complying with ail of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from
later challenging such exactions.
SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
STREET WIDENING
Street widening, improvements and dedications shail be provided in accordance with City Standards
and specifications and as required by the City Engineer.
CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS
Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and
standards as specified by the City Engineer.
STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION
Street lighting shail be installed and shail be as approved by the City Engineer. Lighting fixtures shail
be positioned so as to preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining properties, and
shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site is located.
FIRE HYDRANT
Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City.
TRAFFIC SIGNS
Traffic control signs shail be placed at locations specified by the City.
STREET TREES
Street trees shail be planted within the Public Right of Way and shail be of a type approved by the City
in accordance with Ordinance No. 125.
GRADING
Grading shail be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of
the Cupertino Municipal Code.
DRAINAGE
Drainage shail be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Surface flow across public
sidewaiks may be allowed in the R-l, R-2 and R-3 zones unless storm drain facilities are deemed
necessary by the City Engineer. Development in ail other zoning districts shail be served by on site
storm drainage facilities connected to the City storm drainage system. If City storm drains are not
available, drainage facilities shail be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and
other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected
utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shail submit detailed
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
Resolution No. 6033
Page
5-U-O0 June 12, 2000
plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the
affected Utility provider and the City Engineer.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing
for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park
dedication fee's and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to
issuance of construction permits.
Fees:
a. Checking & Inspection Fees:
b. Development Maintenance Deposit:
c. Storm Drainage Fee:
d. Power Cost:
e. Map Checking Fees:
f. Park Fees:
g. Grading Permit:
h. Street Improvement Re'.unbursement:
i. Pedestrian Crossing Reimbursement:
$ 6% of Improvement Cost or $1,975.00 minimum
$ 3,000.00
$2,420/acre
$75.00/street light
N/A
N/A
$ 6% of on-site improvement Cost or $460.00
min.
$ 6,750.00
See item -30. Not to exceed $60,000.00 for both
the hotel and apartment projects
The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City
Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map
or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time
will reflect the then current fee schedule.
TRANSFORMERS
Electrical 'transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be
screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible
from public street areas.
DEDICATION OF WATERLINES
The developer shall execute a quitclaim deed for underground water rights to San Jose Water and shall
reach an agreement with San Jose Water Company for water service to the subject development.
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board,
for construction activity which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in your grading and street
improvement plans.
PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
Developer to contribute twenty-five percent (25%) of the total cost of Architectural and Pedestrian
Crossing Project at intersection of Stevens Creek Blvd. and De Anza Blvd.
Resolution No. 6033 5-U-00
Page -6-
June 12, 2000
31.
GRADING _
In conjunction with the grading permit the applicant shall submit a path-of-travel for the tracks leaving
the site and hours of operation. The hours of operation shall be non-peak.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June, 2000, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Kwok
COMMISSIONERS: Chairperson Harris
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS: Doyle, Stevens
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/ Steve Piasecki
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
Is/ Andrea Harris
Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
g/planning/pdreport/res5 u006-12-00
~ %o¢ Peek °
7,'00 AM 95% ~B
10:~ ~ ~S~ 18S
11~ ~ 85~ 1~
12:~ PM 8S~ 123
~:~ ~ es~ f23
3:~ PM ~S~ 144
4:~ ~ 87% les
6:~ PM ~% 287
8:~ PM M~ ~
~ PM ~ 3~
?0:~ P~ ~ 410
I1~ PM 1~ 410
12:~ ~ I~ 410
Apldmentl
Size (.pm) 20~
Peak Rate 2 .
Padvded Sul~piy ,,, 344
Oemlnd
Add1 Pa~k~g R~'d Aw~___~_.e Add1 Supl~/ Sho~age
56 :,1SO NO
S 150 NO
0 86 NO
0 n/e NO
0 n/e
0 23
O n/e NO
0 24 HO
0 20
0 n/e NO
O 65 NO
0 ~ZT NO
0 156 NO
2S )156 NO
46 )!5~ NC)
66 :'lBS NO
Hourly VadMkme by Percentage M Peak H(wr of DMZ/Vehicle Count
W#kd
raze (rooms) 202 (sm,*
Perk R~te I
~d ~ - 171
~f Peak ' ~- ~ :,,~-r-~
1~ S ~7
85% 8 1
~5~ 37
45~ 42 133
~ ~ 117
~ 51 112
~ 51 112
35~ 47 118
35~ 47 118
45~ 4o 13~
~ 3g
7~ 28
75% 28
~ 21
~% ~ 212
1~ tS 217
I~ 4
1~ 4
Hotels
(t ,000
Plak Rmto
'/.,of Peak 2O%
20Y.
20%
2O%
3O%
5O% 15
?0~ 21
60% 18
5S% 17
50% IS
70% 21
BOY. 27
100% 30
0O% :27
3
Size (I.000 a.f.) 3.S
Polk Rite 20 ***
%of Peak
o% 0
O%
100% 7O
t00% 70
100% 70
100% 70
100,4 70
100% 70
100% TO
foo'~ 7O
100% 70
li00~ 70
100% 7O
100% 70
100'~ 70
50~ 35
0%
0%
Adu'1 ~"--~lJ Recl'd ~'- "=:--;'- Add1 ~ ~.~, ~,,,~.M,~?
42 3~4
'~S 364 NO
73 293 HQ
54 n/I NO
38 n/o NO
2S SS HQ
26 65 HQ
3~ B0 NO
34 8! NO
45 n/e NO
eS 244 NO
109 315 HQ
132 315 NO
141 315 HQ
104 397 NC)
M 40! HQ
SO 401 NO
(
(
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Deparuncnt of Community Development
10300 Tone Avenue
Cupertino, Ca 95014
408-777-3308
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Staff Use Only
EA File No._
Case File No.
Attachments .~
Project Title
Kimpton Hotel City Center.
Lot 6, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center
Full-service Hotel and restaurant containing 217 guest
PrQectLoc~ion
Pr~ect Description
approximately 3,600 ~quare feet of meeting space and an approximately
3~500 square foot restaurant(includes outside dining).
rooms,
EnvironmcnmlS¢~ing
Located within Cupertino City Center
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Site Area (ac.) 1.4 Building Coverage 70.95 % Exist. Buildin~/~f. Proposed Bldg.130 ,5~.~.
ZoneP(Res/co---~--~.P. Desi~ation eom/off/res Assessor'sParcelNo. 369 - 01 -037 (lot
ofs/ind/hotel)
If Residential, Units/Gross Acre n/a
Unit
Type
#I
Unit
Type
#2
Total// -Rental/Own Bdrms Total s.f. Price
Unit
Type
#3
Unit
Type
Unit
Type
#5
Applicable Special Area Plans: (Check)
l-'--'] Monta Vista Design Guidelines ~ S. De Anza Conceptual
~ N. De Anza Conceptual
~ S. Sara-Sunny Conceptual
I-YY-[ Stevens Crk Blvd. Conceptual 1----] Stevens Creek Blvd. SW & L'scape
6)
· · 130,58
If Non-Residential, Building Area ~.f. FAR2.27 Max. Employees/Shift
Parking Required Parking Provided 164
Project Site is Within Cupertino Urban Service Area YES ~'x NO
8O
[i~'iTIAL STUDY SOURCE LIST ..
A) GENERAL PLAN SOURCES
1) Cupertino C~neral Plan, Land Usr Element
2) Cupertino General Plan, Public Safety Element
3) Cupertino C-choral Plan, Housing Element
4) Cupertino General Plan, Transportation Element
5) Cupertino Guncral Plan. Environmcmal Resourr~s
6) Cup~tino C, encral Plan. Appendix A- Hillside D~v¢lopment
7) Cupe~no C,:ncral Plan. Land Usc Map
g) Noise Element Amendment
9) City Ridgclinc Policy
10) Cupertino C~:ncrai Plan Consuaint Maps
B) CUPERT/NO SOURCE DOCUMENTS 11) Tt~e Prescrvaiion ordinance 778
12) City Aerial Photography Maps
13) "Cupertino Chronicle" (California History Center, 1976)
14) Geological R:port (site specific)
15) Parking Ordinances 1277
16) Zoning Map
17) Zoning Code/Specific Plan Documents
18) City Noise Ordlnanc~
C) CITY AGENCIES 19) Cupertino Conununity Development DcpL
20) Cupertino Public Works Dept.
21) Cupertino Patios & Recreation Dcpartment
22) Cupertino Watater Utility
D) OUTSIDE AGENCIES 23) County Planning Depa.mnent
24) Adjacent City's Planning Depa~unent
25) County Depaz~cntal of Environmental Health
26) Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Disu'ic!
27) County Parks and Rccreation Deparuncnt
28) Cup~tino Sanitary Distzic!
29) Fremont Union High School Disu~ct
30) Cupertino Union School District
31) Pacific Gas and EiccU~c
32) Santa Clara County Fir~ Department
33) County Shm'iff
34) CALTRANS
35) County Transportation Agency
36) Santa Clara Valley Wauer District
E) OUTSIDE AGENCY DOCUMENTS
37) BA. AQMD Survey of Contaminant Excesses
38) FEMA Flood Maps/S~ Flood Maps
39) USDA, "Soils of Santa Clara County"
40) County Hazardous Waste Management Plan
41) County Heritage Resources Inventory
42) Santa Clara Valley Water District Fuel
l~ak Siu:
43) CalEPA Hazardous Was,,' and Substances
Site List
F) OTHER SOURCES 44) Project Plan Scl/Application Materials
45) Field Reconnaissance
46) Expericncc with Project of similar s
47) ABAG Pmjcctions Series
1) Complete all information requested on
the Initial Study Cover page. LEAVE
BLANK SPACES ONLY WI~.N A
SPEC]~C ITEM IS NOT
APPLICABLE.
2) Consult the Initial Study Source List; use
the materials listed therein to complete, the
checklist information in Categories A
through O.
You are encouraged to cite other relevant
sources; if such sources are used, job in their
title(s) in the "Source" column nex~ to the
question to which they relate.
3) If you check any of the "YES" response
to any questions, you must attach a sheet
explaining the potential impact and suggest
mitigation if needed.
4) When explaining any yes response, label
your answer clearly (Example '~N - 3
Historical") Please try to respond concisely,
and place as many explanatory responses as
possible on each page.
5) Upon completing the checklist, sign and
date the Preparer's Affidavit.
6) Please attach thc following materials
before submitting the Initial Study to the
City.
- Project Plan Set of Legislative Document (1) copy
- Location map with site clearly marked (when
8pplic~blc)
Ir~IPACT
i,,YES
WILL THE PROJECT... Not Significant Significant 2umulative SOURCE
:Significant (Mitigation ('No
INTO Proposed) Mitigation
Proposcd)
A) LAND USE GENERAL PLAN
1) Require a changc from thc land usc 1,7,8
d.~gna,io. ~o~ ~e su~:ct s~t: in th: I~1 I--I I"'1
Oencral Plan?
3) Require a change of an adopted
specific plan or other adopted policy O O ~ ~ '0 ,7.,8
statcmcnt?
4) Result in substantial change in the
present land .c of thc site or that of 0 0 [~ ~ 0 7,12
adjoining properties?
$) Disrupt or divide thc physical
configuration of an established I~ O O O O 7,12.22.41
neighborhood?
B) G£OLOGIC/SEISMIC HAZARD
1) Be Iocatcd in an area which has
potential for major geologic hazard? [] O O O O 2,14
2) Be located on or adjacent to a
Imown earthquake fault? ~' '~ O O O :2.,4
3) ~:loc~t:dinaOeo,ogi~S~d~. [~ O O
Zone? 2
4) Be located in an area of soil
instabiliw (subsidence, land~lidc, [] O O
shrinkYswcll, soil creep or scvcrc 2,5,10
erosions)?
5) Cause substantial erosion or
satuation of a watercourse? [~ ~ O [] O 2.5,10
6) Cause substantial disruption,
displacement, compaction or O O ~ O 2.14'39
over¢ovcring of soil either on-site or off-
7) Cause substantial change in
feature? 10,39
8) Involve construction ofabuilding,
or
C} R~OURCF_~
1) Incm~e the existing removal rat~, or 5,10
resu,t in the removal o, . n.~ reso~= F~ 0 F1
for commercial purposes (includi,g i(cms
such as rock. sand, gravel, utes. minerals
or top-soil)?
2) Result in thc substantial depiction of I~ O O O O $
any non-rencwabic natural resource?
3) Conve.~me~i:ul~,and [~ 0 0 F-! 0 5,39
(Clas~ ] or U soils) to non-agriculm~l nsc
or impair thc agficultund productivity of
nearby prime agricultural land?
4) Involve lands currently protcc~d [] O O O O 5,23
under thc Williarnson Ac~ or any Open
Space casement7
IMPACT
YES
WILL THE PROJECT... ~ot Significant Significam :umulativc SOURCE
Significant (Mitigation (No
NO Proposed) Mitigation
Proposed)[
3) Change thc existing habitat food
source or nesting place fora rare or ~ O O O O 5,10
endangered species of plant or animal?
4) Involve cutting, removal of
to thc site or introduced?
G) TRANSPORTATION
1) Cause an increase in traffic which
is substantial in relation to the existing
traffic load and capacity of thc street ]~ ~ O O O 4.20.35
system?
2) Cause any public or private succt
So'vice D?
3) Increase Uaffic hazards m
pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles? ~] O O O O 20.35
4) Adversely affect access to
commercial establishments, public
buildings, schools, parks or other ~ 0 0 0 0 4,,0
pedcstrian oriented activity areas?
$) Causc a reduction in public -
transporiation scrvic¢ at or near the ~' 0 0 0 0 35
project site7
6) lncroasc demand upon existing
,.king facilities, or engender demand for O [~ O O O 15.16
new parking space?
7) Inhibit use of alternative modes of
Uansportation to private automobile ~ 0 0 0 0 5,19. 34,35
usage?
H) HOUSING
1) Reduce the supply of affordable
housing in thc community, or result in thc ~ 0 0 0 0 3.16
displacement of pcrsous from their
present home?
2) Increase thc cost of housing in the 3, 16
arca~ or substantially changc thc varicty [] 0 0 0
of housing typcs found in thc
community?
3) Create a s.bstaatial demand for new ~ 0 0 0 0 3, 16.4"/
housing?
I) HEALTH AND SAFETY
1 ) Involve thc application, usc, ~a 0 0 0 0 32,40,42,43
disposal or manufacture of poe:ntially
hazardous materials? ~] 0 0 0 0 32,43
2) Involve risk of explosion or other
forms of uncontrolled release of
hazardous substances?
3) Involve thc removal or continued ~ 0 0 0 0 33.42,43
usc of any existing, or installation of
any new underground chemical or fucl
torage tank?
4) Be located in an area of seasonal fu'c ~ 0 0 0 0 2,32
danger?
$) Employ technolog~ which could
adversely afl'c, public saf'cty in the ~] 0 0 0 0 40,43
event Of a breakdown?
IMrACT
YES
WILL THE PROJECT... Not Significant Signmcant Cumulative SOURCE
Significant (Mitigation (No
NO Proposed) Mitigation
Proposcd)
agricultural uses? 7, 23
6) Bc located on, within or near a O [~' ~ O O 5.10, 12,21,26
public or private recreation facility, park,
wildlife preserve, public U-ail citber in
cxisteocc already or planned for future
implementation?
D) SEWAGE/WATER QUALITY
1) Result in a septic field being
~ns~ctedonso,,w~thseveredrai-~e,d t~ . .O O O O 6.9
performance limitations?
2) Result in a septic field being
located within 50 feet of a drainage swale 36,39,42
or within 100 feet of any well, watcr
course or water body7
3) Result in extension of a sewer main --.
line with capacity to serve new '~ O ~O O 19. 20. 40
development?
4)Substantially degrade surface or
groundwater quality, or the public water 20,36,37
supply, including but not limited to []
typical stormwatcr polluntants (c.g.
sediment fi.om construction,
hydroc~Woons and metals from vehicle
use, nutrients and pesticides fi.om
landscaping maintenance, metals and
acidity from mining operations)?
5)Bc located in an area of water supply 22
concern ~soc~ as Iow fire ~ows~?
waters through infiltration of reclaimed
water or storm water runoff that has
contacted pollutants from urban.
industrial or agricultural activities?
7)Require a NPDES permit for 20
acres or more.*]?
· E) DR~INAGF_J FLOODING
1) Interfere substantially with ground 20~6
2) Substantially O~ange the direction,
rate or flow or quanti~ ofgroundo
additions or withdrawals, or excavations?
:;)Change the absorption ra~:s, drainage
r~noff or wetland?
.,,.vo, ve.....~..i..,echan.el ffi O E] O O 36.,2
or ~l~:ambed or water ~o~'~¢ $,,ch ~ to
alter the locations, course or flow of its
waters?
5) Be located in ,. floodway or
flo~plaln.~a: [] O
F} FLORA AND FAUNA
1) Significantly nffect fish, wildlife,
reptile, or p,ant life by c,an,i.g the F~
diversity or numbers of existing species,
or by introducing new species, or by
res~cting migration or movement?
~) Substantially reduce the habitat area
fo~fis~.animals.pl.,~? ~ O O O O ~.,o
WILL THE PROJECT... SGoRCE
Not Significant Significant Cumulative
Significant (Mitigation (No
- NO I~*oposcd) Mitigation
Proposed)
6) Provide breeding grounds for
mosquitos or other disease vectors? [~[ O O O O 25
J) AIR QUALITY
1 ) Create objectionable odors? [~[ O O O O 40,43
2) Violate any ambient air quality
standards, con~ibute substantially to an [~ O O O 'O 5,37,42
existing or projected air quality violation,
or expose sensitive r~ceptots to
substantial concentrations of pollutants?
K) NOISE
1) Increase substantially thc ambient
noise environment of the project vicinity 0 ~ 0 0 0 8,18
during consUuction of thc pmjcct?
2) Result in sustained incrcasc in
=bi=' noise '"els in the p J=' I-1 i-1 1-1 l-1 g.,g
vicinity following construction of the
project
3) Result in sustained noise levels
beyond the lhresholds of sound energy [~ O O O O 8.18
and duration iimiu contained in the
City's Noise Ordinance?
_L) AESTHETICS
1) Bc at variance with applicable
d~ign guidelines? . O O [] O O 17
2} Create an aesthetically offensive
I site °Pen t° Public view? [~[ O. O O O 1,17
3) Visually intrude upon an area of
natural scenic qualities? [~ O O O O 5.9
~ 4) Obstruct view of a scenic ridgelin¢
visible from the valley floor? 5, 9
S) Obstruct views of the city's adjacoat
hillsides f~om residential areas or public 10, 21, 24. 41
lands?
6) Adversely affect thc architectund
business district? 1,17,19
7) Produce glar~ from artificial
I or public roadways? ...
I M} ENERGY
, ,..o,. the usc of
quantities of fossil fuels or non-
renewable energy sources?
2) Remove vegetation providing
summer shad, or wind-breaks to an ~ 0 0 0 0 11.19
existing or proposed building?
3) Significantly reduce solar sc_,=-_~s to
an adjacent building, public r~cl~ation 0 ~ 0 0 0 I 1,19
Lspacc or private yard?
HISTORICAL/
aRCHAEOLOGICAL
1) Re located in an area of potential
archaeological or paleontological [~ 0 0 0 O 10.42
r~sources?
IMPACI
YES
WILL THE PROJECT... ~aot ~ignificant Significan, Cumulative Sou'acE
Significant [Mitigation (No
NO Proposed) Mitigation
Proposcd)
2) Affect advcrscly a propcny of historic 1, I 0,41
except aa pa~t of a scientific study?
O) PUBLIC SERVICES AND
UTILITIES
quantities? ·
the location, distribution, or density of
thc human population of an ar=a7
3) Cause substantial impact upon, or
increase thc nccd for: :
"a) Fi~ Protection Services? ]~]' [] [] [] [] 19,32
c) Public Schools? ]~] [] [] [] [] 29,30
d) Pm'ks/Recreation Facilities? ]~]] [] [] [] [] 5, 17, 19, 21
e) Maintenance ofPubn= F~ilities? ~ [] [] [] [] 192.0,21
O Other Governmental $¢rvicrs? ~ [] [] [] [] 19
4) Cause substantial impact upon"
existing utilities or infraatructure in the
following categories:
¢) Storm water management? ~] [] O' [] [] 36.38
5) Generate demand for use of any
poblic facility which causcs that facility ~ 71 0 0 0 19,20,22,25,3!
tO r~a~h or exceed its cap~ity?
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
(To be Completed by City Staff)
IMPACT AREAS:
[] Land Use/General Plan
[] Sewage/Water Quality [] Drainage/Flooding
[] Historical/Archaeological [] Health & Safety
Energy
[] Public Services/Utilities []
~TAFF EVALUATION
[] Geologic/Seismic Hazard [] Resources/Parks
[] Flora & Fauna
[] Air QualiW
[] Aesthetics
[] Housing
[] Transportation
[] Noise
On the basis of this Initial Study, the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) Finds:
:That the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and recommends
that a NEGATIVE DECLARATION be granted.
That although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, no significant effect will occur
because mitigation measures are included in the project. ERC recommends that a NEGATIVE DECLARATION
be granted.
That the proposed MAY have a significant effect on the environment and recommends that an
S ffEvalua,or
Date 5 ~ ~/0~ Date
Select One
[--t
g/planning/intstdy4.do~
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
(To Be Completed by City Staff)
+
WILL THE PROJECT...
Have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, to
substantially diminish the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; to cause a'fish
or wildlife population to drop below self-sustainable levels; to threaten or
eliminate a plant or animal community; to reduce the number of or
restrict the range ora rare or endangered plant or animal; to eliminate
important examples of the major periods, of.California's history or
prehistory?
Have the potential to achieve short term environmental goals to the
disadvantage of long term environmental goals?
Have environmental impacts which are individually limited, but are
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable: means that the
incremental effects of an individual project are substantive when viewed in
conjunction with the effects of pazt projects, other current projects, and
probable future projects)
Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse impacts
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
YES
NO
hereby certify that the information provided in this Initial Study is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
,elief; ! certify that I have used proper diligence in responding accurately to all questions herein, and have consulted
appropriate soun~c references when necessary to ensure full and complete disclosure of relevant environmental data. I
hereby acknowledge than any substantial errors dated within this Initial Study may cause delay or discontinuance of
related project review procedures, and hereby agree to hold harmless the City of Cupertino, its staff and a~.u~orized
agents, fi.om the consequences of such delay or discontinuance. ~
CITY OF CUPERTINO
NEGATIVE DECLARATION'
As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure adopted by the City Council of the
City of Cupertino on May 27, 1973, and amended on March 4, 1974, January 17 1977, May 1,
1978, and July 7, 1980, the following described project was granted a Negative Declaration by
the City Council of the City of Cupertino on June 19, 2000.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
8-EA-00
Application No.(s): 5-U-00, 4-EXC-00, 2-GPA-99
Applicant: Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group
Location: Lot 6, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center
DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST
Use Permit to construct a new 224 room, 130,580 square foot hotel on a vacant parcel.
Heart of the City Specific Plan amendment to exceed the 40 foot height limit and a Heart of
the City Specific Plan exception to allow hotel use.
General Plan amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet.
FINDINGS OF DECISIONMAKING BODY
The City Council granted the Negative Declaration since the environmental impacts are
mitigated.
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
CERTIFICATE OF THE CITY CLERK
This is to certify that the above Negative Declaration was filed in the Office of the City Clerk
of the City of Cupertino on 2000.
City Clerk
g:/planning/eredneg8 ¢a00
CITY OF
CUPER TINO
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
FAX (408) 777-3333
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
AGENDA ITEM
Summary
AGENDA DATE June 19, 2000
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Appeal and exception to the Planning Commission's decision of May 8, 2000, regarding park fees
stated in Resolution 6025: approval of Application 1-TM-00, Tentative Map to subdivide a 8,818 sq.
ft. parcel into two lots at 10440 South Blaney Avenue are listed in Section III item 14 of improvement
agreement in the amount of $31,500.00. Appellant: Ron Bennett.
BACKGROUND
An appeal has been submitted to waive the park dedication fee for the one lot of the subdivision that
currently has a dwelling unit.
The staff has resolved this issue with the applicant by not charging a park dedication fee on the basis of
an existing house on one of the parcels of the subdivision.
This item appears on the agenda only because of a legal requirement of agendizing matters that have
been advertised for a hearing.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
No action is necessary since the resolution is consistent with the applicant's request.
l~irector of Pul
:h
tic Works
Approvq(~ fol' submission:
Donald D. llt~wn
City Manager
Printed on Recycled Paper °73'"' /
The Bennett Group
May22,2000
Roberta' Wolfe
Deputy City Clerk
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, Ca. 95014-3255
MAY 3O
CUPERTINO CITY CLERK
Dear Ms. Wolfe,
Please accept this letter as a formal request to withdraw my appeal of Planning
Commission of The City of Cupertino dated May 17, 2000 item number 1-TM-00.
Bert Viskovich, Director of Public Works has verbally agreed to terms by which, Public
Works Department will assess Park fees in the amount of $15,750.00 in the Development
Agreement. I reserve my right to reinstate my right to appeal the Planning Commissions
decision if the Public Works Department does not provide a written document to show
said agreement within ten days.
Thus based on the verbal commitment of Mr. Viskovich, as a representative of the
City of Cupertino,.an appeal is no longer warranted. I request that the appeal amount
of $125.00 be refunded to me within a 15-day period.
Please feel free to call me if you have any question or issues regarding this matter.
Since/rely
Ron Bennett
P.O. Box 1454 Cupertino, CA 95015 408/996-2222
May 17, 2000
The Bennett Group
MAY 1 7 2000
Dear Mayor Statton and Members of the City Council,
Please accept this letter as a formal request of appeal and exception to the Planning
Commission of The City of Cupertino dated May 8, 2000 item number 1-TM-00.
Appeal of Park fees:
The Park fees stated in Resolution number 6025: Approval of Tentative Map to subdivide
A 18,818sq. Ft. parcel into two lots at 10440 South Blaney Ave. are listed in Section III
item number 14 of Improvement Agreement in the amount of $31,500.00. These fees were
figured on two lots, as stated by The Public Works Department.
Applicant Position:
The stated Park fees are excessive for the applied project. Applicant proposes fees based
on one new lot, resulting in Park fees of $15,750.00 being paid to The City under the
Development Agreement. One of the two lots is a fully improved existing structure
(Applicants home) which will remain as is. The Park Fees have been placed upon the
agreement under a single title. The Public Works Department chose not to define said fees
as either 1. Park Land Dedication or 2. Park Maintenance Fees
City Municipal Code describes Park Land Dedication, Article II section 18.24.020 as"
This section is enacted pursuant to the authority granted by the Business and Professions
Code of the State of California. The park and recreational facilities for which
dedications of land and / or payment of alee is required by this chapter are in
accordance with the open space and conservation element of the adopted General Plan
of the City of Cupertino, and any amendments thereto." Chapter 18:24 lacks any
definition, wording or requirements to assess fees based upon each or all parcels.
Chapter 14.05 Park Maintenance Fees section 14.05.030 General Purpose and Intent sub
section A. states" The purpose of this fee is to finance the establishment, rehabilitation
and maintenance of neighborhood and community parks and recreation facilities in
order to reduce the impacts of declining open space within the City created by new
single-lot residential development within the City."
Section 14.05.040 Requirements - General states "Any person who proposes to erect or
construct any building or structure for which a building permit is required by the City, or
who seeks a use permit or architectural and site approval from the City, must pay alee,
as determined under the provisions of this chapter, for the establishment, maintenance,
and rehabilitation of parks and recreation facilities within the City. Said fee shah be a
condition precedent to the issuance of any required building permit, or architectural
approval." Chapter 14.05 lacks any definition, wording or requirements to assess fees
based upon each or all parcels.
P.O. Box 1454 Cupertino, CA 95015 408/996-2222 ,~_~g
Exception:
Section 14.05.080 Exceptions states" Upon application for an exception, the Department
of Public Works may recommend that the City Council authorize a conditional exception
to any of the requirements and regulations set forth in this charter, provided that the
following facts are found:
1. That there are special circumstances and conditions affecting the subject
property; and
2. That the exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare."
This application and project does have special circumstances. An existing residence will
not change use or configuration. Only the new lot will require a building permit for a new
residence. An exception to the stated charter will in no way have a detrimental effect to
the public welfare.
Conclusion:
Based upon the issues presented, the Applicant requests The City Council to modify said
Development Agreement to read Park Fees-S15,750.00. This modification is in the best
interest of the City and the Applicant.
Thank you for your consideration on this matter
Sincerely,
Ron Bennett
Applicant
CITY OF
cupertino
City Hall
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
FAX (408) 777-3333
AGENDA ITEM
Summary
AGENDA DATE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
June 19,2000
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Public hearings regarding permit parking: Student parking on Hyannisport Drive, Dolores Avenue, and
McClellan Road; Permit parking on McClellan Road between 430 Feet West of Byme Avenue and Madrid
Road, Resolution 00-193
BACKGROUND
You have before you two items for consideration: 1) Student parking on Hyannisport Drive, Dolores Avenue,
and McClellan Road, and 2) Permit parking along the east side of McClellan Road between 430 Feet West of
Byrne Avenue and Madrid Road. The City Council has already approved permit parking for Hyannisport Drive
and Dolores Avenue.
McClellan Road Permit Parking
The City has received a petition from residents of McClellan Road requesting permit parking. There is
approximately 180 feet of residential parking shared among the residents along this section of roadway. The
residents signing the petition of over 2/3, stated the same complaints that others voiced as to the impact of
having student parking in front of their homes.
If the City Council wishes to provide permit parking for this section of McClellan Road, it should include them
into the student permit parking program.
Fremont Union Hi[~h District-Other Programs
The District is committed to improve the parking situation in the Monta Vista area by evaluating the following
programs:
· At the beginning of the modernization program, the District added 32 more parking spaces than they
originally had before the start of the remodeling, even considering the loan of 93 spaces.
Upon completion of the modernization program, within 3-5 years, the District will have yielded an
additional 115 spaces.
· The District will begin a comprehensive study to yield additional parking spaces on-site.
· The District will review ear pooling and bike-to-school incentive programs to encourage more use
of alternative modes of transportation.
· Evaluate subsidized bus passes for both students and faculty.
necessary to implement a student parking permit program. Mr.
representing the following members:
Student Parking Permit Program
The City Council requested that a committee formed by the Fremont Union High District develop the guidelines
Gene Longinetti chaired the committee
· District-- Ruben Delgado, Joanne Laird, Betty Pow,
· Students-- Jin Ahn, Blake Bridges, Erin Juhl, Allison Weeks
· Residents-- Victoria Gomez, E. H. Kawasaki, and. Jackie Kritzer, Sandy Ravizza, David Shen, Felita
Shen, Dennis Yau
· City-- Bert Viskovich
The committee has met on two occasions and has developed the criteria for your consideration.
1. The pilot program will go into effect in September and continue through the first semester of school and
be evaluated by the City Council in February 2001. Preliminary counts indicate that there are 21 spaces
available on Dolores Avenue and 29 spaces available on Hyannisport Drive for this program.
2. A survey would be conducted to determine homes that are eligible for the program on the basis that they
have at least two or more parking spaces in front of their, residence.
3. The City would determine if there are any extenuating circumstances that would prevent any home from
providing one space for student parking.
4. Students would be provided, through a lottery method, a parking permit that is assigned to a specific
address and, therefore, would always park in the same spot throughout the semester for the purpose of
accountability.
5. Eligible students would be those that would live outside a ½-mile radius from the school.
6. Each resident assigned a student parking spot must leave that space available for a student. Each permit
would have a specific address and only be valid in front of that home with the same address.
7. Students would be cited if they parked in the wrong location.
8. Through a questionnaire, residents would have the option of dictating where the student can park and
whether or not they wanted any information on the student.
9. Both the City and the District would enforce this program for direct contact in accordance with their
jurisdiction--the City for the permit parking and the District for behavior and other actions that would
not be acceptable to the residents at that address.
10. Residents may choose to call the high school to register a complaint or may leave it up to the school
patrol to take action. A patrol by the high school would make random checks on a daily basis.
11. If a student finds their spot taken by someone else, they must find another parking spot outside of
Hyannisport or Dolores and report the violation to the school/City.
12. Residents that may have visitors during that time would have the ability to park elsewhere using the
visitor parking permit.
13. The District will conduct a workshop for the students who will be given a permit to go over the rules,
discuss property conduct, and to generally describe the pilot program.
2
14. There will also be a workshop for the residents if they wish to attend to discuss the program details.
15. The student body has an Adopt-A-Block program in which they will notify the residents as to the details
and what type of assistance they will provide the residents. Ge_nerally, it is general clean-up, debris
pickup, light gardening, and other minor tasks.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the following actions:
1)
2)
Adopt Resolution No. 00-193, approving permit parking on McClellan Road between 430 feet west of
Byrne Avenue and Madrid Road, Monday through Friday between 7:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.
Approve the student permit parking program for Hyannisport Drive, Dolores Avenue, and McClellan
Road (limits described above) to begin in September, 2000, and be evaluated in February, 2001.
ich
blic Works
~.rt J. Vis_k
Director of P
ApE o fo ission:
o~1~. D-.~Brown
City Manager
3
RESOLUTION NO. 00-194
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
DESIGNATING PERMIT PARKING ON MCCLELLAN ROAD
430 FEET WEST OF BYRNE AVENUE TO MADRID ROAD
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 1197 of the City of Cupertino ordains that a preferential parking
zone be established in Cupertino in which parking will be prohibited on streets as designated by
resolution of the City Council; and
WHEREAS, exemption to such prohibition shall be by parking permit as established in said
Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that said parking prohibition shall apply Monday
through Friday, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Street Side of Street Limits
McClellan Road East
From 430 feet west
of Byme Avenue
to Madrid Road
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino
this 15th day of June, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
08/13/00 15:48 FAX 680 884 4283 SYNOPSYS NW-SALES ~002
Tuesday, June 13, 2000
Steve Piaeeki
Cupertino - Planning
10300 Tone Avenue
Cupertino, CA g5014-32.55
Dear Steve:
Thank you for meeting with Robert and myself this afternoon.
We are still in the process of analyzing our options. With this in mind and the busy City Counsel
meeting schedule for this Monday, I would like to request · pc, alp°nemant of our appeal.
Please process this request and let me know when the next available date would be if we decide to
proceed with an appeal.
Thursday, May 18, 2000
Cupertino City Council
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Distinguished Council Members:
This letter is intended to serve as an official appeal to the decision of the Cupertino Planning
Commission on Application 16-U-98, 43-EA-98 made on May 8, 2000.
The application was for a Use Permit to demolish an existing house and construct a 4-unit Planned
Development.
The Application/proposed development is in accordance with the current zoning for this property and
is consistent with other developments in the area. It is our feeling that the Planning commission is
taking a very subjective point of view on this matter. No clear direction has been given by Staff or the
Planning Commission as to how we should proceed.
We look forward to presenting this proposal to you and receiving your your informed and objective
decision on this Application.
CITY OF
CUPE iNO
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3308
FAX (408) 777-3333
AGENDA NO.
SUMMARY
Community Development Department
AGENDA DATE June 19, 2000
SUMMARY:
File Nos. 2-U-00, 4-EA-00: USE PERMIT to demolish approXimately 17,430 square feet of
retail and cinema space and construct a new 32,160 square foot market and ancillary cooking
school (Andronico's) at the Oaks Shopping Center, 21275 Stevens Creek Boulevard.
PROJECT DATA
Applicant: John Sutti (representing Andronico's)
Property Owner: Villa De Anza Inc. dba Oaks Shopping Center
Property Location: 21275 Stevens Creek Blvd. (between Mary Ave. & Highway 280)
Project Data:
General Plan Designation: Commercial/Residential
Zoning Designation: P (Stevens Creek Boulevard Conceptual Zoning)
Parcel Size: 7.9 net acres
Square Footage:
Proposed Demolition: 17,427 sq. ft.
Proposed New Const: 32,160 sq. ft.
Net New Construction: 14,733 sq.ft.
Lot Coverage
Existing:
Proposed:
Floor Area Ratio
Existing:
Proposed:
Building Height:
Parking:
Existing:
Total Required
with Proposal:
Proposed:
Net Surplus:
21.2%
24.3%
21.2%
25.5%
32'
549 spaces
488 spaces
496 spaces
8 spaces
Project Consistency with: General Plan yes Zoning yes
Environmental Assessmemr Mitigated Negative Declaration Recommended
Printed on Recycled Paper
BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission reviewed this proposal over four putJlic hearings held on March 13"',
March 27~, April 10a and June 12th of this year. Staff held a neighborhood meeting on June 7"' to
discuss traffic, access and circulation issues with residents. In addition staff revisited the
Environmental Review Committee on May 10~, to present traffic findings based on current
traffic counts. Through the public hearings and staff-level meetings, the applicant addressed
numerous concerns through project changes that are reflected in the submitted plan set and use
permit resolution. A summary of the project changes follows:
1) Requirement to transplant two existing specimen-size coast live oaks to another portion of
the shopping center;
2) Planting of numerous larger-sized trees (mostly 24" box), including 20 more oaks, to mitigate
loss of mature, non-native trees and enhance center;
3) Development of an architectural style and building heights that complement the design of the
existing retail center;
4) Redesign of the Mary Avenue entrances to accommodate Andronico's truck circulation and
isolate it from the busier vehicle driveways;
5) Reduction of the mass of the rear (Mary Avenue) wall through additional roofing, window
boxes, and on-site and off-site landscaping;
6) Improvement of the appearance of the rear wall by using uniform, quality building materials
and reorienting the loading dock and trash enclosure entrance away from residential
development;
7) Addition of features and'furnishings to attract patrons to the southerly and easterly arcades;
8) Screening of transformers and outdoor employee break areas;
9) Limitation on the hours of track delivery;
10) Conditions on parking management during peak days and daily shopping cart retrieval.
Throughout the review process, numerous written comments and petitions have been received
and are enclosed.
DISCUSSION:
Resident Issues Residents continue to express two main concerns: traffic and the loss of the
theaters. In general, residents fear the anticipated success of Andronico's will worsen, traffic
conditions. Second, is the concern that the City is forcing the theaters out and replacing them
with another market. Residents are concerned with the loss of the only movie theaters in the City
and the changing character of the Oaks Shopping Center that is perceived as the only place in
town for community gathering.
Applicant Issues A representative for the Oaks Shopping Center ownership said they had made a
business decision to replace the Oaks Theater with another tenant and that the Theater has been
given written notice to vacate by December 31, 2000. The applicants have also been concerned
about the length of the public review process
2
Staff Issues City Traffic Engineering staff and the applicant's traffic engineer, George
Nickelson, completed an entensive traffic analysis that included: bus duckouts; traffic signal
timing; truck parking along Stevens Creek Blvd.; traffic flo~vs at the Stevens Creek Blvd.
driveways; traffic flows at the State Route 85/Stevens Creek Blvd. interchange; both project and
cumulative traffic generation; traffic level of service at Stevens Creek Blvd. and Mary Ave.;
onsite circulation; traffic accident history; potential cut-through traffic on Meteor Drive, Lubec
Street and Anton Way; and traffic operations at Stevens Creek Blvd./Highway 85 & Stevens
Creek Blvd./Stelling. The analyses and conclusions are documented in the attached traffic
report and can be verbally summarized at the hearing if desired.
The report did not discuss midblock crosswalks on Mary Avenue because staff had already
identified the need for them and incorporated them in the current Capital Improvement Program,
which was approved by the City Council.
In general, the vast majority of residents' traffic concerns stem from existing conditions, which
will be addressed by the city traffic staff in the course of their regular work responsibilities
regardless of whether the project is approved.
Project-related traffic effects can be mitigated or are considered insignificant with respect to the
existing traffic environment.
Project Traffic/Access Mitigations· Increase green time for the signal light at the Stevens Creek Blvd. eastbound left turn pocket
onto Mary Avenue.
· Paint "KEEP CLEAR" signage on Stevens Creek at Anton Way
· Improvements to the easterly and westerly Stevens Creek Boulevard driveways to improve
access and traffic flow.
· Applicant contribution toward constuction of Mary Avenue crosswalks connecting Memorial
Park and Glenbrook Apartments to the Oaks Center.
Insignificant Traffic Effects
· Traffic level of service (LOS) at surrounding intersections will be operating at acceptable
levels of service with the addition of project traffic and cumlative project. For most
intersections, including the three closest to the project site, the City Standard is LOS D.
Stevens Creek Blvd. & Stelling Road C/D C/D
Stevens Creek Blvd. & Mary Ave. B/C B/C
Stevens Creek Blvd. & Highway 85 B/C B/C
Potential Cut-Through Traffic on Meteor Drive, Lubec Street & AntonWay is expected to be
minimal. Based on Andronico's market data, less than 5% of the new store's business would
be expected from north of Stelling Road. This equates to 3-4 peak hour trips of the 77 net
3
new PM peak hour trips generated by the project. Staff has baseline traffic counts and
expects to monitor the situation in the future.
Planning Commission Issues
The Commissioners were sympathetic to the project opponents' concerns about the loss of the
theaters. They noted that the decision to keep or not keep the theaters was between the landlord
and movie theater operator and the theater could be closed at any time by the owner regardless
of the outcome of the hearings. The Commission reviewed the use permit for the market project
on its own merits and analyzed such issues as parking, traffic, site design, architecture,
landscaping, building materials, circulation, driveways, hours of operation, etc. On a series of 3-
0-2 votes ( Doyle & Stevens absent), the Commission recommended approval of the mitigated
negative declaration, the use permit for the market, file no. 2-U-00, and two minute orders as
described in the RECOMMENDATION setion below.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends on 3-0-2 votes (Doyle and Stevens absent):
Approval of a mitigated negative declaration (file no. 4-EA-00) on the use permit project, and
Approval of the use permit, file no. 2-U-00, in accordance with the model resolution with a
deferral of the sign approval to a separate application.
By minute order, a request that the City Council forward a letter to the management of the De
Anza College Flint Center expressing the community interest in inexpensive, family-oriented
film entertainment. The minute actiOn asks that De Anza College consider if such films can
be incorporated into the Flint Center or other De Anza College entertainment programs.
