CC 03-20-00 Santa Clara County
Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority
AVASA-AVASA~AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA
CIo City of San Jose, Code Enforcement Division
777 North First Street, Suite 215 San Jose, CA. 9112-6311
February 2, 2000
Donald Brown, City Manager
City of Cupertino
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
SUBJECT: Senate Bill 1333 (Byron Sher)
The Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority which includes a representative
appointed by your city is a Joim Powers Agency that oversees the distribution of funds
derived from a one dollar fee imposed on the registration of vehicles through the
Department of Motor Vehicles.
These funds may be used for program costs of abating abandoned vehicles in your
jurisdiction as well as reimbursement for equipment used for enforcement of abandoned
vehicle regulations. Existing law authorizing these fees is due to terminate on December
31, 2002 for jurisdictions within the Santa Clara County Abandoned Vehicle Service
Authority. Consequently your city faces the possibility of losing significant revenue.
Senate Bill 1333, introduced by Senator Byron Sher seeks to extend the termination date
for the collection of these fees until January 1, 2015.
On behalf of the agency, I would like to solicit your support for this bill by writing
Senator Sher and by working with your legislative analyst or lobbyist in Sacramento.
This bill is going to be discussed by Senator Sher's office at our quarterly meeting on
February 17, 2000. Mr. Sher's mailing address is 5589 Winfield Blvd.,Suite 102, San
Jose, CA 95123. His telephone number is (408) 226-2992.
AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-
If you are interested in attending the meeting, it will be held at City Hall, in Room 102A
from 10:00 AM to 1:00 PM. The address is 801 North First Street.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at (408) 277-5564 if you have any questions.
Robert L. Cushing, Acting Chair s
SCCAVSA
AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-AVASA-
DRAFT MINUTES
CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Adjourned Meeting
Tuesday, February 22, 2,000
CALL TO ORDER
At 5:35 p.m., Vice Mayor James called the meeting to order in Conference Room A of City Hall,
10300 Torte Avenue, Cupertino.
ROLL CALL
City Council members present: Vice-Mayor Sandra James, and Council members Michael Chang
and Don Bumett. Council members absent: Mayor John Statton and Council member Richard
Lowenthal.
Staff present: Deputy City Clerk Roberta Wolfe.
INTERVIEWS OF CANDIDATES AND APPOINTMENT TO ADVISORY BODIES -
Conduct interviews and appoint candidates to the Librar~ Commission and Public Safety
Commission.
Council interviewed Katherine Stakey and appointed her to the Library Commission for a
partial term ending in 2003.
Council interviewed Bradley Tice, Leslie Schreiber, and Julie Goodman, and appointed
Bradley Tice to the Public Safety Commission for a partial term ending in 2002.
At 6:10 p.m., the meeting recessed, and reconvened at 6:45 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, 10300 Torte Avenue, Cupertino
Mayor Statton called the meeting to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
City Council members present: Mayor John Statton, Vice-Mayor Sandra James, and Council
members Don Bumett and Michael Chang. Council members absent: Richard Lowenthal.
Staff present: City Manager Don Brown, City Attorney Charles Kilian, Administrative Services
Director Carol Atwood, Community Development Director Steve Piasecki, Parks and Recreation
Director Steve Dowling, Public Information Officer Donna Krey; Public Works Director Bert
Viskovich, Planner Vera Gil, Senior Building Inspector Greg Casteel, and Deputy City Clerk
Roberta Wolfe.
February 22, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 2
CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS
Community update on E1 Camino Hospital by Mark O'Connor, E1 Camino Hospital
Board of Directors
Mr. O'Connor outlined the history of the hospital and asked for the support of the
Cupertino community. He said he hoped they could create on ongoing dialog between
council and the hospital. He invited council members to visit the hospital and said he
hoped they could begin to cooperate as two government entities.
3. Report from city committee or commission: Fine Arts Commission
Ms. Charlene Pai, Chairperson of the Fine Arts Commission, discussed some of the
commission's past accomplishments, which included bringing the San Francisco
Shakespeare Festival to Cupertino, beginning a music and dance recital program which
has become a permanent feature of Euphrat's Family Day, sponsoring the children's art
show in the Cupertino Cherry Blossom Festival, selecting finalists for the public
sculpture at the Four Seasons Comer, and awarding $12,000 last year in grants to
individual artists and fine arts organizations. Next year's goals include the completion of
the Four Seasons Comer park, a mural in the children's area of the Quinlan Center, and
continued outreach to other municipal and community arts organizations.
POSTPONEMENTS
Council members concurred to continue item No. 10 to March 20, and item No. 15 to March 6.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
CONSENT CALENDAR
Burnett moved to approve the items on the consent calendar with the exception of Item 7.
James seconded and the motion carded 4-0.
4. Accounts payable: February 4 and February 11, Resolutions 00-059 and 00-060.
5. Payroll: February 4, Resolution 00-061.
Review of application for Alcoholic Beverage License for Dubon Liquor, 10073 Saich
Way.
8. Declaring intention to change street name, Sycamore Drive to Sycamore Court,
Resolution 00-063.
Acceptance of municipal improvements:
February 22, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 3
(a)
(b)
(c)
Jinuny Fung, 21451 Vai Ave., APN 362-04-019
Danny Lee, 10121 Camino Vista, APN 342-14-080
DB Group LP, 10129 Camino Vista, APN 342-14-081
Vote Councilmembers
Ayes: Burnett, Chang, James, and Statton
Noes: None
Absent: Lowenthal
Abstain: None.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
Authorizing filing of applications for Federal Surface Transportation Program &
Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Improvement Program Funding for traffic projects,
Resolution 00-062.
Public Works Director Viskovich provided an update on the projects, noting that the
proposal is three layers, all dealing with the interconnect system. These are upgrades to
that system, including better timing plans.
Bumett moved to adopt Resolution 00-062. James seconded and the motion passed 4-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
10.
Reconsideration of determination by the City Council on January 3 denying the appeal of
Steven Hoffman and upholding the decision of the City Manager regarding use of city
park facilities by the Cupertino Unified School District for commercial day care center
operations. Petition requesting reconsideration filed by Steven D. Hoffman. Continuance
until March 20 requested.
Council members concurred to continue this item to March 20.
11.
Public hearing to determine if a nuisance exists and to order abatement at 20091 La Roda
Drive, Resolution 00-067.
Senior Building Inspector Greg Casteel reviewed the history of the matter and outlined
staff's recommendations, including hiring a contractor to abate the nuisance. Once that is
done, the house will still not be occupiable until there is sanitation, hot water, etc. When
that is completed the city will do an inspection.
Bumett moved to adopt Resolution 00-067. James seconded and the motion passed 4-0.
12.
Public hearing to determine if a nuisance exists and to order abatement at 10645 Cordova
Road, Resolution 00-068.
February 22, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 4
Senior Building Inspector Greg Casteel presented a history of events leading to the public
hearing and outlined staff's recommendations. He said that the owner had tried to board
up some of the openings in the building to keep people out of the residence, but there are
still people getting into the second story and underneath the house, and there continued to
be complaints. He showed 3 slides of the residence, which illustrated the movement of
the structure and the portions of the deck which were rotted. He said it is a definite safety
hazard and an attractive nuisance.
Brian O'Grady, 1134 W. E1 Camino Real, Mountain View, owner of the property in
question, agreed that the structure needed to come down, but was concerned about the
timing of the demolition. He said stability of the hillside is a big issue in the
neighborhood, and demolishing the house now would add to the problem. He said he
hoped to have the application for an exception come before the Planning Commission in
the next 6 to 8 weeks, and would apply for a demolition permit in connection with the
grading process in 3-4 months. He said he had boarded up the house, but would be
willing to look at whether it was feasible to fence the area in the meantime.
Discussion followed regarding the possibility that removing the foundation wall would
destabilize the hillside. Mr. O'Grady said engineering reports indicate that the house sits
on uncompacted fill.
Community Development Director Steve Piasecki outlined options for the council,
including giving the property owner 30 days to fence the property and provide an
engineering report to the City stating whether removing the structure would cause
problems with the hillside.
The Senior Building Inspector said he did not know if leaving the retaining wall would
help hold the hillside in place, or if removing it would affect the drainage. He noted that
the hillside is steep, and the owner had tried his best to board the house up to keep people
out.
Council members expressed concern about how long this situation had existed and said
they would prefer to have it addressed quickly. Mr. O'Grady said he was willing to get a
report as to whether he could remove some or all of the structure at this time.
Doris Jacobs, 10676 Cordova Road, said her house is across from the structure in
question, and the structure has been a magnet for teenagers. She said somebody was still
going into this building, and she thought it was a danger. She said the neighbors were
concerned with the hillside, but they felt that Mr. O'Grady had been given many
oppommities to do something about this structure. She asked if someone had to get hurt
before the city forced the property owner to do something that he knows should be done.
Annie Chyu said she lived next to Mrs. Jacobs. She said the door of the house faced her
kitchen and dining room windows, and sometimes she is seared because she doesn't
know who is at the house. Police have been called several times. She said she and her
neighbors want the structure taken down, but the retaining wall could remain. The owner
February 22, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 5
13.
14.
had done nothing about the situation, even though he has been notified three times; she
had received copies of the notices from the city. She said she didn't think it was possible
to build three houses on the property.
Councilmembers agreed that the house should be removed, not just fenced, and that it
was the owner's responsibility to make sure it was done in a safe manner.
Piasecki said staff's preference was that the property owner deal with this situation. He
said approval of the exception might take awhile, and they would rather not wait for that
to take place before the house is demolished. He said if the owner is not willing to do it,
council could authorize the city to get its own structural analysis and consider
demolishing the house based on that.
City Attorney Kilian stated that council had two options: (1) Direct the property owner
to fence the property and get a report indicating how difficult it would be to tear the
house down; or (2) Order that he abate the nuisance, give him 30 days to do so, and in the
interim, as part of the cost of removal hire an engineer to study the hillside to make sure
removal would not disturb the hillside. He said if the city undertook the demolition, they
needed solid scientific evidence that it would not cause sliding.
James moved to adopt the resolution ordering demolition and removal of the structure,
subject to the owner being allowed to abate the nuisance within 30 days (March 23);
thereafter the city will undertake to abate the nuisance, including engaging an expert to
assure that no problems with the soil will occur. Bumett seconded the motion. The
motion passed 4-0.
Mr. O'Grady indicated that he was willing to initiate the work himself as soon as
possible, in a safe manner, and to pay for it. Staff advised him that the turnaround time on
a demolition permit was very fast.