(Staff has already verbally mentioned this concern to the Flint Center General Manager.)
Secondly, the minute action recommends the City Parks and Recreation Department look into
providing some family film entertainment.
By minute order, a request that the City Council direct staff to expeditiously construct the
Mary Avenue midblock crosswalks and street improvements that were approved for funding
in the City's capital improvements program.
Enclosures:
Planning Commission Resolution No. 6034
Minute Order No. 6035
Minute Order No. 6036
Negative Declaration
Commission meeting minutes from March 13th, March 27th and April l0th
June 12, 2000-dated Planning Commission Staff Report which includes environmental
4
Documents, staff reports and exhibits from the March 13'h, March 27'h
hearings
Written public comments & petitions not included in Jun~ 12th report
Prepared by: Colin Jung, Associate Planner
Director of Community Development
Approved by:
Don Brown
City Manager
g:planning/pdreport/cc/cc2u00
and April
5
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
2-U-00
RESOLUTION NO. 6034
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A USE PERMIT FOR THE DEMOLITION OF A CINEMA AND RETAIL SPACE
AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 32,160 SQUARE FOOT MARKET AND COOKING
SCHOOL (ANDRONICO'S) AT AN EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER AT
21275 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
SECTION I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use
Permit, as described in Section II. of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural
Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public
hearings on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has
satisfied the following requirements:
1) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general
welfare, or convenience;
2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino
Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of this title.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this
matter, the application for Use Permit is hereby recommended for approval, subject to the conditions
which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and
contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. 2-U-00 as set forth in the Minutes of the
Planning Commission of March 13, March 27, April 10 and June 12, 2000 and are incorporated by reference
as though fully set forth herein.
SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
2-U-00, 4-EA-00
Johnson Lyman Architects
21275 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Resolution No. 6034
Page -2-
2-U-O0 June 12, 2000
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
The recommendation of approval is based on Exhibits titled "Andronicos - Oaks Shopping Cemer"
dated 5/25/00, 6/7/00 and Exhibits titled "Preliminary Landscape Plan, Andronico's Market,
Cupertino, CA" dated 4/10/00, consisting of 8 sheets labeled 1 through 6, and L1 & L2, except as may
be amended by the Conditions contained in this Resolution.
2. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION
The applicant is granted an allocation of 14,733 net square feet of commercial development potential
from the "Heart of the City Allocation Pool" of the Retail Commercial Developmem Priorities Table
(General Plan Policy No. 2-3).
3. PERMITTED USES
The applicant is permitted to operate a retail grocery store, deli/bakery with a walk-up service window,
ancillary office uses, and a cooking school as shown on the approved exhibits. In addition, outdoor
seating in the westerly plaza and easterly and southerly pedestrian arcades are allowed where it does
not interfere with pedestrian circulation. Also, in only the westerly plaza, outdoor, unroofed displays
of goods, less than 150 square feet in area, are allowed. Any signage shall follow the City sign code.
4. PERMITTED HOURS OF OPERATION
The permitted hours of operation for retail businesses at the Oaks Shopping Center are specified in use
permit file no. 20-U-86, which are 6 a.m. to midnight.
5. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENT
Building E and a portion of Building F shall be removed prior to or concurrently with project
construction. The developer shall assume the. responsibility to obtain all required demolition permits in
accordance with City Ordinances.
In the event demolition of structures and improvements occurs between January 16~ and July 31", the
applicant shall erect chain-link fencing around the canopy of each protected oak (ID #11 and #12 of
sheet L2) and not disturb the fenced areas until the oaks are transplanted between August 1st and
January 15'h.
6. TREE TRANSPLANTING REQUIREMENTS
The two Coast Live Oaks labeled No. 13 and No. 14 on plan set sheet "L2"shall be transplanted to
other landscaped areas near the project in accordance with the recommendations of the Barrie Coate
arborist report dated 2/24/00. Final locations with be determined by the project landscape architect and
the Community Development Director, however, the preferred locations would be at the entrances of
the pedestrian arcades. The applicant shall take all reasonable means to ensure the survival of the oaks,
but in the evem the oaks do not survive transplanting, the applicant shall replace them with two (2) 8-
inch diameter Coast Live Oaks.
Resolution No. 6034 2-U-00
Page -3-
June 12, 2000
7. ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS
All transformers and outdoor employee break areas shall be adequa[ely screen from public view to the
satisfaction of the Director of Community Development.
8. BICYCLE PARKING
The applicant shall install bicycle parking facilities in accordance with the City's parking ordinance.
The location shall be approved by the Community Development Director.
9. PARKING MANAGEMENT
On peak seasonal days, the applicant shall direct their employees to park in the street parking areas on
Mary Avenue.
10. SHOPPING CART MANAGEMENT
The applicant shall monitor and pick up on-site and off-site shopping carts on a daily basis.
11. DELIVERY TRUCK LIMITATIONS
Vehicular deliveries and pickups to or from the project are prohibited between the hours of 8 p.m. and
7 a.m. weekdays (Monday through Friday) and 8 p.m. and 9 a.m.on weekends (Saturday and Sunday).
12. GROUND AND WALL SIGNAGE
Ground and wall project signage are not approved with this use permit.
separate application for sign approval.
The applicant shall make a
13. 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.
14. Access Improvements to Stevens Creek Boulevard Driveways
The applicant shall show on the building plans, additional widening of the easterly Stevens Creek
Boulevard driveway than what is shown on the approved plans, and additional tapering of the westerly
Stevens Creek Boulevard driveway than what is shown on the approved plans. The purpose of the
improvements is to ease vehicle ingress and straighten the turning movements at the driveways.
15. Landscape Improvements to Westerly Stevens Creek Boulevard Driveway area
Prior to building permit approval, the applicant shall submit to the Director of Community Development
for his approval, a revised plan for landscaping the modified westerly Stevens Creek Boulevard driveway.
ResolutiOn No. 6034
Page
2-U,O0 June 12, 2000
SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.
16. STREET WIDENING
Street widening, improvements and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards
and specifications and as required by the City Engineer.
17. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS
Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and
standards as specified by the City Engineer.
18. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION
Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as approved by the City Engineer. Lighting fixtures shall
be positioned so as to preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining properties, and
shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site is located.
19. FIRE HYDRANT
Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City.
20. TRAFFIC SIGNS
Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City.
21. STREET TREES
Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City
in accordance with Ordinance No. 125.
22. GRADING
Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of
the Cupertino Municipal Code. Overland release shall be provided. Pad elevations shown on the
exhibits will be adjusted as necessary prior to issuance of grading permit.
23. DRAINAGE
Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Surface flow across public
sidewalks may be allowed in the R-I, R-2 and R-3 zones unless storm drain facilities are deemed
necessary by the City Engineer. Development in all other zoning districts shall be served by on site
storm drainage facilities connected to the City storm drainage system. If City storm drains are not
available, drainage facilities shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
24. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and
other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected
utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shall submit detailed
plans' showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall-be subject to prior approval of the
affected Utility provider and the City Engineer. Underground existing overhead lines that crosses
Stevens Creek Blvd from De Anza College using the conduit lines already installed by the City.
Resolution No. 6034
Page -5-
2-U-00 June 12, 2000
25. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
The project developer shall enter into a development agreement w~th the City of Cupertino providing
for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park
dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to
issuance of construction permits.
Fees:
a. Checking & Inspection Fees:
b. Development Maintenance Deposit:
c. Storm Drainage Fee:
d. Power Cost:
e. Map Checking Fees:
f. Street Improvement Reimbursement Fee:
Blvd.
g. Grading Permit:
$ 6% of Improvement Cost or $1,975.00 minimum
$ 3,000.00
$2,420/acre
$ 75.00 per street light
N/A
$7,200.00-Installation of conduit lines ~ Stevens Creek
$ 5% of on-site improvement Cost or $460.00 min.
Additional fees will be due in contribution toward needed Mary Avenue midblock crosswalk
improvements.
-The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City
Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map
or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time
will reflect the then current fee schedule.
26. TRANSFORMERS
Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be
screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible
from public street areas.
27. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES
The developer shall execute a quitclaim deed for underground water rights to San Jose Water Company
and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water Company for water service to the subject
development.
28. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board,
for construction activity which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in your grading and street
improvement plans.
Resolution No. 6034
Page -6-
2-U-O0 June 12, 2000
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June 2000, at a Regular Meeting of the
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
Planning
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
· Corr, Kwok and Chairperson Harris
Doyle, Stevens
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/Steve Piasecki
Steve Piasecld
Director of Community Development
/si Andrea Harris
Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
g:/planning/pdreport/res/res2-U-O0
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 6035 (Minute Order)
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
REQUESTING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE VENUES
FOR INEXPENSIVE, FAMILY-ORIENTED FILM ENTERTAINMENT
The Planning Commission is concerned about the loss of inexpensive film emertainment in the City
and requests that the City Council forward a letter to the De Anza College Flint Center expressing the
community interest in inexpensive, family-oriented film entertainment and the possibility that such
fans can be incorporated into the Flint Center or other De Anza College entertainment programs.
Secondly, the Planning Commission requests that the City Council consider directing the Park and
Recreation Department to look into providing some family film entertainment.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June, 2000, at a Regular
Commission in the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Kwok and Chairperson Harris
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONER-S: Doyle, Stevens
Meeting of the Planning
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/ Steve Piasecki
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
/si Andrea Harris
Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
g :/planning/pdreport/res/mo2u002
2-U-O0
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 6036 (Minute Order)
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
REQUESTING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECT STAFF TO EXPEDITE THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE PLANNED MARY AVENUE CROSSWALKS
The Planning Commission requests that the City Council direct staff to expeditiously complete the two
planned crosswalks and other Mary Avenue street improvements that were approved as part of the
fiscal year 2000-01 to 2004-05 Capital Improvement Program. The crosswalks are necessary to
provide safe passage for pedestrians crossing from Memorial Park and the Glenbrook Apartments to
the Oaks Shopping Center.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June, 2000, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission in the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS: Con', Kwok and Chairperson Harris
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS: Doyle, Stevens
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/ Steve Piasecki
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
/s/ Andrea B. Harris
Andrea B. Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
g:/planning/pdreport/res/mo2u00
CITY OF CUPERTINO
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure adopled by the City Council of the
City of Cupertino on May 27, 1973, and amended on March 4, 1974, January 17 1977, May 1,
1978, and July 7, 1980, the following described project was granted a Negative Declaration by
the City Council of the City of Cupertino on June 19, 2000.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
4-EA-00
Application No.(s):
Applicant:
Location:
2-U-00
Johnson Lyman Architects
21275 Stevens Creek Boulevard
DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST
Use Permit for the demolition of a cinema and retail space and the construction of a new
32,160 square foot market and cooking school (Andronico's) at an existing shopping center.
FINDINGS OF DECISIONMAKING BODY
The City Council granted a Negative Declaration since the project is consistent with the
General Plan and there are no significant environmental impacts.
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
CERTIFICATE OF THE CITY CLERK
This is to certify that the above Negative Declaration was filed in the Office of the City Clerk
of the City of Cupertino on 2000.
City Clerk
g:/plarming/ere/ncg4ca00
;.b
Planning Commission Minutes 6 March 1.1. 2000
City Council Hearing Date April 3, 2000
Staff :ion: The video presentation reviewed the background of thc application m prczonc '
an existing .family residential property to Pre-R'-I 0 to allow annexation o[` the property and
the construction few single family residence, as outlined in tile attached staf[` report.
Ms. Ciddy Wordell,
was a routine procedure th
the application.
referred to Exhibit B, Garden Gate Re-zoning, and stated that it
been done on several lots. Staff answered questions relative m
Tine applicant was not present.
Chair Harris opened the meeting for public
there was no one present who wished to speak.
Com. Doyle expressed concern that every tree in
risk.
trden Gate neighborhood would now hc al
Chair Harris questioned whether it was possible to work county on an arrangement stol
permitting demolition of' tile specimen trees 5vithout bringing at thcprczoning lime. lVlr.
Piasecki said that there have been ongoing discussions with tile co~ about a broader arc:l-wide
annexation.
MOTION:
SECON D:
VOTE:
Com. Corr moved to approve the negative declaration on A
Com. Kwok
Passed 5-0-0
tion I-EA-O0
MOTION:
S ECON D:
Com. Corr moved to approve Application I-Z-00
Com. Kwok
Application No.(s):
Applicant:
Location:
2-U-00, 4-EA-00
Johnson byman Architects
21275 Stevens Creek Blvd. (Oaks Shol~ping Center)
Use Permit for tile demolition of a cinema and retail space and tile construclion of a new .,_. 160
sq. ft. market and cooking school (Andronico's) at an existing shopping center.
Tentative City Council hearing &tie: March 20, 2000
Staff presentation: The video presentation reviewed the application for a Use Permit to demolish
17,340 sq. ft. of retail and cinerna space and construct a new 32,160 SCl. ft. markci and ancillm'v
cooking school at. the Oaks Shopping Center, as outlined in the attached stal'l' report, tssucs fin'
discussion include traffic generation, cut-through traffic, parking, trec removal, trcalmcnt of
loading areas, and architectural and building materials. Staff' feels that thc addition of
Andronico's will provide a much needed grocery store ['or Cupertino and recommends approval.
A recommendation if reached will be ['orwarded to the City Council meeting o1' iVl:u'ch 21), 21)1111.
Plmming Commission Minutes ? March 13.2()0l)
Mr. Raymond Chang, Traffic Engineer, reviewed tile traffic impacts o1' thc dcvclopnmnt, l lc said
t, hat the LOS would remain similar for both a.m. and p.m. peak hours cluring the weekdays, which
is a LOS "D". He noted that although there would be more trips g-eneratcd, thc impacts wotlld
be significant. He clarified that the Level of Service (LOS) was a way to grade an operation
intersection, set by national standards through the Institute of Transportation Engineers, and is
based on the amount of'time or delays experienced at intersections. Tile grades consist ol'A (bcsl:
free flow easy; responsiveness), going to B, C and to D, E and F (F means I'ailure tlr gridlock).
and C is layman's terms is not bad, with an average delay ot'20-25 seconds).
Mr. Chang reviewed the parking issue, stating that the proposed parking was 129 spaces. I Ic
reported that' on a weekday, it is projected the supermarket should generate approximately 82
parking spaces in terms of demand; on a Saturday 98 parking spaces. In comparistm to thc
proposed 129 spaces, staff feels it is adequate. He said for the cooking school ;area o1' 760 square
feet, 3 spaces was considered.
Mr. Chang reviewed the issue of cut-through traffic, noting that there was a potential I'm' 25% o1'
the market traffic to come from Stelling Road and use neighborhood streets to avoid the signali×cd
intersections. He said that staff will conduct a study with the neighbors on the impact, and il' it is
significant, traffic calming measures may have to be considered. Mr. Chang said tha! stal'ffs
position on a mid-block crosswalk on Mary Avenue is that it would create an undue ha~.ard, is a
liability for the city, and did not recommend it for that particular location because o1' thc curve o1'
the street, and relatively high speed traffic. He reported that staff was considering locating a
raised crosswalk in the vicinity of the senior center gateway.
Mr. Colin Jung, Associate Planner, discussed the proposed tree removal and transplantings. I Ic
noted that it ,,vas not the appropriate time of' year to transplant the oak trees and Barry Coatc
recommended that they not be transplanted until late July or early August. I Ic said that thc
construction schedule might not coincide with the tree.transplanting schedule. I Ic discussed thc
use of trellis features, and the truss elements in the entrance design. I-lc said that
would be the anchor tenant itl tile center.
Chair Harris said that as part of the Stevens Creek Plan outdoor eating areas were required, as they
encouraged places for people to gather to sit outsi.de and would relax some o1' thc rules it, allow
and encourage that. Mr. Jung said that a condition was included in the model resolution allowing
outdoor furniture, and that Andronico's intends to establish an active area in thc pla×a It) thc wcsl.
Chair Harris addressed concerns of the Glenbrook apartment residents relative to thc truck loading
dock, mitigations for the view from the apartment complex, and an employee area. Mi'..lung
explained that Andronico's used a single source supplier tbr their goods, thcrcl'orc would nol have
multiple truck deliveries and could utilize a smaller loading dock area. I-lc illustrated where thc
applicant was proposing to plant extra ash trees for mitigation.
Mr. Chang presented information about traffic coming in on Mary vs. other entrances. I Ic said
based on Andronico's market survey, approximately 25% et' the custonler b;.~sc will hc cnlcring
from north of the highway 280 side.
Chair Harris opened the meeting for public input so that Ms. Peikes coulcl speak.
Piannin~ Commission Minutes ~ Pvlm'ch 13, 2()0()
Ms. Wendy Peikes, 10391 Heney Creek Place, said that she was speaking not against Andrtmic~'.s
but in defense of the Oaks Theater. She said that she frequents the theater at least weekly and said
that it has become a neighborhood icon and is a salvation t'or the't:ommunity mcmbcr,s..'-;Itc s;litl
that because of the reasonable ticket price, it is popular with all the commulfity. She suggcslcd
that Andronico's be of assistance in relocating tile theater, such as on thc scctmd I'lmn' similar It,
the Sunnyvale Mall, or share space with the cooking school, or reduce thc number ill' mt~vic
screens down from 3 to 2. She reiterated that many people love the theater and don't want to sec
anything happen to it. She said she would appreciate anything that could be done tt~ sltvc it.
Mr. Dave Johnson, Johnson Lyman Architects, said that the project team included .loire .'quill, .Nulli
Associates; Bill Andronico; and Mark Dick, landscape architect. He said working with staIT has
been a positive experience, all their comments with the city architect's comments have bccn well
taken and have contributed to the design of the project which he felt will bca posilivc addilitm
the area. He presented an architectural rendering to tile Planning Commissioners and reviewed thc
architectural design of the project. He answered questions relative to tile building materials, truck
loading and amenities to be offered by the inarket. I-lc concluded by saying Iha! Ihcv
agreement with all staff comments and were looking l'brward to the project.
Mr. Butt Avery, 10100 Mary Avenue, G lenbrook Apartments owner, said that hc buill Iht 517
unit apartment complex in 1970 and has been the sole owner since then. I-lc presented a Iisi
concerns relative to the proposed use. He said he was proud of the quality o1' thc complex, and
distributed a map of the 32 acre apartment complex. He said he l'elt that approximately 50% o1' ~hc
apartment residents would be customers ofAndronico's , and welcomed the market. Mr. Avery
said he felt the residents would walk to tile marketplace rather than take their cars. and
pedestrian crossing would be useRd. He said he ~'elt thc proposed senior crossing mi Mm'y
Avenue was dangerous as it was so close to Stevens Creek with high speed traffic, l lc ctmcludcd
by stating that he was in l"avor ol" Andronicos but was concerned aboul a safe cm.ssing.
Mr. Brian Avery, co-owner of Glenwood Apartments, said the proposal I'm' thc crosswalk area is
where the postal boxes and newspaper racks for apartment residents arc locate.cl, and hc t'cll a sal~zr
location would be the front of the apartment cornplex property. I-lc suggested language relative to
no delivery tracks on Mary Avenue, and tables es and benches not being allowed on thc mu'Ih
side. He said he was supportive of the use, but did not want tracks on Mary Avenue.
Mr. Mark Dick, landscape architect, addressed tile issue of transplanting trees, and said th:il with
the construction schedule they were working with, they would have to deal wilh thc Il'CC
transplanting before August.
Mr. Bill Andronico, owner of Andronieo's Market, discussed traffic generation, truck delivery
schedules, customer seating in the outside arcade area; ernployee area in the facilities: thc cooking
classes and the inclusion of a wine bar. He said there was no indoor seating planned: a bakery is
planned, and espresso coffee bar that will service the western arcade. I-lc requested operating
hours of 6:30 or 7:00 a.m. to 10 p.m.
Mr. John Sutti, Sutti Associates, said that they did not plan to begin construction until September
or October which would not interfere with the schedule [bt' tree transplanting. Thc plalmcd
opening would be May or June of 2001. He said it was dit'ficult to plan tbr indoor scaling its Iht
newer stores are in the 40,000 square foot category and the Cupertino store is much .smaller itt
28,000 square feet.
Planning Commission Minutes 0 March 13, 2000
Mr. Johnson, addressed tile issue of display windows at a pedestrian level. Ilo said he was willing
to consider tile use of tile display windows on tile blank wall along Mary Avcmlc. I Ic said that
outdoor seating would help attract people to the arcade area. Discussion continued rc~arding
placement ~f'transformers, and location ora suitable employee area.
Chair Harris closed the public hearing.
Com. Doyle summarized the issues: Avery list; north elevation; cooking school parking
impacts/shopping carts; trees- schedule for transplanting; pedestrian crossing; traffic circulalion:
delivery time for trucks; screening of truck loading areas; pedestrian areas; and transl't)rmcr
location/employee area.
Com Doyle said that the Avery list should be reviewed by start'to see whether it shbuld come hack
with a recommendation; north elevation - he said displays or use o1" trellises to liven up thc area
were appropriate; cooking school impact- there is an excess of 33 spots, if thc school is treated as
a school parking requirement and the rest as store, there will be adequate spaces; parking impacts
- lie said he wanted to ensure that they didn't create reasons for people to spill over to thc olhcr
areas for parking; shopping carts - as in other centers, have a way to screen them and have a
process for removing those in the adjacent neighborhoods; schedule [hr tree transplanting - Iht
AugusffSepternber schedule would allow the oaks to be saved; pedestrian crossing - hc said hc
preferred the proposal for the crossing from the development close to thc mailboxes; traflSc
circulation - he said he was in favor of a solution to get more traffic to come in off'ol' Slovens
Creek instead of coming in on the Mary Avenue side; delivery time Ibr trucks - 7 a.m. is a lit~lc
early, but there is a buffered zone between the closest residential neighbors and thc building, il' Ibc
trucks are required to be on location, it would take care of itselfi pedestrian area - hc said hc I'cll
it was a good concept; the access on the east side of the building may be problematic as it is
narrow; transformer location - he said he was not concerned as painting it could camoul'lagc il. or
plant vegetation around it; screening of the loading area can be accomplished; and include an
employee area that is not obvious to tile community.
Com. Kwok said he concurred, although he did not feel the cooking school ~vould present a
problem since most people going to the school would most likely shop also. Relative ~o lral'lic, hc
suggested addressing the Stevens Creek entry which would alleviate thc Mary Ave,mc lral'l~c.
Corn. Corr said that lie agreed that tile cooking school would not present an impact; parking
impacts - tile store should face west where most of' tile parking is, shopping carls - suggested a
cart collection area by the apartments; schedule of tree transplanting will not hca prohlcm:
pedestrian crosswalk - he said he concurred with Mr. Chang that the mid-block crosshlg was nt~l
appropriate because of false sense ofisecurity; transfom~er location is st, itablc; qued an apl~rOl~riulc
area for employee break area; and suggested screening area ['or the loading clock.
Com. Stevens said tile Avery list and north elevation go together in that thc back o1' thc shol)pi,~g
center is desolate; the north elevation is stark and will be seen from the apartments and needs Iobc
improved; cooking school parking impact ,vould be minor and can be ad. juslcd: Iral'l]c ,viii I~c
heavy off Stevens Creek where tile theaters a,'e located now but feh travelling wcsl. mosl drivers
would turn off just before the free~vay, not take Mary Avenue; signage important but nol an issue:
pedestrian crossing- there should be all appropriate crosswalk, whether controlled or highlighted.
the traffic engineer should review. Relative to delivery trucks, 8 a.m. is a more apl~rt*l*riatc lime
Plnnnin~ Commission Minutes Io March i3.2~)0(I
because it is in the vicinity of a large residential area: trans}brmer location - easily camoullagcd:
employee area should not be a loitering area and sl~ould not be visible and should hc screened off'
if for general area it has to be policed; recommended screening of loading area.
Com. Corr said that a number of things could be done to the north elevation, such as usc of h'ccs,
display windows and trellises. He said he concurred with previous comments made in other arc:ts.
Chair Harris said she agreed that the north elevation needs to be changed d,'amaticallv aud needs
to have display windows and a mitigation that makes it more appealing because it will bc visible m
people using the center. She said that the cooking school impacts should be counted to
accommodate future development in the center. She said she felt tile Glcnbrook al~artmcnt
residents would be significant users of the site, and would cross the street and ~lcctl to bc provided
an appropriate usable pedestrian crossing. Ifa safe crossing is not provided, people will bc hil hy
cars when crossing the street. She said she felt more people would be crossing f,'om thc ap;.u'll~lcnl
complex,, and suggested the site the Avery's recommended. She also reconlmendcd an additional
pedestrian crossing at the other entrance to the development for safety reasons. Shopping carts -
suggested an enclosed area similar to Whole Foods; tree transplanting - should no have
demolition until after .tree transplanting is accomplished; 7 a.rn. delivery time is appropriate: Iruck
loading area- need a stipulation in tile use permit that large trucks will nol slack tip on IVlary
Avenue, and if they do they are violating the use pen'nit; pedestrian areas - a ctUlllllilmclll was
made for new developments or redevelopments that areas would be provided for people lo sit and
congregate; transformers needs to be well screened; employee area needs to bc screened as well
as tile loading area.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Doyle moved to continue Application 2-U-00, and 4-F,A-00 Io thc March
27, 2000 Planning Commission meeting
Com. Corr
Passed 5;0-0
A brief discussion ensued regarding the demise of the Oaks Theater. Mt'. ,'-;~cvc Piasccki,
Community Development Director, reported that smaller theaters were closing Ihroughonl thc
valley, and it was a matter of economics of' who gets the first rate fihns and sees returns on
investments. It was reported that consideration is being given to movie theaters tit Vallco I'ark.
Mr. Reed Bennett, Oaks Theater, expressed the support of Oaks Management and ownership for
the Andronico's store.
NE' ~S: None
REPORT OF ING COMMISSION:
Com. Corr reported that the Eh,
neighborhood and the Fountainbleu A
Com. Kw0k said he did n6t attend the Housing Committee
were the recommendation to City Council on the adequacy of
Committee met and reviewed thc I';ichlcr
two items on Iht agenda
[}745 No. I)cAn×a
Planning Commission Minutes 3 March 27, 2000
:om. Corr
Passed 5-0-0
Chair
item.
the agenda back to Item 3. Com. Kwok left the dais during discussion of the
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
of Santa Clara Valley
Referral to Planning Commission of
modifications to grading and tree removal and
Planning Commission decision.final unless appealed
modification to an approved use permit for
MOTION:
SECOND: '
ABSTAIN:
Com. Corr moved to approve Application 7-U-99
Com. Doyle
Com.
PUBLIC I:rEARING
Application Nos.:
Applicant:
Location:
2-U-00, 4-EA-00
Johnson Lyman Architects
21275 Stevens Creek Blvd.
Use permit for the demolition cfa cinema and retail space and the construction of a new 32, i 60
sq. ft. market and cooking s~hqol (Andronicos) at an existing shopping center.
Tentative City Council hearing date of April 3, 2000
Continued from Planning Commission meeting of March 13, 2000
Staff presentation: Mr. Colin Jung, Associate Planner, reviewed the application to demolish
existing cinema space and retail space to construct a new 32,160 sq. ff. grocery store and ancillary
cooking school at the Oaks Shopping Center. He referred to the site plan and reviewed the revised
traffic circulation into the shopping center and truck movement and delivery. He reviewed the
proposal to trim back the island to allow cars entering from Stevens Creek Blvd. the option of
using two driveways to make the traffic flow better. Mr. Jung reviewed other proposed changes
to address concerns about the truck deliveries, parking, and design changes.
Staff answered questions regarding the delivery truck schedule, landscaping, parking, and
likelihood of a crosswalk. Mr. Jung reported that he had met with the Averys to discuss the
possible crosswalk and said that he met with Public Works on the possibility of proposing a traffic
calming measure in that corridor as part of the grand scheme with the Memorial Park gateway
issue. He clarified that a calming measure included islands or textured pavement, to slow down
traffic speeds. Relative to the crosswalks, Mr. Jung said that both gateways would be included as
part of a system approach and could be included as a minute order. He noted that the cooking
classes would be held at non-peak times for the supermarket; therefore parking spaces would be
available.
Planning Commission Minutes 4. March 27, 2000
Mr. Dave Johnson, Johnson Lyman Architects, said that the track circulation and driveway were
wise changes; the trucks not pointing towards entry but turning to the side and screened by the
wall and the trellis were good ideas. He pointed out that the outdoor area for the employees will
be screened, the building mass broken up with the truck dock screen wall, and the building has
more articulation to it; the display windows will have various display items, not just advertising.
He said the landscape architect put together a plan showing all the issues of concern, with seating
areas in the courtyards, and additional plantings; and that they concurred with staff on all issues.
Mr. Johnson stated that the only outstanding issue was the infamous crosswalk, and questioned
whether they were responsible for it, or was it a city component.
Mr. Raymond Chong, Traffic Engineer, said that in discussions with staff, they thought it might
serve a benefit to the center but did not have the costs or co~t sharing for the applicant at this time.
Mr. Jung said that Condition 23 mandated participation, administered by the Public Works
Department and that additional fees would be due in contribution toward needed Mary Avenue
gridlock crosswalk improvement. Mr. Chong said at this point the cost was not known since they
were attempting to fred out the scope or size of the project, but that it could be in the range of
$200,000 for both treatments. The Andmnico's part would be a small part of that because they are
looking at a mui:h larger area than a crosswalk from one side of a street to another. Mr. Piasecki
said that options were to leave it vague as it 'is now or put a cap on it with some reasonable
expectation on their part. If lef~ as is in the current resolution, it becomes a negotiable item
between the Andronicos and the city.
Mr. Johnson said that the tree quantity was Correct, but they were proposed trees. Mr. Piasecki
said that one option discussed was turning the compactor back, which would allow the area to be
landscaped. He said that the compactor was not as critical to them as the truck delivery
movements coming into and out of the loading dock area. Mr. Johnson noted that although the
landscaping was not shown on the side of the loading dock, there could be a landscape strip
incorporated. He clarified that the garbage trucks needed a certain area to be able to back up to
the compactor, and he was concerned that there may be a problem with cars parked in the
perimeter. Mr. Jung said that staff suggested extra street trees along the street, with extra trees on
the landscape islands near the truck only exit. Mr. Johnson said he would be glad to work with
staff to avoid delays.
Mr. John Sutti, Sutti Associates, said that the cooking school hours were M-F 9 a.m. to noon;
p.m. to 3 p.m., Tues. and Thurs., with an occasional dinner function sponsored by a winery.
Mark Dick, Callendar Associates, landscape architect, answered questions about the tree
transplantings and proposed landscaping for the project. Referring to sheet L~2 he said there
would be more tree massing at that comer of the project.
Mr. Jung answered questions about parking spaces, noting that based on the total of 52 !, there was
a net of 33 surplus based on all the existing parking usages in that development. He said the dance
school would remain as part of the 521 spaces. Mr. Jung said that there were some current
vacancies and parking was attributed to even the vacant spaces at a rate of one stall for every 250
gross square feet. He said it would keep the sites from being restaurants, specialty food stores,
medical or dental offices. He noted that general office space is parked at a slightly higher
requirement.
Planning Commission Minutes 5 March 27, 2000
Chair Harris opened the meeting for Chair Doyle opened the meeting for public input; there was
no one present who wished to speak.
Ms. Barbara Geddes, representing Commons of Cupertino Homeowners Association, referred to
the plat map, and said that they were one of the housing groups that would be negatively impacted
by the proposed development. She said that she was specifically concerned with traffic issues, and
only became aware of the project two days ago, and met with the planning staff today. She
disagreed with the comment that the new market would provide a much needed grocery store in
the Cupertino area since there were already 6 grocery stores within l-l/2 miles. She discussed the
parking issue, the traffic flow into the center and traffic going onto the freeway, and the dangers
posed to the pedestrian traffic. She said that in the analysis of the cut through traffic, the
Anton/Alves shortcut was ignored, and it is one of the worit ones, which eventually had concrete
barriers installed to help slow down the traffic. She added that, given that it is adjacent to a public
park used by small children, it is terrifying to have people whipping through the short cut,
spedifically DeAnza College students, at 35-40 mph. She pointed out various problems
encountered with traffic stopping motorists trying to get into the center, headed toward the
freeway, and waiting through 3 or 4 lights to make a turn at Mary Avenue. She said making an
entrance to a major grocery store would only compound the traffic problems as well as increase
the risk to pedestrian traffic. Ms. Geddes pointed out that a factor which staff apparently did not
take into account was that there is no truck access to the Oaks Center, hence the delivery trucks
park along Stevens Creek Boulevard and unload their goods, and impede oncoming traffic. She
said she felt it was irresponsible to have the major access to a major grocery store 100 feet from
the entrance to a freeway across a sidewalk and where people are dodging trucks during the day.
She said she would be drafting a resolution to present to the Planning Commission. Ms. Geddes
said she felt the only safe way to have an entrance would be off Mary Avenue, and that both
entrances to the Oaks should be closed off. She also stated that there were problems with truck
deliveries at 6 a.m. and late at night.
Ms. Doris Ellis, 29541 Shady Oak Lane, said she was disappointed to see the movie theater go as
it was the last community theater left, and was a safe and inexpensive place to go. She said she did
not agree that another supermarket was needed, and was opposed to the location for the market, on
a busy corner. Ms. Ellis said that she was also opposed to the removal of the parking spaces along
Mary Avenue.
Ms. Para Alexander, 7520 DeLa Fargo Drive, said she agreed with the other speakers .that there
was not a need for another market, and there would be increased traffic impact with the addition of
another market. She said the Oaks theater provided families opportunities to go to the movies at a
reasonable price. She said that the market would benefit Andronicos, but not the community, and
she wished Cupertino would look at itself, what they were getting rid of and what they were
keeping.
Mr. Leslie Burnell, 21466 Hollyoak Drive, said that he liked Andronicos, but after listening to the
discussion, he felt they needed to do a system analysis and set up a computer model to determine
what the traffic pattern is, since information was coming from both sides. He said he did not
believe that the stores got deliveries only in the morning. One of his suggestions was for a flop
down loading dock.
Mr. Tony Vandersteen, 10401 Phar Lap Drive, said that he was opposed to the project and was
concerned about the lack of publicity given. He said the Oaks theater not only supports Cupertino,
Planning Commission Minutes 6 March 27, 2000
but other communities as well, with exceptional value, and is a community draw in an area that
brings the community together. Hundreds of people were disappointed to see the bookstore leave
the center because of high rent. He asked if any poll was taken-in the community to see if there
was a need for another supermarket. He expressed disappointment that the community was not
involved in the choices, particularly as many Cupertino residents have been in the area for 30
years or more. He said the theater was obviously not a money maker, but there were other ways to
generate income for the community. He questioned why concerts were not held as they were in
the past.
Ms. Elizabeth Geddes, 10072 Senate Way, addressed the issues of pull out lanes, the heavy traffic
along Stevens Creek, entrances to the freeway, and parking in Oaks Center. She also said that she
was saddened by the loss of the movie theater and the danc~ studio. She said she did not feel that
another market was needed in the area. She also illustrated where the delivery trucks park during
the day on Stevens Creek to make their deliveries, and carry their deliveries to the different stores.
Mr. Piasecki noted that it was not a safe condition and would ask the sheriffs department about the
delivery trucks parking .on Stevens Creek. Chair Harris questioned if the change to the driveway
entrance was a permanent one and approved by the city. She also asked 'staff about the Economic
Development Committee (EDC). Mr. Piasecki said that he would address the parking and
delivery issue with the owner of the center and also the EDC. Relative to the EDC role, Mr.
Piasecki said that typically the Commission is aware of the range of uses allowed within
commercial districts and the private marketplace determines what uses go in and what uses go out.
He said there are some rare uses that may be desirable and the city should be looking at regulating
those. He said there may be occasions where you would be forcing the use to stay that was no
longer economically viable; however in the theater's case, it was a mutual agreement that the
theaters move out and something else would replace them. He said the city typically would not
enter into that type of discussion, the marketplace dictates that.
Chair Harris asked staff to explain how the traffic analysis was done for the proposed use. Mr.
Chong explained that he used old traffic counts in 1988 and used the model to forecast the trip that
would be generated by the market and then imposed the traffic counts over that existing condition
model; then determined the LOS which was B- and C+ for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. He said
he did not address problems related to freeway access at the time, and would also have to do more
research about the entrance. He said most of the traffic going to the market was from the north
side, and going from east to west into the intersection.
Mr. Chong said that based on the market trip generation, during the a.m. peak hour, it was
projected that 13 vehicles would be making the left or u-turn going eastbound on Stevens Creek;
during the p.m. peak hour it would be 38 trips traveling eastbound, based on the Andronico market
survey that they divided into different zones. Relative to the current rating of the left hand turn in
the evening peak p.m., Mr. Chong said that it was operating very good at 200 foot long pocket and
operating at C+ in the p.m. peak hour, and he felt there was more than enough capacity to handle
the left turn.
Com. Doyle pointed out that sometimes caution has to be exercised to cross the exit out of
DeAnza so as not to get caught in the left hand turn lane. He said that adding another 38 would
add to the existing problem. Chair Harris questioned if they took the 38 by taking their count for
the evening and dividing it over the hours they are open evenly, or was there an assumption that
more people would stop on their way home from work and fewer would come in the evening. She
Planning Commission Minutes ? March 27, 2000
also asked if the survey had each hour defined or did it have a certain block of time and certain
number of cars for that block of time. Mr. Chong said that he used the survey provided by the
market and he assumed that would be the draw; he divided up-the whole market to determine
which direction which mostly they would enter from. Relative to defined blocks of time, Mr.
Chong said that it was not that level of detail, but was based to divide the whole Cupertino into
market areas, like so many people living in different areas of town; and based on that he
determined what was the most likely path. Chair Harris said that at the last hearing, Andronicos
said how many cars would come in the evening, and asked if those numbers were used. Mr.
Chong responded no, stating his numbers and theirs were actually close.
Chair Harris closed the public hearing.
Mr. Dave Johnson, Johnson Lyman Architects, said that the issues were narrowed down to ten
from the previous meeting, and noted that traffic had not been included as a major issue.
Com. Doyle said that one of the documents previously discussed contained the distribution of
customers by location'. Mr. Jung Said that he had. a market survey letter, but it was a very complex
document and was not included in th& staff report at this time. 'Chair Harris recalled that the
numbers were quoted during the meeting by Mr. Andronico when he stated how many people he
thought per day and per weekend day that would come into the store; however, they were not
contained in the last meeting minutes. She asked that the discussion of the numbers be included in
the meeting minutes. Mr. Johnson apologized that he did not have the numbers with him at the
meeting that were provided previously by Mr. Andronico. Com. Doyle said that from the numbers
after the first year, it appeared the areas with the highest estimated sales were from the areas that
cut across Highway 280 to go into the center, and were the ones with the highest market shares
and highest dollar volume.
The Planning Commissioners discussed the issues which still needed to be addressed or need to be
addressed as part of a recommendation; Com. Corr summarized issues to discuss: traffic issues;
new truck only exit; landscaping; exit off Stevens Creek; and southwest entrance. Com. Doyle
summarized issues for discussion: concept of the theater; what options for preservation; could
DeAnza help with other possible altematives for this type of venue. Com. Kwok summarized
issues: traffic patterns; theater alternatives for neighborhood entertainment - upstairs in a center?
He said he felt they should not rush with approval of the project, but would look at options to
bring entertainment back to the community.
Com. Kwok said he was not too concerned about the landscape as it was adequate; trucking: the
loading dock is appropriate under the revised proposal, but again the noise made when the trucks
back out of the area could be a concern especially if deliveries start at 7 a.m. He also was
concerned if trucks blocked the cars in the parking stalls while unloading. Com. Kwok said
relative to the traffic circulation, he was concerned because it does compound the parking and also
the traffic problems around in the neighborhood, especially because it is so close to DeAnza
College} every time there is an event, the traffic problems are compounded. Traffic is definitely a
problem and needs to be addressed before making a decision on the project. Relative to the
theater, he expressed concern about the entertainment in the neighborhood, but possibly could
work out something with Flint Center; but agreed with Com. Corr that whether Andronicos is
there or not, they are going to close the theater because it is an economic issue. He said he was not
overly concerned with the backup truck noise, as they could regulate the hours. He said he
Planning Commission Minutes g March 27, 2000
supported having an Andronicos market in the area because the other markets are different
enough.
Chair Harris said that an issue to add to the list was the new plans for the trucks backing up. She
said that many people would be entering on Mary Avenue because it was easier, closer to the
store. She noted that a speaker suggested unloading the delivery trucks through an open door
where the unloading is hidden. Although it is more costly for an interior unloading area, it is
functional and more efficient, and doesn't have the constant track backup noise. Chair Harris said
that it is important with traffic that when using a document provided by the applicant, to take the
devil's advocate approach, and verify and validate the information provided and do site
inspections of the present situation.
Chair Harris said she liked the project and would like to see Andronico's there; however, the
traffic problems need to be confronted and mitigated. It does not mean that the project won't go
forward, but that a realistic view up front must be taken. As suggested by a previous speaker, a
study needs to be done.. Until this meeting, the problem with the other delivery trucks stacking up
on Stevens Creek Blvd. was not known, 'and. it needs to be addressed. The project could revive
that whole center and be a real asset to the community but the traffic issues need to be mitigated.
She said the revamping of the truck program was positive, the wall has been redesigned land a
planting strip put in. There needs to be a track access and people access. The demise of the
theater is unfortunate but you can't mandate something that is failing. Possibly contact Parks &
Recreation with this particular community concern; the Quinlan Center is available, perhaps
family movie nights could be sponsored or partnered with DeAnza or another organization, such
as the current foreign film series. Relative to backup noise, it is a nightmare and it should be
mitigated as much as possible. Too many grocery stores: she said she agreed with Com. Doyle,
that the market drives that and Andronicos wouldn't be Willing to go to the expenditure of putting
this into play if they didn't feel it was worthwhile. It is different than what we have, different
stores offer different products, and specialty stores are good for the community. She said the
landscaping was appropriate. The daily counts for the cars expected and trucks per day were
discussed at a previous meeting and should be included in the meeting minutes. She said she did
no feel that a count of 38 cars is reasonable, as it could very well be 300 cars.