Public hearing regarding Notice of Intention to Abate and Remove an Abandoned,
Wrecked, Dismantled or Inoperative Vehicle or Parts Thereof as a Public Nuisance. The
vehicle owner is Steven Reed, 6276 Shadygrove Court.
Staff noted that the nuisance no longer existed and that Mr. Reed did not wish to address
council. No action was taken.
Ordering vacations of various easements:
(a) easement, Parcels A and B, Pmneridge Avenue, Resolution 00-069
(b) easement, Linnet Lane, Resolution 00-070
(c) easement, retaining public utility easement, Becket Lane, Resolution 00-071
(d) sanitary sewer easement, Linnet Lane, Resolution 00-072
Public Works Director Viskovich said this was a housekeeping chore as part of the
approval of the projects of the Hilton Hotel and the apartments near Pnmeridge, Wolfe
February 22, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 6
and Linnett. He said all the vacations were consistent with council's conditions of
approval for the project, including access to parcel 2.
James moved to adopt Resolutions 00-069, 00-070, 00-071, and 00-072. Chang
seconded, and the motion passed 4-0.
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - None
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None
NEW BUSINESS
15.
Consider recommendation of Parks and Recreation Commission to install a pedestrian
access at Kennedy Middle School along Hyannisport Drive.
Council members concurred to continue this item to March 6.
16.
Authorizing execution of ground lease with Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection
District, 1-1.2 acres located affordable housing project, Resolution 00-073.
City Attorney Charles Kilian said that the affordable housing would be in the form of
rental housing, together with an office and warehouse for Cupertino Community
Services.
Mary Ellen Cheil, Executive Director of Cupertino Community Services (CCS), asked
council to approve the lease, noting they had been working for several years to provide
affordable housing to people who live and work in Cupertino. They are proposing to
develop 24 one- and two-bedroom units. She said CCS has committed to raising $1
million.
Don'Allen, Chairman of Cupertino National Bank and CCS capital campaign chair, said
there is a risk in the city entering into the agreement, primarily whether CCS can raise $1
million dollars for their participation in the development of the property after the lease is
executed. He said they are already more than halfway toward that goal and he was
comfortable that it would be accomplished.
At 8:14 p.m., Council recessed to a closed session in Conference Room A. At 8:40 p.m.,
Council reconvened in open session. The City Attorney announced that the City Council
discussed the pros and cons of executing the ground lease at this time. The decision was
to approve the resolution.
Burner moved approval of resolution No. 00-073. James' seconded, and the motion
carried 4-0.
James praised the project and acknowledged Don Bumett who had worked with the
neighborhoods.
February 22, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 7
Statton acknowledged staff, Don Burnett, and Mary Ellen Cheil for their ideas and their
work.
At 8:45 p.m., the Council meeting recessed and the members reconvened as the
Redevelopment Agency. At 8:50 p.m., the Council reconvened in open session.
ORDINANCES - None
STAFF REPORTS - None
COUNCIL REPORTS
James said the first meeting of the skateboarding park task force was held. She said half of the
people were teens, and the group was very energized. She missed part of the meeting because
she was representing the city at San Jose Mayor Ron Gonzales' state of the city address. She and
Chamber Director Linda Asbury went to see offthe delegates to Hsin-Chu City. She and Burnett
welcomed a Japanese delegation visiting the city. They were particularly interested in technology
and how technology and education in our city government interact. She and many other city
representatives attended the Lunar New year luncheon sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce,
and she also attended the Women's Business Council.
Chang reported that he and James attended the Leadership Cupertino Steering Committee
meeting last week, and both the adult and high school programs are going well. Unfortunately,
the director for the high school program will not be continuing in that position next year, and
they will be hiring a new director. He said Carol McNeil had successfully reactivated the high
school program.
Bumett said he had reported to the Cities Association regarding Association of Bay Area
Govemments (ABAG) activities, and about the controversial plans to expand the San Francisco
Airport. There was a discussion about housing quotas. He said that the Governor has created a
commission to start looking at increased ferryboat usage in the bay. He said that Mary Ellen
Chell gave a presentation for funding for affordable housing. He reported a very serious power
outage in Rancho recently. He said apparently there are a lot of problems with losing power
there, and perhaps the city could do something to make PG&E look at the situation there.
Lowenthal reported that during a visit to Redding he was taken to see their new skateboard park.
Their local cement company donated all the cement for it, and it was crowded. He also visited
the new kids kingdom area in one of their parks that has been donated by Rotary and other local
volunteers
ADJOURNMENT
At 9:02 p.m., the meeting was adjourned.
February 22, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 8
Roberta Wolfe
Deputy City Clerk
DRAFT MINUTES
CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
Monday, March 6, 2000
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 Bumett, 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, Parks and Recreation
Director Steve Dowling, Planner Vera Gil; Public Information Officer Donna Krey; Public
Works Director Bert Viskovich, and City Clerk Kimberly Smith.
CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS
1. Report from city committee or commission: Library Commission
Ms. Sheila Mohan, Chairperson of the Library Commission, said they were very
optimistic about tomorrow's election on Measure A regarding the library. She said the
Commission's accomplishments had been to educate the community regarding library
expansion through town hall meetings, at community events, and by developing and
disseminating information. They had also strengthened ties with their sister city in
Hsinchu City, Taiwan, improved the commission web site, followed funding legislation,
and supported Proposition 14. Their furore goals include working with staff, council, and
the library on expansion, pursuing interim solutions to overcrowding, and improving
services. She thanked Council for the additional funding to extend the current library
hours, and said they were doing all they could to implement Council member
Lowenthal's suggestion to increase the use of automated checkout.