Com. Stevens said that he agreed with previous comments, and said he frequented the Coffee
Society and experienced problems in the parking lot with speed bumps. He said he was interested
in the comment that trucks are parking on Stevens Creek to unload theirdeliveries which presents
traffic problems. He said he liked Mr. Burnell's comment about the need for a system approach.
He said that traffic circulation is multi faceted, and an important issue and along with truck
parking needs to be looked at, and until addressed he could not approve the project. He said truck
access was also an important issue, and he expressed concern about the trucks backing up. The
proposal is a superior proposal; with the trucks folding into a departhre area, unloading and
folding out. Many people are fioncerned about the theaters, but it is an economic issue driven by
the market. Alternatives are being sought. He said he was concerned about the lack of
information and the lack of publicizing the meetings. He said the backup noise was addressed
earlier with truck access; looking forward to having the Andronicos market; and landscape
improvements are appropriate. Com. Stevens said he was satisfied with the proposal overall, with
the exception of the traffic circulation and the theater issue.
COm. Con' said he agreed in terms of the traffic issues; but need to address it today as to what the
numbers really are and not use old 1998 numbers. He said the traffic department's figures are
Planning Commission Minutes 9 March 27, 2000
usually accurate, but they have not instilled confidence that things have been addressed the way
they should. He said he was concerned about the stacking lane on eastbound Stevens Creek; and
the city is in the process of changing the flow of the lights. In terms of the driveway off Stevens
Creek by the freeway, it is a difficult turn to make, but need to look at the whole traffic circulation
and make sure we look at all the pieces including senior center, where the bus stops. In terms of
the truck stacking and the access in the back, he said he felt the plan works well, and unless
someone comes up with a design that shows how the pull through one can work or something
where you don't have to back up, he did not know how it would be solved. The trucks can back
in, be almost lined up with that driveway and back in and there will be the beeping noise. The
stores have indicated that their deliveries will be early in the morning. He expressed concern with
the truck only exit because it will be difficult to monitor for trucks only. The theater issue is not in
the Planning Commission's purview to deal with; the reality' is that economically, it is failing and a
mutual agreement was made with the center. Relative to too many grocery stores, Com. Stevens
said that Andronicos is different and they are looking at their market share; landscaping is suitable
with ample screening. The overall project is a good project for the site; however, he said he would
not give 'the go ahead until some of the other issues are adequately addressed, particularly the
traffic circulation
Com. Doyle said he thought the duckout on the Stevens Creek entry close to close to 280 or 85
was a good concept. He questioned if it was possible to modify the two entries off Stevens Creek
to improve the flow without doing away with the 500 year old oak trees. Mr. Jung said the traffic
department would have to look at it, although there was not much to work with as it was very
narrow. Mr. Piasecki said that the landscape area was not very wide, and to have a deceleration
lane you would lose your landscaping.
Com. Doyle said that relative to traffic and circulation, the key things to consider are the turns
onto Mary Avenue; the Stevens Creek turnoffs, how to improve that; the traffic cut through, he
said looking through the dat~i it appears that most of the customers come from the western part of
town; that is the traffic direction that will have the most impact. Truck access and stacking: make
sure we don't turn that backside which will be where most of the people come into this center or
into this shopping center and into this grocery stores seeing all truck access and doors; landscape:
make sure it is as mature as can be and of good quality. The renderings should reflect whatwill be
reality. With the loss of the theater, address creative ways to involve the community in providing
opportunities that would foster family gatherings/opportunities, such as YMCA, Parks and
Recreation or Flint Center. Back up noise: not overly concerned with if is controlled by the hours,
make sure the distance to the closest 'units are somewhere around 250 feet so that it creates a
significant buffer so as not to' create a significant impact. Too many grocery stores: he said the
experts feel that it will be successful. Relative to the overall project, something is needed to liven
up the Oaks Center; there are a lot of other possibilities that would be a lot more onerous and
problematic, but it is much better than a Home Depot or some night club. Andronico's has a good
image, and we should try to see if we can try to work that in, but make sure the tradeoffs are
understood. To be successful, the community has to support it and we need to make sure that
compromise and equation is correct. On the architecture side of it, we need to do something to
break up the northwest comer or enliven it; it is covered by trees in all our documents, but it is
really a 25 or 28 foot high wall plain on two sides. Community involvement: is there someway we
can better inform the community which is the message from the last two meetings. He said it has
been in the Courier but there should be some way in the future for the larger developments, to find
a communications mechanism that would let them be informed of that in advance.
Planning Commission Minutes l0 March 27, 2000
Chair Harris summarized that all were in favor of the project, with the loss of the theater. The
design and landscaping were agreed upon, and the main issue is the concern about the traffic and
the truck routing. Mr. Chong suggested taking another traffic count in a week or so to see if there
were any changes. Chair Harris encouraged community members to call Colin Jung with
comments.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Doyle moved to continue Application 2-U-00, 4-EA-00 to the
April 10th Planning Commission meeting
Com. Kwok
Passed 5-0-0
Chair Harris suggested that when there is a big commuriity issue, perhaps there should be a
community meeting which has been well publicized. She said it may be too late now, but for the
future, they need to catch the wave' because the community does not like to find out things by
accident.
Mr. Jung said he felt some of the concerns had to do, not with Andronicos itself, but the concerns
with the center management. He said relative to this particular application, the center management
has not been very active, it has really been Andronicos that has been in the driver's seat pushing
forward. Chair Harris noted that a written communication from Lisa Rittenhauer was received.
Mr. Jung said that another wildcard issue is what goes on at DeAnza College (DAC), because staff
has very little or no control what goes on at DAC, and as long as they charge for their parking,
people will naturally look for free parking over at the Oaks Center. Chair Harris said that at times
extra security guards are hired at the Oaks Center to monitor non- customers parking in their
stalls.
7. Area: Recommendation to City Council on adoption of proposed
ent Plan.
Staff presentation: Wordell, City Planner, reported that in July 1999 the Planning
Commission City Council and the City CoUncil adopted the boundaries for
the redevelopment area. Activ then have been for the most part the legal steps required
to actually reach final adoption flopment project in the redevelopment area. She said
' that the Planning Commission will be the recommendation to the City Council on the
redevelopment plan and its conformance Plan. The item will go to the City
Council on May 15 and they will adopt it at that t will also receive the final EIR but will
not take action on it. The final action on the entire ent project is scheduled for June
19, 2000, which would include the adoption of the final arming Commission will not
take any action on the EI1L the only time it will take action on it time the use permit
is submitted for the project and at that time the draft EIR of the final be evaluated to see
if it anticipated what the actual project is and if any impacts change or anym change to a
significant degree, there would be an analysis and possibly amendment to the
Ms. it is acknowledged that the Df
since
Planning Commission Minutes 6 April 10, 2000
Chair
location is
more intensive landscaping across the front area.
that the .three issues were: midnight closing time; which drop box
fie, or none; and additional landscaping requirement.
Chair Harris o
public input; there was no one present who wished to speak.
Com. Corr said that
appropriate; and the ret
that the midnight closing
openings are in both sides of the
that staff's proposal was approt
for the drop box was appropriate; hours are
for additional landscaping was appropriate. Com. Kwok said
applicant's proposal for drop box is appropriate if
.ditional landseap~ screening needed. Com. Doyle said
upgraded landscaping; however, closing time
should be 11 p.m. Com. Stevens said closing hour was acceptable to remain
competitive with the other video stores; staff' osal for the drop box is appropriate. Relative
to the landscaping, he said it was an entire and the video store should not have
requirements that are not consistent with the entire He said he did not agree that they
should be required to provide additional landscaping unica, part. of the entire center.
MOTION:
SECOND:
NOES:
Com. Con' moved approval of Application
midnight; drop box be located in the area proposed b3
upgrades be included according to the model resolution
Com. Stevens
Com. Doyle
include closing hours of
that landscaping
10.
Application Nos.
Applicant:
Location:
2-U-00, 4-EA-00
Johnson Lyman Architects
21275 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Use Permit for the demolition of a cinema and retail space and the construction of a new 32,160
square foot market and cooking school (Androni¢o's) at an existing shopping center.
Tentative City Council hearing date of April 17, 2000
Staff presentation: Mr. Colin Jung, Associate Planner, provided a brief overview of the
application for a use permit to demolish approximately 17,430 sq. ft. of retail and cinema space
and construct a new 32,160 sq. ft. market and ancillary cooking school (Andronico's) at the Oaks
Shopping Center. During the last two meetings a number of changes were made to the center
design, among them to integrate the architecture of the Andronico's market into the look of the
existing center, match the roof pitches and materials, repetition of concrete columns match,
creation of more pedestrian accessible type amenities. He said the dance academy would be
relocated to another section of the center; truck circulation was reviewed; truck loading and
unloading hours to be limited to morning and early afternoon hours which are considered non-
peak times; changes to the rear elevations were made with additional landsi:aping, display boxes,
addition of trellis work; pedestrian connection across the asphalt re-established; and landscape
strip added to screen loading dock. He said that comments from the public relate to concerns
about traffic. Staff has proposed in the conditions of approval that the access issue be addressed
with Andronico's to improve how it works.
Planning Commission Minutes ? April 10, 2000
Com. Kwok questioned if any parking spaces were being eliminated with the changes; Mr. Jung
responded that there was a surplus of 22 spaces. He also stated that the traffic would be one way
for trucks and vehicles, with a sign for exit only.
Mr. Raymond Chong, Traffic Engineer, explained that staff will measure the before and after
traffic volumes on the key sweets and assess whether the supermarket will have an impact on the
neighborhoods. If so, staff will meet with the neighborhood and address the impacts by instal ling
traffic calming measures in the neighborhood. In terms of the Glenbrook crosswalk, there is a
proposal to integrate with the senior center Memorial Park crossing, and the issue would be
addressed for the crossing both at the apartments and Memorial Park. He added that "no parking"
signs wc~uld be put on Stevens Creek Boulevard. He discussed the anticipated trip generation
figures generated by the supermarket. The results of the intersection LOS analysis indicated a
performance standard LOS of D, and a B- for both existing and background conditions; and a C+
for the project. Mr. Chong reviewed the diagram which illustrated the traffic generation and
answered questions.
Mr. Chong reviewed the exhibit illustrating the eastbound left turn spillback, and said that based
on current analysis, it was anticipated as adequate. He noted a glitch on the timing plans for the
left mm, and added green time; however, said that another traffic count would be done next week
to look at the p.m. peak hour, to determine whether there is a need to extend the left turn pocket,
and at the same time put a condition of approval if there is impact for the applicant to contribute to
extending the left mrn lane. Mr. Chong said that the letters received were related to operational
improvements, and said he has agreed to meet with one of the key participants to review the key
issues, especially at Stevens Creek and Mary Avenue.
Chair Harris read portions of the contents of the letters and asked that Mr. Chong respond.
"Current flow from Mary onto Stevens Creek Boulevard is already difficult; the light for traffic
turning onto Stevens Creek is very short which means that to keep traffic from backing up on
Mary, drivers must make turns on red after the required stop. Often they are competing for space
to make their turns, with drivers making a U-turn from eastbound Stevens Creek who then turn
into the Oaks Center." Mr. Chong explained that an arterial management project to update the
controllers and signal timing plans would address the issue. Once put into the plans, he said they
would go out and adjust the timing to address any spillbacks or bad timing issues.
"Aren't 85 and 280 closed to trucks?" Mr. Chong responded that a portion southbound of 85,
south of Stevens Creek was closed to trucks.
"What is the cost to the City of Cupertino for traffic considerations related to this development,
specifically new traffic lights and new street or other constructions. Is there any?" Mr. Chong
said that future plans included putting some safety improvements at Stevens Creek and 85, such as
larger signal heads, and modifications to the traffic signals.
Chair Harris questioned if there were cause for new streets or construction related to the
application. Mr. Jung said that only private improvements related to driveway entrances that the
applicants would be financing; none to the city of Cupertino.
Chair Harris read into the record further inquiries for response. "This is an issue brought up
related to Stevens Creek Blvd. A lack of a pull in lane for buses at the Mary Avenue westbound
bus stop; this is a very heavily used bus stop that forces buses to occupy the right traffic lane while
Planning Commission Minutes 8 April 10, 2000
picking up and dropping off passengers." Mr. Chong responded that it was an issue to be
coordinated with the VTA who operate the buses, who determine the desirable locations for
turnout. He said if it was an ongoing concern, staff could meet with VTA to discuss if it was
possible to relocate the turnout.
"Lack of a right mm lane in the westbound direction to turn onto Mary Avenue." Mr. Chong
responded that the role of thumb was having 300 right tums; and currently it was projected to have
220; therefore he did not anticipate an immediate need.
"Close proximity of the first entrance into the Oaks to the Mary Avenue intersection which
routinely causes traffic backups when cars slow or stop to negotiate the right turn into the center."
Mr. Chong acknowledged the problem, and said it was part 'of the scheme to work with the owner
of the development on how to address the driveway issues. He said he did not have a solution at
this time.
"Proximity of the second entrance to the right mm lane entrance to the freeway." Mr. Chong said
they would work with the owner and with the Planning Department.
"Steep bank of the second entrance ramp with a sharp turn at the bottom of the ramp; any cars
pulling out of parking spaces or pedestrian with bags or carts will quickly overwhelm the ramp's
ability to hold cars trying to enter the shopping center." Mr. Chong responded that it was another
issue to work with the Planning staff and the owner.
Mr. Dave Johnson, Johnson Lyman Architects, said that John Sutti, Bill Andronico, Reed Bennett,
and Mark Dick were present, and were in general agreement with the conditions specified and
were ready to move forward.
Chair Harris questioned if the parking lot was going to be restriped. Mr. Johnson said that the
Andronico's side of the parking lot would be restriped to meet the city standards. He addressed
the shopping cart issue, stating that Andronicos had a program to return the carts to the storage
area by the front of the store and were aware of the issue.
Com. Corr asked staff to clarify for the public the Planning Commission's role in terms of adding
and deleting businesses in this and other shopping centers. Mr. Piasecki clarified that the city was
not requiring the demolition of the theaters, and said that as long as the theaters are viable and can
operate in a market sense, the city has no input into whether they continue operating or cease to
operate. He said the city does not get involved in market decisions, because market
determinations are complex matters and are influenced by market supply and demand fomes. He
explained that the city was responding to a private application from Andronicos and the property
owner. He said that the one thing the city desires is viable shopping centers, and it does not matter
so much whether it is theaters, bookstores or markets that make them viable, but they are
interested in seeing that the centers are viable centers and they serve the community in the market
sense.
Mr. Reed Bennett, General Manager for Oaks Shopping Center, said that the center entered into a
mutual agreement with the theater over a year ago which gave them the ability to replace them as a
tenant, which specifically involved a financial burden on behalf of the ownership. He said he felt
Andronicos would provide a chance for renaissance for the center. He said he submitted a letter
Planning Commission Minutes 9 April i 0, 2000
which illustrates their willingness to cooperate with staff in terms of issues of circulation, and
ingress and egress.
Mr. Brian Hiles, Assistant Manager of the Oaks Theater, apologized for the false perception that
the management of the theater was not interested in the possible demise of the theater. He said it
was a false perception arid said that prior to becoming an employee, he was a long time patron of
the theater and considered it an icon in the community. He appealed to the Planning Commission
as a patron to consider not tearing down the theater. He suggested that Andronicos consider an
alternate location; but said he was in favor of any alternative that would make both parties happy.
He also expressed concern about the DeAnza College traffic converging upon the center.
Ms. Cheryl Geddes, resident, Commons of Cupertino, expressed thanks to Chair Harris for
reading the letters submitted because of the time constraints. She said that it has been difficult
getting information about what is going on, and as of 4 p.m. there was no information available
relative to the agenda, which made it difficult for her to respond. Ms. Geddes said that she
distributed a packet with photos and exhibits earlier this evening to staff. She said it was clear at
the last meeting that staffWas not particularly familiar with the shopping center and traffieissues,
and perhaps the councilmembers and commissioners were not as familiar as they could be.
Referring to the vicinity map, she said that on one hand it was good to talk about the ramp as
being a problem from the community's perspective, but then to read a rebuttal that states it is not a
problem was a contradiction. She said that it was a major problem. As a community and resident
of the Commons, she requested that the city consider closing the entrance off completely, and if
there is going to be a large Andronicos in the center, make access be off Mary Avenue; even if it
meant putting in signaling or otherwise changing the entrances off Mary Avenue. She said they
were not familiar with the design review process and perhaps should have known about this many
months ago and would have been able to participate and provide comment at that point. Ms.
Geddes said it was clear that they could cut and paste a picture of Andronicos, and move the
building to the other side and solve a great number of problems. She said it would eliminate the
truck loading problems that were discussed the last time, the backing up, all the issues related to
the truck loading. It provides a much more attractive arrangement, putting it up against the sound
wall, which is where most major shopping centers go. If there is a sound wall, they tend to back
the grocery stores up against the sound wall. She said that if they were involved earlier in the
process, they might have been able to offer some different thinking that could have been applied
to the project. In terms of traffic, a proper traffic study would have been requested before
approval of the project-because as a community they are uncomfortable with the notion of
approving a project without knowing what the impact is. She said Mr. Chong eluded to the fact
that he had spoken with someone and she acknowledged that she was the person and said she
appreciated his willingness to meet with regard to the traffic study to make sure that all of their
concerns were relayed. She said she did not agree with the numbers in the traffic reports; stating
that 539 trips per peak hour on a Sunday is equivalent to 9 extra cars per minute, which is a lot of
cars. One left turn lane is not going to solve that problem; most of those trips are not going to
come out of the people who live off Mary Avenue. Ms. Geddes suggested locating Andronicos
along Stevens Canyon Road, as there are five other supermarkets to chose from within 1-1/2
miles. She said in terms of the community impact, loss of the movie theaters is difficult for some
of the community to comprehend, as it is the only low cost entertainment option, the next closest
theaters are at El Pasco and cost more than $8.00. She said she spoke to people who said the
theaters were viable. She requested that the Planning Commission not make a decision until the
traffic study has been accomplished, and the whole thing more thoroughly thought through and
perhaps avoid a rush to decision on the process. Ms. Geddes reviewed the suggested layout for the
o7 -3 1
Planning Commission Minutes t0 April 10, 2000
store against the back wall in the unused area, which saves the trees and allows for a different
orientation with a small caf6 eating area in front, provides interesting circulation for the traffic
without having to depend upon the ramp off Stevens Creek. She illustrated how steep the right
turn is into the Oaks by the Shane Company, and illustrated how the trucks unloaded their supplies
and delivered to customers. She said the problem with the circulation is a generic problem to the
shopping center that should be addressed in terms of servicing the businesses that are there; and
said for a successful center, you have to accommodate the suppliers to that center. She added that
having a major entrance as the principle entrance to the supermarket on top of that is a recipe for
disaster.
Ms. Nadine .Deede, resident, said that Mary Avenue was a major exit from her neighborhood. She
expressed concern about the traffic, and competing with traffic making U-turns from eastbound
Stevens Creek Boulevard. She said there are delivery trucks as early as 6 a.m. parked between the
Shane Company and the east side of the shopping center. She said she felt the proposed parking
would not be adequate for the large Size of Andronieos. She questioned if there was a ratio of
parking spaces per square foot and type of business. She said that the trash collection vehicles
would probably begin their collection as early as 6 a.m.
Ms. Ann Robertson, Oakdale Ranch resident, said that the Oaks Center was developed to service
the needs of the community, and asked that consideration be given to what is being traded off.
She said there is no downtown in Cupertino, but the Oaks Center serves the west end of Cupertino
and has provided recreation and entertainment for students and families. Residents are
questioning the need for another gourmet food store within such close range to the others.
Mr. Ray Peck, Oakdale Ranch resident, agreed with previous speakers about the loss of the theater
and bookstore as assets. He said the theater is the only theater in town, and residents are aghast
that the theater is closing. He compared the grocery store traffic with the theater traffic and
questioned how the numbers'were arrived at, noting that he felt the grocery store would have more
increase in traffic than was shown on the charts illustrated. He said there was nothing addressed
about customers finding a back door into Andronicos. He expressed concern about the loss of
parking spaces because of the restriping and the loss due to the docking area.
Mr. Peck read into the record a letter from Carolyn Miller, President of Oakdale Ranch
homeowners association: "Members of the City Council and Planning Commission; this letter is in
regard to the recent discussion regarding the Oaks Center change and expansion. It looks as
though the city planners of Cupertino have been enticed by the glitter of silver and not thinking of
the very people they ought to be representing. A grocery store definitely removes the appeal, not
to mention the additional burden of traffic, added to Stevens Creek, Mary and Stelling. The
Council put a great deal of time and effort into exploring and limiting the construction of monster
home building when they instituted the FAR regulations, but doesn't seem to be following the
same plan for community development in regard to the Oaks Center. One of the appeals of
Cupertino since we don't have a downtown like Los Altos, Mountain View, Saratoga and Los
Gatos is the Oaks Center. The sense of community with the Oaks and Memorial Park and I would
add the Senior Center provides an alternative to the City Center need. The intersection of Stevens
Creek and Mary is impacted enough from DeAnza students and vehicles during the day and
anyone would agree that leaving Flint Center and flowing into various traffic routings is
tumultuous enough without adding more constant vehicles created by the market. It has been my
personal experience to have waited through the left turn signal from Stevens Creek to Mary two or
three light changes before being able to make the turn, this during mid-morning hours without
Planning Commission Minutes Il April 10, 2000
DeAnza or Flint Center traffic. Forgetting a sense of community could be the very thing to lessen
interest in living in Cupertino, after all there needs to be a reason to be here beyond schools and
convenient commute to work. Residential values, property val~es could be affected negatively.
As a realtor, one of the things I occasionally have to overcome with families moving into the area
is the lack of downtown. The Oaks Center, restaurant, shops, adjacent Memorial Park and Flint
Center helped to alleviate the lack of City Center. I would earnestly request that more
consideration than to earning revenue be explored. An environmental study should be a place to
start. Perhaps public opinion on a need for a grocery store would be another. More awareness to
this issue to residents would be most certainly reveal positive and negative things about this issue.
The limited information published in the Cupertino Courier is hardly enough to make the
population aware of what the city planners are doing. I thank you." (End of letter)
Ms. Debra Jamison, Rumford Drive, north of the Oaks Center, said that she submitted a letter
outlining her general objections to thepmposal. She said that she is familiar with the area as she
frequents the intersection as a runner, walker, a cyclist and a motorist. Relative to traffic, if the
figures presented do not include traffic from the new senior center, the figures should be deemed
invalid as the numbers would increase the traffic at the intersection. She said that the traffic
figures should not ignore the special events occurring at the park, Flint Center, DeAnza and the
Oaks Center. She said there were already many markets in the area, and although she was not
opposed to a small gou.rmet.food shop and deli in the area, but another full service supermarket is
not appropriate for the site. She said that the added traffic would negatively impact the quality of
life for the neighborhood. She said she felt the loss of the theater would diminish her quality of
life and another supermarket would not increase it. She expressed concern also for the safety of
cyclists and pedestrians in the area. She concluded by stating that she felt there were other
alternatives for increasing the viability of the Oaks Center, including gourmet food alternatives.
Mr. Chong said that the traffic count used from the senior center was from 1998 and the expansion
would have to be factored in for more trips generated.
Ms. Wing Ping Yu, resident, said she is a frequent shopper at all the supermarkets in the area and
did not see the need for another major supermarket in the area. She said the area with Flint Center
and the theater is a cultural area and attracts people to Cupertino. She suggested that the exit by
the freeway onramp be closed because of the heavy traffic going onto the freeway onramp, even'in
the middle of the day. She expressed concern also about the lack of parking spaces for the
supermarket in the center and said that the entire traffic circulation issue should be addressed
before approval of the project.
Ms. Christine Pearce, Gardenview Lane, expressed concern about the traffic concerns generated
by the addition of Andronicos, and the quality of life if the proposal is approved. She said she
sensed that the citizens felt there has been a rush and reaction in the project, rather than a through
planning. She said she submitted a letter asking if a full environmental report should be
conducted, to allow an opportunity for the proposed changes at the Oaks Center to be thoroughly
considered by the community. She said of particular interest were the assumptions, the sources of
data and the calculations that were used to assume that there would be no significant impacts on
the traffic relating to such a vastly different use. She pointed out that the last traffic count was in
1998 and questioned the validity of 1998 numbers. Mr. Chong clarified that the numbers used
were from the trip generation handbook, which is a nationwide survey of different supermarkets
based on their square footage, sizes, typical profile. Ms. Pearce said she would'like an
independent traffic study'done associated with the project, and that studies, analyses and
Planning Commission Minutes 12 April 10, 2000
mitigation should be done prior to approval of the project, not after. She referred to the
environmental impact assessment prepared by the applicant and questioned the "no" answer
relative to transportation impacts. She said that she was awar~ there was a process which was
probably followed to some extent, but she was grateful to the Cupertino Courier for an article that
made people aware of what was happening. She said, it may not be as the city said the
commission felt the marketplace was making it difficult for small inexpensive movie theaters to
survive. She said it appeared the commission is making a marketplace decision there and it does
not seem to be supported by the operation of the Oaks. Ms. Pearce stated that the commission also
has said that the staff believes the addition of Andronicos would provide a much needed grocery
store for Cupertino, particularly for residents in this area. She pointed out that she did not hear
one person step up and say "please another market on Stevens Creek". She questioned the market
analysis done by Andronicos which indicated it would be a good location and questioned whether
it would really bring back benefits that would be a result of an additional market in the area. She
submitted two petitions which were generated a week earlier when community members became
aware of what was happening with the theater and proposed market. The petitions ask for careful
consideration of the benefits of keeping the Oaks theater; one petition is signed by residents of the
community and the other petition is non-residents. She concluded by requesting a full
investigation of what really is in the city's best benefits and if the choice is to go forward, then to
back up and look at what the ramifications are of putting the Andronicos market on that site.
Mr. David Michelfelder, resident of Glenbrook Apts., said that he was a patron of the Oaks
Theater and he too would miss the theater. He echoed earlier statements that it is a quality of life
issue in the community, losing the bookstore, and the theater would really send a message in the
wrong direction. He said Mary Avenue was a high use area, and construction will be going on for
the senior center. The east side of Mary used to be no parking with a bike lane along the curb; it
was changed and now the parking is along the curb, the bike lane is out further into Mary Avenue,
making it much more dangerous exiting traffic for bikers, runners, walkers, and traffic in general.
He said it also makes it difficult if considering putting a crosswalk from the Oakstheater across to
the apartments, as there is not a straight stretch of territory to put in such a crosswalk. He said
traffic into a large supermarket would create a major gridloek. Mr. Michelfelder also expressed
concern that the traffic impacts are not being addressed' adequately with all the activities in the
area and the traffic coming from Highways 85 and 280.
Ms. Lenore Slayden, President of Cupertino Countrywood Homeowners Assoc., said she only
became aware of what was happening last night when a neighbor told her. She said she patronizes
Andronieos in Los Altos and felt that Cupertino did not need another one in such close proximity.
She said she felt it was not publicized adequately and that the traffic analyses is grossly
inadequate. She said she has been a patron of the movie theater since it opened, and was sorry
she did not know about its demise sooner, as she would have brought more residents from
Countrywo0d to the meeting to voice their opinions. She said she concurred with previous
speakers, and implored the Planning Commission to move slowly and cautiously. She said they
were losing a community asset, and although she liked Andronicos market, did not feel one more
was needed.
Mr. Reed Bennett, General Manager of the Oaks Center, said that everyone had valid concerns;
however he wanted to make it clear that the theater was not going to remain in the Oaks Center,
and if Andronicos did not go into the center, another business would. He reiterated hose who are
hoping the theater is going to remain are hoping in vain; it is not going to remain at the Oaks
Center. He pointed out that the theater was not viable and they have reached a mutual agreement
..= ............ ~,, ,~mutcs 13 April 10, 2000
with the theater to end its lease; it is fin~¢ially driYell ~tld ll0t related to the quality of life, but is
strictly a matter of finances. He said they have to create a renaissance for the center and bel;''~.
Andronicos is the way to do it.
Ms. Gail Lee, Rumford Drive, said that her main concern was with traffic with people coming
through the neighborhood. She said she was not in favor of speed bumps and other methods to
keep the traffic down. She said the next two proposals on the agenda also would increase traffic
down Stevens Creek. If the two plans get approved without a comprehensive study, there is going
to be have gridlock on Stevens Creek and at 85, the exit and entrance into DeAnza College. She
said she felt that the traffic should be addressed more thoroughly than it has been.
Chair Harris closed the public hearing.
There was a brief discussion relative to whether or not there would be time to discuss Items I I and
12 because of the late hour, or to continue them to the next meeting.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Kwok moved to continue Applications 5-U-00, 4-EXC-00, 2-GPA-99,
8-EA-00; 6-U-00, 3-EXC-00, 2-GPA-99, 9-EA-00 to the April 24, 2000
Planning Commission meeting
Com. Doyle
Passed 5-0-0
on:
Kimpton Hotel and Restaurant Group
Lot 6, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center
(So. DeAnza Blvd.)
Use Permit to
vacant parcel and operate
General Plan Amendment to
Heart of the City Specific ]
room, 130,580 square foot hotel, restaurant and bar, on a semi-
allowed height of 75 feet.
exceed the 40-foot height limit and to allow hotel use
Tentative City
12.
Application Nos.: 6-U-00 9-EA-00
Applicant: Cupertino City Center
Location: Lot 1, Tract 7953, comer c Creek and
DeAnza Blvd.
Use Permit to construct a new 205 unit, 293,137 square foot
7,000 square feet of retail space on a vacant parcel (Stevens Creek Boulew
Various exceptions to the Heart of the City Specific Plan which may ir
apartment use, maximum height of building and side and rear setbacks.
General Plan Amendment to exceed the allowed height of 75 feet and to penetrate
ratio from Stevens Creek Boulevard.
Tentative City Council hearing date of May 1, 2000.
fidential building and
ity Center)
allowing an
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM
Application: 2-U-00, 4-EA-00 Agenda Date: June 12, 2000
Applicant: John Sutti (representing Andronico's)
Property Owner: Villa De Anza Inc. dba Oaks Shopping Center
Property Location: 21275 Stevens Creek Blvd. (between Mary Ave. & Highway 280)
Project Data:
General Plan Designation: Commercial/Residential
Zoning Designation: P (Stevens Creek Boulevard Conceptual Zoning)
Parcel Size: 7.9 net acres
Square Footage:
Proposed Demolition:
Proposed New Const:
Net New Construction:
Lot Coverage
Existing: 21.2%
Proposed: 24.3%
Floor-to-Area Ratio
Existing: 21.2%
Proposed: 25.5%
Building Height: 32'
Parking:
Existing:
Total Required
with Proposal:
Proposed:
Net Surplus:
17,427 sq. ft.
32,160 sq. ft.
14,733 sq.ft.
549 spaces
488 spaces
496 spaces
8 spaces
ProjeCt Consistency with: General Plan yes Zoning yes'
Environmental Assessment: Mitigated Negative Declaration Recommended
Application Summary: Use permit to demolish approximately 17,430 square feet of
retail and cinema space and construct a new 32,160 square foot market and ancillary
cooking school (Andronieo's) at the Oaks Shopping Center.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the addition of Andronico's would provide a much needed grocery store for
Cupertino, particularly for residents in this area and the western side of Cupertino. The
market will serve as a much needed anchor and economic boost for the shopping center
that has no anchor store.
Staffs recommendations are that the Planning Commission recommend:
Approval of a mitigated negative declaration (file no. 4-EA-00) on the use permit
project, and _
Approval of the use permit, file no. 2-U-00, in accordance with the model resolution
with a deferral of the sign approval to a separate application.
Approval of a minute order requesting that the City Council forward a letter to the
management of the De Anza College Flint Center expressing the community interest
in inexpensive, family-oriented film entertainment. The minute action asks that De
Anza College consider if such films can be incorporated into the Flint Center or other
De Anza College entertainment programs. (Staff has already verbally mentioned this
concern to the Flint Center General Manager)
Secondly, the minute action recommends the City Parks and Recreation Department
look into providing some family film entertainments.
BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission reviewed this project at their meetings of March 13th, March
27th & April 10* (Exhibit A-3). Numerous changes have already been made to the north
elevation, landscaping, cimulation, building materials and activity restrictions to limit the
impact on the residents of the Glenbrook Apartments across Mary Avenue. At the last
Commission meeting, despite staff attempts to address traffic-related issues, residents
continued to express concerns over the loss of the theaters and traffic, circulation, access
and parking problems.
The Commission asked staff to:
1) Examine throughly traffic generation, access, circulation and parking issues,
particularly along Stevens Creek Boulevard, using current traffic counts;
2) Rework environmental review checklist using traffic findings and resubmit it to the
Environmental Review Committee;
3) Hold a neighborhood meeting to present any new information.
DISCUSSION:
Andronico's hired a private traffic consultant, George Nickelson, to work with the City
Traffic Engineer' in analyzing the data. This combined with the numerous traffic issues
that staff was asked to address has delayed the hearing until this point.
ERC Meeting
A new analysis was completed using current traffic counts and resubmitted to the
Environmental Review Committee on 5/10/00. It was noted that the Stevens Creek/
Mary Ave intersection continued to operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS) during
typical traffic conditions. Special events at the Flint Center and Memorial Park can
impact that intersection but they occur at off-peak times. Flint Center events usually
begin at 8 p.m. and there are only four larger events held at Memorial Park on the
2
weekends and spread between the months of April and October. Staff believes the
community benefits of these occasional events outweigh temporary traffic congestion.
Staff noted a minor mount of potential cut-through traffic on Meteor, Lubec and Anton,
which was insignificant, but will be monitored iftheproject is approved. The ERC
reaffu'med its original recommendation of approval of a mitigated negative declaration
for the project.
Neighborhood Meeting
A traffic/operations report and supplement were prepared by George Nickelson, traffic
consultant (Exhibits B-3, C-3). The report findings were summarized (Exhibit D-3) and
presented at the neighborhood meeting held at the Commons Clubhouse on June 7th. All
public hearing speakers, and residents who wrote letters or sent Sound Off cards who
expressed concerns about traffic, parking, cimulation or access were sent meeting
invitations if staff had their address. Twenty people attended the meeting, which
included Bill Andronico and his representative John Sutti. Certain residents expressed
concerns that public notification of this major project has been inadequate since the
beginning of public review.
Existing Traffic Operational Concerns. In reviewing the report and sharing the results
with the attendees, it became clear that most of the concerns stem from existing traffic
operational problems and unsafe driver and pedestrian behavior. Most of these types of
concerns are normally addressed in the day-to-day operations of the Traffic Engineering
Division. These concerns over existing traffic conditions and operations were not
expressed to staff until after the first public hearing on the Andronico's use permit. At
the neighborhood meeting, additional, new traffic operation concerns were expressed that
will be addressed by traffic staff. There are continuing concerns about the westerly
Stevens Creek Boulevard driveway, particularly its proximity to the Highway 85 onramp
and its peculiar geometry. Several residents favor modifying the entrance to ease access
or closing it entirely. Staff pointed out that recorded accident history does not indicate a
significant problem here. Further staff study shows a high concentration of utlities
(water, electrical, traffe & communications) near the entrance which makes modification
prohibitively expensive.
Andronico Traffic Effects and Solutions. On the conservative side, Andronico will
generate an additional 77 new peak hour trips, which will not degrade existing levels of
service at surrounding signalized intersections below acceptable levels (LOS D). This
includes factoring in traffic from a fully leased Oaks Shopping Center, the Senior Center,
growth in background traffic, expansion at City Center and anticipated enrollment
expansion at De Anza College.
There will be additional, minor cut-through traffic impacts. Based on Andronico's
market survey, it is estimated that 5% of their customers will come from north of Stelling,
which is 34 cars of the 77 net new peak hour vehicle trips.
3
Andronico macks will be directed through the Mary Avenue entrance,
specifically designed to handle its type of trucking needs.
which has been
Andronico's will add traffic to the westerly and easterly Stevens Creek driveways, which
will be improved to enhance flow. This is accomplished by lengthening the throat of the
driveways so that cross traffic is put at a greater distance from the entrance. Note that
these improvements have, of course, cut into the surplus parking number. 0nly the
easterly driveway can be widened. A median will be installed to separate inbound and
outbound traffic. Staff has reached a verbal agreement with the Oaks Center management
to widen and somewhat straighten out the inbound lane, more so than what is shown on
the plan set. The concern here was the proximity of some underground utility vaults and
how proposed improvement would affect them. A condition has been added to the model
resolution.
The driveway changes were received late by the architect, who has not had time to revise
the landscape plans. These plans will be available at the hearing.
Theaters. A discussion about the theaters ensued at~er the neighborhood meeting on
traffic. Staff's sense of the discussions was that the theater issue was actually a small part
of the larger issue of having a community focal point, a gathering place. The Oaks
Shopping Center and its surroundings: Flint Center, Memorial Park, Quinlan Center,
Sports Center and Senior Center are the only places in the City attendees identify as
approximating a real community center, i.e2, Heart of the City. Ongoing tenant changes
at the Oaks Shopping Center worries residents that the center will lose its uniqueness as a
gathering place and become more like other shopping centers. Bill Andronico and John
Sutti expressed their desire to have Andronico's become a good member of the shopping
center and community, and to open a dialog with the landlord about the future of the
shopping center.
Additional Resident and Tenant Input
Staff has received numerous correspondence about the project in the last two weeks.
Copies are enclosed (Exhibit E-3).
Enclosures:
Model Resolution for Approval
Minute Order
Revised Initial Study, ERC Minutes
Exhibit A-3: Planning Commission staff report dated April 10, 2000, which
includes reports from the March 13 & 27, 2000 meetings and other exhibits.
Traffic/Parking Analysis for the Proposed Andronico's dated
Exhibit B-3:
5/25/00
Exhibit C-3:
Exhibit D-3:
Conclusions
Letter from George Nickelson to Raymond Chong dated 6/5/00
Matrix of. Existing Traffic, Parking & Access Issues, Analyses and
Exhibit E-3: Public correspondence
Plan Set
4
Prepared by: Colin Jtmg, Associate Planner
Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development?~.~
G:/Planning/Pdreport/pc/pc2u00c
5
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO.
2-U-O0
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A USE PERMIT FOR THE DEMOLITION OF A CINEMA AND RETAIL SPACE
AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 32,160 SQUARE FOOT MARKET AND COOKING
SCHOOL (ANDRONICO'S) AT AN EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER AT
21275 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
SECTION I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use
Permit, as described in Section II. of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural
Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the PI ,arming Commission has held one or more public
hearings on this matter; and
WHEREAS,. the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has
satisfied the following requirements:
1) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general
welfare, or convenience;
2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino
Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of this title.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this
matter, the application for Use Permit is hereby recommended for approval, subject to the conditions
which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and
contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. 2-U-00 as set forth in the Minutes of the
Planning Commission of March 13, March 27, April 10 and June 12, 2000 and are incorporated by reference
as though fully set forth herein.
SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
2-U-00, 4-EA-00
Johnson Lyman Architects
21275 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Resolution No. 2-U-00
Page -2-
June 12, 2000
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
The recommendation of approval is based on Exhibits titled "Andronicos - Oaks Shopping Center"
dated 5/25/00, 6/7/00 and ., consisting of__ sheets labeled 1 through 6, and
except as may be amended by the Conditions contained in this Resolution.
2. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION
The applicant is granted an allocation of 14,733 net square feet of commercial development potential
from the "Heart of the City Allocation Pool" of the Retail Commercial Development Priorities Table
(General Plan Policy No. 2-3).
3. PERMITTED USES
The applicant is permitted to operate a retail grocery store, deli/bakery with a walk-up service window,
ancillary office uses, and a cooking school as shown on the approved exhibits. In addition, outdoor
seating in the westerly plaza and easterly .and southerly pedestrian arcades are allowed where it does
not interfere with pedestrian circulation. Also, in only the westerly plaza, outdoor, unroofed displays
of goods, less than 150 square feet in area, are allowed. Any signage shall follow the City sign code.
4. PERMITTED HOURS OF OPERATION
The permitted hours of operation for retail businesses at the Oaks Shopping Center are specified in use
permit file no. 20-U-86, which are 6 a.m. to midnight.
5. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENT
Building E and a portion of Building F shall be removed prior to or concurrently with project
construction. The developer shall assume the responsibility to obtain all required demolition permits in
accordance with City Ordinances.
In the event demolition of structures and improvements occurs between January 16th and July 31 st, the
applicant shall erect chain-link fencing around the canopy of each protected oak (ID #11 and #12 of
sheet L2) and not disturb the fenced areas until the oaks are transplanted between August 1~t and
January 15th.
6. TREE TRANSPLANTING REQUIREMENTS
The two Coast Live Oaks labeled No. 11 and No. 12 on plan set sheet "L2"shall be transplanted to
other landscaped areas near the project in accordance with the recommendations of the Barrie Coate
arborist report dated 2/24/00. Final locations with be determined by the project landscape architect and
the Community Development Director, however, the preferred locations would be at the entrances of
the pedestrian arcades. The applicant shall take all reasonable means to ensure the survival of the oaks,
but in the event the oaks do not survive transplanting, the applicant shall replace them with two (2) 8-
inch diameter Coast Live Oaks.
Resolution No. 2-U-00 June 12, 2000
Page
7. ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS
The African Sumac trees to be planted along the north wall shall be a minimum size of 24-inch box.
All transformers and outdoor employee break areas shall be adequately screen from public view to the
satisfaction of the Director of Community Development.
8. BICYCLE PARKING
The applicant shall install bicycle parking facilities in accordance with the City's parking ordinance.
The location shall be approved by the Community Development Director.
9. PARKING MANAGEMENT
On peak seasonal days, the applicant shall direct their employees to park in the street parking areas on
Mary Avenue.
10. SHOPPING CART MANAGEMENT
The applicant shall monitor and pick up on-site and off-site shopping carts on a daily basis.
11. DELIVERY TRUCK LIMITATIONS
Vehicular deliveries and pickups to or from the project are prohibited between the hours of 8 p.m. and
7 a.m. weekdays (Monday through Friday) and 8 p.m. and 9 a.m.on weekends (Saturday and Sunday).
12. GROUND AND WALL SIGNAGE
Ground and wall project signage are not approved with this use permit.
separate application for sign approval.