POSTPONEMENTS
Item No. 10 was removed from the agenda.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Council received copies of a letter dated February 29, 2000, from Mr. Chun Pong Ng regarding
Item No. 7, requesting exemption from Ordinance 1834 for the home on 22170 Berkeley Court.
There was also a letter dated February 17, 2000, from Saifu and Cecilia Angto regarding the
same property, also asking for the exemption and for annexation to Cupertino.
March 6, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 2
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mr. Floyd Meyer, 10186 Westaeres Drive, said that he now gets fi.om the Internet about 90% of
what he used to get fi'om the library, and wondered if the library expansion was necessary. Mr.
Meyer also discussed the traffic gate on Kim that was not operating. Since staff was not
operating the gate manually, then tickets should not be given. He spoke about the amount of
student traffic in the area and said that the only way to relieve that would be to allow Bollinger
Road to go all the way through.
CONSENT CALENDAR
James moved to adopt the Consent Calendar as presented, with the exception of Item No. 10,
which was removed. Lowenthal seconded and the motion carried 5-0.
2. Minutes: February 7, 2000.
3. Accounts payable: February 18 and February 25, Resolutions 00-074 and 00-075
4. Payroll: February 18, 2000, Resolution No. 00-076
5. Treasurer's Budget Report: January 2000.
Making determinations and approving the reorganization of territory designated "Festival
Drive 99-13," approximately 6.85 acres located on the east side of Festival Drive between
Kenmore Court and Orogrande Place; Eubanks, Ware, Argenti, Dixon and Perusina (APN
362-17-067), Resolution No. 00-077.
Making determinations and approving the reorganization of territory designated
"Berkeley Court 99-11," approximately 0.444 acre located on Berkeley Court between
Creston Drive and the Cupertino city limits; Angto (APN 326-12-033, Resolution No. 00-
078.
Making determinations and approving the reorganization of territory designated "Byme
Avenue 99-10," approximately 0.234 acre located on the west side of Festival Drive
between San Femando Avenue and Alcazar Avenue; Holt (APN 357-12-029), Resolution
No. 00-079.
Electing to be subject to the provisions of Section 22873 of the Public Employees'
Medical and Hospital Care Act (domestic partners medical and hospitalization insurance
coverage), Resolution No. 00-080.
11.
Improvement agreement, Nan Yin Ku, 10112 Camino Vista Dr., APN 342-14-065,
Resolution No. 00-081.
12.
Quitclaim Deed, Nan Yin Ku, 10112 Camino Vista Dr., APN 342-14-065, Resolution No.
00-082.
3..-(O
March 6, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 3
13.
Authorizing execution of Program Supplement 006-M, Federal aid projects (Rt. 85,
Stevens Creek Boulevard), Resolution No. 00-083.
Vote Councilmembers
Ayes: Bumett, Chang, James, Lowenthal, and Statton
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Abstain: None.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR - Item No. 10 was removed from
the agenda and was not discussed.
10.
Leadership Cupertino/Tomorrow's Leaders Today - Agreement between sponsors to
share equally in liability.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
14. Ordering vacation of roadway easement, Rainbow Drive, Resolution 00-084.
Lowenthal moved to adopt Resolution No. 00-084. Chang seconded and the motion
carded 5-0.
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
15.
Consider approving or denying a use permit to demolish three single-family dwellings
and construct eight townhomes totaling 17,112 square feet on a 23,170 square foot lot.
Application 16-U-99 (31-EA-99), Stanley Wang (applicant), at 10060 S. Stelling Road,
10051 Bianchi Way. A negative declaration is recommended and this item is
recommended for approval.
Planner Vera Gil reviewed the staff report and explained that staff had recommended
denial of the project. After the first hearing before the commission, the applicant had
made some revisions to the plan, including reducing the height of the buildings, changing
them all to face Stevens Creek Boulevard, and using tandem parking. The density
remained the same at 8 units. The Planning Commission recommended approval by a 3-2
vote.
The applicant, Mr. Stanley Wang, showed a chart that compared the city standards to his
original plan and revised plan, as well as a chart that compared the comments of the
City's contract architect, Mr. Cannon, with his revised plan. Mr. Wang discussed in
detail the issues of density, setbacks, tandem parking, and setbacks.
3---//
March 6, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 4
Community Development Director Steve Piasecki said this is a difficult parcel to design,
as well as to provide privacy screening with landscaping. Staff felt the design was very
plain, that the tandem parking in all locations will cause circulation problems, and the
density should be lowered.
The council members commented individually and Piasecki summarized their input as
follows: The absolute density, whether it is seven or eight units, is not as material to the
council as getting a very high-quality project. The density may impact the amount of
open space in the project. At least two of the Councilmembers prefer the front of the
units facing Stelling. That would result in parking in the back and the loss of private
spaces, but in exchange the units may have decks off the second floor, or fi'ont patios.
Council has indicated that tandem spaces will be acceptable if they solve a circulation
problem. Staff will probably encourage the applicant to keep tandem parking along the
panhandle. Council prefers through access, and that would work well on the panhandle
because it would require the least amount of modification from the Heart of the City
standards. Having the units front on Stelling will also meet some of the privacy
objectives by moving the windows farther away, and there will only be a side-up
relationship with the neighbor to the south.
The applicant agreed to work with the staffon additional redesign. Council referred the
item back to the Planning Commission with their comments.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None
NEW BUSINESS
Mayor Statton reordered the agenda to hear item No. 17 next.
17.
Consider endorsement of Tri-County Apartment Association's (TCAA) "Moving in for
Less" program and direct staff to send attached letter to Cupertino apartment owners
inviting them to attend an informational meeting, scheduled for April 3, 2000, and
participate in the program.
Council members were given a revised staff report. Planner Vera Gil explained that this
is project was an application from city staff. It is proposed that the Tri-County Apartment
Association work with the city staff and Chamber of Commerce to introduce the
"Moving in for Less" program in Cupertino. This program was originally introduced in
San Jose in April 1999 and has worked very well. About 39 teachers have utilized
program in that city.
Ms. Jeannie Bradford said she chaired the Cupertino Chamber's Business-Education Link
Committee. She said this committee supports education and educators in Cupertino
without duplicating or reinventing any of the existing programs. There are multiple goals
within this program, and she highlighted three in particular. The first is the "Moving in
for Less" program. The committee is very familiar with this program and they thanked
March 6, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 5
16.
Sandra James for being the pOint person. Councilmember James and Linda Asbury have
had several discussions with Tri-County association regarding the program coming to
Cupertino, and the committee encourages the city to approve the proposal and accept the
Chamber of Commerce as its panner. The second goal is a discount program offered to
educators and employees of the Fremont Union High School and the Cupertino Union
School District. The businesses in Cupertino will receive recognition for their various
contributions and support, and teachers will be encouraged to do business in Cupertino.
Ms. Bradford referred to the package of materials which had been provided to city
council which included a letter and flyer about the program. The letter was sent out a
week ago and the committee has received many responses from businesses eager to
participate. The third program is the creation of a web site on the Chamber home site that
specifically addresses educator friendly-programs. Ms. Bradford also discussed other
projects the committee has been working on, welcome packages to the teachers, a
shadowing program, and participating in the Principal for a Day program.
Brown said it is logical for the city'to be a partner in this program. There are preferential
situations for residents of Cupertino and it may be possible to add some fee discounts for
teachers as well. The staffwill need to investigate the impact on the demand for service
and it is possible that existing programs could be changed to benefit teachers.
Ashlin Cherry, Government Relations Director for Tri-County Apartment Association,
said it was the trade association representing rental property owners the in San Marco,
Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties. She said that the high cost of housing can be a
determining factor whether a teacher takes a job in the community. Participating property
owners have agreed to require no more than 20 percent of one month's rent as a security
deposit. California state law allows the collection of up to 200 percent of one month's
rent. TCAA maintains a list of available properties on their Web site and they will be
updating the site to include Cupertino and the other communities new to the program.
Chang moved to endorse the "Moving in for Less" program and direct staff to send a
letter inviting Cupertino apartment owners to participate in the program. Bumett
seconded and the motion carried 5-0.
Consider recommendation of Parks and Recreation Commission to install a pedestrian
access at Kennedy Middle School along Hyannisport Drive (was continued at 2/22
meeting).
Parks and Recreation Director Steve Dowling reviewed the staff report and the Council
watched a brief video illustrating the proposed location(s) for pedestrian access. He
explained that two years ago the residents of Hyannisport asked for a restricted parking
permit program which council endorsed, so there is currently a permit required 24 hours a
day to park on the north side of Hyannisport. Some of the users then asked whether it
was time to reconsider providing access to the sports complex. Residents living on Fort
Baker and Wilkinson, and some on Hyannisport, began to raise concerns about parking
impacts based upon this new access point for sports and also school drop-off. The Parks
and Recreation Commission unanimously recommended Option A as the preferred
March 6, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 6
alternative, with a caveat that it be reviewed six months after installation and impacts
would be analyzed and brought back before the commission, and if necessary, the
council, for further action.
Viskovich said that during the six-month period, the first thing that staff will find out is
whether there is any parking overload in the adjacent neighborhoods, and there are
options available such as permit parking. Staff can also do some traffic counting to see if
the volume has increased, although staff does not anticipate a major increase'from a"
traffic point of view. It may even spread out some of the traffic that is currently
experienced on Bubb Road.
Lowenthal asked that staff do a modal count to see if more students are walking to school
during the six-month period, as well as the walking pattern between Kennedy and Monta
Vista schools.
The following individuals spoke in favor of opening one or more gates for access, as well
the best location(s). They also commented on the changes that may occur in regard to
increased traffic, reduced parking and increased litter. Other benefits of pedestrian access
are that it would be more convenient for parents to drop off children and see them reach
the supervision of a responsible adult; more convenient for coaches and parents carrying
gear and food; students will no longer be climbing the fence. Also, there may need to be
a barrier to keep out dirt bikes and motorcycles
Ms. Cathy Gatley, 11510 Well Spring
Ms. Susan Camilleri, 10812 Wilkinson Avenue
Mr. Curtis Gatley, 11510 Well Spring Court
Mr. Dana Drysdale, 21767 Terrace Drive
Mr. Bill Wilson, 11129 Clarkston,
Carl Wanke, Cupertino resident
Kareen Lambert, 777 Squirehill Court
Natalino Camilleri, 10812 Wilkinson Avenue
Ms. Alexandra Kao, a Cupertino resident
Mr. Chris Gatley, 11510 Well Spring
Ms. Gatley noted that the Parks and Recreation Commission had been given a petition of
over 200 signatures from people in the community that were also in favor of opening an
access.