The applicant shall make a
13. 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 Govemmem 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.
14. Additional Widening of Easterly Stevens Creek Boulevard Driveway
The applicant shall show on the building plans, additional widening of the easterly Stevens Creek
Boulevard Driveway than what is show on these approved plans. The purpose of the widening is to
ease vehicle ingress and straighten the turning movements at this driveway.
Resolution No. 2-U-00
Page -4-
June 12,2000
SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.
15. STREET WIDENING
Street widening, improvements and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards
and specifications and as required by the City Engineer.
16. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS
Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and mimed structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and
standards as specified by the City Engineer.
17. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION
Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as approved by the City Engineer. Lighting fixtures shall
be positioned so as to preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining properties, and
shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site is located.
18. FIRE HYDRANT
Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City.
19. TRAFFIC SIGNS
Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City.
20. STREET TREES
Street trees shall be planted within, the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City
in accordance with Ordinance No. 125.
21. GRADING
Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of
the Cupertino Municipal Code. Overland release shall be provided. Pad elevations shown on the
exhibits will be adjusted as necessary prior to issuance of grading permit.
22. DRAINAGE
Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Surface flow across public
sidewalks may be allowed in the R-l, R-2 and R-3 zones unless storm drain facilities are deemed
necessary by the City Engineer. Development in all other zoning districts shall be served by on site
storm drainage facilities connected to the City storm drainage system. If City storm drains are not
available, drainage facilities shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
23. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and
other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected
utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shall submit detailed
plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the
affected Utility provider and the City Engineer. Underground existing overhead lines that crosses
Stevens Creek Blvd from De Anza College using the conduit lines already installed by the City.
Resolution No. 2-U-00 June 12, 2000
Page -5-
24. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing
for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park
dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to
issuance of construction Permits.
Fees:
a. Checking & Inspection Fees:
b. Development Maintenance Deposit:
c. Storm Drainage Fee:
d. Power Cost:
e. Map Checking Fees:
f. Street Improvement Reimbursement Fee:
Blvd.
g. Grading Permit:
$ 6% of Improvement Cost or $1,975.00 minimum
$ 3,000.00
$2,420/acre
$ 75.00 per street light
N/A
$7,200.00-Installation of conduit lines ~ Stevens Creek
$ 5% of on-site improvement Cost or $460.00 min.
Additional fees will be due in contribution toward needed Mary Avenue midblock crosswalk'
improvements.
-The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City
Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map
or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time
will reflect the then current fee schedule.
25. TRANSFORMERS
Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be
screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible
from public street areas.
26. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES
The developer shall execute a quitclaim deed for underground water rights to San Jose Water Company
and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water Company for water service to the subject
development.
27. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board,
for construction activity which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in your grading and street
improvement plans.
Resolution No. 2-U-00
Page -6-
June 12, 2000
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June 2000, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
g:/pdreport/res/res2-U-00
2-U-O0
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Tone Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO.
Minute Order
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
REQIJESTING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE VENUES
FOR INEXPENSIVE, FAMILY-ORIENTED FILM ENTERTAINMENT
The Planning Commission is concerned aborn the loss of inexpensive film entertainment in the City
and requests that the City Council forward a letter to the De Anza College Flint Center expressing the
community interest in inexpensive, family-oriented film entertainmem and the possibility that such
rims can be incorporated into the Flint Center or other De Anza College entertainment programs.
Secondly, the Planning Commission requests that the City Council consider directing the Park and
Recreation Department to look into providing some family film entertainment.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June, 2000, at a Regular
Commission in the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
Meeting
of the Planning
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
Andrea B. Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
g:/pdreporffres/mo2uO0
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torte Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
COMMITTEE
Conference Room A - 8:00 a.m., Wednesday, May 10, :2000
ORDER OF BUSINESS
MEMBERS PRESENT
Richard Lowcnthal - City Council Member, Ciddy Wordell - City Planner (for Steve Piasecki -
Director of Community Development), Bert Viskovich - Director of Public Works, Don Brown - City
Manager, Charles Con' - Planning Commissioner
STAFF PRESENT
Colin Jung - Associate Planner, Karen Bernard - Office Assistant
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
April 26, 2000 - Bert Viskovich moved for approval, Charles Con' seconded.
VOTE: 5-0
NEW ITEMS
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
l-U-00, 2-EA-00
Pinn Brothers (The Adobe Inn Hotel)
28128 Stevens Creek Blvd.
Use permit to demolish a restaurant and construct a 47,000 square foot, 77 room hotel.
Colin Jung presented the application for demolishing the Adobe Restaurant and building a three
story, 77 room hotel. One environmental impact is the size of the sanitary sewer line down
Stevens Creek from De Anza down to Wolfe. That impact is being addressed through the work
on the city center project. As mitigation, the line may need to be replaced by a larger one and the
applicant will share in the cost. Another impact is the large specimen size tree on the property.
The applicant is mitigating the removal of the tree by planting more palm trees as part of their
proposal. Another concern is construction noise. Staff will require in the conditions of approval
limiting the hours of construction and the use of mufflers. In addition, the GPA allocates a total
585 hotel rooms. With the new proposed projects, the total number of room exceeds 27 rooms.
From a policy standpoint, staff indicated that this matter can be mitigated at the hearing level.
Staff recommended the adoption of a negative declaration. Richard recommended that the project
have a "hole in the fence" - a walk through area for pedestrians.
Bert Viskovich moved for approval of a negative declaration, Ciddy Wordell seconded.
VOTE: 5-0
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
2-u-00 (4-F,A-00)
Johnson Lyman Architects
21275 Stevens Creek Blvd.(Oaks Shopping Center)
Use permit for demolition of a cinema and retail space for construction of a new 32,160
sq. ft. market (Andronico's).
Colin Jung presented the application for the proposed 32,160 square foot market. The project
has sparked a number of traffic concerns from the residents. Staff indicated that these concerns
do not apply to environmental impacts. They deal with operational issues such as the timing of
the lights, etc. The Planning Commission has requested for staff to re-evaluate this project and
look at the current traffic counts generated by the traffic engineer. Staff concluded that there is
not a deterioration in the level of service at Stevens Creek and Mary. Staff recommended a
mitigated negative declaration contingent upon traffic timing mitigation, operational concerns
and cut thru mitigation in the future. The committee members reaffn'med the previous
recommendation based on the recent data received.
Bert Viskovich moved for approval of a mitigated negative declaration, Don Brown seconded.
VOTE: 5-0
ADJOURNMENT
G/erc/planning/MINmay 1000
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Department of Communi~ Development
10300 Totte Avenue
Cupertino, Ca95014
408-777-3308
Staff Use Only
Case File No. '7- -- tO- '~, C:)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Attachments ?
Project Title ~-l-.r'~., C'--. rh .-.
Project Description ~.~,,,~,~ i;'~'vcl, t a~ 'Tgo-- g~;x..~ Ct e,e.~,.c,. (3 xe.~.~c~, q
Environmental SeRing ~ , , .
~'~,._,~ o~=,~.~-~,,~.~ ~c,~k'~ BXv,~.( m ~.~1~,:.~ ~,.~ -~ +L,.~ ~~.
PRO. CT DESC~ON:
Site ~ea(ac.) Z'~ .uild.gCov~e~; Z:e Ex~t. Build'~s.f. Proposed
Zone Q O.P. Dcsi~ation C.~~}% Assessor's P~el No.'3 ~-~-
/
If Residential UniWOross A~e ~/~
Tota.l~ Rentnl/Own Bdrms Total s.f. Price
Unit
Type
#1
Unit
Type
#2
Unit
Type
#3
Unit
Type
~4
Unit
Type
Applicable Special Area Plans: (Check)
Monta Vista Design Guidelines [----]
N. De Anza Conceptual ~
Stevens Crk Blvd. Conceptual ~
S. De Anza Conceptual
S. Sara-Sunny Conceptual
Stevens Creek Blvd. SW & L'scape
If Non-Residential, Building Area~%1~ LC'
s.f. FAR Max. Employees/Shifl~
Parking Required ~',~, '~ Parking Provided
Project Site is Within Cupertino Urban Service Area YES '~ NO
A) GENERAL PLAN SOURCES
1) Cupertino Cvcnoral Plan, Land Use Element
2) Cupertino C-cncrai Plan, Public Safety Element
3) Cupertino General Plan, Housing Element
4) Cupertino General Plan, Transportation Element
5) Cupertino General Plan, Environmental Resources
6) Cupertino General Plan, Appendix A- Hillside Development
7) Cupertino General Plan, Land Use Map
8) Noise Element Amendment
9) City Ridgeline Policy
10) Cupertino General Plan Consn-aint Maps
B) CUPERTINO SOURCE DOCUMENTS 11) Trcc lh~eservation ordinance 775
12) City Aerial Photography Maps
13) "Cupertino Chronicle" (California ~ Center, 1976)
14) Geological Report (site specific)
15) Parking Ordinances 1277
16) Zoning Map
17) Zoning Code/Specific Plan Documents
18) City Noise Ordinance
C) CITY AGENCIES 19) Cupertino Community Development Dept.
20) Cupertino Public Works Dept.
21) Cupertino Parks & Recreation Depamnent
22) Cupertino Water Utility
D) OUTSIDE AGENCIES
23) County Planning Department
24) Adjacent City's Planning Department
25) County Departmental of Environmen~ Health
26) Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
27) County Parks and Recreation Deparunent
28) Cupertino Sanitary Dis~ict
29) Fremont Union High School District
30) Cupertino Union School District
3 I) Pacific Gas and Electric
32) Santa Clara County Fire Deparnnent
33) County Sheriff
34) CALTRANS
35) County Transportation Agency
36) Santa Clara Valley Water District
E) OUTSIDE AGENCY DOCUMENTS
37) BAAQMD Survey of Contaminant Excesses
38) FEMA Flood Maps/SCVWD Flood Maps
39) USDA, "Soils of Santa Clara County"
. 40) County Hazardous Waste Management Plan
41) County Heritage Resources Inventory
42) Santa Clara Valley Water Disu'ict Fuel
leak Site
43) CalEPA Hn~rdous Waste and Substances
Site List
F) OTHKR SOURCF. S 44) Project Plan Set/ApplicaUion Materials
45) Field Reconnaissance
46) Experience with Project of similar s
47) ABAG l~'ojectious Series
1) Complete al.~l information requested on
the Initial Study Cover page. LEAVE
BLANK SPACES ONLY WI~.N A
SPECIFIC 1TEM IS NOT
APPLICABLF..
4) When explaining any yes response, label
your answer clearly (Example "N - 3
Historical") Please try to respond concisely,
and place as many explanatory responses as
possible on each pa~e.
2) Consult the Initial Study Source List; use
the materials listed therein to complete, the
checklist information in Categories A
through O.
You are encournged to cite other relevant
sources; if such sources are used, job in their
title(s) in the "Source" column next to the
question to which they relate.
S) Upon completing the checklist, sign and
date the Prepnrer's Affidavit.
6) Please attach the following materials
before submitting the Init/al Study to the
City.
- Project Plan Set ofLaghlative l:leoanent (I) copy
- L4~cafion rnnp with sit~ deafly marked (when
applicable)
3) If you check any of the "YES" response
to any questions, you must attach a sheet
explaining the potential impact and suggest
mitigation if needed.
,46 -5/
IMPACT
YES
WILL THE PROJECT... ~ot Significant $i~nifi~unt =umula~iw SOURCE
Significant (Mitigation (No
NO Proposed) Mitigation
Proposed)
A) LAND USE GENERAL PLAN
I) Require a change fi'om thc land usc
designation for the subject site in thc
General Plan?
2) Require a change ofzoning? [~ 0 0 0 0 16. Ig
3) Require a change of an adopted
specific plan or other adopted policy ,~ O O O O 17,18
statement?
4) Result in substantial change in the ..
present land use of thc si. or that of 0 ~ 0 0 0 ?,12
adjoining properties?
S) Disrupt or divide the physical
configuration of an established ~ O O O O 7,12,22,41
neiBhborhood?
B) GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC HAZARD
1) Be located in an area which has
,otcntial for major geologic hazard?
2) Be located on or adjacent to a
~ow~e~,qu~efau,t? 1~ O O E] E] 2.,4
,~ Be,o~ted,naGeoio~icS~d~.
Zone? 2
4) Be located in an area of soil
inst~bili;y (subsidence, landslJdc,
shrink/swell, soil creep or sevcre 2,$,10
erosions)?
S) Cause substantial erosion or
samation cfa watercourse? [~ O O O O 2,5,10
6) Cause subsUmfial disruption,
displacement, compaction or ~ O O O O 2,14.39
overcovering of soil either on-site croft-
S) Cause subs~m~tial change in
topography or in a ground surface
feature? ! 0,.39
8) Involve construction of a building,
.ad or.p,c sys.m on. s,o~ o,,~
or gre~
C) R~SOUR~ PARKS
1) ln~v.~e th~ ~xi.~ing ~moval ra~ or $,10
result in the removal of a natural resource J~ O O
for commercial purposes (including items
such as rock, sand, gravel, trees, minerals
or top-soil)?
:~ ~,, in the ,uh~al ~ep,etion o,
any non-tcnow~blc nmtural r~o~?
(Class ! or Il soils) ~o non-~icultural u~
or impair ~hc ~ri~ultur~ produ~vi~y of
ncmtby prime ~ri~ulmral land?
under the Williamann A~ or uny Open
Spa~ ees~rnent?
YES
~]ot Significant Significant Cumulative SOURC]~.
-'VILL T~ PRO. CT... Si~ifi~t (Mifig~on ~o
NO ~po~d) Mifig~ion
~o~sed)
exis~n~ ~My or pl~ne~ for ~
implemen~ion?
D) S~WAG~AT~R QUAL~
1) Result in a septic field being
2) ~suit in ~ scptic ficld being
Io~d wi~in 50 feet of a drainage ~e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 36,39.42
or wi~in 100 feet of~y well, wa~r
coupe or w~r ~dy?
~) ~sult in ex~ion of a sew~ m~n
dcvelopmmt?
4)Subs~ly de~ su~ or
~upply, including but not limi~d ~
~ing m~n~n~ce, mc~s ~d
:idi~ ~om mining ope~io~)?
5)Be loc~d in ~ ~a ofwa~ supply
w~m ~ugh infliction of m~l~m~d
~)~qui~ ~ ~DES ~it for 20
2) Subs~fi~ly ~ge ~ di~o~
~ or flow or q~W of ~d-
Mdi~o~ or wi~d~s, or ex~v~om?
p~ or.c ~.o~t of~~ ~ ~ ~ D 20~6
runoff or ~d?
4) Involvg a n~ ~c ~!
or ~d or ~r ~ such ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 36,42
~t~ ~e 1o~o~, ~ or flow ofi~
~) Be Io~d in a fl~ or
or by in~ducin~ n~ s~ci~, or ~
~ng mi~on or movc~n~
2) Sub~ly ~du~ ~c habi~ m
for fish, ~im~s or pl~? ~ O O O O 5,10
- IM?ACT
lYES
WILL THE PROJECT... ~ot Significant Significant :umulative SOURCE
Significant (Mitigation (~o
NO Proposed) Mitigation
Proposed)
3) Change the existing habitat food ~ 0 0 0 0 lO
source or nesting place for a rnre or 5,
endange.d species of plant or animal?
4) Involve cutting, .moral of
specimen scale t.es, whcther indigenous O O ~ O O 11,12,41
to the site or introduced?
G) TRANSPORTATION
1) Cause an increase in n-afdc which
is substantial in relation to thc existing
traffic load and capacity of the Street O ' O O O O 4. 20,35
system?
2) Cause any public or private street
intersection to f~nction below Level of 4,20
s.viceD? O O O O
;3) Increase tra~c hazards to
is,, and vehicles? O O O O 20,35
4) Adversely affect access to
commercial establishments, public
buildings, schools, parks or other ~ O O O O 4,10
pedestrian oriented activity areas?
S) Cause a .duction in public -
tnmsportation service at or near the ,~' 0 0 0 O 35
project site?
6) increase demand upon existing
p.king facilities, or engender demand for O [~ O O O 15,16
new pa~king space?
7) Inhibit use of alternative modes of
l~'ansportation to privat~ automobile ~ O O O O 5,19,34,35
usage? -.
H) HOUSING
1) Reduce the supply of alfordable
housing in the community, or .suit in the J~' 0 0 0 0 3,16
displacement of persons f~om their
present home? ' .
:) In asetheco ofhous gln*e O O O O 3.,6
area, or substantially change the variety
of housing types found in the
community?
3)' Create a ,nhstantial demand for new ~ 0 0 0 0 3. 16.47
housing?
l) HEALTH AND SAFETY
dLqpo~l or manuf~tm'~ of potentially
hazasdous matetiaL~? ~ O O O O 32.43
2) ~nvolve risk of explosion ot other
forms of uncontrolled release of
h~tdom subst~ces?
3) Involve the removld or continued C'~ O O O O 33,42.43
use of any existing, or installation of
any new underground chemical or fuel
storage tank?
danger?
S') Employ technology which could
adversely affect public safety in thc ~ 0 0 0 0 40.43
event of a breakdown?
WILL THE PROJECT... $Obg, CE
Not Significant Significant Cumulative
Significant (Mitigation (No
~ NO Proposed) Mitigation
proposed) -
mosquitos or other disease vectors? 25
J) AIR QUALITY
2) Violate any ~mbicnt .ir qu~li~
existing or proj¢c~d air qunlity violation,
or expose sensitive receptors to
substantial concentrations of pollutants?
I0 NOISE
1) Increase substantially the ambient
noise environment of thc project ,icinity O ]~ O O O g, lg
during cons~uction of the project?
2) l~esult in sustained increase in
vicinity following construction of the
project
3) Result in sustained noise levels
and duration limits contained in the
City's Noise Ordinance?
--~) AESTHETICS
1) Be at variance with applicable
design guidelines? [] O O O O 17
:2) Create an aesthetically offcnsii/¢
site open to public view? J~ O O O O 1.17
3) ¥isu~lly inlrude upon an area of
4~ Obstruct view of n scenic rid~¢iin¢
hillsides fzom residcmial areas or public I0, :21, :24, 41
lands?
~) Adversely affect thc architectural
business district? 1,17,19
7) Produce slarc ~om mtificial
J lighting sourees upon adjacent properties ~ 0 0 0 0 1,16
Jot public roadways?
I M) ENERGY
quantities of fossil fucls or non- '
renewable ¢nc~. sources?
2) Remove vegetation providing .
existing or proposed building?
3) $iguiflcantly reduce solar access to
LSpoce or private yard?
j HISTORICAL/
ARCIIAEOLOGICAL
1) Be inca~d in an a~a of potential
IMPACT
YES
WILL THE PROJECT... ~ot significant ~ignific~Cumui,,ive SOURCE
Significant (Mitigation No
NO Proposed) aitigation
!Proposed)
2) Affact adversely a' property of historic ~ ["--] [-='] [--=] O 1, 10,41
or cultural significance to the community,
except as part ora scientific study?
O) PUBLIC SERVICES AND
UTILITIES
2) Induce substantial growth, or alter
thc location, distribution, or density of '~ ~ O [] [-'] I, 46,47
thc hunmn population of an area?
3) Game substantial impact upon, or
increase thc need for:. :
,) Fire Protection Services? '--'~ [] -. [] [] [] 19,32
b) Police se. ices?
c) Public Schools?]~ [] [] [] [] 29,30
d) Parks/Recreation Facilities? [~ [] [] [] [] 5, 17, 19, 21
e) Maintenance otPublic Facilities? ~ [] [] [] [] 19,20,21
0 Other Governmental Services?
4) Cause substantial impact upon
existing utilities or infrastructure in thc
following catcgnrics:
b) Natural Gas? ~ [] [] [] [] 3]
d> Sewage ueatment and disposal? [~' [] [] [] [] 20,28
8) Generate demand for use of any '[~
to reach or exceed its capacity?
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
(To Be Completed by City Staff)
WILL THE PROJECT...
Have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, to
substantially diminish the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; to cause a fish
or wildlife population to drop below self-sustainable levels; to threaten or
eliminate a plant or animal community; to reduce the number of or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal; to eliminate
important examples of the major periods.of. California'shistory or
prehistory?
Have the potential to achieve short term environmental goals to the
disadvantage of long term environmental goals?
Have environmental impacts which are individually limited, but are
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable: means that the
incremental effects of an individual project are substantive when viewed in
conjunction with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and
probable future projects)
YES NO
4. Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse impacts
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
I hereby certify that the information provided in this Initial Study is tree and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief; I certify that I have used proper diligence in responding accurately to all questions herein, and have consulted
appropriate source references when necessary to ensure full and complete disclosure of relevant environmental data. i
hereby acknowledge than any substantial errors dated within this Initial Study may cause delay or discontinuance of
related project review procedures, and hereby agree to hold harmless the City of Cupertino, its staff and authorized
agents, fi'om the consequences of such delay or discontinuance.
Preparer's Signature
Print Preparer's Name
Colin Jung
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Colin Jung
Tuesday, May 09, 2000 6:17 PM
Colin Jung
Bert Viskovich; Raymond Chong
21275 Stevens Creek Boulevard -Traffic Impacts
Dear Colin,
The proposed market at 21275 Stevens Creek Blvd should not have significant traffic impacts.
1. The signalized intersection on Stevens Creek Blvd at Mary Ave is currently operating at LOS B- based on
current data (April 18, 2000). This LOS is better then the City standard LOS D. The net increase of traffic during
p.m. peak hour is 77 vehicle trips.
2. The eastbound left turn queue spillback on Stevens Creek Blvd at Mary Ave can be addressed with longer
green time with a custom traffic signal timing plan.
3. Special events at Flint Center of the Performing Arts and Memorial Park due affect traffic conditions but occur
generally off-peak times. They have community benefits. Staff will develop custom traffic signal timing plans to
adjust special events at the Flint Center for the traffic signals on Stevens Creek Blvd between State Route 85 and
Stelling Rd.
4. City Center and Vallco Fashion Park expansion are not approved developments. They should be considered
after the Project Scenario. Their traffic impacts are neglible at the intersection on Stevens Creek Blvd at Mary
Ave. They will add about 113 vehicle trips on Stevens Creek Blvd in vicinity of the market.
5. Staff is addressing the operational concerns on Stevens Creek Boulevard. They will consider operational
improvements, including traffic signal retimings, traffic signs, pavement markings, bus turnout, etc.
6. There is a strong potential of traffic diversion into the adjacent neighborhoods as a result of the market. There
are cut-through traffic due to De Anza College and Oaks Shopping Center. We anticipate an increase of 183
vehicle trips per day through local streets in the neighborhoods. Staff will monitor the before- and after- traffic
volumes on Meteor, Lubec and Anton. If they observe a significant impact, they will propose traffic calming
measures in cooperation with neighborhood residents. City's Capital Improvements Program will fund them.
Raymond Chong
City Traffic Engineer
Page 1
EXHIBIT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 9S014 -
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM
Application: 2-U-00 Agenda Date: April I0. 2000
Applicant: John Sutti (representing Andronico's)
Property Owner: Villa De Anza Inc. dba Oaks Shopping Center
Prope'rty Location: 21275 Stevens Creek Blvd. (between Mary Ave. & Highway 280)
Project Data:
General Plan Designation: Commercial/Residential
Zoning Designation: P (Stevens Creek Boulevard Conceptual Zoning)
Parcel 'Size: 7.9 net acres
Square Footage:
Proposed Demolition:
Proposed New Coast:
Net New Construction:
Lot Coverage
Existing: 21.2%
Proposed: 24.3%
Floor-to-Area Ratio
Existing: 21.2%
Proposed: 25.5%
Building Height: 32'
Parking:
Existing:
Total Required
with Proposal:
Proposed:
Net Surplus:
17,427 sq. ft.
32,160 sq. ft.
14,733 sq.ft.
549 spaces
488 spaces
510 spaces
22 spaces
Project Consistency with: General Plan yes Zoning yes
Environmental Assessment: Mitigated Negative Declaration Recommended
Application Summary: Use permit to demolish approximately 17,430 squa,'c ii~ct of
retail and cinema space and construct a new 32,160 square foot market and ancillary
cooking school (Andronico's) at the Oaks Shopping Center.
BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission reviewed this project at their meetings of March i 3"' and
March 27'h (Exhibits A-2 & B-2). Numerous changes have already been made to the
north elevation, landscaping, circulation, building materials and activity restrictions to
limit the impact on the residents of the Glenbrook Apartments across Mary Avenue. At
the last Commission meeting, about a half dozen residents who lived in adjacent areas.
spoke in opposition to the project citing:
1) the market-induced traffic flows on Stevens Creek Boulevard next to the I lighway 85
onramp and the poor ingress of the site (easterly and westerly Stevens Creek
Boulevard driveways) will increase accidents at this location:
2) delivery trucks park on Stevens Creek Boulevard and partially block traffic, because
they can't access the shopping center;
3) potential for additional cut-through traffic on Alves Drive and Anton Way;
4) demolition of the theatres will eliminate affordable family movie entertainment in
Cupertino;
5) The delivery trucks will cause too much back-up noise and disturb thc residents living
on Mary Avenue.
6) There are already too many grocery stores in Cupertino.
The Commissioners, speaking individually, stated the market would make a fine addition
to the Oaks Shopping Center and that it offered goods different from.other area markets.
The Commissioners were satisfied with the amount of landscaping but wanted to make
sure the north elevation was well-planted and the proposed landscaping was accurately
depicted on the drawings.
The Commissioners felt the marketplace was making it difficult tbr small, inexpensive
movie theatres to survive and they were unwilling to force the shopping center to keep a
second-run movie house. Some commissioners suggested that De Anza College or thc
City Parks and Recreation Dept. be approached to fill the demand fbr low-cost movie
entertainment.
The Commission asked staff to:
1) examine traffic generation, access and circulation issues, particularly along Stevens
Creek Boulevard;
2) investigate truck unloading on Stevens Creek Boulevard and proposed onsite truck
movements;
3) examine potential cut-through traffic on Alves Drive and Anton Way; and
4) assess potential noise impacts from truck deliveries.
DISCUSSION:
Access & Circulation along Stevens Creek Boulevard
At the easterly Stevens Creek BOulevard driveway entrance, delineators wcrc erected by
the Shane Company to direct traffic northerly down the driveway aisle, rather than
westerly pass the Jamba Juice store. Reed Bennett, shopping center manager, said the
delineators were needed to end a gridlock problem that backed up traffic and was a
hazard for pedestrians (Exhibit C-2). Staff notes that the delineators arc collapsible (i.e.,
can be run over) and its function is to direct traffic flow in a certain direction, rather than,
obstruct traffic.
Staff also observes that this intersection of driveways is congested with three popular
businesses: Jamba Juice, Coffee Society and Hobee's; a constricted driveway aisle: '
parking which is located too close to the driveway entrance; and numerous
pedestrians/customers. Staff believes this is a shopping center circt, lation problem, rather
than an Andronico's problem and will be asking the store owners to evaluate and
improve shopping center access and circulation in a separate application and they arc
agreeable (Exhibit D-2).
The westerly 'Stevens Creek Boulevard driveway entrance flows smoothly into thc
shopping center. Staffhad no difficulty negotiating this turn. Thc width o1' thc driveway
is somewhat narrow and probably should not be used by smaller delivery U'ucks. Thc
driveway and Stevens Creek Boulevard approach cannot be widened to accommodate an
additional lane. There are numerous utility vaults, traffic controllers, pipes and fiber
optic cable in the abutting landscape strip and there is no nearby, alternative location for
them.
Staff believes the throat of the driveway in the parking lot can be lengthen to i lnprovc
access, but at the loss of some parking stalls. The driveway entrance may bc relocated
west to straigthen out the driveway, but the City will need to seek the approval of
Caltrans to encroach on its right-of-way Staff r~quests the authority to work with thc
applicant, before a building permit is issued, to determine if the driveway ent,'ancc can bc
moved and to realign the circulation path to improve access into the center.
Market-generated Traffic
At the March 13"' meeting, the owner of Andronicos reported that thc nLinlbcr ol' daily
round trips for a market in a "mature state," which takes 2-4 years to reach, arc as
follows:
Saturday: 2,700 trips
Sunday: 2,500 trips
Weekdays: 1,700 trips
The peak times were:
Sat. & Sun.: 1-4 p.m.
Weekdays: 5-7 p.m.
The City Traffic Engineer used the above traffic numbers and ~bund they did not
deteriorate the transporation level of service (LOS) below the acceptable LOS of D. The
Traffic Engineer will present the data at the hearing. In response to Commissioner
Doyle's concern about queuing eastbound Stevens Creek Boulevard traffic making thc
left mm on Mary Avenue. The traffic "green" time was lengthen to ease the queuing.
Members of the public also expressed concerns about the number of accidents at thc
driveway entrances. The Traffic Engineering staff reviewed the traffic collision history
of this segment of roadway and found no major pattern of rear-end collisions associated
with the Stevens Creek Boulevard driveway entrances for the Oaks Shopping Center.
Truck Deliveries
Staff observed that the rightmost lane on Stevens Creek Boulevard l"ronting the Oaks
Shopping Center is wider than a typical lane and that delivery trucks have been
occasionally parking here to make deliveries. Parking is prohibited here because it blocks
the travel and bicycle lanes. Delivery trucks can park in the Oaks Shopping Center to
deliver goods, but it appears some delivery drivers stop on Stevens Creek Blvd. because
its closer than other parking areas to certain stores. The street area was not signed to
prohibit parking, so the Public Works Department will be erecting "no parking" signs at
this location and have requested the Sheriff's Office to cite drivers wilt) park in this area.
Staff believes the proposed truck circulation plan works well tbr Andronicos bce:mst it
isolates the majority of truck movements to the rear shopping center driveway aisle,
which will be the least used aisle in the center. Andronico truck deliveries will be
limited to the weekdays between the hours of 7 a.m. and 2 p.m. and on Saturdays al'tcr 9
a.m., which are off-peak hours for the market. Andronicos states that 6 semi-trailer
deliveries will be made per day and that it would take no more than .3-4 minutes to
complete the back-up movement based on the proposed loading configuration. Staff
believes this is a minor disruption of the driveway aisle during the least busy time Ibr the
center and thus does not recommend further modification of the driveway aisle.
Cut-through Traffic on Aives Dr. & Anton Way
There is some cut-through traffic on these streets attributable to De Anza College
motorists. Traffic staff will monitor this route, as well as the Garden Gate cut-through
route in the future to see ifAndronicos worse.ns the situation. Some traffic cahning
measures have already beeri installed on both streets.
Potential Noise Impacts from Deliveries
The driveway aisle is separated from the Glenbrook Apartments by the 84-1'hot wide
Mary Avenue ROW and a row of shopping cenfer parking spaces. Total separatim~ is
more than 100 feet. Only the smaller 24-foot (bobtail) trucks are required to have the
back-up horns, not the semi-trailers. Andronicos expects 4 deliveries per day by these
types of trucks which will unload either at the front door or the rear loading dock. td i vcn
the frequency of the noise and the separation, the noise impact, if any, will bc minimal.
Other Minor Design Changes
Staff asked the applicant to make some minor design changes to the rear (north)
elevation to improve its appearance and re-establish the pedestrian connection around thc
store. These changes (Exhibit E-2) will be incorporated into the plan set.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the addition of Andronico's would provide a much needed grocery sim'c
Cupertino, particularly for residents in this area. The market will serve as a [Buch needed
anchor and economic boost for the shopping center that has no anchor store.
Staff's recommendations are that the Planning Commission recommend:
4
1. approval ora mitigated negative declaration (file no. 4-EA-00) on lhe usc permit
project, and
2. approval of the use permit, file no. 2-U-00, in accordance with thc model resolution
with a deferral of the sign approval to a separate application.
The Planning Commission should also adopt a minute order requesting:
That the City Council direct the Public Works Traffic Engineering Division to evaluate
potential increases in cut-through traffic after the market is built and occupied and rcpm't
any findings to the Council.
Enclosures:
Model Resolution for Approval
Minute Order
Initial Study, ERC Recommendation
Exhibit A-2: Planning Commission staff report dated March 13, 2000
Exhibit B-2: Planning Commission staff report dated March 27, 2000
Exhibit C-2: E-mail message from Reed Bennett to Colin Jung dated 3/28/00
Exhibit D-2: Letter from Reed Bennett to the Cupertino Planning Commission
Dated 4/6/00.
Exhibit Eo2: Minor Design Revisions to North Elevation
Plan Set
Prepared by: Colin Jung, Associate Planner ~
Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developr~~~/.,.1.,.
G:/Planning/Pdreport/pe/pc2u00b
5
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, Cali~rbrnia 950 i 4
RESOLUTION NO.
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO REC()MMI!NDIN(;
APPROVAL OF A USE PERMIT FOR THE DEMOLITION OF A CINEMA AND RI:TAIl. SPA(.'Ii
AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 32,160 SQUARE FOOT MARKET AND C()()KIN(;
SCHOOL (ANDRONICO'S) AT AN EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER AT
21275 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
SECTION I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application
Permit,. as described in Section II. of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Ih'occdural
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 o,'
improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, sali:ty, general
welfare, or convenience;
2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupct-tino
Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of this title.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this
matter, the application for Use Permit is hereby recommended fbr approval, subject to thc conditions
which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in ti'tis resolution arc based an
contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. 2-U-00 as set I'brth in the Minutes o1'
Planning Commission of March 13 and March 27, 2000 and are incorporated by rel'erence as though fully
forth herein.
SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No,:
Applicant:
Location:
2-U-00, 4-EA-00
Johnson Lyman Architects
21275 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Resolution No. 2-U-00 March 27, z000
Page -2-
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY I)EVI,:L()I'MI,~NT
DEPT.
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
The recommendation of approval is based on Exhibits titled "Andronicos - Oaks Shopping Center"
dated 2/15/00, 3/20/00, 3/21/00 and 3/27/00, consisting of 8 sheets labeled I through 3, 5 {~wo of
them), 6 and L1, L2 & L3 except as may be amended by the Conditions contained in this Resolution.
2. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION
The applicant is granted an allocation of 14,733 net square feet of commercial development potential
from the "Heart of the City Allocation Pool" of the Retail Commercial Development I'rioritics 'l'ablc
(General Plan Policy No. 2-3).
3. PERMITTED USES
The applicant is permitted to operate a retail grocery store, deli/bakery with a walk-up service window,
ancillary office uses, and a cooking school as shown on the approved exhibits. In addition, outdoor
seating in the westerly plaza and easterly and southerly pedestrian arcades are allowed where it docs
not interfere with pedestrian circulation. Also, in only the westerly plaza, outdoor, unrool'cd displays
of goods, less than 150 square feet in area, are allowed. Any signage shall follow thc City sign code.
4. PERMITTED HOURS OF OPERATION
The permitted hours of operation for retail businesses at the Oaks Shopping Center arc specified in usc
permit file no. 20-U-86,'which are 6 a.m. to midnight.
5. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENT
Building E and a portion of Building F shall be removed prior to or concurrently with project
construction. The developer shall assume the responsibility to obtain all required demol.ition permits i,~
accordance with City Ordinances.
In the event demolition of structures and improvements occurs between January' 16'~' and July 31~', the
applicant shall erect chain-link fencing around the canopy of each protected oak (ID t111 and I! 12 o1'
sheet L2) and not disturb the fenced areas until the oaks are transplanted between August I'~' and
January 15th.
6. TREE TRANSPLANTING REQUIREMENTS
The two Coast Live Oaks labeled No. 11 and No. 12 on plan set sheet "L2"sl~ali be tr:msplantcd to
other landscaped areas near the project in accordance with the recommendations of the Barrio Court
arborist report dated 2/24/00. Final locations with be determined by the project landscape architect and
the Community Development Director, however, the preferred locations would be at thc entrances of
the pedestrian arcades. The applicant shall take all reasonable means to ensure the survival o1' thc oaks,
but in the event the oaks do not survive transplanting, the applicant shall replace them with two (2) 8-
inch diameter Coast Live Oaks.
Resolution No. 2-U-00
Page -3-
March 27, _4)00
7. ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS
The African Sumac trees to be planted along the north wall shall be a minimum size ol'24-inch box.
All transformers and outdoor employee break areas shall be adequately screen I?om public view to thc
satisfaction of the Director of Community Development.
8. BICYCLE PARKING
The applicant shall install bicycle parking facilities in accordance with the City's parking m'dinancc.
The location shall be approved by the Community Development Directorlocking device (Bicycle
Locker) for every 6,500 sq. ft. of building floor area.
9. PARKING MANAGEMENT
On peak seasonal days, the applicant shall direct their employees to park in thc street parking areas
. Mary Avenue.
10. SHOPPING CART MANAGEMENT
The applicant shall monitor and pick up on-site and off-site shopping carts on a daily basis.
11. DELIVERY TRUCK LIMITATIONS
Vehicular deliveries and pickups to or from the project are prohibited between the hours ol' 8 p.m. and
7 a.m. weekdays (Monday through Friday) and 8 p.m. and 9 a.m.on weekends (Saturday and Sunday).
12. GROUND AND WALL SIGNAGE
Ground and wall project signage are not approved with this use permit.
separate application for sign approval.
The applicant shall make a
13. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain tees, dedication requirements,
reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (I),
these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such [~es, and a dcscriptitm
of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that thc 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 Ii'om
later challenging such exactions.
SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS I)EPT.
14. STREET WIDENING
Street widening, improvements and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards
and specifications and as required by the City Engineer.
Resolution No. 2-U-00 March 25, .O00
Page -4-
15. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS
Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and
standards as specified by the City Engineer.
16. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION
Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as approved by the City Engineer. Lighting fixtures shall
be positioned so as to preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining properties, and
shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in ~vhich thc site is Iocatccl.
17. FIRE HYDRANT
Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City.
18. TRAFFIC SIGNS
Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City.
19. STREET TREES
Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved bv the ('i tv
in accordance with Ordinance No. 125.
20. GRADING
Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.1)8
the Cupertino Municipal Code. Overland release shall be provided. Pad elevations shown on Iht
exhibits will be adjusted as necessary prior to issuance of grading permit.
21. DRAINAGE
Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Surt'hce flow across public
sidewalks may be allowed in the R-l, R-2 and R-3 zones unless storm drain facilities, arc deemed
necessary by the City Engineer. Development in all other zoning districts shall bc served by on site
storm drainage facilities connected to the City storm drainage system. If City storm drains arc not
available, drainage facilities shall be installed to the satisfaction or' the City Engineer.
22. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and
other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with allizctcd
utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shall submit detailed
plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval o1' thc
affected Utility provider and the City Engineer. Underground existing overhead lines tha! crosses
Stevens Creek Bird from De Anza College using the conduit lines already installed by thc City.
23. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City o1' Cupertino providing
for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection tees, storm drain fi2cs, park
dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall bc executed prior to
issuance of construction permits.
Resolution No. 2-U-00
Page -5-
March 25, _O00
Fees:
a. Checking & Inspection Fees:
b. Development Maintenance Deposit:
c. Storm Drainage Fee:
d. Power Cost:
e. Map Checking Fees:
f. Street Improvement Reimbursement Fee:
Blvd.
g. Grading Permit:
6% of Improvement Cost or $1.975.00 minimum
3,000.00
$2,420/acre
75.00 per street light
N/A
$7,200.00-1nstallation of conduit lines (~.t) Stevens (.','cck
$ 5% of on-site improvement Cost or $460.00 min.
Additional fees will be due in contribution toward needed Mary Avent, c midblock crosswalk
improvements.
-The fees described above are imPosed based upon the current fee schedule adopted hy the ('ity
Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map
or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the liecs changed at that time
will reflect the then current fee schedule.
24. TRANSFORMERS
Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall bc
screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not vlsi bio
from public street areas.
25. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES
The developer shall execute a quitclaim deed for underground water rights to San .lose Water £'ompany
and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water Company tbr water service lo thc subject
development.
26. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State'Water Resot, rces Ctmt'-ol iloarcl.
for construction activity which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in your grading and street
improvement plans.
27. REDESIGN OF WESTERLY STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD ACCESS
Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall work with the Community Development I)h'cclor
and City Traffic Engineer to redesign the westerly Stevens Creek Boulevard ingress/egress to thc
market to improve traffic flow and safety.
Resolution No.
Page -6-
2-U-00 March 2. ~000
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of April 2000, at a Regular Meeting o1' the I'lanning
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of Califbrnia. by the tbllowing roll call wnc:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Develo
~ment
Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
g:/pdreport/res/res2-U-00
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
MINUTE ORDER
OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO 'FO TI-IE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING DI RECTI()N T()
THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION TO EVALUATE C UT-TH RO !. j (il.l
TRAFFIC INCREASES AT 21275 STEVENS CREEK BOU LEVA RD
The Planning Committee recommends that the City Council direct the Tral'fic
Engineering Division to evaluate potential increases in cut-through traffic after the
market (Andronico's) is built and occupied and report any findings to the City Council.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10'h day of April 2000, at a Regular Meeting ol'thc
Plam~ing Commission of the City of Cupertino by the tbllowing roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
C- OMMIS SIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
G:planning/pd reportJres/2u00mo
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
'DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT-FORM
Exhibit
Application: 2-U-00 Agenda Date: March 13. 2000
Applicant: John Surci (representing Andronico's)
Property Owner: Villa De Anza Inc. dba Oaks Shopping Center
Property Location: 21275 Stevens Creek Blvd. (between Mary Ave. & Highway 280)
Project Data:
General Plan DeSignation: Commercial/Residential
Zoning Designation: P (Stevens Creek Boulevard Conceptual Zoning)
, Parcel Size: 7.9 net acres
Square Footage:
Proposed Demolition:
Proposed New Const:
Net New Construction:
Lot Coverage
Existing: 21.2%
Proposed: 24.3%
Floor-to-Area Ratio
Existing: 21.2%
Proposed: 25.5%
Building Height: 32'
Parking:_
Existing:
Total Required
with Proposal:
Proposed:
Net Surplus:
17,427 sq. ff.
32,160 sq. ft.
14,733 sq.R.