Mr. Leslie Burnell, Holly Oak Drive, said he was neutral about the gate but more
concerned about encouraging the junior high school children to ride their bicycles.
Ms. Kao felt that it was an unsafe area for children to ride bicycles because of all the
traffic. She suggested the gate be put on a timer to better control the access.
March 6, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 7
Robert Levy, 10802 Wilkinson Avenue, said that it would be okay to open a gate or even
to remove the fence entirely, but Council should not set a precedent of changing traffic
patterns merely for convenience.
A letter was received from Vincent and Shirley Pisano, in opposition to another access. It
included a photograph showing illegal parking near the proposed access.
Lowenthal said he wished more people living on Hyannisport had spoken tonight, and the
city needs to acknowledge they pay a price for living there in terms of heavy traffic and a
lot of noise on the weekend. He was in favor of opening both accesses, especially
because he wants to encourage more walking and lower the traffic load.
James said she though it was important to not remove the fence completely, because
unlike a park, there are school security issues. She said she was generally opposed to
permit parking around parks or playground areas, so this will help people to drop offtheir
kids. She was in favor of two openings, and she thought that perhaps more students
might walk to school if they can come through the back gate.
Chang thought that it made sense to have a couple of openings. He said he appreciated
the neighbors for their patience, and said he believed that the permit parking will keep the
situation manageable and may spread out traffic a little bit better.
Bumett said he agreed with the other council members, but would like a little bit more
background about the general traffic problem. One of council's highest priorities is traffic
safety, not only making it safe for children to fide their bikes and walk to school, but also
that it is perceived as safe. He said that he has taught bicycle safety to several thousand
students in the past several years. When he asks them how they get to school, the answer
is usually that they are driven but they want to walk. The council is very anxious to work
with the community and the school district to see if there's some way to overcome the
fear that it is unsafe to walk or ride. Some ways might be street design, enhancing
crosswalks, or expanding the crossing guard program. There are other programs where
adults volunteer to escort groups of children to walk to school, so that there is a trusted
adult present.
Lowenthal said he was in favor of opening both gates, but was concerned about
unintended consequences. There may be some enforcement action necessary over the
next 6 months as the evaluation is done. He asked if this would shift parking down onto
Wilkinson or down onto Fort Baker farther than it is now, and whether additional parking
permit areas will be necessary. He also asked staffto track the citizen input on this issue.
Bumett moved to provide access points to the sports fields at Kennedy Middle School at
both locations that have been considered, with a review after six months. James seconded
and the motion carried 5-0.
ORDINANCES - None
March 6, 2000 Cupertino City Council Page 8
STAFF REPORTS-None
COUNCIL REPORTS
James said she made a presentation to the Board of Supervisors regarding the affordable housing
project on the fire station site. Bumett added that he recently got a communication fi.om the
Council Committee for the County Board of Housing and their staff recommendation is that the
Cupertino Project would receive about 90 percent of the grant money. The amount is about
$650,000. James said that she and Burnett had attended a field trip with the neighborhood.
James acknowledged Finance Director Carol Atwood and Chamber of Commerce Director Linda
Asbury for their work on the teen leadership program, Tomorrows Leaders Today, and she
described the programs that had been developed and the speakers in the community. Also, she
went on tour with the Skate Park Committee to look at skate parks in other communities. They
hope to break ground on Cupertino's skate park by the end of the year. She said that it appears
that rollerbladers and skateboarders can share a facility, but it bicycles do not work out well in
the same facility. James also reported on the status of the search for a new city manager. There
are between 25-30 applications. One of the biggest problems in attracting applicants is the cost
of housing, even with the housing allowance provided by the city. She anticipated that the list of
candidates will be presented to the full council in April, and an offer made by May 1.
Lowenthal reported that the county library had a labor dispute and lawsuit that the JPA got
involved in, and that was settled yesterday to everyone's satisfaction. He said that he spent two
days at the League of California Cities Planning Institute, which was very good, and it seems that
all California cities are working on similar issues. Those include infilling and redevelopment,
and most of all walkability and cute little downtowns.
Chang reminded everyone to vote the next day because there are important issues on the ballot,
including the library construction measure.
Burnett reported on trail proposed to provide entrance fi.om Stevens Creek Blvd. into Rancho
San Antonio Park. The city will need to work with the railroads and the county parks and even
with the developer to a certain extent, but it looks like there will be some kind of opening
ceremony on Trails Day this year.
CLOSED SESSION - None
ADJOURNMENT
At 9:20 p.m., the meeting was adjourned to Friday, March 10, noon-4 p.m., for a goals workshop
with staff and review of library elections results. The meeting will be at the Blackberry Farm
Retreat Center, 21975 San Fernando Avenue, Cupertino.