549 spaces
488 spaces
521 spaces
-~ spaces
Project Consistency with: General Plan yes Zoning yes
Environmental Assessment: Mitigated Negative Declaration Recommended
Application Summary: Use permit to demolish approximately 17,430 squart: I~:et o1'
retail and cinema space and construct a new 32,160 square toot market and ancillary
cooking school (Andronico's) at the Oaks Shopping Center.
BACKGROUND:
The applicant, John Sutti, representing Andronico's, is proposing to demolish one
building and part of another building at the rear of the Oaks Shopping Center in order to
build a grocery store and ancillary cooking'school in a new two-story structure. The
proposed demolition includes the'Oaks 3 Cinema, a vacant restaurant space and the
Dance Academy. The retail center manager has indicated that he intends to relocate the
Dance Academy to a vacant tenant space in the center of about the same square footage.
A-2_
Adjacent land uses for the shopping center are apartments to the north across M:u'v
Avenue, Memorial Park to the east across Mary Avenue. Dc Anza Co]logo to thc smIth
across Stevens Creek Boulevard and Highway 85 to the west.
The market building is integrated into the rest of the shopping center with thc market
entrance facing west toward the largest concentration of underutilized parking. An
outdoor plaza will be created at the store entrance, which is located near thc westerly
pedestrian arcade entrance to the shopping center.
The main driveway entrances are the westerly Stevens Creek Boulevard entrance and thc
Mary Avenue entrance. The loading and trash facilities are located near the Mary
Avenue entrance. ·
Ketail sales and storage spac~ will occupy the 28, 200 square foot footprint and
supporting office, employee areas, catering and a cooking school will occupy a small
mezzanine space of 3,960 square feet.
DISCUSSION:
Traffic Generation. Staff and the Environmental Review Committee (ER.C) were
concerned about potential net traffic impacts because the theater has not been a popular
venue in years and the restaurant has been closed for some time. The City Traffic
Engineer reviewed traffic and parking issues in the attached memorandum (Ex h i bit A).
He found the adjacent signalized intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Mary
Avenue operating at the "B-lC+" level of service (LOS) during .AM and PM peak hours
respectively. The change in traffic caused by the.market is not si'gnificant enough to
change the LOS levels. The City intersection performance standard is LOS "D."
Cut-Through Traffic: Staff and ERC were also concerned about potential cut-through
traffic, which the City's traffic engineer also reviewed. Cut-through traffic is traffic that
travels through neighborhood streets to avoid vehicle backups on streets with signalized
intersections. Based on traffic surveys, the traffic engineer found cut-through tralq'~c
occurring on the Gardens Dfive/Castine Avenue/Meteor Drive/Mary Avenue route to
Anza College, but the amount of such traffic has not yet generated neighborhood
complaints, Future monitoring of such traffic is warranted if the project is approved. Il'
the neighborhood traffic impact becomes significant, then traffic calming measures, such
az a diverter, chockers or road bumps, should be considered. The City currently has
$100,000 budgeted for traffic calming measures. Public Works will be proposing to
increase this mount to $500,000 in the next City budget cycle.
Parking. Although the Oaks Shopping Center has not pertbrmed well over a number
years, the parking lot has historically been overcrowded for two reasons: I ) The City has
allowed the center by permit to be underparked in relation to City parking standards, and
2) there was a large concentration of eating establishments, which tended to draw peak
traffic at the same times of the day. This parking demand has been reduced over the last
few years due to the conversion of the largest restaurant, Pacific Breeze. to retail space
(Shane Co.) and the replacement of other restaurants and ret.',il tcn.',nts ,.~ ith Iov.'cr
parking-generating tenants. -
With the addition of the Andronico's project and the parking changes it is prt)l'~t)sing there
will be a net surplus of parking of 33 stalls. Total parking required and supplied hv
Andronico's will be 129 stalls calculated at the I stall per 250 gross squ:u-c I'cct parking
ratio. The parking for the ancillary office space and small cooking school classroom was
calculated at the same ratio. The Traffi'c Engineer estimates a peak parking demand
98 spaces on the weekend and concludes the parking supply is adequate. Staff' believes
Andronico's will more fully utilize their parking than other retail center uses t)n a daily
basis. Staff has added a project condition that Andronic0's will require their cmploycc.s
to park in the public spac.es on Mary Avenue'on peak seasonal days when patr()nagc is
especially high, such as the holidays.
Tree Removal. The larger footprint of Andronico's necessitates the removal ol'a number
of specimen and non-specimen-sized trees. On Sheet L2, o~'the plan set the following
trees are proposed for removal or transplanting:
.;i~o..ot'.;. .R~mow (g) .or'. .':,?,:.:..,.:~:~'!:.'&~T~j~pe .:' . ' ... ~ . '.. Sizes/Notes
6 R Ash Trees (Fraxinu.v sp.) All specimen-sized, one is ~ sit'cci is'cc
3 R Evergreen Pears (Pyru.s. sp.) I specimen size. 2
I T Holly Oak (Quercu.~' i/er) Specimen size, Tree ll5 tm Iht plim set.
2 ~ I I R Co~t Live Oak (Querc~' Tree ~ I I is a non-spcci~ncn-sizcd trak
~ 12 T agr~olia) (8"); Tree ~ 12 is a specimen-sized. Iwin
trunk oak (18").
Barrie D. Coate has evaluated the three oaks tbr possible transplanting to other portions
of the shopping center (Exhibit B). While Mr. Coate states it would be possible to
transplant all three oaks, he said it would be impractical to move the Holly Oak because
of the constricted growing area and the need to excavate a large enough motbali. 'l'rcc
#12, the larger Coast Live Oak, also could be moved but it would be expensive. 'l'rec #1 I
is the best candidate for transplanting.
Based on the arbofist's recommendations, staff is recommending that only thc two Coast
Live Oaks be transplanted. Mr. Coate recommends that the oaks may be moved only in
July or August, boxed, and transplanted during dormani:y, before January ! 5"'. This
timeline has to do with growth and dormancy periods of oaks and that such trees should
only be disturbed during their dormant periods. This transplanting schedule may conl'lict
with Andronico's construction schedule. The architect has informed staff that
Andronico's, if approved, hopes to open for business by the December holidays. Staff
will discuss this issue further with Mr. Coate and present information at the hearing.
The applicant is providing additional landscaping. Staff'is pleased to see the addition o1'
14, 24" boxed Coast Live Oaks. They are proposed near one pedestrian entrance, near
3
the loading dock, at the Mary Avenue driveway entrance, and along thc I lighway S5
corridor. -
Treatment of Loading Areas
The loading dock and trash areas are located toward the "rear," Mary Avenue side ol' the
property. Trash areas are internalized in the building and accessible through a th)able
door. Note there is only one loading dock. Stag questioned this since thc recent Whole
Foods Market has a much larger loading area. The applicant explained that '/\ndrt)nico's
goes to a single source supplier (one truck), versus Whole Foods. which relies on many
suppliers (many trucks)..
Also note that the loading, dock is near the driveway entrance to minimize t'ruck
movements in the parking lot. This makes the loading area more visible [?om Mar5,
Avenue. The applicant will screen this view by planting trees along the west side t)l' thc
loading dock and planting extra street trees (24" boxed American Ashes) along Mary.
Avenue. The Public Works Department is agreeable to the planting ol'additional street
trees in this area. The landscape plan was revised to create larger landscape bulbs
each side of'the Mary Avenue entrance and frame it with two 24" boxed Coast l.ivc
This will provide additional landscape screening of the loading area.
Architecture' and Buihling Materials.
Existing Design. The Oaks Shopping Center has a very clean and simple design, which
consists ora low pitch tile roof that extends over a deep pedestrian walkway that wraps
around 4 of the 6 buildings (much less so with the Shane Company building and Oaks 3
Cinema). The'roof is supported by a uniform pattern of concrete'columns that crc:rte u
pleasing design rhythm around the center. Storefront walls do not dominate the
appearance of the center because of these deep arcades. The existing cinema/restaurant
building (Building E on the plan set)'is somewhat the design variant ol'the ce,ncr. First.
it is the only. "two story" tall building and the pedestrian arcade wraps only I and V: si(.Ics
of the building. It does, however, have some design similarities to the rest oF thc center.
This. building still has a low pitch roof` and the repetitive concrete c6lumns.
Proposed Design. Staffand the City Architect, Larry Cfinnon, have been working with
the applicant to carry over these design patterns and relationships to the Andronico's
· Market. The applicant said the market needs higher floor-to-ceiling spaces to
accommodate storage needs, but has agreed to lower these heights closest to.the existing
buildings and reduce the pitch of the roofs as shown in the elevations {plan set sheets 4 &
5). It'is important to approximate the cave line height and roo{'pitch to avoid axvkward
visual contradictions at the' center.
The repetitive concrete columns will be duplicated on the Andronico's, matching thc size
and spacing of columns in the rest of the center. Note that the concrete walkway banding
proposed along the renovated southern pedestrian arcade will line up with the cuncrctc
columns..Roof tiles will also match the existing center.
4
Building Wall. Existing st°refront materials are varied'glass, painted wood. tile. etc.
There is no design consistency. The applicant has chosen hardboard siding on t'hc hmcr
level (horizontal wood siding) and board & batten (vertical wood siding) on thc tlppcr
level. The different orientations were proposed by the architect to hrc'4k up thc visual
mass of this building. The City Architect has recommended in his second set o{'dcsign
comments (Exhibit C), which could not be incorporated in the revised plan set. to side or
replace the splitf'ace masonry portion of the wall with hardboard siding. St:tiT ugrccs ,,vith
this change.
The visual mass oft. he Mary Avenue-facing wall (north elevation) was very dominating.
Design devices shown in the plan set to soften this mass include:
· the lower roof element,
· the combination of vertical and horizontal siding,
· the repetition of concrete columns,
· a landscaped strip of trees and shrubs a!ong the wall without sacrificing thc walkway.
and
· extra street'trees along Mary Avenue..
The City Architect suggests extending the trellis along this wall (Exhibit C). Stall' agrees
with this change as long as the trellis height matches the lower roof cave line height. The
trellis would not work as well on the west elevation because of the loading dock and
height of the wall, so staff is not recommending wrapping the trellis around this corner.
Market Entrance. Staff agrees with the City Architect's comments about thc entrance
design. It needs heavier looking truss elements and an intermediate design [Eatum at a
pedestrian height level. Staff can work with the project architect to design this fizaturc.
Pedestrian Arcades. The design of the market is a closer match to the existing cinema
than the rest of the center. For example, the market does not have a covered pedestrian
arcade like the other buildings, nor did the cinema/restaurant have much o1' one either.
The new building will tend to visually share the arcade with the adjacent buildings. It
was important to staff to activate the easterly and southerly pedestrian arcades, i.e.. to
draw market customers into the rest of the shopping center. Most o1" the Andronico's
outdoor activities will be around the entrance and adjacent plaza on the westside. While
there is a bakery/deli service window on the southwest corner and window-l"mnts on the
south and east elevations, staff was hoping to receive additional details: ["umiture,
landscaping, lighting, displays, etc. that would demonstrate a well-thought-out pkm to
activate these areas with pedestrian traffic. Staff has not received such details yet and
prefers to work with the applicant during a building permit process to develop such
details.
Signage. Staff recommends that the suggested three (3) wall signs not bc part o1' ti'tis usc
permit application, but made part of a separate application. While it ia important Ibr thc
70"
market to have customer exposure, there may be more e'l"t'ective ways that cmm6t
addressed at the moment. For example. Andronico's would control tile tull movie
marquee sign located in the parking lot facinL_., Stevens Creek Boulevard and tl~is si,._.,n was
not addressed in the application.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the addition of Andronico's would provide a much needed grocery store
Cupertino, particularly for residents in this area. The market will serve as u much nccdcd
anchor and economic boost for the shopping center that has no anchor stm'c.
S taft' s
recommendations are that the Planning Commission recommend:
I) approval'ofa mitigated negative declaration (Hie no. 4-F_.A-00) on thc usc
permit project, and
2) approval of the use permit, file no. 2-U-00, in accordance with thc model
resol,ution, which includes additional direction to:
· Transplant the two Coast Live Oaks (tree #s 1 i & 12) but not the I-Ioily ()ak Itrt:~: 115):
· Side or replace the publiciy visible, splitface masonry with I'mrdbou,'d siding:
· Extend the trellis along the north wall frbm the gable to the west end of thc building:
· Work with staff to redesign the store entrance to include heavier-looking truss
elements and a pedestrian scale, intermediate height design element:
· Provide additional design details to activate th.e easterly and southerly pcdt:stria,~
arcades; and
· Defer sign approval to a separate application.
3) approval ora minute order to the City Council to direct the 'l','ullic
Engineering Division to evaluate potential increases in cut-tl'lrough trul'fic t~l'tcr thc
rnarket is built and occupied and report any findings to (he C't)tm~:il.
Enclosures:
Model Resolution for Approval
initial Study, ERC Recommendation
Exhibit A: Memorandum from Raymond Chong to Steve I)iasccki re:
Andronico's transportation impacts.dated 3/8/00
Exhibit B: An Arborist Report prepared by Ba=ie Coate on three oaks'at the
Oaks Shopping Center dated 2/24/00
Exhibit C: Letter from Cannon Design Group to Colin Jung re: Andronicos dated
3/I/00
Prepared by: Colin Jung, Associate Planner
Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development
G:/Planning/Pdrepon/pc/pc2u00
()
CITY OF CUPEKTINO
KECOMMENDATION OF ENVIKO~AL REVIEW COMMITTEE
February 9, 2000
As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure, adopted by the City Council of the City of
~upertino on Ms), 27, 1983, as amended, the following described project was .reviewed by the
Environmental Keview Committee of the City of Cupertino on Februm'y 9, 2000.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
4-EA-O0
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
2-U-O0
lohnson Lyman Architects
21275 Stevens Creek Blvd.(Oaks ShopPing Center)
DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST
Use permit for demolition of a cinema and retail space for construction'of a new 32,160 sq. fc market
(Andronico's).
FINDINGS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMIVII~EE
The Envirohmental Review Committee recommends the g~nting of a Mitigated.Negative Declaration
contingent upon mitigation measures as followed:
1) Tree relocation or replanting of specimen oak trees,
2) Eyaluation of parking standards, and
3) A traffic,~urvey
Director of Communk7 Development
g/crc/REC4~a00
~ '77
cr~ OF CU?EKTTNO
gcp~'u~cnl of Communi~/Development
Cupertino. C~, 9~0
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Unit
Type
#1
Unit
Type
#2
Unit
Type
Unit
Type
Unit
Type
#5
Applie.~ble Special Az~ Pla=s:
Total# Rental/Own Bdrms Total s.f. Price
Mont~ V'~-ta D~si~.?.uid¢lin~s I----]
N. De A-~s Canc~mal I-----!
Stcvcr~s Crk Blvd. Conceptual ~
$. Dc Anza Conceptual
S. Sara-Sunny Conceptual
Stevens Creek Blvd. SW & L'scapc
If Non-Residential, Building Area s.f. FAR. Max. Employees/Shift,
Parking Required Parking provided
............... :-- ,,.~-~- c~,:~..~..~ v=c t.-''~ N'O
GENERAL PLAN $OURCF~
2) Cupertino Czen=al Plaz~ Pubti¢ Sat'c~ Elcmenc
3) Cupertino General Plan, Housinl EI~ment
4) Cupertino Gener~ Plan, Transportation Element
:~) Cupertino General Plan, Environmental Re.sources
6') Cupertino General Plan, Appendix A- HilLside Dcvclopmunt
7) Cupcnino General Plan, Land Usc Map
8) Noise Element Amendment
9) City Ridgclinc Policy
10) Cupertino C.~ncral Plan Con.strainc Maps
B) CUPERTINO SOURCE DOCU~
· t I) Tr~= Prcscrwtiun ordinancg WI 12) CiU Acfi~ Photo.by M~
13) ~up~ ~nlclc" (~i[o~l ~m~ C~r, 197~
14) Gcoiogi~ ~o~ (si~ sp~ific)
15) P~I ~ 1277
l ~ Zon~ M~
I~ Zo~g Cod~pccific PI~ Do~en~
C) crrY AC£NCIF. S 19) Cupertino Community D~welopmcnt DcpL
20) C-pcnino Public Wor~ Dcpc
2~) Cupertino ?~ ~ l~crc*,ion Dcpar~munt
2/) Cupertino Water Utility
D) OUt'SlOE *C~NCIES
2~) County Plmning Dcpar~cnt
24) Adjacent City's Plannin§ Ocpar~ncnc
25) County Dcparunental of Environment. al Hcaldl
2g) Midpct{in.suiz Rggional Open Spat-' District
27) County Parks and Recreation Department
28) Cupertino Sanitary DLgrict
29) Fr~mo. nt Union High School Distric:
30) Cupertino Union School District
31). PacLfic Ga~ aad Electric
ill) Santa Clar~ County F'tr~ Dcpar~ent
33) County Sheriff' o
34) CALTR,au~$ "
BO County T~pott~un Agent/
3~) Santa Clar~ Villcy Walat DLstrlc;
~ OUTSIDE AG~CY
37) BA.AQMD Survey ofContaminant Exc~,ses
38) F'EM~ Flood M~pdS'~ Flo~d M~os
39) USDA, .'Soils of San~. Clara Count'
40) County H~zardous W~st~ Management Plan
41) County Hcri~c Resources [nvcntoty
47) S~nta Clar~ Valley Wamr District Fucl
~ Sit:
43) CaIEPA Hazardous Waxtg and Substances
Si,,. Lin
o'rH~R SOURC'E.5 44) Pmjc~ Plan Set/Appli~atiun Materials
4~ Field R~counsi.ss~e
463 Expcrienc~ with Pmjc~ or'similar s
47) ABAG Pmj~-'~ion.s Se. tics
1) Complete al_il information mq/tcsted on
thc Initial Study Cover page. LEAVE
BLA_N~ SYACE$ ONLY _V~:rV.N A
' SPECIFIC rrEM Is NOT
APPLICA.BT.~.
2) Consult the Initial Study Source List; usc
the materials listed therein to complete, thc
checklist information in Categories A
.through O.
You arc encouraged to cite. other relevant
sources; if such sources are useci, job in their
title(s) in the "Source" column next to the
question to which they relate.
3) If you check any of the "YES" response
to any questions, you must attach a sheet
explaining the potential impact and suggest
4) When explaining any yes response, label
your answer clearly (Example "lq' - 3
Historical") Please U-y to respond concisely,
and place as many cxplanato.ry responses as
possible on each page.
5) Upon complel~ng the checklist, sign and
dam thc Prcparcr's A.ffidav~
6) Please attach thc following mal=ials
·beforc submitting the Initial Study to the
City.
- Pmje~ Plan Set ofLe~slativc ~ (I) ~py
- I.o~zion. m.~o wi~ si~ deady marked (when
IM'PAcr
YES
WILL TI--~ PROJ'ECT... Not Signiticant Significant 2umulative SOURC]~
~0 Proposed)Mi~g~on
Pm;oscd)
A) ~ USE G~E~L P~N
d~i~ation f~r ~ subject sk~ in ~ '
Gcnc~ PI~?
3) gcqui~ a chmgc cfm adop~d
~mcn~
4) ~ult iu ~bs~ ~gc in ~c /'
p=cnc l~d ~c of ~c sim or .~ o~
~]oin~g pmpc~o~
co~g~on of ~ ~i~hcd
nci~bo~hood?
1) Bc {oca~d in ~ ~c~ whi~ h~
~o~ ¢~u~c E~I~
Zone?
4) Be located in ~ ~a ofsoH
shdn~swcll, soil ~cp or scvcrc
c~sio~)?
~ Cz~c subs~ci~ erosion or
dbplaccmcn~ compac~on or
ovc~ovcfing ofsoil ci~cr on-site oro~-
~ C~c sub~fi~ ~ge in
8) ~vQivo ~on Of~ build~
m~orscp~c~on astopao~l~ , ~ ~ ~_ ~ 6.12~9
Or ~ '
~ult ~ ~c ~ of~ n~ ~o~
~r =~i~ p~ ~ndud~l i~ ' ' '
or m~oil)?
(CI~ [ or II soils) ~ non-~cul~
or imp~r ~c ~culm~ pmduc6vi~
no.by p~mc ~d~ I~d?
un~cr ~c Willi~on Acc or ~y Open
[ IMPACT
Y'ES
';'FILL THE PRO,J-ECl'... so, $i~,inc.m, $igmfimt! Cumumi,: SOURCE
~ O Prepay:d) Mitigation
~ublic or F~m rccrc~ion facili~,
wiidlif~ ~mc~c, ~ublic ~1 d~cr in
~ncc ~ad~ or ~l~cd for ~
implcmcn~an~
D) S~AG~A~R QUAL~
1) ~uit in a scp~c field bring .
pcffo~cc limi~fia~?
~) R~ult in · s~pfic field ~cing
or wi~ I00 fcct of ~y wcll, watcr '
coumc or wa~r
3) R~lt in ~ion or ~ sewer m~n
dcvclogmcnt?
4)$ubsmti~ly dc~c s~acc or
~undwa~r qu~i~, or ~c public w~cr
supply, including bu~ no~ limited to
jcdimcnt ~om com~cfion.
,~c~o= =d mc~ ~m vehicle
l=~mping mdntcn=cc, mc~ md
concern (such ~ Iow fire
watcm ~mu~ infilm~on of ~cldmcd
~n~cd pollu~ ~m urb~,
indus~ or ~riculm~
co=~c~on ~o~ it d~=rb five (5)
m or more?I?
w~r ~c? ·
~ or flow or qu~
~di~om or wi~dm~ or
, p~ or ~c ~t of~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 20J6
moff or wc~d?
4) ~Yolvc,~ ~c ~cl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 36.42
. or ~bcd or ~ ~mc s~ ~
d~ ~ I~o~ ~ or flow
~dplain ~?
~ I) Signifimfly ~cct ~ wildlife,
~pOl~ or pl~t life by ch.gini .c
di~cmi~ or numbco of~fini specie,
or by in~duclng new species, or by
~fficfing migration or movement?
WILL THE PROJECT... ~ot si~.mc=t $i¢.mc=,~Cumu~.,i,,~SOURCE
~0 P~pascfl)~ifiption
Pm~sed~
souse or n~tini pl~c~ for a ~ or '
~) Involve cunint, ~mov~ of
m ~c sim or in~duc¢d? - .
G) ~5~ORTA~ON
~) C~c =y puMic or p~v~ s=cc~
in~ccfion ~ ~nccion bclow L~c, or ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4~0
4) AdYc~cl7 ~c~ ~c~ m
~ C~¢ a mduc~on in public '
pmjcc= si~?
ncw p~nB
~ ~ibi~ mc o~mm~fivc mod: o~
~ aOUS~C
displ~cm~c oE pcma~ ~m ~ck
p~cn~ hamc?
ofho~ing ~ ~und ~ ~c
ha~inB?
dbpos~ or m~u~ oE
~e of~7 ~ing, or i~l~on of
~ ~ploy m~nole~ which could
c~cnt of a bm~do~?
WILL THE PROJECT... SOURCE
-- N~t Si~nific.~t S~enificant C~mul~ti~
Si~ific~t ~i~g~on ~o
~0 Proposed) Mitig~ian -
Pm~sed~
masqulms or o~cr d~c~e vector?
2) ~o1~ ~y ~bicflt ~r qu~i~
~g or pmjccmd ~ qu~i~ viol~io~
or ~pasc sc~i~vc ~ccp~m ~ .
su~ conc~n~6o~ oE poll~?
~ Nom~
during co~cfion of ~c
2) ~ul~ in s~incd indic in
vicini~ followin~ ~cgan
pmjc~
~) ~u', in s~t~incd no~c lave. ~ Q G ~ Q
beyond ~c ~hol~ orsound
~d duration [imlu cofl~incd in ~c
,- Ci~'s Narc Ordin~c:?
I) Bc a~ v~cc wia appli~lc
2) Create ~ ~cfi~ly offc~ivc
3) V~u~[y in.dc upon ~ ~ca of
~ib[c ~m ~c v~lcy
hillsid~ ~m ~idcnfi~ ~ or public
I~?
~ Advc~cly ~cc~ ~c ~i~
H~n~ sou~ upon ~j~cnt pmpc~ I, 16
or public
~lc m~
...O O, 0 0 ,,.,,
~n~ or p~¢d building? ·
~ ~j~nt buildin~ public ~an
i ~ or pdv~ y~?
i
~O~OGI~L
INIPAC'.[
,YES
'~'LL THE PROJECT... ~ot Sic. niece, hr Si~nific~, Cumul,,i,: so'CE
~0 Pmpescd) ~iti~tion
.[Proposcd~
or culm~ si~ifimc~ ~ ~ communi~,
~xcept ~ p~ of a scientific study?
O) P~C
~c Ioca~o~ d~bu~o~ or de~i~
~e hum~ popul~on of ~ ~?
3) C~e subs~ imp~ upo~ or
in~c~c ~c nccd fo~
4) Ca~c suhs~ impact upon
cx2ting udlifi~ or in~c~c in ~c
following
~ Gcnc~m dc~d for
public ~ili~ whi~ ~... f. ill~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 19~0~1
;~ILL FI-IE PR OIECT...
Have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, to
substantially diminish the habitat of a 5sh or wildlife species; to cause a t',~h
or wildlife population to drop below self-sus~inable levels; to threaten or
eliminate a pla~t or animal community; to reduce the number of or
· restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal; to eliminate
important examples of the major period~ of California's hLstory or
prehistory?
2. Have the potential to achieve short term environmental goals to the
disadvantage of long term environmental goals?
Have environmental impact~ which are individually limited, but are
cumulatively considerable? (''Cumulatively considerable: mear~ that the
incremental effects of an individual project are subsumtive when viewed in
conjunction with the effects of pair projects, other current projects, and
probable future projects)
4. Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse impacts
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
YES NO
I hereby certify that the information provided in thi~ Initial Study is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief; I certiSy that I have used proper diligence in responding accurately to all questions herein, and have consulted
appropriate source references when nece~ary to ensure RtlI and complete disclosure of relevant environmental data. l
hereby acknowledge than any substantial errors dated within this InitialJ ,tudy may cause delay or discontinuance o['
related project review procedures, and hereby agree to hold harmless tl~e City of Cupertino, its staff and authorized
ageats, ~'om. the con.sequences of such delay or discontinuance. ~
Prcparcr's Sign~'ur~
Print Pmpar~r's Name
7
:. EN'VIRONi~I]~NTAL EVALUATION
.< >../(-' · ...... 3.. · ' "" (T°~b~c°m~leted'b¥Ci~stuff)
.~.' ..'.j _;:~ ~.: ::'.... .... ... ~ .- ... ,. ....
IMPACT AR.SAS:
[] Land Use/General Plan [] Oeo[ogic/Seismk Hazard [] Resource~Parks [] Housing
~ Sewage~ater QualiW ~ D~inag~lood[ng ~ Flo~ Fauna ~ Transpo~tion/~ ~
~ ~odca~chaeological ~ Heal~ & S~e~ ~ Air Qual/~ ~ Noise
~ Public Se~ices~tilkies ~ Ener~ ~ Aes~etics
~ST~ EV~UA~ON
' 0 '1
~at a ~GA~ DECL~ON be ~ted.
~at al~ou~ ~e project could have a si~cmt effect on ~e envkonmen~ no si~ific~t effect will occur
became mitigation me.utes ~e ~duded ~ ~e projec~ ERC recommen~ ~at a NEGA~VE DECLARATION
be ~ted.
~at ~e proposed ~Y have a si~ific~t effect on ~e environment ~ recommen~ ~at m
~ , E~C Chaise ~ _
Stuff Evaluator ~~
F./pla nninFffin ts tdyd.do¢
CITY OF
CUPER iNO
Exhibit
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3202
(408) 77%3354
FAX (408) 777-3333
Public WorKs Department
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 8, 2000
TO:' Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director
FROM: Raymond D. Chong, P-E-, City Traffic. Engineer
SUBJECT: Andronico's at the Oaks Shopping Center - Transportation Impacts
Discussion
This memorandum address several issues related to the transportation impacts at a
proposed supermarket, Andronico's at the Oaks Shopping Center. The issues are:
intersection capacity; site parking; and neighborhood traffic "
i. Imersection Capacity
The proposed supermarket will generate 3,179 trips during the weekday, 93 trips during
A.M. peak hour, and 329 trips during P.M. peak hour. The threshold to prepare a
transportation impact analysis is ]~00 peak hour trips. It will generate 5,062 triPs during
the Saturday and 350 trips during the peak hour. It will generate 4,744 trips during
Sunday and 539 trips during the peak hour.
Staff evaluated the intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard at Mary Avenue on level of
service (LOS) for traffic conditions under two scenarios during A.M. and P.M. peak
hours on a weekday. This signalized intersection is currently operating at LOS B- and
LOS C+ during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. Under the Project Condition scenario, it
will continue to operate at LOS B- and LOS C+ during both A.M. and P.M. peak hours..
LOS B describes traffic operation with delay in range of S.I to I5.0 seconds per vehicle.
LOS C describes traffic operation with delay in range of 15.1 seconds to 25.0 seconds per
vehicle. This generally occurs with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. The
City's performance standard for an intersection during A.M. and P.M. peak hours is LOS
D. The intersection will continue to operate above the performance standard.
2. Site Parking
Andronico's is proposed to have 129parking spaces. The Cupertino Zoning Ordinance
requires 129 parking spaces at one parking space per 250 square feet. A survey of other
Andronico's in the San Francisco Bay Area show a range from one parking space per
139 square feet to one parking space per 310 square feet. A review oft. he Parking
Generation Manual by Institute of Transportation Engineers shows that a typical
supermarket generates 2.87 peak parking spaces occupied on weekday and 3.42 peak
parking spaces occupied on Saturday per 1,000 gross square feet of leasable area. The
supermarket will generate. 82 peak parking spaces on weekday and 98 peak parking
spaces on Saturday. The proposed Andronico's will have an adequate supply of parkhag
spaces for their customem
3. Neighborhood Traffic
Customers north of Interstate Route 280 may shortcut the neighborhood northeast to
travel to and from Andronico's. They may want to avoid the three traffic signals:
Stelling Road at GreenleafDfive; Stevens Creek Boulevard at Stelling Road; and Stevens
Creek Boulevard at Mary Avenue. Shortcut traffic for De Anza College currently
occurs on this route. The shortcut route is: Gardena Drive; Castine Avenue; Meteor
Drive; and Mary Avenue. The normal route is: Stelling Road; Stevens Creek Boulevard;
and Mary Avenue. The distance for both routes is 1.1 miles. Staff'conducted a travel
time survey during the A.M. peak hours. Average travel times for the shortcut route and
normal route are, respectively: 138 seconds; and t57 seconds. The shortcut route is an
attractive option for drivers. '
Conclusions
My conclusions on the transportation impacts of Andronico's are:
1. The signalized inter~ection on Stevens Creek Boulevard at Mary Avenue will'operate
satisfactory.
2. The proposed on-site parking supply is adequate to meet parking demand.
3. The neighborhood may experience more shortcut traffic. Staff'monitor should
traffic conditions. If the neighborhood traffic impact is significant, traffic calming
measures should be considered.
Exhibit
AN ANALYSIS OF THREE COAST LIVE OAK TREES AT THE OAK
SHOPPING CENTER IN CUPERTINO WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
TRANSPLANTING PROCEDURES
Prepared at the Request of:
Colin Jung
City of Cupertino
10300 TOrte Avenue
· .Cupertino, CA 95014
Site Visit b~:
Bm-He D. Coate .
Horticultural Consultant
.February 24, 2000
Job 4/06-98-155-00
·
An A.u.zl-F~is Of Tlzsee c:o~t: Live Oak 'Pro~ At The Oak fiho~pf.n~ Center
A.~~ent
I was asked to inspect three oaks at the Oaks Shdpping Center in
Cupertino, to determine whether it was possible or practical to
transplant them.
Su~' '
It would be possible to transplant all three of the oak trees in question,
however, practical considerations will prevent the transplanting of holly
oak 85 and excessive cost may prevent or discourage the transplant of
oak 812.
If trees 811 and 812 are to be transplanted the following instructions
should be c~refully followed.
Discussion
The trees in question are two coast live oak (Ouercus agr/fo//a), trees 811
and 81~2, and one holly oak (Ouerc'u~ fle~c), tree 85.
Of these three trees, 811 is the only one which was planted within the
last ten years, from eont~r~er stock and for that r~ason should be
relatively easier to dig than the other trees in question. However, if tr~e
812 is not transplanted it will be very difficult to gain access to tree 811
for the transplanting process.
Tree $$5 is a holly oak which is growing in a very sm~l~ narrow planter
and adjacent to a concrete w, 11 which extends several feet below grade
and as a result the access to this trees root"system is badly restricted.
It would require demolition of the landSCape surrounding the tree on
three sides, demolition of the curb and part of the paved area in order to
obtain sufficient access to dig this rootbaI1.
I would predict that any high quality tree moving company would refuse
to work with a tree in this kind of site, but I could be wrong.
Tree 812, is a twin trunk tree which was planted at an earlier stage of
land~cal~ development on the property ~ud should be considered at this
point a native tree as one would find growing in the moune~ns.
Recommendations
1. I suggest that two companies be asked to inspect these trees and offer
a propos~ for tr~_~planting, tho~ companies being Valley Crest Tree
Company (510/862-2485} ~ud Trees of C. alffornia (408/264-3663).
2. Tree 811 could be moved fairly easily by digging and tmusp~g to
a 96-inch box.
F~ ~..4, 2000
An, A.~ ~ Three ~ Ltw Otk TTees AC ~ Oak Sh%~f.af C~3~' ~
Tree # 12 would no doubt tolerate transplanting well if other
recommendations are followed but will require that bolts be inst21]ed
through the joint at which the included bark is seen at 1-foot above
grade.
Two bolts of 5/8-inch diameter should be installed precisely as shown
in the enclosed sketch.
A 112-inch rootball would be required to successfully move this plant
in my opinion but the.two contractors should each be asked to voice
their opinion on the appropriate container size.
General Recommendatio~
These t~ees may. be moved only during the period between August 1, and
January 1Sm.
This does not mean ff the time lapse is available that they could not be
side boxed in July or August and then transplanted in the following
November t_hrcu~. January.
Tree #5 will not be a candidate because of the very small space in which
it is growing and the great dif~culty in separating enough rootbaI1 to
make .this process' successful.
The minimum size rootball which should be allowed fo~ this tree would
be an 84-inch box which would require 3 ~ feet o£ rootball on each of the
four sides, and since there is so much paving and other hard,cape in the
way it doesn't seem possible to m~ke that much rootbaXl accessible for
transplanting.
It should be noted that even though this holly oak is a fine specimen in
spite of two large wounds on the trunk at 4 and 5 feet above ~rade that it
is not a Califom/a native oak species..
Respectfully subm{tted,
B~rie D. Coate
Horticultatml Consultant
BDC/sl
Enclosures: Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
BARRIE D. rDATE
and ASSOCIATES
Horticultural Consultants
408-353-1052
23555 Summit Road, Los Gamz, CA 95030
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING
CONDITIONS
1. Any legal description provided to the appraiser/consultant is assumed to be correct.
o
10.
11.
12.
Any titles and ownerships to any property are assumed to be good and marketable.
No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character nor is any opinion rendered as to the quality of any title.
It is assumed that any property is not in violation of any'applical~le codes, ordinances, statutes., or other governmental
regulations.
Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible;
however, the appraiser/consultant can neither guarantee nor be responsible for accuracy of information provided by
others.
The appraiser/consultant shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this appraisal unless
subsequent written arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for services.
Loss or removal of any part of this report invalidates the entire appraisal/evaluation.
Possession o! this report or a copy thereof does, not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any other thr
the person(s) to whom it is addressed without written consent of this appraiser/consultant.
Neither all nor any part of the contents .of this report, nor copy thereof,shall be qsed for any purpose by anyone but the
client to whom it is addressed, without the prior written consent of the appraiser/consultant; nor shall it be conveyed by
anyone, including the client, to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media, without the
wri~en consent and approval of the author;, particularly as to value considerations, identity of the appraiser/consultant
or any protessional society or institute or to any initialed designation conferred upon the appraiser/consultant as
stated in his/her qualifications.
This report and the values expressed herein represent the opinion of the appraiser/consultant, and the
appraiser's/consultant's fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value nor upon any finding to be
reported.
Sketches, diagrams, graphs, photos, etc. in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessa, rily to scale and
should n. ol be construed as engineering reports or surveys.
This report has been made in conformity with acceptable appraisal/evaluation/diagnostic reporting techniques and
pl'ocedures, as recommended by the International Society of Arbodculture.
When applying 'any pesticide, fungicide or herbicide, always follow label instructions.
No tree described in this report was climbed, unless otherwise stated. We cannot take responsibility for any defects
which could only have been discovered by climbing. A full root collar inspection, consisting of excavating the soil
around the tree to uncover the root collar and major buttress roots, was not performed, unless otherwise stated. We
cannot take responsibility .for any root defects which could only have been discovered by such an inspection.
PLANNING
Exhibit C
URBAN DESIGN
March 1, 2000
Mr. Colin Jung, AICP
Associate Planner
City of Cupertino
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
RE: Andronicos - Oaks Shopping Center
Dear Colin:
I contacted the architect, and he forwarded a larger size set of elevations for my review.
In general, the changes made are very positive. The building is well designed and should be a
positive contribution, to Cupertino.. There are, however, a few more issues you might want to
consider before signing off on the design. They are as follows:
1. The split face masonry wall seems out of place and reads as a real "back door" for the building.
Consideration should be given to using .wood throughout the building and increasing the extent
of trellis on the North Elevation. It seems to especially create an awkward transition at the
northwest comer Of the building near the entry. A similar wood and trellis treatment was used
on the Safeway store across from the Blackhawk development in Danville. A photo is shown
below.
Il[L: 415.551.5795 FAX: 415.551.57~
180 HARBOR DIII~. Stffr~ 219.5A~AIIro. CA94965
o
,,..clronicos - O~ks .Shoppin.~ Ccntcr
Design Review
M,~'ch l. 2000
P~e 2
The two story entry element seems too high and lightwe[§ht in design ch~acter compared to '
the existing center and the rest of the Adronico's building. The two sketches below are not
intended as designs, but rather as a couple of simple approaches ~a£ might be explored to bring
the scale down a bit more to pedes~an height. A~ noted on the second sketch, consideration
should be given to increasing the visual weight of ~e truss elemenm. The exis~ng buildings'
have a rather substantial feel to them. This envy detailing seems a little delicate in comparison.
Colin, ! hope' these comments ~ of help. Please call if you'have a.ny questions.
Sincerely, ..
CANNON DESIGN GROUP
Larry L. Cannon AIA AICP
President
CANNON DESIGN GROI.~
1~0 I.~.~O~ DF.,rv~. S~ 219. SAUSAI2'ro.cA~4~
Exhibit
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 -
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM
Application: 2-U-00 Agenda Date: March 27.2000
Applicant: John Sutti (representing Andronico's) '
Prope .rty Owner: Villa De Anza Inc. dba Oaks Shopping Center
Property Location: 21275 Stevens Creek Blvd. (between Mary Ave. & Highway 280)
Project Data:
General Plan Designation: Commercial/Residential
Zoning Designation: P (Stevens Creek Boulevard Conceptual Zoning)
Parcel Size: 7.9 net acres
Square Footage:
Proposed Demolition:
Proposed New Const:
Net New Construction:
Lot Coverage
Existing: 21.2%
Proposed: 24.3%
Floor-to-Area Ratio
Existing: 21.2%
Proposed: 25.5%
Building Height: 32'
Parking:.
Existing:
Total Required
with Proposal:
Proposed:
Net Surplus:
17,427 sq. ft.
32,160 sq. ft.
14,733 sq.ft.
549 spaces
488 spaces
521 spaces
.~.~ spaces
Project Consistency with: General Plan yes Zoning yes
Environmental Assessment: Mitigated Negative Declaration Recommended
Application Summary: Use permit to demolish approximately 17.430 square feet'of
retail and cinema space and construct a new 32,160 square tbot market and ancillary
cooking school (Andronico's) at the Oaks Shopping Center.
BACKGROUND:
The applicant, John Sutti, representing Andronico's, is proposing to demolish one
building and part of another building at the rear of the Oaks Shopping Cente~' in order
build a grocery store and ancillary cooking school in a new two-story structure.
proposed demolition includes the Oaks 3 Cinema, a vacant restaurant space and thc
Dance Academy. The Planning Commission reviewed this proposal on March I
(Exhibit A). One member of the public spoke about Saving the theaters and its Iow cost
entertainment. She suggested reducing the number of screens or rebuilding it on top
the market. The owners of the Glenbrook Apartments. the Avery Family..sp~,l<c ~m
behalf of themselves and their renters, stating that the northqhcing ~vall. needed t~ bc
detailed; truck deliveries needed to be staggered and restricted; employee rest areas
identified; and a crosswalk provided between the apartments and the shopping center.
The Planning Commission directed that the applicant should:
1. Address the comments expressed in the Avery Family correspondence.
· Install a trellis along the north wall. The trees along the wall should be at least 24"
boxed.
· There should be a crosswalk across Mary Avenue 'tbr the 517-unit GIcnbrook
Apartments.
· The wood siding should be planks, not sheets of wood designed to look like planks.
· Plant 2, 48" boxed trees on each side of the Mary Avenue driveway entrance.
· Prohibit trucks waiting to make deliveries from parking on Mary Avenue.
· Screen outdoor employee rest areas from street view.
2. Add additional details to the north elevation to make it look more interesting.
31 Address potential cooking school parking demand. The Commission was
concerned that the cooking school with a potential attendance ol-'24 students and a
instructor would impact the parking lot
4. Transplant two oak trees. The two native oak trees can only be succcssl'ully
transplanted during the late summer or early fall. The Commission wanted assurances
that the demolition/construction schedule would not impact these particular trees.
5. Provide for a mid-block pedestrian crossing across Mary Avenue. Thc
Commission was interested in providing a safe Mary Avenue pedestrian crossing Ibr thc
use of Glenbrook Apartment residents to the shopping center.
6. Traffic/Circulation. Individual commissioners had general concerns about making
traffic and vehicular circulation work better on and off the site. One Commissioner
hoped that the Stevens Creek Boulevard entrance would draw the bulk o1' thc incoming
traffic, rather than, Mary Avenue.
7. Delivery Truck Schedule. Commissioners favored no deliveries betbre 7 a.m. ,'md no
truck stacking on Mary Avenue.
8. Pedestrian Areas. The Commissioners wanted to see additional pedestrian fi2aturcs
in the arcade and integrated with proposed uses.
9. Screening of Transformers and Any Outdoor Employee Break Area.
10. Screening of Loading Area. The Commissioners Wanted to make sure the loading
areas were screened as much as possible. _
DISCUSSION:
1. Avery Family Project Comments
Staffwill not be addressing these comments individually in the staff report since they arc
duplicated by the other Planning Commission directives.
2. More North Elevation Details
See Sheet 5 of the plan set. The architect has integrated several details to make thc wall
look more interesting:
· A wall mounted trellis has been added to the blank wall and is aligned with
the cave of the adjacent roof. A wall mounted trellis (no posts) will allow
trees to be planted in the narrow landscape strip. Staff' has c0ndititmcd thc
permit to require 24-inch boxed trees.
· The masonry walls have been replaced by hardboard siding .so thc w;lll tloc.s
not look too much like the rear of the building. At the previous hearing thc
architect stated this siding would be wood planks, not plywood sheets made to
look like planks.
· Two display windows, integrated with the building, have been added to thc
blank wall.
3. Parking Demand of CoOking School
Staff assigned 3 parking stalls to the 760-square foot cooking school based on thc retail
parking requirement of 1 parking stall fur every 250 square t'eet or'retail space. I.;xhibit
B, a letter from Sutti Associates, states that as many as 30 people may attend these
classes twice a week during the weekdays, generating a parking demand o1'15 stalls.
Classes will be held during off-peak grocery shopping hours so this parking demand can
be accommodated within the existing parking requirements without diminishing thc
surplus. Staff will monitor the situation and consider it in any new tenancy that generates
inordinate parking demand.
4. Oak Tree Transplanting
According to the recommendations of the arborist, Barrie Coate. the oak trees must bc
transplanted between August 1~ and January 15'". The applicant believes this time period
would not affect his construction schedule. Staff has added a condition ~1' approval m
protect these trees.
5. Mid-block Pedestrian Crossing across Mary Avenue
The Public Works Department had already been looking at redesigning a portion of Mary
Avenue to slow down traffic around the Oaks Shopping Center and Memorial Park. and
provide a pedestrian crossing. A crossing closer to the Glenbrook Apartments is a new
consideration which the department will factor into its redesign plans and request I"unding
'" g (t'q7
for in the upcoming capital improvements budget. While Public Works will likely look
at a larger area than just the Oaks Shopping Center/Glenbrook Apam'ncnts connection
and must consider the Andronicos truck traffic, Andronicos will be expected to
contribute financially toward this street improvement.
6. Traffic & Circulation
Staffhas been working with the project architect to realign some of the circulation around
the driveway entrances to make them flow better. Th6 designs are in draft l-btm (Exhibits
C & D). Staffhopes to have a more finished drawing at the hearing.
Exhibit C: Stevens Creek Boulevard Entrance
Staff is recommending that the landscaped "bump" be trimmed back so vehicles
frequenting Andronicos from Stevens Creek Boulevard have the option to navigate either
aisle shown. This is important in the event a queue of cars lbrms in either aisle. No
parking will be lost with this change.
Exhibit D: Mary Avenue Entrance
Staff is recommending that the adjacent intersection of driveway'aisles be realigned, and
the driveway entrance on Mary Avenue be moved north. There are several adv,'mtagcs to
this design:
· The confusing geometry of aisles in the original proposal is greatly simplilicd:
· Two large landscape islands are created at the new MaD' Avenue Clltl';.irlcc:
· The delivery trucks will still back into the loading dock, but the movements will bc
isolated from the main circulation aisle and driveway entrance;
· The loading dock m~d trash area are turned away fi'om public street view and thc
apartments to' the north.
A separate truck-only exit will be created on Mary Avenue. Staff estimates only II)
parking stalls will be lost with this design and the center had ast, rplus of 33 parking
spaces with the original proposal. The applicant and City Traffic Engineer arc ag,'ccablc
with the changes.
Staff requests that the Commission approve the realignment in concept :md allow st:fiT to
work with the applicant to complete the details.
7. Delivery Truck Schedule
A condition of approval has been added to the use permit prohibiting vehicul:~r deliveries
or pickups to or from the project between the hours of 8 p.m. and 7 a.m. weekd.'~ys
(Monday through Friday) and 8 p.m. and 9 a.m. on weekends ( Saturday and Sunday).
The Public Works Department can sign portions of Mary Avenue to prohibit commercial
truck parking. This should address any truck stacking concerns on Mary Avenue.
8. Pedestrian Areas
The revised landscaping plan (Sheet L3) shows additional landscaping, stools, benches
'and tables in the arcade areas on the east and south sides of the market. '['his should work
well with the market's proposal to install a walk up deli window.
9. Screening of Transformers and Any Outdoor Employee Break Area
Sheet L3 also shows the screening concept for the transformers. Although thc' location
the northern transformer will change with the realignment of the circulation aisles, the
screening concept still applies and staff will make sure the trans[brmer is well screened.
Sheet L3 shows a screened outdoor employee break area. This solution can be
incorporated in the redesign of the circulation, which will create a large enough pad near
the loading dock to accommodate such a feature that is adequately screened from view.
Staffwill work with the applicant to develop this employee break area.
10. Screening of Loading Area
The redesign (Exhibit D) orients the loading and trash areas to the east, out o1' direct view
of the street and apartments. Screening is not as critical and having 48" boxed oak trees
at the Mary Avenue entrance, as suggested by the Averys tbr the original project, is not
needed.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the addition of Andronico's would provide a much needed grocery store for
Cupertino, particularly for residents in this area. The market will serve as a much needed
anchor and economic boost for the shopping center that has no anchor store.
Staff's recommendations' are that the Planning Commission recommend:
1. approval of a mitigated negative declaration (file no, 4-EA-00) on the usc pcmfit
project, and
2. approval of the use permit, file no. 2-U-00, in accordance with the model resolution
with a deferral of the sign approval to a separate application.
The Planning Commission should also adopt a minute order requesting:
That the City Council direct the Public Works Traffic Engineering Division to evaluate
potential increases in cut-through traffic after the market is built and occupied and rcpm't
any findings to the Council.
Enclosures:
Model Resolution for Approval
Minute Order
Initial Study, ERC Recommendation
Exhibi~ A: Planning Commission staff report dated March 13,201)0
Exhibit B: Letter from Sutti Associates to Colin Jung dated March ~(), 2000
Exhibit C: Driveway Aisle Realignment at Stevens Creek Blvd.
Exhibit D: Driveway Aisle and Driveway Entrance Realignment at Mary Ave.
Prepared by: Colin Jung, Associate Planner
Approved by: Steve' Piasecki, Director of Comrl'ff.~nity Development
G:/Pla,m ing/Pdrcport/pc/pc2u00
Exhibit
irfTi
ASSOCIATES
March 20, 2000
Colin Jung, Associate Pladfi~'
City of Cupertino. ,
10300 Torre Aveuri~
Cupertino, CA
,Telephone (408)' 777-3308
Fax (408) 777-3333
RE: Response to Planning Commission issues and concerns dated 3/15/00
on Use Permit File No. 2-U-00. 'Andronico's Market
l'~'~m 3) Cooking School Parking demand
Cooking school classes will be held during off-peak..shopping hours.
A maximum of 30 people will attend classes two days a week Monday
through Friday, 10:00 AM To Noon and 1:00 to. ~J:00 PM.
Cooking school participants will use 15 parking stalls:
Item 7) Delivery Truck Sbhedule
There will be no truck deliveries on Sunday,
Andronico's will schedule truck deliveries 7:00 AM to 2:00 PM
Monday through Saturday so that only one truck will be delivering at
any one time. There will not be a second truck waiting to approach
the loading dock.
Six deliveries will be' made each day Monday through, Saturday:' two
60-foot long trucks and four 4q-.foot long trucks
500 Ntpod Boulevard
Suite 110
9ui~gam~ C~ 94010-1614
6K0,343,4244
FAX 6~0-343,4944
Post-It' brand fax ~nsmittal memo 7671
/
336906
Colin Jung
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
bennettr@urbanretail.com[SMTP:bennettr@urbanretail.com]
Tuesday, March 28, 2000 11:35 AM
Colin Jung
The Oaks / Andronico's
Exhibit C- ~-
After hearing the various comments at last night's (March 27th) Planning
Commission meeting, I wanted to give you some information from the perspective
of the shopping center management.
- Traffic (and Trucks): I agree that traffic patterns should be studied by the
City of Cupertino to ensure that good decisions are made regarding
ingress/egress at The Oaks Shopping Center. It is never going to be perfect. It
can be optimized. I have been watching the flow of traffic at The Oaks for the
last several years at all times of the day and evening. There are always people
who will drive too fast or make reckless moves in traffic. However, I have not
personally seen many of the "problems" described by the members of the public
who were vocal at the meeting. The southwest entry into the center from Stevens
Creek Blvd. in front of Linda Evans is a viable entrance. The flow into it off
of the main street is very fluid for automobile traffic, and I rarely see large
trucks utilizing it, although some bobtrucks do enter this way.
I liked the second plan offered by Staff, which "split" the inbound lanes from
that entrance. Further, I feel the "truck" exit proposed for Andronico's
delivery trucks is quite useful, and could easily be used by automobile traffic,
as well.
I do not think it is feasible to unload the delivery trucks for Andronico's any
other way than to pull in as your plan shows and back up into the loading dock.
This just isn't that difficult a manuever. It has been my experience that the
larger tractor/trailer trucks do not utilize the "beep-beep" signal when
backing, and that the signal device is mostly used on bobtrucks and panel trucks
such as UPS uses. Such signal devices are not required by DOT. As for the
complaints about trucks parking on Stevens Creek Blvd to unload and make
deliveries, I can say that I have seen at least two trucks who do so. There are
areas available within the center at the times they deliver where they could
park and unload, but the drivers seem to think that it is just too much to ask
them to walk a few extra feet. They are never satisfied if they are not right in
front of the door they are delivering to. I suggest that the Shedffs Dept.
handle the matter.
There were some complaints about the delineators which were installed at the
main entrance from Stevens Creek Blvd (by Shane Company) and it was stated that
they prevent trucks/cars from pulling directly across toward Jamba Juice, that
is, the delineators force the flow of traffic down the lane to circle back
around to the area by Jamba Juice. Those delineators are absolutely necessary.
Drivers still run over them or drive around them into the lane of oncoming
traffic to get in. The majority of the time, the delineators do the job they are
intended to do. The gridlock that used to form as traffic tried to force its way
through the intersection by Jamba Juice and the danger to pedestrians walking
across the front of the center has been mitigated by these delineators. The
addition of speedbumps in the drive lanes of the center were necessary as well,
· due to the drivers who speed through the property and nearly hit our
pedestrians.
- Landscaping: The management and ownership of The Oaks are in total agreement
with the City concerning the need to preserve and enhance the landscaping at the
center. We will look to the Landscape Architects to guide the project through
the approval process. The shopping center has many historic Pacific Live Oak
Trees and is named for those trees. We have professional landscapers and
cerified arborists who handle the needs of the property.
- The Oaks Theater: Ownership of The Oaks signed an agreement with the Oaks'
Theater many months ago which, for our financial consideration, will allow us to
Page I
terminate their lease upon written notice. This agreement was mutually
beneficial. The theater has its following, but is a poor performer as modern
theaters go and the center needs a replacement tenant for the theater, whether a
grocery store or some other use. The costs for The Oaks of doin9 business in
this area are high, and we need market rents in order to keep the center
well-maintained and clean. Because The Oaks has a variety of tenants, is open
from early morning until late night, and must preserve its parking spaces for
those visiting the center, we must keep a seven day a week Security operation in
force. This is another large expense for us. The need will continue to exist
when Andronico's joins the center. I heard some panelists ask the question, "Who
will watch the trucks making deliveries tq Andronico's, and who keeps DeAnza
students from parking at The Oaks and walking to school?" The answer is that
these duties, and many others, are performed by our on-site security staff.
As for the issue of there being too many grocery stores in the area, I must be
misjudging distances, because I do not believe that there are six major grocery
stores within a mile or two of each other. Regardless, I think Andronico's
stands alone in terms of the type of exemplary operation they present, the
gourmet aspects of their offerings, and the services such as deli and cooking
schools. While some citizens may not want the grocery store, there are others
(particularly in the neighboring apartments) who will be thrilled to have the
conveniences offered by Andronico's.
- Misc. ':. the proposed crosswalk from the apartments across Mary Avenue to The
Oaks seems a good idea and should be considered by The City of Cupertino. As I
mentioned to you previously, I would want to hear from Staff how it would be
done and how it would fit within ADA guidelines, etc.
Other comments were made by a gentleman who seemed to think that The Oaks should
have more "promotions" and events, "like they used to do". Most of these events
were discontinued because the tenants themselves did not want the expense of
them because their stores did not benefit in terms of sales or visibility when
events were held. For the center, it was a burden due to the small amount of
staff available to handle the events and the costs associated with the events. A
few of them, such as the Cherry Blossom Festival, actually grew too large to
continue to be held at the center.
I hope this has helped address some of the concerns expressed during the
meeting. Please feel free to contact me if I may be of assistance. Thank you.
Reed Bennett
General Manager
The Oaks Shopping Center
Page 2
FE[3M : ~ PLRZR PHONE NO. : ~b-~41~3~5 Rp~. ~ 2000 0~:~3AM P~
Exhibit D - ~-
April 6, 2000
Cupertino Planning Commission
10300 Tone Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
De~r Sirs:
The Oaks Shopping Center, in order to remain competitive and reflective of community
needs, requires a change of direction in, and an upgrading of. its tenant mix. It is our
sincere belief that a sophisticated market such as Andronico's will not only be a major
asset to the center, but to the surrounding eo~mtmity as well. Because it is expected that
Andronico's will sombwhat intensify usage of the shopping center, Ownership is
committed to working closely with City planners to seek reasonable yet economic ways
tn optimize the entire property in temis of ingress/egress, circulation within the parking
lot, crosswalks, and other changes to insure the best and highest use of the public space.
Andronico's has a tremendous Bay Area presence, and has proven to be a good neighbor
in many other communities surrounding Cupertino. This will certainly hold tree when a
beautiful, new Andronico's grocery store opens for business at The Oaks. The feedback
from many of our closest neighbors, such as the Gler~brook Apartment tenants, has been
most favorable and they look forward to the convenience and varlet3, Anclronico's will
provide for them. The Oaks Shopping Center can experience a degree of renaissance with
this wonderful addition, and we hope that both citizans and City officials will agree with
us that thc time is fight for Andronico's. We look £orward t° working with you to bring
this unique opportxm/ty to fruition, and to the prompt and positive actio~l necessary to
accomplish that objective.
Very Truly Yours,
The Oaks Shopping Center
Reed Bennett, RPA
General Manager
21265 Scevcns Creek Blvd. Suite 205 · PMB 230 · Cuperr. ino, CA 95014 · Phone (408) 257-87~7 · Fax (408) 517-0271
Ap'?'-06-00 O1: 22P EXHIBITE-Z.
Z
George W. Nickelson, r.E.
Traffic Engineering · Transportation Planning
EXttIBIT B-3
May 25, 2000
Mx. Raymond D. Chong, P.E.
citY Traffic Engineer
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
PUBLIC i~ORK$
Subject:
Traffic/Parking Analysis for the Proposed Andronico's Market in The Oaks
Center in the City of Cupertino
Dear Mr. Chong:
This letter report summarizes an analysis of traffic and parking issues as related to the proposed
Andronico's Market in The Oaks Center. The analysis reflects your input and discussions at our
May 9 meeting,m Because there are a number of potential issues which have been identified, this
report separately addresses each issue.
1. EXISTING TRAFFIC ISSUES
A. Buy Turnout on the Northeast Comer of Stevens Creek/Mary
Currently, the westbound Stevens Creek Boulevard buses must stop along the existing curb,
tempo.rarily blocking westbound traffic flows in the curb.lane. Based on our discussions, a bus
turnout lane could be constructed at this location. There WOuld be Sufficient right-of-way ·
adjacent to the new Senior Center to provide this tumout and the City estimates the construction
cost at $50,000-$60,000.
It is noted that the bus turnout would improve existing westbound traffic flows, and to the extent
that the Andronico's Market would add vehicles to the westbound flows, there would be some
benefit derived by Andronieo's. However, as eaiculated in a subsequent section of this report,
the Andronico's would add 1% to the westbound PM peak hour through/fight-turn volume on
Stevens Creek Boulevard approaching the Stevens Creek/Mary intersection.
B,'Traffic Signal Timings at StevenSCreek/M~'y and $t~¥~n~ Creek/Stellin~:
There are several issues which have been raised regarding the traffic signal timing (and related
vehicle queuing) at these intersections. As discussed at our May 9 meeting, your staff have
reviewed the signal timing patterns and have determined that the timing has been optimized to
-/ob
1901 Olympic Boulevard · Suite 120 · Walnut Creel CA94596 · (925)935-5014 · FAX (925)935-2247
May 25, 2000
Raymond Chong
Page 2
address the peak hour traffic flows. However, the following items could be considered by the
City to alleviate specific problems;
Because westbound traffic on Stevens Creek can periodically block Anton Way,
consideration will be given to painting a "KEEP CLEAR" legend on westbound Stevens
Creek at Anton.
At Stevens Creek/Mary, the eastbound u-turn movements destined for The Oaks Center
are relatively heavy and occasionally back up out of the eastbound left-turn lane. City
staff are reviewing the signal timing at this intersection with a potential increase in signal
time for this eastbound left-turn movement. The increased signal time would involve
retiming the signal to allow a portion of the eastbound left-turns to flow while the north-
south pedestrian movements (on the east side of the intersection) are occurring.
C. Truck Parking Along Stevens Creek Boulevard
On occasion, a truck destined for one of the center's restaurants (fronting on Stevens Creek
Boulevard) tends to double park in the bike lane along the center's Stevens Creek Boulevard
frontage. This parking/unloading conflicts with bicycle travel and can conflict with westbound
vehicle traffic. The City is aware of this problem and is prepared to more aggressively enforce
the "no parking" requirement. Consideration could be given to painting the curb red (no parking
signs already exist) and'working with center tenants to ensure that truck loading activities occur
on-site.
D, Traffic Flows at The Oaks Driveways on Stevens Creek Boulevard
The east driveway on Stevens Creek Boulevard provides inbound/outbound (fight-mm only)
access for the center. Due to the short distance between Stevens Creek Boulevard and the
internal parallel parking aisle, inbound traffic at this driveway is forced (through a series of
.bo[lards installed along the driveway's centerline) to continue into the center on a one-way
northbound parking aisle. To the west of this driveway, the internal circulation within the center
is somewhat confusing. The parking aisle provides one-way westbound diagonal parking spaces,
but the aisle is intended to operate as a two-way internal aisle
The center's westerly driveway on Stevens Creek Boulevard only provides fight-turn inbound
access. Due to the grade difference between the street and the parking lot, the driveway enters
the center nearly parallel to the internal parking aisle. This configuration results in somewhat
restricted visibility between driveway traffic and traffic in the adjacent parking aisle. There is
also a lack of clearly defined right-of-way for internal traffic flows.
May 25, 2000
Raymond Chong
Page 3
E. Traffic Flows at the Sate Route 85/Stevens Creek Boulevard Interchange
There has been some concern relative to motorist confusion at the State Route 85/Stevens Creek
Boulevard interchange. The City has reviewed the current signing/striping and will work with
Calms to improve overall sign visibility/clarity at this interchange.
2. TRAFFIC EFFECTS OF TH'E PROPOSED ANDRONICO'S MARKET
A. Project Trip Generation
The PM peak hour trip generation changes associated with the proposed Andronico's Market
have been calculated based on trip rate data compiled by the Institute of Transportation Engineers
(ITE).~ As shown on Table 1, the project would involve removal of the existing cinema
complex and existing restaurant and shop space. The project would result in a net increase of
77 PM peak hour trips. As indicated, the Andronico's Market would also generate 112 PM peak
hour pass-by trips by customers who are already traveling on Stevens Creek Boulevard.
B. Intersection Ol~ration at Stevens Creek/Mary
The operation of Stevens Creek/Mary has been calculated for the following scenarios:
existing traffic;
· existing traffic plus traffic from full leasing of the center (excluding Andronico's), the
new Senior Center and 1.1% growth in background traffic;
· existing plus approved plus Andronico's; and
· cumulative traffic growth due to De Anza College growth and the proposed City Center
project.
As shown in Table 2, the Stevens Creek/Mary intersection currently operates at the Level of
Service (LOS) "B/C' range with about 14-15 seconds of delay. With approved development
traffic added to existing flows, the intersection operation would remain in the LOS "B/C" range
although the delay would increase slightly (less than 1 second). With the proposed Andronico's
project, the operation would continue in the LOS "B/C" range with a slight increase in vehicle
delay (less than 1 second). Cumulative traffic growth would add more substantially to peak hour
volumes and the intersection operation would degrade slightly to LOS 'C'. However, it is noted
that LOS 'C" conditions are considered very satisfactory for peak hour operations in an urban
alT. it.
In addition to the overall operation, we have considered vehicle queuing on specific intersection
turning movements. As noted in the discussion of existing conditions, the eastbound left-turn on
May 25, 2000
Raymond Chong
Page 4
TABLE 1
TRIP GENERATION CALCULATION FOR TI~ PROPOSED
ANDRONICO'S MARKET IN TI~, OAKS CENTER
PM PEAK HOUR'CON'DITIONS~
Proposed Andronie0'S Market:
32,160 sq. ft. @ ITE equation -- 373 trips x 70% new trips
261 PM trips
Site U~es tO be Removed:
3 cinema screens @ 44.53/screen x 100% new trips -
4,050 sq. ft. restaurant°~ @ 10.86/I,000 x i00% new trips =
2,200 sq.ft, dance studi&~ @ 2.59/1,000 x 100% new trips=
-134 PM trips
- 44 PM trips
- 6 PM trips
Net New Trips Generated by Andronico's Market
Pass-By Trips For Andronico's = 373 trips x 30%
= 77 PM trips
--- 112 PM pass-by trips
(2)
(3)
(4)
Basic trip rates obtained from the ITE reference Tr~p Generation 6th Edition, 1997.
The percentage of new trips for the Andronico's market reflects a 30 % maximum pass-by
trip ratio as prescribed by the' Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA).
The ITE land use category used in this calculation is "High Turnover Sit-Down
'Restaurant".
The ITE land use category used in this calculation is "Specialty Retail".
May 25, 2000
Raymond Chong
Page 5
TABLE 2
EXISTING AND PROJECTED OPERATION AT THE
STEVENS CREEPY INTERSECTION
Traffic Condition
Existing Traffic
Approved Development
Andronico's Project
Cumulative Growth
Level of Service
B/C
.B/C
B/C
C
May 25, 2000
Raymond ChOng
Page 6
Stevens Creek at Mary can periodieatly queue out of the left-turn lane. The existing calculated
left-mm queue is 10 vehicles and the eastbound left-turn volume would increase by 9% with
approved development and 33% with the proposed Andronieo's project. The project increases
in this left-turn volume would be primarily as a result of Andronico's customers on eastbound
Stevens Creek needing to make a left-mm or U-turn.movement at Mary. Any increase ia the
eastbound left-turn volume would tend to increase the vehicle queues.
In response to the expected increases in the eastbound left-ms on Stevens Creek at Mary, it is
recommended that the City consider providing additional ~green time" for this movement
(without increasing the overall intersection signal cycle length). This added green time 'would
allow the eastbound left-turn movements to clear during each signal cycle. Because the
intersection operation is very stable (LOS "B/C"), a reallocation of signal time should not
measurably impact overall intersection operations.
C. Changes in The Oaks Driveway. Operation
Although the proposed Andronico's Market project would not significantly increase traffic flows
on adjacent streets, there would be increased activity at The Oaks driveways and within the
center itself. In response, several driveway/circulation changes are proposed.
On Mary Avenue, the project would include a new full access driveway near the proposed
Andronico's Market. The existing two-way-left-turn-lane (TWLTL) on Mary Avenue would
provide adequate inbound/outbound access for this new driveway. '
At the existing driveways on Stevens Creek Boulevard, suggested design changes would enhance
access and more clearly define internal circulation. As shown on the attached sketch, at the
easterly driveway, it is recommended that a more permanent median be installed to clearly
separate the inbound and outbound traffic flows. At the same time, changes in the internal
circulation would enhance parking aeeesibility and more clearly define internal traffic flows. The
westerly center driveway should be extended somewhat into the site,, linking with proposed
internal parking/circulation changes. As shown on the attached sketch, these changes would
direct the inbound driveway traffic to a more appropriate right-angle intersection with internal
parking aisles.
It is noted that consideration was given to creating a new driveway between the two existing
center driveways on Stevens Creek Boulevard (with the potential closure of the two existing
driveways). However, it appears that this new driveway would result in a greater potential for
internal traffic conflicts with traffic backing out onto Stevens Creek Boulevard. A new driveway
would have to link with the first parallel parking aisle within the center and the distance between
Stevens Creek Boulevard and that first aisle would be minimal. 'If entering vehicles wait while
May 25, 2000
Raymond Chong
Page 7
another vehicle maneuvers in/out of'a parking
backing up onto Stevens Creek.
space, there would be a potential for traffic
D, Traffic Ac.cident History
Based on City accident records, the accident history along the center's Stevens Creek Boulevard
and Mary Avenue frontages has been very limited. Along the Stevens Creek Boulevard frontage,
there were three accidents in 1994 but no accidents in 1995-1998. Again in 1999, three accidents
were recorded. The center's Mary Avenue frontage had no accidents in 1994-1997, two
accidents'in 1998 and no accidents in 1999.
These statistics do not indicate a pattem of significant accident problems along the center' s street
frontages. The average accident numbers are representative of what would be expected on
relatively high volume streets adjacent to a commercial center.
E. Tr .affic Effects on Meteor Drive, Lubec Street and Ant0n Way
This issue relates, to the potential for Andronico's traffic diverting through the neighborhood to
the north and impacting these local streets. Based on. the Andronico's market data, less than 5 %
of the new store's business (3-4 of the 77 net new PM peak hour trips) would be to/from the
north on Stelling. Even if a portion of these Uips diverted from Stelling to the neighborhood
streets, the effects on these streets would be minimal. As indicated in a previous section of this
report, the City of Cupertino will consider providing a."I(~? CLEAR" legend in Stevens Creek
Boulevard at Anton Way to facilitate access/in/out of Anton.
F. Traffic Operations at State Route 85/Stevens Cre0k and Stevens Creek/Stelline
At the State Route 85~Stevens Creek interchange, both ramp intersections are currently operating
in the LOS "B/C" range during the PM peak commute hour. The proposed Andronico's project
would add about 1% to current volumes at the interchange ramp intersections. Changes of this
magnitude would not be measurable within the typical daily fluctuations in lraffic flow and the
intersections' operation would rem in the LOS 'B/C" range.
At Stevens Creek/Stelling, the current PM peak hour operation is in the LOS "C/D" range. The
net traffic increase due to Andronico's would be less than 0.5 % and this change would not be
measurable.
May 25, 2000
Raymond Chong
Page 8
3. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
ha summary, the proposed Andronico's Market project would result in a rehtively small net
increase in PM peak hour trips. The volume of increased traffic and the distribution of that
traffic suggests that local neighborhood streets would not be measurably impacted. Even with
the traffic from other approved development, nearby intersections would not be significantly
affected. The City could however, consider traffic signal retiming, improved signing and other
minor operational measures to improve overall traffic flows in the area.
The proposed Andronico's would increase activity at The Oaks driveways and within the center.
In response, modifications to the center's Stevens Creek Boulevard driveways (and within the-
center) are recommended to enhance access and internal circulation.
I trust that this report responds to your needs. Please call me With any questions or comments.
Sineer. ely, .
G o ge WC,Nickelson, P.E.
(1).
(2)
May 9- meeting with' Raymond C'hong and Vicki Guapo', City of Cupertino.
ITE, Trip Generation 6th Edition, 1997.
attachments: sketches of suggested driveway changes
/'/
figure
06IE512000 17:E2 5109352247 C~H! ~'EAHS PA~ 0~
George W. Nickelson, P.E.
Traffic Engineering · Transportation Plqnning
Exhibit
June 5, 2000
Mr. Raymond D. Chong, P.E.
City Traffic Engineer
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Subject:
Tdp Genemtio# Am~ris for the Pn~posed Amtmnieo's Market in Th, Oakz
Center in the C~ of Cure.no
Dear Mr. Chong:
As requested, we have conducted traffic counts at an existing Andronico's market to determine
the validity of the trip rate used in our analysis of the proposed Cupertino Andronico's. 'We
conducted PM peak lc~'iod (4-6 PM) counts at the existing Andronico's Market ir] the Town of
Danville. This market has been open roi' about one year, and has an established customer base..
Our counts indicate a PM peak hour volume of 243 inbound/outbound trips for the 38,700 sq.fl.
store or a trip rate of 6.28 trips per 1,000 sq.ft, of store area. This trip rate compares with a
rate (based on the ITE equation) of 11.60 trips per 1,000 ~.ft. used in our analysis of the
proposed Cupertino Andwnico's Mm'ket.
As this analysis indicates, our use of time standard 1TE trip generation equation for the proposed
Cupertino Andronico's Market has provided a Ve~'y conservative estimate of project trip
generation. The actual trip generation should be substantially lower.
Please review this information and call me with any questions.
Sincerely,
/
George W. Nicketson, P.E.
copy: Dave Johnson
1901 Olympic-Boulevard · Suite 120 · Walnut Creek, CA 94596 * (925~ 935-5014 ·
Matrix of Existing Traffic, Parking, Access Issues for
the Oaks Shopping Center and Surrounding Area
Buses stopping at NE comer
of Stevens Creek & Mary Ave
impede traffic
Traffic signal timing at
Stevens Creek & Mary and
Stevens Creek & Stelling
Tracks park on Stevens Creek
to tmload goods at the Oaks.
This blocks the bicycle lane
and can impede traffic fltiw.
The Stevens Creek driveways
are awkward for entry
There are a lot of incidents
and near-accidents at the State
Route 85/Stevens Creek
Interchange
EXhibit
A bus duckout will improve
westbound traffic flow.
Signal timing is designed for
peak traffic flows. However,
improvements can be made to
address specific problems.
There is no signage
pro,biting parking even
though parking is prohibited.
The internal circulation and
parking conflicts with entry
There appears to be motorist
confusion as they approach
westbound to SR 85/Stevens
Creek Interchange
Feasible to install duckout
adjacent to Senior Center. This
requires approval through the
Capital Improvement Program
Budget.
a) Increase signal green time
for heavy, eastbound U-turn
movements on Stevens Creek
at Mary and b) paint "KEEP
CLEAR" on Stevens Creek at
Anton Way
1) Install "NO PARKING"
signs, 2) Inform Sheriff to
enforce parking prohibition, 3)
Ask Center Manager to work
with tenants to ensure track
loading occurs on-site.
Modify eastern driveway to
improve entry and flow and
modify the western driveway
to enhance flow.
City staff will review thc
current traffic signing and
pavement striping and will
work with CALTRANS to
improve visibility and clarity
of signs and markings.
//7
q- oO
California Restaurants ~,~
EXHIBIT
City Council and Planning Commission
city of Cuper o
10300 Torre Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014
Dear City Council and Planning Commission:
We are writing to voice our support for the proposed new Andmnico's Market at The Oaks
Center. We have watched and listened with keen interest the developments and controversy surrounding
this proposal, as it will have great affect on us here at Hobe¢'s.
The Oaks Center Ires been and will be'a unique shopping place compared to others in our modern,
glass and concrete world. Thc current use of thc hack building, thc Oaks Theatres, has at times been
terrffic for Hobee's dinner business at The Oaks, and at other times it's been invisible. It is a fact that today
some people demand the high-teclL surround-sound, life-like qualities of new movie.houses, and don't
mind paying $9 to get it. And it is equally true that some people relish thc quainmess and relaxed
a~nosphere of a throwback theatre SUCh as The Oaks. The reality of today's real estate market has dictated
th~_~_ no matter what the citizens of Cupertino would like, The Oaks Theatres is going to close, and be
rephced by a new tuie. It's a business reality that ~:~nnot be avoided.
Over the 15 years that Hobce's has been in business in Cuper~o, we have seen tenants come'and
go at The Oaks, some packing up after as li~l¢ as 6 m°nths. We have seen what was a ~int collect/on of
eclectic stores go through awful phases of empty storefronts, poor concept choices, and the loss of earnest,
hardworking business owners who couldn't rno~e it on 5tevcn's Creek Boul~rd, in the hem of
Cupertino, right in the center of Silicon Valley.
Now we have an oWnership at The Oaks who has tinnily taken hold of this place ~ in only a
couple of years made a tremendous difference for its customers and the tenams. Management has really
tried hard to m.~lc~, the most of an aging shopp/ng center. As lon_t~tim~ te~t-% w~ have, year ~ year,
longed for other viable entities to come in to The Oaks that would bring people and w'orancy back to'the
center. A handfid of tenants like ns have sweated and grinded it out in that center which long ago should
have had some kind of"anchor~ _t~n~nt other than just Hobee's. Andronico's is exactly that kind of to_.n~nt
They will bring life back to The Oaks, make it once again a meeting place, a place with a real point of
atUaction that the people of Cuper~o can mili~¢ and enjoy. THEY WIT.I. ATTRACT OTHER FIRST-
LINE BUSIHESSES to take root in The Oaks, and that is what we are excited for. We are here for the
long run, and we know that as the next economic slowdown takes hold, Andronico's will be there, bringing
in customers and providing a focal point for Cupertino that has been sorely lacking, ffwe don't ~ an
opportunity like this one now, we may not have this chance in a few years, and The Oaks will likely drift
further back to the condition in which it languished in the late 1980's.
California Restaurants
We know there are negatives. At Hobee's, we really don't know what the effects of a first-class
grocer Illin ,~nttronico's will be on our business. They have a t~emendous take-out Ixepared foods business
and will likely siphon off some of our customel~. And the paltdng questions must be adequately ~
- we may lose spaoes for our customers because 8f this store. But we feel that the new business created
and the types of customers attracted by Andrenico's will far outweigh the downside. The center will then
fill up over the next few years with wonderful new b~.~ine~.~, and dr'aw customers and 1'~/~ from out
tremendous location at the intersection of highways 85 _~nd 280. And we'll have the kind of active, unique,
and useful shopping area th~ Cupertino deserves, right at the gateway to the city.
Please consider this oppOrtunity carefully. The bay area and the city of Cupertino are going to
grow rapidly whether we like it or nok To attract young, new f~milies and strengthen the services for our
existing residents, we need businesses like Andronico's. We at Hobee's think it will be a surprisingly
wonderful addition to The Oaks Center and to the city of Cupertino.
Sincerely,
Gwil Evans
Gordon yon Richter
Hobee's Cupertino Restaurant
NO Bear~ ~t~ Grm~l~, Inc. dba ~'ab~e ·
Cup rtJn Charnl:e of Comm .
June 8, 2000
Cupertino Planning Commission
Cupertino City Council
Cupertino Courier
RE: Andronico's
We want to go on. record as being in complete support of the approval of Andronico's
Market in the Oaks Shopping Center.
There are several points to consider. The management of Andronico's Market has an
excellent reputation as a grocer, as well as an outstanding community citizen. We
understand the concerns of the public of losing a local attraction, but the decision has
been made to replace the Oaks Theatre with another business. Therefore we should be
applauding the Oaks Management for securing an' ideal addition to our community.
And most importantly, we should honor and protect the free market system. The Oaks
Shopping Center is privately owned and the owners have the right to lease their property
to any establishment they feel is appropriate, providing they meet the requirements of
their use permit, ie. traffic, noise, hours of operation. The management of Andronico's
and the management of the Oaks Center have worked diligently to satisfy any of those
concerns. Their ability to open their store and be successful in Cupertino should be
market driven, and we believe they will be wildly successful!
Sincerely,
President
www. cupertino-chamt)er, org · info(~cupertino-chamber, org
204S5 S}lveradoAvenue · Cupertino, CA C)5014 . 1408t 252-7054 · FAX I4C)RI
June 7, 2000
Jennifer Woodul
21307 Glen Place #3
Cupertino, CA 95014
Planning Commission and City Council
City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Dear Planning Commission members,
As a long-time resident of Cupertino and a current resident of Glenbrook
Apartments near' The Oaks shopping center, I'd like to express strong
support for the addition of Andronico's to the facility. It's a great store and
will be quite likely to draw lots of people from around the area to the far end
of the shopping center, which has certainly seemed to languish over the
years from lack of good draw.
The Oaks' location has always appeared to be a promising one, but
businesses that have limited appeal and a low customer base are doomed
down there at the end of the center. They come and go, often without the
neighborhood becoming all that aware of them - particularly the restaurants.
The theater, while an asset for some of us, is nearly empty most of the time.
The Andronico's name and reputation is so well-known and appealing that it
will very likely bring life, crowds, and class back to a shopping center that
really ought to have a great deal. of potential, but has seemed to be headed
downhill for some time.
f~ase support the addition of this fine store to The Oaks.
~nna~corp.talkcity.com
0/8-257-3820 v
10175 PARKWOOD DR APT 3
CUPERTINO, CA 95014-1558
June 6, 2000
Reference: approval of Andronico's Market in the Oaks Shopping.Center
Planning Commision & City Council
City of Cupertino
10300 Tone Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
To Whom It May Concern:
I support the new Andornico's Market in the Oaks Shopping Center. I look forward to its
products and services.
Sincerely yours,
Bob Lent
Daniel O'Keefe
10124 Parkwood Drive #2
Cupertino, CA 95014
June 8, 2000
Cupertino Planning Commission
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA. 95014-3255
To whom it concerns,
Ahead ofthe June 12th vote on whether W appwve the Andronico's building permit in the Oaks
Shopping Center, I am writing to express my strong support for approval.
As a resident of the Glenbrook Apartment complex, the grocery store would add immensely to the
convenience of life here. Glenbrook residents would no longer be forced to drive in their ears for
even the smallest of grocery items.
Again, I wish to express my full support for the measure to approve the Andronico's building
permit..
Sincerely,
Daniel O'Keefe
6/7/2000
Re: An opportunity to express support for an upscale Andronico's Market in the Oaks Shopping
Center
Dear Sir/Madam,
We would like to live in a nice environment as we are having right now. We are very happy with it. We do
not want to be disturbed with a new upscale Market. Thanks for the information.
Have a good day.
Yi Jin, Di Ge and Mark Jin
Glenbrook residents
(408) 873-3526
t,~cd d
glenbrook
GARDEN APARTMENTS
10100 MARY AVENUE · CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA 95014 · TELEPHONE 408-253-2323 · FAX 408-253-0107
Ke. An opportunity to express support for an upscale Andronico's Market in the Oaks
Shopping Center
Dear Glenbrook resident(s),
On June 12, the Cupertino Planning Commission will decide whether to approve an
upscale Andronico's market in the Oaks Shopping Center across the street from
Glenbrook. The purpose of this letter is to give Glenbrook residents an oppommity to
send a note of support to the Planning Commission members. We believe that each of us
will benefit if the Oaks Shopping Center establishes an upscale anchor tenant that will
insure the continued operation of an attractive shopping center. Can you imagine if the
shopping center were replaced with a single, big box retail store!
The management of Glenbrook has spent approximately 100 hours on this issue. We
submitted a number of design changes at the initial Planning Commission meeting that
we felt would improve the look of the store; and fortunately, Bill Andronico, the founder
of the store's chain attended that meeting and agreed to the changes. For examPle,
delivery trucks will be scheduled between appropriate hours and will never be allowed to
park on Mary Avenue. And, the landscaping of this entire area will be enhanced,
including the addition of more oak trees. Also, the store's dumpsters will be located
inside an enclosed room, and not in the parking lot. The City of Cupertino has also given
preliminary approval to the addition of a Mary Avenue crosswalk located at Glenbrook
Apartment's main entrance. We were thrilled with these accommodations.
Is there a need? We probably would not be writing .to you if this were a typical grocery
store. Instead, Andronico's is proposing aa upscale store that has been very successful in
a few other Bay Area locations. Features include:
*Coffee & espresso bar with a "to go" window for "on the nm" customers
*Bakery & delicatessen
*Food stations with prepared food for "carry-out meals"
*Cooking classes
*Two locations for ample outdoor seating
will it be attractive? This would be a modest style grocery store, replacing a vacant
restaurant, the movie theatre and a dance academy (which is scheduled to relocate within
the Oaks Shopping Center). Needless to say, these were areas with few windows. You
can see from the attached sketch that Andronico's has developed a building with tall
ceilings, lots of windows, and quality exterior building materials including Spanish roof
tile, hardboard siding, and a very attractive store entrance.
Is there opposition? Yes, there is a small group who uses the movie theatre and would
like it to stay. In an informal poll we found that very few Glenbrook residents use the
movie theatre. Moreover, it is our opinion (based on extensive knowledge of rental rates)
that there is no way the existing movie theatre could afford anything close to the renewal
rental rate at the Oaks.
Also, a small group of homeowners do not think the increased traffic fi.om
Andronico's is worth it. Regarding parking I think Glenbrook residents know best that
the end of the Oaks has a huge, little-used parking lot facing Highway 85. That is because
the restaurant space has been vacant for so long, and the movie theatre has so few
customers. This opposition group also points out that there are other grocery stores to
drive to. That is true, but this is a bit more of a shopping experience where people can
read a paper ,enjoy a cup of coffee, learn how to cook, and grab fresh bread and bagels
baked daily. No doubt, the store will give the 1,200 Glenbrook residents the opportunity
to walk to everyday shopping.
Why should I use the enclosed, stamped envelope and write to the Citw? Each letter is
very important and will be read by each planning commissioner and city council member.
Due to its proximate location Glenbrook residents probably have the most to gain with
Andronico's across the street ... and therefore we have the most to lose if we sit on our
hands. Your letter can be hand written, and it can be as short or long as you wish. Every
extra letter is a plus.