Kimberly Smith
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 00-085
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'
MARCH 3, 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
o3/o6/ob
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00
CITY OF CUPERTINO
C~ECK R~GISTER - DISSURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between '02/26/2000' and '03/03/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DE~T
1020 575469 02/28/00 1773 D N L DELI 1101070
1020 S75470 02/26/00 4 A T & T 1108501
1020 S75470 02/26/00 4 A T & T 1108501
TOTAL CHECK
1020 S75471 02/26/00 444 MINTON'S LLI~ER S708510
1020 575471 02/26/00 444 MINTON'S LURER 1108503
1020 S75471 02/26/00 444 MINTON'S LL11~ER 1108503
1020 S75471 02/26/00 444 MI~rrON'S LURER 1108506
1020 575471 02/26/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108501
1020 575471 02/26/00 444 MINTON'S LLI~ER 1108503
1020 575471 02226/00 444 MINTON'S LLI~ER 1108501
1020 575471 02/26/00 444 MINTON'S LLI~ER 1108501
1020 575471 02/26/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108315
1020 575471 02/26/00 444 MINTON'S LUI~ER 1108503
1020 575471 02/26/00 444 MIIT~ON'S LUMBER 5708510
1020 575471 02/26/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108501
1020 575471 02/26/00 444 MINTON'S LURER 1108303
1020 575471 02/26/00 444 MINTON'S LURER .2809213
1020 S75471 02/26/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108530
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575472 02/26/00 1220 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108506
1020 S75472 02/26/00 1220 ORCHARD SUPPLYHARDWAR~ 1108506
1020 575472 02/26/00 1220 ORCHARD SUPPLY }b~WARE 1108507
1020 S75472 02/26/00 1220 ORCHARD SUPPLY }~q/~DWARE 1108504
1020 575472 02/26/00 1220 ORCHARD SUPPLY~al%~)WARE 5708510
1020 575472 02/26/00 1220 ORC~ SUPPLY HARDHA~ 1108504
1020 S75472 02/26/00 1220 ORCH~ SUPPLY HARDWAR~ 1108408
1020 575472 02/26/00 1220 ORCHARD SUPPLY I~RDWARE 1108502
1020 575472 02/26/00 1220 ORC~ SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108312
TOTAL CHECK
1020 S75474 02/26/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY H~W~ 1106265
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 ORCH~ SUPPLY HARDWAR~ 1108312
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWA~ 1108303
1020 S75474 02/26/00 981 ORCH~ SUPPLY HAR~A~ 1108312
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 ORC~SUPPLYHARDWAR~ 2708405
1020 S75474 02/26/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLYHARDWAR~ 1108314
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 ORC~SUPPLYH~W~ 1108314
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 5706450
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 ORO1ARDSUPPLYHARDWAR~ 6308540
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 OROIARDSUPPLYHARDHAR~ 1108315
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HA~ARE 6308540
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 ORC~ SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108530
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108303
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY ~U~ 2708405
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLYHARDW~/~ 2708405
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLYHARDWA~ 1103501
1020 575474 02/26/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108530
..... DESCRIPTION ......
FOOD/PLANNING COF94ISSI
TELEPHONE SVCS 1/00
TELEPHONE SVCS 1/00
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES.
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
PAGE
SALES TAX AMOUNT
0.00 115.29
0.00 34.10
0.00 11.73
0.00 45.83
0.00 36.40
0.00 19.65
0.00 113.67
0.00 26.24
0.00 20.20
0.00 168.87
0.00 17.54
0.00 83.72
0.00 11.91
0.00 8.23
0.00 12.54
0.00 30.86
0.00 202.91
0.00 162.27
0.00 29.99
0.00 9/ q
0.00 16.74
0.00 8.87
0.00 21.03
0.00 58.87
0.00 82.26
0.00 60.99
0.00 45.87
0.00 43.28
0.00 S5.28
0.00 393.19
0.00 43.97
0.00 356.72'
0.00 25.56
0.00 169.23
0.00 225.33
0.00 449.54
0.00 346.74
0.00 11.65
0.00 44.19
0.00 225.08
0.00 237.28
0.00 34.16
0.00 16.79
0.00 433.65
0.00 243 ~3
0.00
0.00 9b.~J
RUN DATE 03/06/00 TIME 09:08:08
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
o~/o~/oo
ACCOUNTING PERIOD:
F TION CRITERIA:
9/O0
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CHECK REGISTER - DISEURSEMENT FUND
cransacc. Crans_date between '02/26/2000# and '03/03/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENEl~ FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
1020 575474
1020 S75474
1020 S75474
1020 575474
1020 575474
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575475
1020 575475
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575476
1020 S75477
1020 S75477
1020 575477
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575478
1020 575479
103..~.' 575479
] 575479
1, 575479
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575508
1020 575509
1020 S75510
1020 S75511
1020 S75512
1020 S75513
1020 575514
1020 S75515
1020 575516
1020 575517
1020 575518
1020 575518
TOTAL CHECK
I S75519
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT
02/26/00 981 ORCI~ SUPPLY H~ARE 1108303
02/26/00 981 ORC~ SUPPLY I~I~ARE 1108503
02/26/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 2708405
02/26/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108503
02/26/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 2708405
..... DESCRIPTION ......