Many thanks for reading this. We do not like to bother you with city issues, but we feel
compelled to respond to one of the most commonly asked questions of new Glenbrook
residents: "Are thek some good stores across the street that I can use?"
Sincerely,
GLENBROOK MANAGEMENT
ENDOS(:X:)PY
From The Office Of...
BRETT BAGWELL
Manufactudncj Engineer
Scooes Una
2590 WaJsh Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95051
(408) 567-9100 ext. 2162
1(800) 435-O220
V~ice Mail #2162
Fax (408) 567-2508
Email bOagweil~stryketendo, com
FnA~qK LAHAYE
STEVENS CREEK BLVD,. SUITE 102 CUPERTINO, CA 9~014 · (408} 996-7212
North Elevation
East Elevation
South Elevation
= =- ~.~
West Elevation
Andronico's
5
3/21100
North Elevation
East Elevation
South Elevation
West Elevatio .n
Andromco's - .no
3~1/00
:' u"'"['~ }'z'~ t
ci
frS-o/
/
'~'6, cb. ~:x~x: (.07o {
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cul~rtino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits W Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER! !!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED abotg he
dem01igon of the Oaks Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest tlmt you carefully weigh
the benefits of a l/rocer~ store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the grea~er community!
Thank you[
Print
Address
Signature
Print Name
Addr~s
Print Name
Address
Intimated in m'or~ information or getting tnvolved in Savtn~ the Oal~ Theater ?
Call Chri~ at 408 72~-010'h or ~-mail chris_u~actvanc~dskiils.¢om, or indud~ your _Dhan~ number or e-m~], aboveI
RESIDENTS of the City of Cuport/no
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Om' City's l~esidents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Ma.vor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED a ,bout th~
~iemoli.fion_ of the Oaks Theater in favor of a grocery store,
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and sugge,s,t that you carefully weigh
the b~nefits of a gro¢c-ry store or a theater. Please consider what really is the' highes~ and best use" o/~
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you!
CJI Ci~i{ ~ 405 738-0107, or ~.mail .~hris0('_~dv~no~ds '~.lls,~:,om, or include your uhone OUmOer or e-malt, ai~w!
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Resi_dents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cuperfino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Signature
Print Name
Address
Thank you!
Signature
Print Name
Signature ~
Print Name f~ e~ 7-~
Address j, v ~.-'- -~,~,,-, ',r-
t l 'o ci ra .e t PI,
Signature~
Print Name
'
Signature "~~ {'_~_,t~4~ ,
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chriso _(~flvaneedski!!s~cgnl, or include your ohone number or e-mail,, abovel
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CO_NSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino M~.vor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theft_er in favor of a'grocery store,
I value tho community benefits that the Oaks Theater off, rs and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents ~nd the greater community!
Signature --~-'.'at'-~ ~
Print Name ~o.~ r; /tc- y ,,~r r_,, ,u ~ ,l'~.-
Address
Interested in mor~ lntornmtion or getting involved in Sm, lng tha Oak~ T~eatcv ?.
Ofli Cl~i~ ~t 401~ 72~-0107, or ~.nml ~hrisp(ehadvanc~skjllS.com, or ~nclud¢ your uhone numar or o-malL
FOR RESIDENTS of the Ci~ of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Ma.vet and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
/iemoli,fio. n of the Oaks. Thea~e~ in favor of a grocery store,
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater, Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you!
.)
Sigrmture
Inter~sted in more information or getting involved in Saving th~ Oaks Theater ?
Call Clufi~ at 40g ?~S.0107, or ~.mail qhrisp(e,~advanccdskJlls.com, or ~nclud¢ your rhone number or e-mall, aoove!
FOR R~SID. ENTS of the Civy of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER! !!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNed) about th~c
demoli,fion of th._e Oaks Th. eater in favor of a grocery store,
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocxry store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you!
Signature, ~~~~.^,, ,
.. i't.)~ .,()I,: /
Signature ~,.~ d'., a,.,'~,,,~.~
PrintName %[ ¢'~ L~-;:'..~ "", ;--,'. ,' ' ~
Addr~s ',0 t"~,q, i;;. :" '.
Intzrested in mor~ information or getting involved in &r~ln~ the oaks Theater ?
Call Cilia ai ~0~ '~2~-0107, or ~-mai! ~hris_~('&aavaneed~kiils.com, or include your phone numar or
FOR RESIDENTS of the Civj of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Ma.vor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demol,ifiqn, of ~e Oaks. Theater in favor of a grocery store, ,
I value the commtmity benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please comider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our elty residents and the greater commtmity!
Than~ you!
Print Name
Address
Signature
Inter~sted in more Information m' getting involved in &ri, lng th80a~ Theater ?
C~il CK~is at ~.Ol1725-0107, or ~-rtmil ~lh,com, or include your phone numar or o-matt.
FOR RESIDEN~f$ of thc Ci~d of Cupmino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
EP THE OAKS THEATER!I!!
c:Dear C>ap~rtino M~.vor and City Council Member,
d~_~s a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am yERY CONCERN~,a.I~out the
d ._~. '~on of the Oaks. Theater in favor of a grocery store,
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers ~ suggest that you carefully weigh
the b~n¢fits of a groc..ery store or a theater. Ple~e consider what realty is ~e "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and ~e great? community!
Inter. ted in mor~ tv. formation or gotting involved in Saving ghe Oat~ Theater ?
C~l] Clufi~ a~ ~,08 72~-0107, or e.mail ~hris_~(&advan,eds~lls.com, or include your ohor~ nutntmr or e-mall, a~vel
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cul~rtino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Resid~ts
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know ttmt I am VERY CONCERNED about the
dcm..olition of the Oaks. Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the O~ks Theater offers mad suggest that you cm'efully weigh
the benefi~ ora grocery store or a theater. Ple~ consider what really is the "highest and be~t use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you!
Prim Nme A/~ t~.c n ~ ~ . .22>/~_o~'
-/bO
For NON- Residents - (people ~ of'the Cupertino City limits, but ~o tO movies at the Oak.s)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CO_NSIDF, R
The Benefits to Your Gre~ter Community
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theaer. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theamr will eliminate this reasonable enterta/nment that bring~ me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highes~ and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater communityl
Thank you.
Signature ,I -~ ,/,-'-r-~-
Print Name
Addr~s
Addr~ iog( CD, wtrYff~,.,~'r~,,o Ax,fi,
Interested in more information or g~tting involv~ in ~vtng th~ Oaks Theater ?
C~l Chri~ ~t 401 725-0107, or ~-m,,il christ~_.advn~c, odsidlls,eom, or tn~hde your _~hone number or ~-rnt~il, abovel
For NON- Residents - (people living outside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Community
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you.
Signature ~?j.(.,5::, /,?i.,,
Print Name ~' ~ '~
i
Address
Signature ' .' '
Print Name
Address
Address
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature Signature
Print Name Print Name
Address Address
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chrisp@advancedskills.com, or include your phone number or e-mail, above!
l:OR I~IDENT~ o/~l~ ci~ of C~mino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Be~eflis to Our City's Re~id~
~o
.?
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cu~n/~o Mayor a~d City Council Member,
As a r~ident of Cup~, I w~t you ~o l~ow ~ I am VERY CONCERNED
demolition of th~ ~ Th~ in f~or of a grocery sto~,
I val~ thc oommunity benefits that ~he Oaks Theater off¢~ and suggest lhat you carefully weigh
t~ b~nefits of a grocm'y s~ c~ a t~s~. Pl~ comid~ wl,~ ~ally is the "highes~ and b~ use" o~
this property ~ o~ city rr. sidents and the great~ commuuity!
Add,'~as
Addr~
Signature
Print Name
$ignatm'e
P~im Nanm
AddJ'es~,,
Signature
l~,lnt Na~
Address
$ig~mre
Pr~Nmue
lntaruted in more htfuflnatJon or {ettin$ involved In 3~n,t~, ~ O~ks ~e~,~ ?
Call CkPin at
FOR RBSIDEN~I'S of ~he City of Cupe~ino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Resident~
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER! ! !!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of tl~ Oak% Theater in favor of a grocery store, --
I value th= community benefits tha~ the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefu/ly weigh
the bm'lefits of a groom'y store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "higho,si and bes~ use" of
this property to our city residents ~md the greater community]
d~ank youl
Signature
Print Name
Inmr~st~i in more information m' getting tnvolved iu Savtng fha Oa/~ Iff)eater ?
C. lll C.~l at 401 T25-010'/, ot ~.r~! ehHi~Vanoedakill~.com, or include your aho~e numt~er or o.mmI, a~wi'
For NON- Reaidcntz - (people living outside oftll¢ Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Community
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I u'avel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you.
Signature
I Ill I I I
Si~at~
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature Signature
Print Name Print Name
Address Address
Signature Signature
Print Name Print Name
Address Address
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0 I07, or e-mail ~hriso _(-~dvnncedskills.eom, or include your phone number or e-mail, above{
~.)
_,N:o
: ,g~ -/77
,dO-/7q
d
,..?,
/
,5:2
tO.o-
Cupertino Planning Commission
City Of Cupertino
10300 Torre Ave
Cupertino, CA
Tom Hill
10254 Parkwood Drive #3
Cupertino, CA 95014
Dear Commission Members,
I just wanted to write to support the building of a new Andronico's Market in the Oaks
shopping center. I frequently drive to the existing Andronico's on Foothill expressway,
and would much prefer to be able to walk to the store.
Of course, I have some concerns about late night, early morning (before 8am) noise from
deliveries/garbage trucks etc., so I trust some agreement will be reached that make sure
that the quality of life here is only improved by the presence of the market.
Thanks,
Tom Hill
JUN 13 3000
CUPERTINO CITY CLERK
William P. Ledeen
10265 Parkwood Drive
Cupertino, CA 95014
June 9, 2000
Planning Commission & City Council
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
JUN 1 3 2000
CUPERTINO CITY CLERK
Re: Application 2-U-00 Andronico's
Dear Members of the Commission and City Council:
I am writing to you to express my deep concern over the proposed
adoption of a plan to build a major grocery complex in the Oaks
Shopping Center.
Since my graduation from Stanford University in the late '70's I
have been a resident of the Cupertino community and I have lived
for twenty-two years in the Glenbrook apartments directly across
the street from the Oaks.
I have watched with sadness as the Oaks has steadily been converted
into uses which I believe can hardly be described as "best and
highest uses". The management of the Oaks have steadily driven out
service oriented small business suppliers such as our beloved Clean
Well Lighted Place for Books bookstore, our neighborhood dry
cleaner, and our neighborhood cafes and delicatessen in favor of
deep pockets concerns that in no way serve our local community
(real estate brokers, diamond retailer, yet another fitness
provider (!) in the shadow of the city's own high quality facility
and redundant to the fitness facilities that are inherent in our
Glenbrook community).
Ail of these newer businesses that have been brought in are clearly
intended to serve the needs of outsiders, not the hundreds of us
who live in this neighborhood and call it our home. Now the Oaks
management is to be rewarded for this behaviro by being permitted
to create a clear public nuisance for our neighborhood in the form
of a major grocery complex!
I am astounded that our Council, who have allowed our neighborhood
to become nothing but a parkin'g lot for De Anza college and an
incredible traffic hazard for those of us who cross busy Mary
Avenue, would even consider granting a permit for a use which will
generate enormous amounts of additional traffic, and all of the
noise of garbage trucks and supply trucks at all hours of the
morning and night. Cupertino is already well served by a broad
variety of food retailers - Whole Foods, Marina Foods and two
Safeway hypermarkets. On the other hand we have only one movie
theater in this entire town and it is the only entertainment that
is available on a seven days a week basis and in the evenings for
those of us working people to be able to enjoy when we come home
at nine o'clock at night after a hard day's work. And yet this
particular entertainment can be accessed on foot, at reasonable
cost, without generating a major traffic concern and without
producing any external noise or untoward disturbance of our lives.
Now, let's consider what it will be like to have a major grocery
operation, even one of the caliber of an Andronico's in our
neighborhood. First, a grocery generates enormous amounts of
litter (from careless patrons) and refuse (from routine operations
with packing boxes, spoiled produce, rotting meat and fish
products, etc.). This means frequent garbage service and the very
real sanitation danger and malodorous conditions that are
associated with spoiled food products in large quantities.
Secondly, a grocery generates a continuous flow of vehicular
traffic from opening hours to long after closing as the staff
eventually finish restocking/cleaning chores and return to their
homes in distant communities. (Surely the city staff is not so
naive as to believe that the low paying jobs created will be filled
by Cupertino residents!).
I invite the members of the Commission to visit the Whole Foods
market and observe the incredible increase in traffic that has
resulted from this operation, in the same kind of constricted
traffic flow situation. Imagine that operation placed in the midst
of a residential neighborhood with people crossing the street (no
provision has ever been made to permit us to safely cross) and
drivers racing to and fro from the market with no consideration for
pedestrian safety.
As a resident of the neighborhood, then, I am to face these
additional disturbances and hazards without compensation of any
kind?
I realize that you consider those of us who are apartment dwellers
to be "second class citizens" who have no rights to self
determination. But we are legitimate residents and voters in this
community. As one who lives not more than 100 yards from the
proposed confluence of traffic and noise that is represented by the
construction and operation of this store, I beseech the Council and
the Commission to consider the reasonableness of my concerns and
to reject this plan to preserve what remains of the peace in our
corner of this city.
Thank you very much in advance for your careful consideration of
this matter before it causes irreparable and irreversible harm to
my neighborhood in my adopted "home town".
June 11,2000
Planning Commission & City Council
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Planning Commission & City Council:
As a local resident and registered voter, Iwant to express SUPPORT for
Andronico's planned market in the Oaks Shopping Center.
Sincerely
Don Huntley
10130 Parkwood Drive - #5
Cupertino, CA 95014
408-973-9366
10190 Parkwood Drive #4
Cupertino, California
June 8, 2000
To The Planning Comission & City Council,
The management of the Glenbrook Apartments has asked us tenants to send a note in
support of Andronico's application and I would like to do so without reservation however I
am disturbed by the loss of the Oaks Cinema. I am familiar with other Andronico's stores,
particularly in Los Altos and would expect to be a regular customer of theirs if they receive
approval.
Despite the assertions of the management here at the Glenbrook complex, I suspect there are
more patrons of the Cinema than they may be aware of. I personally attend the movie theatre
on average once per month.
In my mind, a better solution is to add Andronico's without disrupting the other viable
businesses in the complex. There is some vacant space already in the complex which could be
consolidated by moving tenants around and then more space could be built by going higher
as well as out.
I would be very disappointed if Cupertino were to lose its only cinema. The Oaks has given a
valuable service to the community by offering films at a reasonable cost for students and
others who cannot often afford the cineplex operations in other towns. If the Oaks Cinema
must make way for Andronic. o's, I hope that the city of Cupertino will see the wisdom of
finding another suitable place in town for the operation to move to. It means a great deal to
me not to simply gain a "yuppie/upscale" food store at the expense of a cinema. We have
many fine food stores in town such as Whole Foods. The Oaks Cinema is unique.
SiTely' -/
tJavid Lynch
[F~om: Ronda Hoxsie [SMTP:rhoxsie~yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2000 10:01 AM
To: librarv.c0mmission~cupertino, org
Subject: l~brary location-
I voted NO on Measure A 'because I was afraid that it would be built on the large field. DO NOT
let it be built there, Our city center needs open space. Most cities have parks and open space in
the centers. Build the h'brary on the plaT. or on the comer of Stevens Creek and De Anza.
That open field just sits there and isn't used, You certainly can't use it for soccer or frisbee. Balls.
and flying discs going into traffic would be bad. Once open space is built on it hardly ever gets
reclaimed. We very rarely use the library. We use the Internet. When we do use the h'brary we
usually use the Los Altos library more than the Cupertino h'brary. WHY?
Because it has longer hours and we live on the westside of town.
Why can't we be tike Los Altos and Palo Alto and have more than 1 library in town?
Ronda Hoxsie
10545 Mira Vista Road
Cupertino, CA 95014
May 15~2000
21600 Edward Way
Cupertino, CA 95014
I would like to see us keep the movie theaters, not let A~xironicos move in. Too much tra~c with
that grocery store.
Ma¥16,2000
William Copley
10256 Alpine Dr. Apt. 1
Cupertino, CA 95014-0962
PGSd~- San Jose Water-and various cable people have been tearing up Foothill Blvd. in Cupertino
between 280 and Stevens Creel You've noticed? Well, take a look. Their patches are road
hazards. Hopefully, you folks will be,able to get them to repave as needed after their hole-dlgging
contest.
.. .- LETTERS OPINION ...
Good riddance to
aging Oaks Theater
I am a movie buff who
attends at least one movie
per week. I am. also a 32-year
resident of Cupertino. The
Oaks Theater is the last
place I want to go to see a
movie.
The theater is run down
and many of the seats are in
disrepair and broken. There
are several theaters, within a
short driving distance, that
offer more variety in movies
and much more comfort for
the dollar spent.
I vote for Cupertino to fol-
. low through on revitalizing
the Vallco area and building a
first class movie theater there.
And, revitalize the Oaks
Shopping Center by allowing
Andronico's to follow
through with its plans.
PATRICIA CAPSHAW
Cupertino, CA
DEGINZO
,..How wE SF.F. THF.~,
SooN,
Here's a tip: Stop. begging for mom
By BRIAN D. ROSSMAN
IS. the cost of.living so bad
here in Silicon:'Valley .that
working stiffs are reduced
to begging for money? The
beggar industry is everywhere.
I see it in restaurants, night-
clubs, ice cream stores, coffee
shops, beauty salons, gas sta-
tions and many other locations.
I am speaking of 'tip jars~
The tip jar, the previously
indiscreet courtesy can of
coins made popular by street-
corner musicians and others.
down on their luck, has now
become ubiquitous to Silicon
Valley and resides wherever
products or services are sold.
Before you dismiss this as
ranting from a gratuity-less
columnist (try to say that
phrase three times fast), ~
would like to declare that I tip
from 20 to 25 percent in
moved to the front of the line,
I noticed a tip jar in front of
the cashier.
I observed 'the young
woman managing the register
for a few minutes. She was in
her early 20s, dressed in brown
and black, with hair colored to
match her outfit. She had long
nails with a small metal chain
hooking around her index fin-
ger. This chain matched the
piercing on her nose and
tongue (noticeable from the
manner in which she chewed
her gum). "
I was curious to see what
tip-worthy services she provid-
ed beyond taking patrons'
money and stamping, the
underside of their right .wrist
with permanent .black 'ink.
After our entire party had
paid the surcharge to enter
this overcrowded warehouse, I
asked her who receiw.~ tho
.i
I was curious to see what
tip-worthy services she provid-
ed beyond taking .patrons'
money and stamping the
underside of their right wrist
with permanent black ink.
Her disinterested tone
turned aggressive. "1
work my a- olT for
eight hours, a night. I
have to sit in this chair
i taking money. I deserve
all the tips I get. How
else am I supposed to
make money?"
to reach its destination i
pocket or purse.
Even if you are the fir
tomer of the day, this
will already have some c
cy inside..How can th~
Did the tip fairy visit th
vious night? Sort of- Pr
placing the jar out for
solicitation, the workei
some money inside to
customers believe that ti
is acceptable at a non,cu
ary-tip establishment.
Is there any way to p
ourselves from this in.si
attack on our change7 ¥
quote the forme rst
once removed, "Jus. Jay i
may initially be difficult.
pockets may be weighted
with extra coins and thc
line may look at you and
the jar and then at you
then at the jar. But, with
The Cupertino Courier
May 4, 2000
0aks..theater:.: .
needs to stay ..
Cupertin° Oaty~bas one ·
movie,.theater,.Tne Oaks:..' ::
Th'eateJr:is needed so,.the
neighbOr.hood children'haqe a
theater withilz.walldrtg dis- -~
tancc. Cupertino has a num-
bet O['supcrmarkets and an
upscale market; Whole Foods, -
not far fxom the Oaks shop-
ping:center.
· There is...a.n,Axtdronico's
.market o~it~Fdbthill · '.
drivc for the Mercedes and
Suburban~lriving Yuppi~ '
~RA~p~ XS~ BL~S~C'~ EDDY,
· . . · ~ ~ Cupertino
The Cupertino' Courier
May 4, 2000
Compromise could preserve city's uniqueness
Cupertino histo
deserves protection.
B), GEOFF PATNOE
As a child, I remember the
thrill of riding my bicycle to
the Oaks Shopping Center for
the first time. Many great
weekend afternoons "were
spent riding to the~ Center,
catching a movie, buying ice
cream, taking a pass through
the bookstore and perhaps
riding around Memorial Park.
Many of us in-CUpertino
share similar fond memories of
time spent at The.. Oaks
Shopping Center with family,
friends and loved ones.
Imagine' how many first dates,
anniversaries or birthdays were
spent at the movies or in one of
the restaurants at the Oaks
Center. Sometimes going, to
the Oaks Shopping Center
feels like coming home again.
Like many long-time
Cupertino residents, I was sad-
dened when the Oaks
Shopping Center and the com-
munity said good-bye to thc
bookstore A Clean. Well
Lighted Place for Books .in'
1997. The recent City discus-
sions surrounding the possibl~
closure of the'Oaks Center
movie theater to make way for
· e. gr?cery store, has. brought,.
back many of these feelingx It
has also raised a larger issue of
concern about Cupertino losing
some of it's unique history and
the character that makes this
such a great place to call home~'
The Oaks Shopping Center
is one of the core symbols or
locations that demonstrate
Cupertino's unique character.
Though a place of commerce,
its style and architecture does
not match the all too prevalent
strip malls along Stevens Creek
Boulevard. The Oaks Shopping
Center is one of Cupertino's
few "town squares."
Observing the debate sur-
rounding the proposed gro-
cery store at this location.and
the potential forced closing of
the movie theater, many
Cupertino residents stood up
at recent government meet-
ings to express their concerns,
fears and anger over the pro-
posed transition.
It is not .surprising that. 'the
landlord 'of the Oaks CenteX
keeps an eye peeled for ways
to generate revenue. Though'
many have embraced.the cen-'
ter over the Years, it has not
be6n a financial success as evi-
denced by the. closing of such
center favorites as the book-
store, Cafe Quinn, Blue Chip
Cookies and other smatl.busi,.
port the financial investment
in this prime business location.
However, isn't the heritage
and history of Cupertino
equally valuable, deserving of
protection?
Shifting the plans
to accommodate the
theater and the grocery
storecould be beneficial
to both the landlord,
store owners and
the community
Why couldn't both the pro-
posed grocery store and movie
theater coexist? Unfortunately,
there are plenty of empty store
fi'onts in the center. Shifting the
plans to accommodate the the-
ater and the grocery store
could be beneficial to both the
landlord, store owners and the
· community. This will give the
· Oaks Canter the anchor tenant·
'it requires to ch'aw patrons,
which will trickle in to busi-
nesses coming back to the cen-
ter with the theater'remaining
open, as well.
As a result, local govern-
ment wilt also benefit from the
increased sales tax dollars gen-
. crated from an economically
· ness~ bOOming Oaks Shopping
· I realiz~ that the Oaks.' i'-Center.
· Shopping Center lacks the-one. ? .. Cupertino is the gateway to
anchor tenant needed .~OsUl~.. i Silicon Valley. It was Cupertino
residents who helped build the
Inforraation Superhighway and
this community continues to be
one of the most sought after
areas to live in in the United
States. We have the best schools,
a top-notch community college
and a character that make this
place unique. Thinking about
the Cupertino we want for our
children ought to be at the fore-
front of this debate.
Bringing a grocery store to
the Oaks Center is an idea
with merit, but let's not .~"ri-
flee the 'movie theater i .e
process. We should protect the
things that are unique and fun
about Cupertino, and our her-
itage at the. Oaks .is' part of
that. We deserve better than
reducing our community to a
cookie-cutter town like many.
suburbs in Southern
California with One main
street, no ·bookstores, no
movie theaters; fast-food joints
and a few gas stations. We
deserve, much better, and we
should protect the things that
make this community a great
place to call home. One step in
this process is to find a eom-
promise at the Oaks Center by
bringing the grocery store in
while, protecting the movie
theater at the same .time.. ·
Geoff Patnoe~ of Cupertino,
is a .former aide to Governor
Pete Wilson and Assemblyman
Jim Cunneen. He is now a pub.
tic affairs.exqcuave. ....
LETTERS '- .:OFINtON" ·
Oaks Theater brings in.
regional, customers
Hours of driving and park-
ing time just 'to endure long
lines to hopefully purchase
tickets for a first-run movie
isn't always a top choice in
our already hectic lives We
are residents of Sunnyvale
and frequently go to the Oaks
Center for a show at'the Oaks
Theaters.
The Oaks Theaters have
always provided that refresh-
ingly relaxing option to view
a film without the hassles.
The aura of this serene,
oak-studded area calledThe
Oaks Center with its proximi-
ty to De Anza College, the
new Cupertino Senior Center,
the Sports Center;' ".
community ~Cefit~r'and~ ",i..
Memorial Park can't be .... '< "::
replaced. Let's speak to its
uniqueness as plans are made'
for its revitalization.
MR. AND MRS. D~NlS
GAUSHELL. :
Sunnyvale'
Small sc'hool..s, big d.rear
KUCERA
May 1 was the
postmark
deadline for
high-school
seniors to con-
firm their col-
lege acceptances. In a last-ditch-
effort to be certain of her
choice before the deadline, our
daughter and I flew to visit a
large university in Colorado
and' a 'small college in
Washington.
Both had offered attractive
admission packages, and I
wanted her to know What she
was saying "no" to before
making a final decision. I
should add that the trip was
world. It's not hard to see why
Boulder, Colo., has been listed
in recent publications as one of
the 10 best places in the U.S. to
live. The mountain air is crisp
'and clear, the streets are filled
with bikers and backpackers,
and the pace is indefinably
more relaxed and friendlier
than here. Nobody honked at
me or swerved impatiently
around me while I was navi-
gating unfamiliar streets in a
rented car.
When we asked for informa-
tion in a mountaineering store,
three young male clerks
leaped to their feet simultane-
ously to be helpful. I admit
that may have had more to do
with having a 17-year-old
To me, $60,000 is a lot of
money to pay for higher edu-
cation by graduate students,
which is what lower-division
students get charged at a large
research institution such as the
University of California.
Although they will be very
small cogs in a very big wheel,
receive little personal atten-
tion and write exams that will
be graded by students just a
few years older than them-
selves, my daughter and most
of her friends want to go to
large campuses.
The college we visited in
Washington .has a distin-
guished reputation, and serves
a student body of fewer than
2,000. The student-teacher
At an inn adjacen
where we stayed ov
happened to have
with the head of
department and a vi
lecturer. Both of'
conversation, al, acc(
interested in our da
prospective stude:
dear to me that she
'be an anonymous n
database there. It xx
.of academic heaven
The key phrase t
idea." With laudabi
she said, "Mom, y,
ing at this as a fi:
person who would
back to college. I'rr
it as a teenager'
been there yet."..
March 6~ 2000
Gail Marzolf
1138 Kentwood Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014
REPLY REQUESTED
~x_~i am concerned that the sound wall built by Home Depot on Westlyn Ave. is going to become a
graffiti nightmare. What will be done to protect this large surface of wall from being completely
covered with graffiti?
Thank you,
Gall Marzolf (408) 725-8815
March 6~ 2000
Mr. & Mrs. Howard Trudeau
19821 Men'itt Drive
Cupertino, CA 95014-2441
REPLY REQUESTED
Re: Agenda Review News on Andronicos Market and school being considered at the Oaks
Center.
This will create a traffe nightmare. High volume traffe times at DeAnza College; entrance to
85; only Stevens Creek at Mary area; access to the Oaks Center=major problems. We would
love to see an Andronieos in Cupertino, but not there, please!
Thank you
March 6~ 2000
Tom and Carol Robbins
10146 McLaren Place
Cupertino, CA 95014
REPLY REQUESTED
The recent resurfacing of streets in our neighborhood appear to be faulty substandard work.
There are more and larger cracks than before the work was done. I don't think the city got its
moneys worth. Also, isn't there some material that could be used without leaving all the residual
loose gravel on the mnqace?
Steve Piasecki
From: Kimberly Smith
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2000 10:15 AM
To: Steve Piasecki
Subject: FW: Oaks Theater
I'll include this with the Sound-offs, but I thought you might want to forward copies to the Planning
Commission.
IFrom: Lisa Ridenour [SMTP:Reimche@pacbell.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2000 9:40 AM
To: City. of Cupertino General Information Mailbox
Subject: Oaks Theater
I read this morning in the Cupertino Courier that the City Planning Commission is entertaining the
idea of replacing the Oaks Theater with another grocery store. I would like to express my utmost
opposition to this idea. We have more than enough grocery stores, Whole Foods and Marine
Foods are on Stevens Creek Blvd all but a few miles away. The Oaks Theater is the only theater
we have in Cupertino. I agree with Wendy Picus, "Ther must be some way to save our theater.
There are a lot of us in the neighborhood, who love thai theater, and don't want to see anything
happen to it."
Sincerely,
Lisa Ridenour
City Planning Commission
City of Cupertino
April 10, 2000
Dear Commissioners,
Wouldn't An Environmental Impact Report Provide More Through Information about
The Proposed Changes to the Oaks Shopping Center?
I suggest that the City do a more thorough investigation about the impacts that replacing
the Oaks theater with an up-scale market would presem. There are several conclusions in
your project files that seem to be based on "less than thorough" information.
Given the proper time, investigation, and process, I am confidem that all of the voiced
concerns can be heard and incorporated into any changes that are approved for the Oaks
Shopping Cemer.
Of particular concern to me are the assumptions, source of data and calculations that were
used to assume that there would be no significant impact on our traffic relating to such a
vastly different use.
I look forward to your more thorough investigation before proceeding with this plan.
Thank you,
Cupertino
California 95014
April 10, 2000
Members of the City Council and the Planning Commission:
This letter is in regard to the recent discussion regarding the Oaks Center change/expansion.
It looks as though the City planners of Cupertino have been enticed by the glitter of silver and are not
thinking of the very peopl~ they ought to be representing. A grocery store definitely removes the appeal--
not to mention the additional burden of traffic added to Stevens Creek, Mary Avenue, and Stelling.
The Council put a great deal of time and effort into the exploration and the limiting of construction of
"monster" home building when they instituted the FAR regulations, but doesn't seem to be following the
same plan for community development with regard to the Oaks Center. One of the appeals of Cupertino
since we don't have a "downtown" like Los Altos, Mountain View, Saratoga, or Los Gatos is the Oaks
Center. The sense of community with the Oaks and Memorial Park provides an alternative to the "City"
center need.
The intersection at Stevens Creek and Mary Avenue is impacted enough from De Anza students and
vehicles during the day and anyone would agree that leaving Flint Center and flowing into various traffic
routings is tremulous enough without adding more constant vehicles created by the market. It has been my
personal experience to have waited through the left turn signal from Stevens Creek to Mary 2 to 3 light
changes before being able to make the turn. This during mid-morning hours without De Anza or Flint
Center traffic!
Forgetting a sense of community could be the very thing to lessen interest in living in Cupertino. After all,
there needs to be a reason to be here beyond schools and convenient commuting to work. Residential
property values could be affected negatively. As a Realtor, one of the things I occasionally have to
overcome with families moving to the area is the lack of a downtown. The Oaks Center Theater,
restaurants, shops, and adjacent Memorial Park and Flint Center help to alleviate our lack of a city center.
I would earnestly request that more consideration than to earning revenue be explored. An environmental
study could be a place to start. Perhaps public opinion on the need for a grocery store would be another.
More awareness to this issue to residents would most certainly reveal positive and negative feelings about
this issue. The limited information published in the Cupertino Courier is hardly enough to make the
population aware of what the City Planners are doing!
Sincerely, ,.., ,
Carolyn Miller
10100 Phar Lap Drive, Cupertino
President of the Oakdell Ranch Homeowners Association
May 1,2000
No name given
Why would "Our City" ever agree to having Pacific Bell slurry only half of each street (in the'
Mary Avenue neighborhood)? The city apparemly told Pacific Bell that they would have to slurry
only half the street after trenching. Now we have two-toned streets, and Pacific Bell is in the
driver's seat and it looks like heck!!!
Many unhappy residents
May 1~,,2000
I was very happy to see the safety improvements that were put up on McClellan Road by Morea
Vista and Lincoln Schools. However, I am concerned that high school students cross where the
old crosswalk was and not the new one. Now there are two places to watch.
Esther Grant
1228 Bubb Road
Cupertino, CA 95014
I am opposed to Andronicos Market taking over the Oaks Theaters. The theaters are a big asset
to this city. There is no need for another upscale market when Whole Foods is a few blocks down
the street. Save .the theaters.
ceilings, lots of windows, and quality exterior building materials including Spanish roof
tile, hardboard siding, and a very attractive store entrance. -
Is there opposition? Ye ,~there is a small group who~uses~the movie theatre and would
,1/~ hi. an inf.o__~__.~al~o, ll we found that ver~Glenbrook residents use the
rrLovie~~Moreover, it is our opinion (based on extensive knowledge of rental rates)
that there is no way the existing movie ,theatre could afford anything close to the renewal
rental rate at the OaksJ
Also, a small group of homeowners do not think the increased traffic from
Andronico's is worth it, Regarding parking, .I think Glenbr~ok residents know best that
the end of the Oaks has a huge, little-used parking lot facing Highway 85. That is because
the restaurant space has been vacant for so' long, and the movie theatre has so few
customers. This opposition group also points out that .there are other grocery stores to
drive to. That is true, but this is a bit more of a shoppir~ experience where people can
read a paper ,enjOy a cup of'coffee, learn how'to cook, and grab fresh bread and bagels
baked daily. No doub.t, the store will give the 1,200 Glenbrook residents the opportunity
to walk to everyday shopping.
Why should I use the enelosed~ stamped envelope and write to the City? Each letter is
very important and will be read by each planning commissioner and city council member.
Due to its proximate location Glenbrook residents probably have the most to gain with
Andronico's across the street ... and therefore we have the most to lose if we sit on our
hands. Your letter can be hand written, and it can be as short or long as you wish. Every
extra letter is a plus.
Many thanks for reading ~xtat-like~to, bother_you..with, city issue.s, but we feel
compelled to~...~.o, nd.to..~..n~.e of the most commo~y asked ..questions of
c; 'ss
Sincerely, (~t~..~,,::.~.~ .. ~
GLENBROOK MANAGEMENT
ceilings, lots of windows, and quality exterior building materi~s including Spanish roof
tile, hardboard siding, and a very attractive store entrance.
Is there opposition? Yes, there is a small group who uses the movie theatre and would
like it to stay. In an informal poll we found that very few Glenbrook residents use the
movie theatre. Moreover, it is our opinion (based on extensive kaowledge of rental rates)
that there is no way the existing movie theatre could afford anything close to the renewal
rental rate at the Oaks.
Also, a small group of homeowners do not think the increased traffic fi.om
Andronico's is worth it. Regarding parking, I think Glenbrook residems know best that
the end of the Oaks has a huge, little-used parking lot facing Highway 85. That is because
the restaurant space has been vacant for so long, and the movie theatre has so few
customers. This opposition group also points out that there are other grocery stores to
drive to. That is tree, but this is a bit more of a shopping experience where people can
read a paper ,enjOy a CUp of coffee, learn how to cook, and grab fresh bread and. bagels
baked daily. No doubt, the store will give the 1,200 Glenbrook residems the opportunity
to walk to everyday shopping.
Why should I use the enclosed, stamped envelope and write to the City? Each letter is
very importam and will be read by each planning commissioner and city council member.
Due to its proximate location Glenbrook residents probably have the most to gain with
Andronico's across the street ... and therefore we have the most to lose if we sit on our
hands. Your letter can be hand written, and it can be as short or long as you wish. Every
extra letter is a plus.
Many thanks for reading this. We do not like to bother you with city issues, but we feel
compelled to respond to one of the most commonly asked questions of new Glenbrook
residents: "Are their some good stores across the street that I can use?"
Sincerely,
ceilings, lots of windows, and quality exterior building materials including Spanish roof
tile, hardboard siding, and a very attractive store entrance.
Is there ouoosition? Yes, there is a small group who uses the movie theatre and would
like it to stay. In an informal poll we found that very few Glenbrook residents use the
movie theatre. Moreover, k is our opinion (based on extensive knowledge of rental rates)
that there is no way the existing movie theatre could afford anything close to the renewal
rental rate at the Oaks.
Also, a small group of homeowners do not think the increased traffic fi.om
Andronico's is worth it. Regarding parking, I think Glenbrook residents know best that
the end of the Oaks has a huge, little-used parking lot facing Highway 85. That is because
the restaurant space has been vacant for so long, and the movie theatre has so few
customers. This opposition group also points out that there are other grocery stores to
drive to. That is tree, but this is a bit more of a shopping experience where people can
read a paper ,enjoy a cup of coffee, learn how to cook, and grab fresh bread and bagels
baked daily. No doubt, the store will give the 1,200 Glenbrook residents the opportunity
to walk to everyday shopping.
Why should I use the enclosed~ stamped envelop.e and write to the CiW? Each letter is
very important and will be read by each planning commissioner and city council member.
Due to its proximate location Glenbrook residents probably have the most to gain with
Andronico's across the street ... and therefore 'we have the most to lose ifwesit on our
hands. Your letter can be hand written, and it can be as short or long as you wish. Every
extra letter is a plus.
Many thanks for reading this. We do not like to bother you with city issues, but we feel
compelled to respond to one of the most commonly asked questions of new Glenbrook
residents: "Are their some good stores across the street that I can use?"
Sincerely,
GLENBR00K MANAGE~
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupe~ino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a residem of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theat. er in favor of a grocery store;
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits ora grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you!
Signature
Print Name ~_~,~
Si~t~e ~~
Ad~ _ , . Ad~
Call Chris at ~0~ 72~-0107, or ~1 chfi~a~d~ills.~m, or inclu~ ~ ph~e n~ ~ ~mail, akwl
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!II!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a residem of cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
.demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community bene~s that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits ora grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you!
Signature
Print Name
Address
Address' >
Signature~..
Print Name
Print Name
Signature
Print Name
Address
Print Name~ ~t
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chrisp~_ advancedskills.com, or include your phone number or e-mail, above!
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!I!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor ora grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits ora grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you!
Signature ~~t~ ~./K.~--" j
Address
Signature~
PrintName /r~'~"]"l~{~ ~'~',}-'~ ~ ~..
Signature~
Address~
Signature ~ _~.~ ~ Signature
Print Name .~R~ ~ .ffi~ ~ ~ Print Name
Address ~Jl ,% ~ft~oL~ ~/_ Address
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Resi~lents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits ora grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residems and the greater community!
Thank you!
Address~7,.~ -- 0 /
Print
.~ddress~C
Print Name '
Signature
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oak., Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chrisl~_~advancedskills.com, or include 7our phone number or e-mail, above!
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits ora grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you!
Signatur~'~.~ ~. ~~.. / J
~ Si~t~e~
t Name
ddress~
.
Signature c5~ ~~
Print Name /ocx9 ~ A- M Oc
Print Name
Address [ ~ ! ~"~
Intc~ in ~ i ng mvolv~ in ~ing the Oa~ Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or ~1 c~~anc~lls.~m, or incl~ y~ phme n~ ~ ~mail, a~ve~
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!II!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oltlcs Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits ora grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you!
Signature
Address
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature ~ Signature
Print Name ~'lq~/' /~'m c/t g S; ~ Print Name
Aadr~ / ~& ~ .ltl/~o o Plo,'//,~ I
Interested in mor[;nformation or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail christ~advancedskills.com, or include your phone numlx~' or e-mail, above!
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this propertyto our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you!
Print Name .~., ,~ '~/
~int N~e ~ ~--~ t ~~
Si~t~e ~ ~.
[ ....
Signature
Print Name
Ad~e~
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature Signature
Print Name Print Name
Address Address
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chrisp~dvancedskilis.com, or include your phone number or e-mail, above!
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!I!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a residem of Cupertino, I want you to know that I ara VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residems and the greater community!
Signature
Print Name
Thank you!
Signature
Print Name
~-4ddress
Address
Signature
Print Name
Address
Print Name
Address
Intem~ in mo~ i~o~fion or g~ng i~olv~ in ~i~g th~ 0~ ~eat~r ? .
Call Chris at 40~ 725~107, ~ e-~l ~~~lls,~m, or in~l~ ~ ~h~e n~ ~ ~mail, a~v~!
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor oft grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits oft grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you!
Print Name R(~~
Address /0 7..~- CO L~:0.t"'~ot.) ~ te -
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signatur~
Print Name
Address
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chrigo(&advancedskills, com, or include your i~hone number or e-mail, above!
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!I!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor ora grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residems and the greater community!
Thank you!
· /
Address tO~,aiO '~ .'~L"!
Signature
Signature
Print Name
Intcmsl~ in mo~ i~o~fion or ge~ng i~olv~ in ~ing the Oa~ Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or ~1 chfi~a~an~lls.~m, or inclu~ ~ ph~e n~ ~ ~m~l, a~ve]
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a residem of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor ora grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you!
Signature
Print Name ~.//db~ ~ ~' ~e~"""
Address
Signature ~O ..5
Print Name ~L! 1'~ ~/E~~// '
Si~t~e ~ ~ ~
lntemst~ in mo~ i~o~fion or g~ng i~olv~ in S~ng the Oa~ Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or ~1 chfim~a~~ills.~m, or include yo~ ~hone
Print Name
Address ~
FOR KESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a residem of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature
Print Name
Address
Print Name. _ ,.
Inl~l~t~ in mo~ i~o~fio~ or g~ng invo~ i~ ~ing the Oa~ ~eater ~
Call Chris at 408 725~107, ~ e-~l c~a~~lls.~m, or inclu~ y~ phone n~ ~ e-mail, a~ve~
FOR RESIDENTS of the Cky of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you!
Signature
Print Name
Signature
Print Name
~/AY
Print Name
Signature~
Print
Name
PrintName ~th~fel(..~ ~-- L; '~'41~t~R ~ ~intNme
Intemst~ in more i~o~fion or getting i~oiv~ in S~ing the Oa~ ~eater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chrisp~_,~dvancedskills.com, or include your phone number or e-mail, above!
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residems
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!II!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor ora grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater cormnunity!
Thank you!
Signature ~
Print Name
Signature~
Signature
Print Name
Aadr s g
Signamre~
~ :dress~
'Signature
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature~
Print Name~
Address ~;;~-) '-~ 0~ ''
!
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chris~L&_ .advancedskills. com, or include your phone number or e-mail, above!
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residems
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and susgest that you carefully weigh
the benefits ora grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
· ~
this property to our city residents and the greater commumty.
Thank you!
Signature ~~
Signature,
Print Name
Address %~
Print Name
Address ~
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature
Print Name
Ad~s ~~
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chriso~advancedskills,com, or include your phone number or e-mail, above!
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a residem of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor ora grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community[
Thank you!
s
Si~t~e
~t Nme
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chrisp~_ ~lvancedsldils.com, or include your phone number or e-mail, above!
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cupertino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Residems
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a residem of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition 0fthe Oaks Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits ora grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest .and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature
Print Name
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chrisp~_advanccdskill$.corn, or include .your phone number or e-mail, above!
FOR RESIDENTS of the City of Cup,xtino
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Our City's Resldents
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
As a resident of Cupertino, I want you to know that I am VERY CONCERNED about the
demolition of the Oaks Theater in favor of a grocery store.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residems and the greater community!
Thank you!
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature Signature
Print Name Print Name
Address Address
Signature Signature
Print Name Print Name
Address Address
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chrisl~advancedskills.com, or include your phone number or e-mail, above!
For NON- Residents - (people living outside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Conimanity
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!I!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable emenalnmem that brings me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you.
qs xo
Signature
Print Name
Print Name
Address
Signature
Print Name.
Address
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oak~ Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail christ~_.advancnMskills.~m, or include your rhyme number or e-mail, above!
[:or NON- Residents - (people living outside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks) el-/~', ~
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Cornm~ty
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!I!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you.
Signature
Si~t.e ~~~.
Aaar~ss ~%xw~o¥ ..,C~b-' ~'1%~3o')
Interested ~ more ~f~ati~ or ge~ng i~olv~ in ~ing the O~ Theater ?
Address
Signature
Print Name
Address
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail christ~_advan~Lskills, com, or include your phone number or e-mail, above!
For NON- Residems - (people living outside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Community
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable emertainment that brings me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits ora grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents, and the greater community!
Thank you.
Signature
Print Name
A, dr s
Signature,~?~.~ ~~.~
Address /,~o ~o /'~,.. o ~ .~ Z c-7~
Print Name --- --- ~'-" ,
Addres~
Signature
Print Name
Address
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oak~ Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chriso(&~advancedskills.com, or include your phone number or e-mail, above!
For NON- Residents - (people livin~ out~ide of the Cupertino City limits, but go ~o movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Bene~s to Your Greater Community
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
rOU.
Signature
Print Name
Signature ~
Print Name
Address L~i~
Signat~
Print Nam~ .,,. ~AI 5 ~
Signature ~ ~-~ ,.._~.~_.....,
Print Name~c-.,,_.~.
~ I
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chris~C~advancedskills.com, or include .your phone number or e-mail, above!
For NON- Residents - (people living omside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Community
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable emertainment that brings me into your City.
Signature~
Print Namer'S' 7',~v
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
. !
this property to our city residents and the greater eommumty.
Thank you. /~/~~
Signature
Print Name ~.~~ _~l.
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chriso~.advancedskills.com, or include your phone number or e-mail, above!
For NON- Residents - (people living outside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Community
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the '°nighest and best use" of
·
this property to our city residems and the greater eommumty.
Thank you.
Signature
Print Name ~/-,,~ .~
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature
Address
Signature
Print Name 0'~ / D/_~.
Print Name
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chriso~.advancedskills.~;om, or include your phone number or e-mail, above!
For NON- Residents - (people living outside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Community
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you.
Si~t~e~
~t N~e
Signature~
Print Name
Signature~
~t N~e~
S~t' , / ' ' Si~~
~t~ted ~ more info~ati~ ~ g~ng i~olv~ in S~ing the Oak Theater ? /
Call C~is at 408 725-0107, ~ ~! chfi~a~~lis.~m, or include ~ phone n~ ~ e-mail, a~ve~
For NON- Residents - (lmople living outside of the Cupenlno City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Community
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!II!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
I value the coiniiiunity benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Print Name
Address
Interested in more informatim or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail christ~advance¢$kills.com, or include your uhtme number or e-mail, above!
ab -iff/
For NON- Residents - (people living outside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Cotranunity
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits ora grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you.
Signature ~
Print Name ~'
Print Name
Address.
Signal..
Print Name
Address
Signature,,
Print Name
Address
Signature ~/-~ }'2--.
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chri _~_adv0nced.~kili.~,c0m, or include your ohone number or e-mail, above!
For NON- Residents - (people living ou~;¢de of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Community
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Signature
Print Name
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and sUggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thanlf_ you.
Address
Address
Print Hame
q 'of'7
Signat ,
Address
Print Name/"~'O~--
Inlerest~ in more in£orm~lion or §¢tlin§ invoN~! in Sm~i.g ti~ 0~/~ Theater ?
C~II (]tis ~l 408 795-0107, or e-nmil ¢1~i~. al~tn~lskiil$.e, om, or in~l~d~ your ph~m¢ n~ml~r or e-mail, ~bov¢!
,20 /
For NON- Residents - (people living outside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEA~
The Ben
KEEP TH
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council
I travel into your City to come to
demolition of the theater will eliminate thi
I value the community benefits tha
the benefits ora grocery store or a theater,
this property to our city residents and the
Thank you.
Signature
;E CAREFULLY CONSIDER
,fits t° Your Greater Community
to
E OAKS THEATER!!!!
~lember,
he Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
~ ,'ater community!
Signature
Address
(" ~ignature
~--/Address ~--/ ,~/~.~/ ,,~
Address
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature~~~_~~~~
Print Name
Address~
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chri ~s3~advaneedskills.com, or include your phone number or .e-mail, above!
For NON- Residents - (people ~ outside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefis to Your Greater Community
to
KEEPiTHE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City COuncil Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will elim~te this reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
Signature
Print Name
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grOcery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
,!
Signature
Print Name
Address
Signature
Print Name
Address
For NON- Residents - (people livir~_ outside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Community
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
~Thank you.
Signature ~ ~~~'~.~..~
Print Name C) J-~
Signatur~
Print Name~
Address~
Address
Signature~::~~~~-,~~
Print Name~
Signatu~~
Print Nam
Address '/ ' .' ff'~'~.D~ Address
Signatur~
Print Name
Interested in more in~ation or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mai! chrismS_ fgtvano?4J~lls.c0m, or include your phone nomber or e-mail, above!
For NON- Residents - (people living outside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Community
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!I!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use"of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Thank you.
Print Name~~
Print Name
Signature~ ,, t'e'?_~ ,1) ~"w'r I.A t ,6
A~ ts-'gO f~ ~_~f.fo~.~ ~ ~I
Signature~
Address ~,~1 ~,~ ~r~,~. ~.
Signature ~ Signature~
Print Nam ~ ~ Print Name~~l-
Interested in more information or getting involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chrisv~.advanced.~ldlls.com, or include ,your phone number or e-mail, above!
For NON- Residents - (people living outside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to Your Greater Community
to
KEEP THE OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable entertainment that brings me into your City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater community!
Signature
Signature~
Print Name
Aaa~s~ 372, ~ :~ 10a-~Po,', I'-e cf, ~ lO
Signature
Print Nam
Address
Print Name(yOL~"C
Address~
Signatur~ ~
Print Name
Interested in more information or getting involved in ~aving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chrisx~.advancnxlskills.com, or include yotlr phon~ n0mber or e-mail, above!
For NON- Residents - (people livin~ 0otside of the Cupertino City limits, but go to movies at the Oaks)
...----.------..--....----...----.........
PLEASE CAREFULLY CONSIDER
The Benefits to YOUr Greater Community
tO
KEEP THE.OAKS THEATER!!!!
Dear Cupertino Mayor and City Council Member,
I travel into your City to come to the Oaks Theater. I am concerned that your approval of the
demolition of the theater will eliminate this reasonable entertainment that brings me into yoUr City.
I value the community benefits that the Oaks Theater offers and suggest that you carefully weigh
the benefits of a grocery store or a theater. Please consider what really is the "highest and best use" of
this property to our city residents and the greater ¢o .mmunity!
Thank you.
Print
~t N~e
Signature
Print Name
~8~ldress
Signature~,/(~_
Print Name
Signature~
Print Nam~
Address
Address
Interested in more information or gettin[~ involved in Saving the Oaks Theater ?
Call Chris at 408 725-0107, or e-mail chrisp~_ ~lvanced~skills.com, or include your phone number or e-mail, above!
Print Name
Io5'
Apffi2000
Dear Council Member,
This letter is in regard to a possible new Andronico's at the Oaks Shopping Center.
As a neighbor of the Oaks, I have some very real concerns about such a store being located at the Oaks.
1 .Traffic:
A. The Steven's Creek Blvd. entrances are too small to accommodate the increased volume of traffic
a grocery store would generate.
The parking lot has recently (within the past 18 months) been resurfaced and re-striped with each
parking space being so narrow, it is hard to open car doors once the car is parked~ Add the need to
load groceries into the car fi.om a shopping cart that could not be brought near enough to the car
and the inconvenience becomes even greater. These inconveniences don't even take into account
damage to cars from tight parking spaces and shopping carts.
Current deliveries are made fi.om small tracks and these can sometimes impede traffic. Imagine
what eighteen wheelers would do to an already tight parking lot. They would not even be able to
make a mm fi.om Steven's Creek Blvd. and doing so at either entrance on Mary would create
major back ups.
Current lxaffic flow fi.om Mary onto Steven's Creek Blvd. is already difficult. The light for traffic
mining right onto Steven's Creek Blvd. is very short, which means that to keep traffic fi.om
backing up on Mary, drivers must make tums on red after the required stop. Often they are
competing for space to make their mm with drivers making a U-mm fi.om eastbound Steven's
Creek Blvd. who then mm into the Oaks entrance.
2. Other concerns:
A. Most deliveries are made in the early morning around 6a.m. This creates an extremely noisy
environment for those who live along Mary and whose bedrooms overlook Mary Av.
B. The likelihood of carts littering the neighborhood is greatly increased as people use them to
transport their groceries home.
There are many pedestrians who cross Mary fi.om the apartments to the Oaks for whom the
increased volume oftraftic would be a very real haTard. (There are no marked crosswalks other
than those at Steven's Creek Blvd. and Mary Ay.)
In conclusion, while I applaud the desire of Andronico's to locate a store in Cupertino, I strongly
recommend they take a look at a more appropriate property for their store, such as a strip mall in Cupertino
where there perhaps was a grocery store when it was originally built. The Oaks Shopping Center is not
such a mall.
Thank you for your time.
Colin Jung
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Steve Piasecki
Monday, April 10, 2000 10:55 AM
Colin Jung
FW: Androni¢os
From:
Sent:
To;
Subject:
Bert & Steve:
Linda Lagergren
Monday, April 10, 2000 9:02 AM
Bert Viskovich; Steve Piasecki
FW: Andronicos
Here is another message to council regarding Andronico's Market. --Linda
From: Steve [SMTP:slp@stevenscreek.com]
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 3:50 PM
To: John Statton; Sandra James; Don Burnett; Richard Lowenthal; Michael Chang
Subject: Andronicos -.
Dear City Council Members,
As a nearby resident, I have serious reservations about the proposed addition of a supermarket to the Oaks.
Specifically, the Oaks and its various ingresses and egresses onto Stevens Creek and Mary are VERY poorly
designed for a high-volume operation such as a supermarket. The "main" entrance off Stevens Creek is an
absurdity; now that left turns are prohibited from that entrance, driving anywhere but the Shane Co. requires
weaving through the entire parking lot. The other entrance off Stevens Creek is an entrance only and is located at
a VERY poor spot vis-a-vis traffic getting on 85, bike and pedestrian traffic headed west on Stevens Creek. This
leaves two entrances on Mary, and one can only assume that the second of these (the furthest from Stevens
Creek) is considered the only serious entrance to the proposed market. The problem this introduces is that it
means a major increase of traffic on the front part of Mary Ave. If Mary were a straight road, this wouldn't be a
problem, but it isn't, it's continuously curving througout that entire section, making for semi-blind pedestrian
crossings. Combine that with the presence of apartments, park, and senior center across the street and you have
a recipe for disaster. Other issues include people driving from Monte Vista and making a U- or left-turn at Mary to
go to Andronico's. That left-turn lane already frequently backs up nearly to the limit without entering the main
traffic lanes of Stevens Creek; with additional traffic being generated by the market, that will get m~rkedly worse,
as will the egress from Mary back onto Stevens Creek. I'm not even mentioning the parking at the Oaks which is
already very bad for stores like the Coffee Society, Hobees, etc; at crowded times it is already common to have to
park down at the end of the parking lot for those popular spots. If the spots at the end disappear to the market,
heaven only knows what is going to happen.
What the Oaks REALLY needs is something like the Oakville Grocery (in Old Town Los Gatos) which would
provide an upscale specialty market which IS needed in Cupertino but without being a full-service (and hence high
traffic) grocery store. Oakville would also fill the need at the Oaks for a decent sandwich shop which hasn't been
present since the deli left the location of the current Dance Studio many years ago.
I would love to see the Oaks revitalized, but a full-scale market is a very poor choice.
Steven Patt
21346 Rumford Dr.
Cupertino
slp@stevenscreek.com
Page 1
Colin Jung
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Steve Piasecki
Monday, April 10, 2000 10:55 AM
Colin Jung
FW: Andronico's Proposal'
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Linda Lagergren
Monday, April 10, 2000 9:01 AM
Bert Viskovich; Steve Piasecki
FW: Andronico's Proposal
Bert & Steve: I've been getting a few messages sent to council regarding Andronico issues. I will forward them to
you. --Linda
From: Deborah Jamison [SMTP:ddj(~stevenscreek.com]
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 3:21 PM
To: John Statton; Sandra James; Don Burnett; Richard Lowenthal; Michael Chang
Subject: Andronico's Proposal
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing with regard to the proposed Andronico's at the Oaks Shopping Center, and the expansion of the
shopping center to accomodate more square footage. As a resident of the neighborhood north of The Oaks
("Nathanson Ranch"), I am very concerned about the impacts that a supermarket at that location will have on the
traffic situation on Stevens Creek Blvd. and it's intersections with 85 and Mary Ave. I'm also concerned that
congestion on Stevens Creek Blvd. will cause drivers to cut through our neighborhood to get to the market.
The existing situation at the hub of activity at Stevens Creek Blvd./Hwy 85/Mary Ave./De Anza College/Flint
Center/The Oaks/Memorial Park/and soon the bigger Senior Center, not to mention the big events at these
locations, is not good. It's often congested, with long wait lines, rushing cars and unsafe conditions for pedestrians
and bicyclists who aren't members of racing teams. I walk, run, bicyle, and drive these roads near my
neighborhood more than anyone I would guess and I see regularly how very congested and unsafe it can be.
There is just too much going on in this small corner of the city already. I'm afraid that the traffic attracted by a large
market in this area will be intolerable. I don't think you need to do any special studies to figure this out, but I sure
hope that if you can't figure this out without a study that you do one before approving the proposal.
With all that congestion on Stevens Creek Blvd., a certain percentage of market customers coming from the north
or east will want to cut through the Nathanson Ranch neighborhood to get to Mary Ave. and on to The Oaks, thus
increasing through traffic on our residential streets which are already subject to frequent speeders just passing
through.
Now I'm sure I would like and use the products and services of Andronico's as much as anyone, but do we really
need another market within just a few miles of Whole Foods (on Stevens Creek Blvd.), PW Super (on Homestead)
and Safeway (at Loehman's Plaza, Stelling and Homestead)??? Those are the markets that I use and they are
just a few minutes away. If Monte Vista needs a bigger market closer, I suggest that another site be identified
further west on Stevens Creek Blvd. that wouldn't have the traffic impacts of the currently proposed site. I have
several suggestions for the types of retail stores that could go into The Oaks that we residents actually need if The
Oaks Management is interested and wants to attract them. But another supermarket, at this busy intersection of
lots of vehicular, pedestrian, and community activity already? I don't think so.
Thanks for listening to my views.
Sincerely,
Deborah Jamison
~d Drive
Page 1
COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT
SERVICES, INCORPORATED
April 7, 2000
Planning Commission
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Re: The Oaks Shopping Center and Andronico's Market
Dear Commissioners:
Regarding the proposal to demolish the movie theaters at The Oaks and replace it with an
Andronico's Market, The Commons of Cupertino community requests that a thorough
traffic study be conducted prior to any approval being granted for this proposal. In
particular, The Commons requests that the traffic study include community participation
and feedback regarding the planned entrances and exits for the shopping center as a
whole and the proposed market specifically.
The Board of Directors of The Commons is especially concerned with the apparent lack
of knowledge demonstrated by staff concerning current traffic patterns in the area. The
following is a brief summary of some specific problem areas that we think should be
considered in preparing a comprehensive traffic plan for the block of Stevens Creek
between Mary Ave. and the freeway and for Mary Ave.:
Stevens Creek Boulevard:
Lack of a pull-in lane for buses at the Mary Ave. westbound bus stop. This is a
very heavily used bus stop that forces buses to occupy the right traffic lane while
picking up and dropping off passengers.
· Lack of a right mm lane in the westbound direction to mm on to Mary Ave.
Close proximity of the first entrance into The Oaks to the Mary Ave. intersection
which routinely causes traffic backups when cars slow or stop to negotiate the
right turn into the center.
· Numerous obstacles immediately in front of the second entrance into The Oaks,
including a fire hydrant, requiring very careful negotiation of the turn.
· Proximity of the second entrance (2-3 car lengths) to the right-mm lane entrance
to two major freeways: Route 85 and Route 280 both north and southbound.
727 University Avenue
Los Gatos, California 95032-7610
Bus: (408) 395-9606
· The second entrance is accessed via the right-turn lane for the freeway. The
majority of traffic in that lane is for the freeway and many drivers are not aware
that there is a shopping center entrance just a short distance before the freeway, so
they are not expecting the car ahead to slow or stop to negotiate the turn into the
shopping center.
· Steep bank of the second entrance's ramp with a sharp turn at the bottom of the
ramp. Any cars pulling out of parking spaces or pedestrians with bags or shopping
carts will quickly overwhelm the ramp's ability to hold cars trying to enter the
shopping center.
· Pedestrian traffic, especially crossing the second entrance on the sidewalk.
· Bicycle lane that runs between the right hand lane and the second lane, crossing
over just before the freeway fight-mm lane.
· Use of the fight lane by trucks wishing to unload for The Oaks stores caused by
the inaccessibility to tracks of the majority of the shopping center. Large trucks
cannot negotiate the narrow traffic aisles.
· Significantly increased traffic at the Mary Ave. intersection generated during peak
evening hours by commuters stopping to shop on their way home from work.
Staff's own estimates indicate hundreds of additional cars will use this
intersection that is already at or beyond its carrying capacity several evenings a
week forcing left-turn lane backups to the freeway overpass or beyond.
· This intersection is the major entrance into De Anza College.
· This intersection experiences exceptionally heavy pedestrian traffic at all De Anza
class breaks and also every time there is a concert or other event at Flint Center.
· The proximity to the Senior Center and its senior citizen users who will be forced
to compete with increased traffic trying to cross Mary Ave.
Mary Avenue:
· The parking along Mary Ave. is routinely filled by De Anza students and Flint
Center event attendees since this is free parking. Note that this applies all day and
evening since De Anza has both day and evening classes.
· The street is very wide and would not be easy to cross pushing a shopping cart
without a traffic light as well as a cross-walk.
· This is a 2-lane street and traffic is heavy during the evening commute time as
residents return home. Unless a left-turn lane is installed at the proposed new
entrance to the shopping center, traffic will back up behind cars and trucks
waiting to mm into the center.
Sincerely,
Board of Directors
Commons of Cupertino
April 6, 2000
Cupertino Planning Commission
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Dear Sirs:
The Oaks Shopping Center, in order to remain competitive and reflective of community
necd~, requires a change of direction in, and ~t~ upgradh~g ol; its tenaxit mix. it is om-
sincere belief that a sophisticated market such as Andronico's will not only be a major
asset to the center, but to the surrounding community as well. Because it is expected that
Andronico's will somewhat intensify usage of the shopping center, Ownership is
committed to working closely with City planners to seek reasonable yet economic ways
to optimize the entire property in terms of ingress/egress, circulation within the parking
lot, crosswalks, and other changes to insure the best and highest use of the public space.
Andronico's has a tremendous Bay Area presence, and has proven to be a good neighbor
in many other communities su. rrounding Cupertino. This will certainly hold tree when a
beautiful, new Andronico's grocery store opens for business at The Oaks. The feedback
from many of our closest neighbors, such as the Glenbrook Apartment tenants, has been
most favorable and they look forward to the convenience and variety Andronico's will
provide for them. The Oaks Shopping Center can experience a degree of renaissance with
this wonderful addition, and we hope that both citizens and City officials will agree with
us that the time is right for Andronico's. We look forward to working with you to bring
this unique opportunity to fi'uition, and to the prompt and positive action necessary to
accomplish that objective.
Very Truly Yours,
The Oaks Shopping Center
Reed Bennett, RPA
General Manager
21265 Stevens Creek Blvd. Suite 205 ° PMB 230 · Cupertino, CA 95014 · Phone (408) 257-8797 · Fax (408) 517-0271
otb'-&77
COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT
SERVICES, INCORPORATED
April 7, 2000
Planning Commission
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Re: The Oaks Shopping Center and Andronico's Market
Dear Commissioners:
The Commons of Cupertino community recently became aware of the 300-foot limitation
regarding neighborhood notification for proposed construction, zoning changes and
similar activities that come under the purview of the Planning Commission. The
Commons is uniquely situated in that it is surrounded by City property (Memorial Park,
the Sports Center, Quinlan Center and Stelling Road). As a consequence, although our
homeowners are significantly affected by decisions concerning properties in the greater
area, we are not presently on the neighborhood notification list because we do not fall
with the 300-foot range.
The Board of Directors, on behalf of the 60 homeowners of The Commons, respectfully
requests that the Planning Commission extend the notification range to include notifying
this community of any proposed changes to the greater surrounding area. In particular,
The Commons wishes to be notified of proposed changes to: The Oaks shopping center,
De Anza College, Memorial Park, Cupertino Sports Center, Quinlan Center, the
businesses across Stelling Rd. (Shell gas station, Abundant Life Church, car dealership).
All notifications should be sent to The Commons of Cupertino, c/o Community
Management Services, Inc., 727 University Ave., Los Gatos, CA 95032. The Board of
Directors will ensure that the individual CommOns homeowners are notified of proposed
changes.
727 University Avenue
Los Gatos, California 95032-7610
Bus: (408) 395-9606
Board of Directors
Commons of Cupertino
MAR. 10. 2000 5'23PM AV~RY/~CCO 650 9~5 9188
130 E. Dana Street
Mountain View. California 94041-1599
~[~e~o N s.r ~u c.r, o N
NO, 1750 P. 2
Telephone{650) 961.8330
Fax (650) 965-9188
COMlaANY
March 10, 2000
Honorable Members of the Planning Commission
City of Cupertino
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Via Fax: (408) 777-3a33
Andronico's at the Exlstia& Oaks Shopping Center
Application tt2-U-00
Dear Honorable Planning Commission Members:
We were nolilied by the City of Cupertino 3 days ago ol the proposed Andronico's, As we ate
the only residential neighborhood adjaccnt to the planned co~truct]on project, it is
unfortunate that the applicant never contacted us. We have worked very quickly and
diligently with Colin lung of the Planning Department to detail the concerns that have come
forth kom residents, on-site staff and resident managers in the 32 acre, Glenbrook Apartments
where approximately 1,200 residents live. We constructed the property with our own crews in
1970 and have the benefit of 30 years cE ownership and management as wc examine the plans
propmed by Andrortico's.
After much deh'beration, we respectfully ask that the following cOnditions be attached to your
recommendation to the City Council:
1. We agl'ee with the City Architect who recommends a trellis or some type of break between
the first and second floor of the north side of the property. The proposed row of trees is fine
so long as the tzees are at least 24' box container stze when planted.
2. There should be a crosswalk across Mary Avenue just northwest of the 517-unit Glenbrook
Apartment front entt7 so the 1,200 residents fzom out property, as well as the adjacent
neighborhood can logically walk lo Andronicos in reasonable safety, Out residents are of
all ages, includin$ hundreds of children, and they walk to ~ Oaks frequently. Walking
with groceries acrms an extra wide curved street with traffic, perpendicular parking, and
parallel parking taking place at all hours is tough enough!
3. We have not seen confirmation that the wood-siding on the first and second floor is to
consist of individual wood planks versus a cheaper quality fashion of using ¢ foot x 8 foot
sheets of wood that have indentations to look like planks.
MAR, 10. 2000 5:24PM AVERY/ACCO 850 965 9188 NO. 1750 P. 3
4. The City Architect recommended landscape screening near~ the truck loading dock. Since
this appears to not be feasible, the screening i~ accomplished with two 24" box oak trees at
the new entrance to be created on Mart- Avenue. We strongly recommend that the City
require that the two be 48" box or large~ at this driveway entrance since it will take many
years to realize significant sc. reeniu$ for a truck dock.
Some would' say that a single truck dock is somewhat ide:tli~tic. While we understand that
Andronico's is serviced b~r a single source supplier, we fear that one or more waiting trucks
might park along Mary Avenue and cause traffic blockage and/or an eyesore.. We ask that
"trucks in waiting" not be allowed to park on Mary Avenue for any length of time.
5. We ask for a recommendation that no tables or benches be allowed on the north side of the
building. Currently, at the Stanford Shopping Center location the employees hang around
a table next to the truck load,s dock. This is the locat~n where they smoke and take
breaks. Since we are living with the truck loading dock and trash compactor we hope that
the residences need not look toward tables of employees on breaks. We would not raise
this issue if it were not a problem at Stanford Shopping Center.
6. We endorse the City Staff's suggestion of a sidewalk along the north side of the building so
pedestrians need not walk in the middle of the parking lot to access the entrance of the
store.
We will be pleased to further dJscuss these issues with staff, as necessary. We certainly
appreciate your cooperation and assistance in guiding this project to fit this quality location
and environment.
Sincerely,
L. Burr Avery~
LBA/BBA:jb
CITY OF
CUPERTINO
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
FAX (408) 777-3333
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
AGENDA ITEM
Summary
AGENDA DATE June 19, 2000
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Prohibition of parking along the north side of Bollinger Road from De Anza Boulevard west + 546
Feet
BACKGROUND
Currently, parking is restricted on the south side of Bollinger Road, which is in the city of San Jose.
Recently, Bollinger Road between De Anza Boulevard and Westlynn Way was re-striped in order to
restrict traffic from the new Home Depot development into the Westlynn Way and Kirwin lane
neighborhoods. This re-striping has reduced the westbound Bollinger Road traffic lane. In order to
provide the safe movement of both vehicles and bicycles, it is necessary for parking to be prohibited on
the north side of the street.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. [~ C' !., prohibiting
parking along the north side of Bollinger Road from De Anza Boulevard to a point + 546 feet west of
the intersection.
~k~ vi~h "~ -
pirector of l ~ublic Works
Approved ~mission:
r)o a d'r>.
City Manager
ORDINANCE NO. 1851
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 11.24.150 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PARKING PROHIBITION
ALONG CERTAIN STREETS, NORTH SIDE OF BOLLINGER ROAD FROM
DE ANZA BOULEVARD, WEST + 546 FEET
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN that Chapter 11.24, Section 11.24.150 be amended to include the following:
Section 11.24.150, parking prohibited along certain streets.
Street Sides of Street Limits Exceptions
Bollinger Road North Between De Anza None
Boulevard, west
+ 546 feet
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 19th
day of June, 2000, and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this day of ,2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
ORDInAnCE ~O. 1~49
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
PREZONING AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT LOCATED AT 21095
GRENOLA DRIVE TO PRE RI-10 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT
WHEREAS, an application was received by the City (Application no. 4-Z-00) for the prezoning of
property to PRE-R1-10 (Single-family Residential Zoning District); and
WHEREAS, the property is presently unincorporated, within the City's urban service area and has
no City prezoning;
WHEREAS, the prezoning is consistent with the City's general plan land use map, proposed uses
and surrounding uses;
WHEREAS, the prezoning will enable the property owner to develop his property in accordance
with City residential development standards;
WHEREAS, upon due notice and after one public hearing the Planning Commission
recommended to the City Council that the prezoning be granted; and
WHEREAS, a map of the subject property is attached hereto as Exhibit A as a proposed
amendment to the Master Zoning Map of the City of Cupertino.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the property' described in attached Exhibit B is hereby prezoned to PRE-R1-10,
Single-family Residential Zoning District; and that Exhibits A & B attached hereto are made part of the
Master Zoning Map of the City of Cupertino.
Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after its passage.
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the 5th day of
June, 2000 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the
day of ,2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
Iclw o~
¢~P~T~NO
V cinity Map
Exhibit A
GARDEN GATE
ELEM.
SCHOOL
Dr.
Grenola Dr.
)k Dr.
Project Location
.avina
Ct~o
21095 Grenola Drive
4-Z-00
May 8, 2000
N
0 100 200 F....,
~ ,.~.. z..,
Ann Arbor
^v. ~
Glencoe Dr. Dr.
Beardon
N. DE ANZA BLVD.
Exhibit C
I - Project Location
coo.~V ~ ,~ I~ ~ ~ ~
0
t~EAsT 7~.4)o -~
o~ ~EIqOLA
~ EE~. 25, 2 0 o.0
~'~0. O0
/~P~4: 326-
PRE- ZONE
.- DESCRIPTION
0.215 ACRE' FR~ COUNTY TO
PRE RI-10
Ail that certain =eal property situated in the County of Santa
Clara, State of California, being all of Lot 87 in Tract No. 682
"GARDEN GATE VILLAGE UNIT No. 2", a map of which was recorded on
February 20, 1950 in Book 26 of Maps at Pages 24 and 25.
Date: Feb. 25, 2000
APN: 326-28-009
Site Address: 21095 Grenola Drive, Cupertino.
Exhibit D
OPEN SPACE AREA
ON GRADE
ON PODIUM
TOTAL
TOTAL OPEN SPACE AREA
RECREATION AREA
PARK FRONTAGE
ON PODIUM
REC. ROOM/LOUNGE
TOTAL RECREATION AREA
HARDSCAPE AREA 9,780 S.F.
LANDSCAPE AREA 8,000 S.F.
HARDSCAPE AREA 8,057 S.F.
LANDSCAPE AREA 11,500 S.F.
HARDSCAPE AREA 17,837 S.F.
LANDSCAPE AREA 19,500 S.F.
37,337 S.F.
4,341 S.F.
19,557 S.F.
2,075 S.F.
25,973 S.F.
lO.4% OF GROSS AREA)
8.6% OF GROSS AREA)
(8.8% OF GROSS AREA)
(12.2% or GROSS AREA)
(19% OF GROSS AREA)
(21% OF GROSS AREA)
(40% OF GROSS AREA)
(32% OF NET AREA)
DWELLING UNITS BY TYPE
LOW-RISE UNIT AREA DECK AREA ROOM COUNT NO.0F UNITS TOTAL UNIT AREA PERCENTAGE
SQ.FT. SQ.FT. Sq.rT.
PLAN A .804 fi0 t BR , I BA .4 3,216 8n
PLAN AL 1,176 60 2 BR , 2 BA 2 2,352 4n
PIAN B 845 152 I BR , 1 BA 14 11,830 27n
PLAN BL 1,295 152 2 BR , 2 BA 4 5,180 8n
PLAN CL 1,121 145 2 BR , 2 BA 17 19,057 33n
PLAN C 1,429 145 3 BR , 3 BA 4 5,716 fin
PLAN D 1,239 68 2 BR , 2 BA 3 3,717 6n
PLAN E 1,221 88 2 BR , 2 BA 3 3,663 6n
TOTAL 51 54,731 loon
MID-RISE UNIT AREA DECK AREA ROOM COUNT NO.0F UNITS TOTAL UNIT AREA PERCENTAGE
SQ.rr. sq.rr, sq.rT.
PLAN I 841 60 I BR , 1 BA 56 47,096 36n
PLAN IL 1,196 60 2 BR , 2 BA 1 1,196 In
PLAN 2 1,180 59 2 BR , 2 BA 58 68,440 37n
PLAN 2L 1,531 59 3 BR , 3 BA 7 10,717 5n
PLAN 3 1,160 116 2 BR , 2 BA 23 26,680 15n
PLAN 4 1,455 78 3 BR , 2 BA 10 14,550 6n
TOTAL i55 166,679 loon
GRAND TOTAL 206 223,41o 100~
PROJECT
SITE AREA
NET AREA
GROSS AREA
BUILDING COVERAGE
BUILDING AREA
LOW RISE RESIDENTIAL
LOW RISE RETML
LEASING OFFICE
81,815 S.F. / 1.88 ACRES (RECONFIGURED LOT 1)
93,795 S.F. / 2.15 ACRES (INCLUDE LOT 9)
74,540 S.F. / 80% OF GROSS AREA
23,454 X 3 + 3,776 ~ LOFT = 74,138 S.F.
7,000 S.F.
3,341S.F.
RECREATION/EXERCISE ROOM/BATHROOMS 3,320 S.F.
MID RISE RESIDENTIAL
27,923 X 5 +26,075+25,581+24,843 + 2,812 ~ LOFT = 218,926 S.F.
TOTAL
FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR)
NUMBER OF STORIES
LOW RISE
HIGH RISE
HEIGHT
LOW RISE
HIGH RISE
BUILDING PAD ELEVATION
CURB ELEVATION
PARKING
REQUIRED :
RESIDENTIAL
RETAIL
TOTAL
BICYCLE
306,725 / 81,815 = 3.75
306,725 S.F.
RETAIL + 3 RESIDENTIAL W/PARTIAL LOFTS = 4 STORIES
RETAIL + 8 RESIDENTIAL W/PARTIAL LOFTS = 9 STORIES
50'-0" (TYPICAL HEIGHT TO TOP OF EAVES)
62'-0" (TO THE HIGHEST ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTION FROM
CURRENT DATUM ELEVATION ~ 226.0')
91'-6"(TYPICAL HEIGHT TO TOP OF EAVES / 87'-6" MEASURED
FROM PREVIOUS SUBMITTAL'S DATUM ELEVATION ~ 230.5')
97'-6"(T0 THE HIGHEST ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTIONS FROM
CURRENT DATUM ELEVATION (~ 226.0')
226.0' ~ Entry Lobby
226.0' ~ STEVENS CREEK ENTRY DRIVE
(SEE CIVIL DWG. FOR SPECIFIC GRADE ELEVATIONS)
205 UNIT X 2 = 410 STALLS
7,000S.F. ~ 1/ 250 S.F. = 28 STALLS
438 STALLS (INCLUDE 9 HANDICAPPED STALLS)
(205 X .4) + (28 X .05) = 83 STALLS
PROVIDED :
PARKING LEVEL 1
PARKING LEVEL 2
PARKING LEVEL 3
ON-SITE TOTAL
OFF-SITE TOTAL
TOTAL
BICYCLE
113 STALLS(INCLUDE 9 HANDICAPPED STALLS)
210 STALLS
69 STALLS
392 STALLS
46 STALLS
438 STALLS
83 STALLS(OPEN BIKE RACKS WITNIN A SECURED GARAGE)
SUMMARY
STEVENS CREEK APARTMENTS
CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA
PEGASUS DEVELOPMENT
5-15-2000
McLARAND VASQUEZ & PARTNERS
,450sf.
FI. Hgt.
Pedestrian
i ryp.
EXERCISE R~.
i. ~ YS-sf. T
900sr.
~226.O~
LEASING
OFFICE
1,600sf.
12'
RETAIL/GUEST PARKING
59CARS
12' FI. Hgt.
Typ;
R
R
R
R
R
Ramp: Down
35
BICYCLES
/
MID RISE GUEST PARKING
29 CARS
+226.0 : C
12' FI. Hgt, :
, G
J
RETAIL/
PROPOSED HOTEL
SEE HOTEL DRAWINGS FOR DETAILS
PARKING LEVEL 1
FOUNTAIN
SITE
STE
CREEK APARTMENTS
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
PEGASUS DEVELOPMENT
5-15--2000
McLARAND VASQUEZ & PARTNERS
=1
DIAGRAM LEGEND
llllllll
FIRELANE
RETAIL PARI(ING/ACCESS PATH
RETAIL TENANT
PATH TO TRASH
RETAIL LOADING/SERVICE
DELIVERY
MOVING VAN PAREING
& DELIVERY PATH
N
0 10 20 40
feet
i 2,0C~RS / 48 BICYCLE!
t-~.~ ~ ~ t!i t ~t ~ ' ~' ~'
!--- I'~ il! i ~ /I !/ I,i ! ~11 I ! !j,!
Y - ~ : , // '_ ramp
PARKING LEVEL
SCALE : 1/16"=1-0"
STEVENS CREEK APARTMENTS
CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA
PEGASUS DEVELOPMENT
5-15-2000
McLARAND VASQUEZ & PARTNERS
N
feet
PARKING LEVEL 3
SCALE : 1/16"=1-0"
STEVENS CREEK APARTMENTS
CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA
PEGASUS DEVELOPMENT
5-15-2000
McLARANI) VASQUEZ & PARTNERS
N
feet
Y
Stevens Creek Boulevard
+244.0
+23&0
PROPOSED HOTEL SITE
SEE HOTEL DRAWINGS FOR DETAILS
LEVEL 1
(PODIUM LEVEL)
FOUNTAIN
\
\
{
I
STEVENS CREEK APARTMENTS
CUPERTINO , CM~IFORNIA
PEGASUS DEVELOPMENT
5-15-2000
McLARAND VASQUEZ & PARTNERS
EXISTING
OFFICE SITE
0 10 20 40
feet
N
52' Set Back Line
~ Elev. +226.0
........... 1st Floor 1Line
........... 2nd Floor Line
It~llT DTC~I7
LU.--I%I~Dr~ . - - 3rd Floor Line
LEVEL 2-3 . 4th Floor Line
....... 5th Floor Line
MID-RISE
LEVEL 2 - 4
SCALE : 1/16"=1-0"
STEVENS CREEK APARTMENTS
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
PEGASUS DEVELOPMENT
5-15-2000
McLARAND VASQUEZ & PARTNERS
N
0 10 20 40 ~
feet
52' Set Back Line
~ Elev. +226.0
LOW-RISE
LOFT
6th Floor Line
LEVEL 5
SCALE : 1/16"=1-0"
STEVENS CREEK APARTMENTS
CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA
PEGASUS DEVELOPMENT
5-15-2000
McLARAND VASQUEZ & PARTNERS
N
feet
52' Set Back Line
~ Elev. +226.0
7th Floor Line
I
LEVEL 6
SCALE : 1/16"=1-0"
STEVENS CREEK APARTMENTS
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
PEGASUS DEVELOPMENT
5-15-2000
McLARAND VASQUEZ & PARTNERS
0 10 20 40
feet.
N
52' Set Back Line
0 Elev. +226.0
/
8th Floor Line
LEVEL 7
SCALE : 1/16"=1-0"
STEVENS CREEK APARTMENTS
CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA
PEGASUS DEVELOPMENT
5 - 15 - 2000
McLARAND VASQUEZ & PARTNERS
N
feet
52' Set Back Line
~ Elev. +226.0
Top of Eave line
LEVEL
SCALE : 1/16"=1-0"
STEVENS CREEK APARTMENTS
CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA
PEGASUS DEVELOPMENT
5-15-2000
McLARAND VASQUEZ & PARTNERS
N
feet
10
PORTE-COCHERE RETAIL FOUR SEASONS PARK
STEVENS CREEK BLVD. ELEVATION
PENTHOUSE 357.0
E~S~NG OFFICE BUI~ING
TOWER ENTRY
SCALE : 1/16"=1-0"
STEVENS CREEK APARTMENTS
CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA
PEGASUS DEVELOPMENT
5-15-2000
McLARAND VASQUEZ & PARTNERS
STEVENS CREEK BLVD.
N
0 5' 15' 40' ~
MIDRISE
EAST ELEVATION
12
FOUR SEASONS PARK ELEVATION
CONC. ROOF TiLE
0 5' 15' 40'
feet.
SOUTH ELEVATION
SCALE : 1/16"=1-0"
STEVENS CREEK APARTMENTS
CUPERTINO , CALIFORNIA
PEGASUS DEVELOPMENT
5-15-2000
McLARAND VASQUEZ & PARTNERS
13
CONC. ROOF TILE
GRAPHICS BANNERS
PAINTED TRELLIS
METAL CANOPY
EXTERIOR PLASTER
DECORATIVE LIGHT FIXTURES
FABRIC AWNING
PAINTED ALUMINUM STOREFRONTS
PRECAST CONC. BASE
PAINTED METAL RAILING
K
STEVENS CREEK APARTMENTS
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
PEGASUS DEVELOPMENT
3-31-2000
McLARAND VASQUEZ & PARTNERS
PARTIAL ENLARGED ELEVATION
Stevens Creek Boulevard
HOTEL
Tud
Park Plaza (Not a Part)
APARTMENTS
- ~ln~b P~&l~lg (Rhepilkile~'$1D(hlglllr4) - Tu~pT~
Exisfing Pedestrian Pafh and Fire Access
~ Loading Area o o
SUN MICROSYSTEMS
SUN MICROSYSTEMS
0.~
0
0
SURFACE PARKING I
L-1.2
-- Birch Grove in Raised Planter
~ Interlocking Paving Stone
Paving Stone (6x12)
'pus Gracilior Standards
Raised Planter
Paving Stone
, Garden
~ Benches
butus Marina
Fence-- Spa--
Tree Ferns
L-1.3
Section at Access Road from Stevens Creek Boulevard
Section at Fire Access Road
Section at Retail Terrace and Pedestrian Walkway
L-1.4