SALES TAX
SUPPLIES 0.00 90.43
SUPPLIES 0.00 90.44
SUPPLIES 0.00 24.33
SUPPLIES 0.00 22.70
SUPPLIES 0.00 255.43
0.00 3567.92
02/26/00 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 4209110 ELECTRIC 1/00 0.00
02/26/00 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 4209110 GAS 1/00 0.00
0.00
02/26/00 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1108602 ELECTRIC 1/00 0.00
178.78
106.86
285.64
02/26/00 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1108407
02/26/00 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1108602
02/26/00 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 5606620
19.02
ELECTRIC 1/00 0.00 7.39
ELECTRIC 1/00 0.00 7.84
C4~S 1/00 0.00 83.78
0.00 99.01
02/26/00 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1108407 ELECTRIC 1/00 0.00
02/26/00 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 5708510 WATER SVC 0.00
02/26/00 625 SAN JOSE WATER CO,ANY 1108407 WATER SVC 0.00
02/26/00 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMP/~NY 1108303 WATER SVC 0.00
02/26/00 625 SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY 1108312 WATER SVC 0.00
0. O0
Check numbers 575480-575507 were voided(check numbers were out of sequence)
02/28/00 1083 BROUSSARD INSUR~CH SERV 1101500 INSUI~ANCE 3/1 0.00
03/03/00 1132 3M CENTER 2708405 PARTS & SUPPLIES 0.00
03/03/00 1695 3M TRAFFIC CONTROL MATER 2708405 FARTS/SUP. TP06049 0.00
03/03/00 1744 AARON'S INDUSTRIAL PUMPI 1108504 PARTS/SUPPLIES 0.00
03/03/00 918 ALAMO WORLD TRAVEL AND T 5506549 BAL.DUE/COLUMBIA/RV/CR 0.00
03/03/00 M AMERICA~S FOR THE ARTS 1101042 PAMFHLETS/FUNDRAISING 0.00
03/03/00 M ARAD, AHUVA 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00
03/03/00 S7 ARAMARK 1104510 EMPLOYEE COFFEE 0.00
03/03/00 M BAGWELLo BRETT 580 RENTAL DEPOSIT REFUND 0.00
03/03/00 M BELMONT, NANCY . 5500000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00
03/03/00 1057 BENEFITAMERIcA 110 FLEX 0.00
03/03/00 1057 BENEFITAMERICA 110 DEPENDENT CARE 0.00
0.00
9.96
11.97
16.03
121.81
162.21
312.02
6008.00
22.80
1968.70
500.00
55056.00
45.20
11.00
216.52
500.00
55.00
118.65
769.24
887.89
03/03/00 M BERG, JEI~INIFBR 580 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 100.00
RUN DATE 03/06/00 TIME 09:08:09
- FI~CIAL ACCOUNTING
O3/O6/OO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00
SELECTION CRITERIA:
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
transact.trans_date between N02/26/2000# and N03/03/2000"
FUND - 110 o GENERAL FUND
CASE ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 575520 03/03/00 1475
1020 575521 03/03/00 104
1020 575522 03/03/00 1160
1020 575523 03/03/00 M
1020 575524 03/03/00 M
1020 575525 03/03/00 M
1020 575526 03/03/00 M
1020 575527 03/03/00 1670
1020 S75527 03/03/00 1670
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575528 03/03/00 1460
1020 575529 03/03/00 1460
1020 575530 03/03/00 M
1020 S75531 03/03/00 1156
1020 575532 03/03/00 M
1020 575533 03/03/00 S
1020 575534 03/03/00 M
1020 575535 03/03/00 M
1020 575536 03/03/00 M
1020 575537 03/03/00 M
1020 575538 03/03/00 M
1020 575539 03/03/00 M
1020 575540 03/03/00 M
1020 575541 03/03/00 1729
1020 575542 03/03/00 M
1020 575543 03/03/00 M
BILL'S TREE CAR~ AND LAN 1108314
BRACKEN LIFE INSUR~21CE 6204550
DAVID BRADY 1103300
B~F~W, HE~Y S80
B~STEIN, ~A 580
BUSINESS WEEK 6104800
~TAC C/O LILLI~ JO~S 1101040
~HEW ~ISA 1108503
~W ~ISA 1108~03
C3~RREIRO 5606620
TONI C~IRO 6104800
CASHIER 1108407
CHA 110
CHAN, KIEN 580
· CHAN, SIU-KI AND YI-MING 110
CHEN, SIN-JING 5800000
CHESSEN, DEBI 5800000
CHESSEN, DEBI 5800000
CHEW, KARBN 580
CHING, WANG I. 5800000
CIBLICH, ADRIAN 5700000
~ONDY, JOAN S506549
CAMERON CORRY 4209524
DEAN, JOSEPH 5500000'
DIRECTOR, BEP,~ 5500000
..... DESCRIPTION ......
TREE CARE
EXCESS WC AUDIT #2478
CRYSTL/COMMISSONER/AWR
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
SUBSCRIPTION
INV.022800 MEMBRSHP (S
TIME & MATERI~Ja
TIME & MATERIAL
WEBSITE/S~T-UP/INV.#26
WEBSITE UPDTE/FEB/2000
COPIES/1998bAWS/REG.GU
EMPLOYEE DEDUCTIONS
RECREATION REFUND
R1843 ENCR.EOND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATIONREFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
' RECREATION REFUND
REIMB/PURCH/B INGO/CASH
TRAVEL EXPENSES
RECREATION REFUND
RECRBATIONREFUND
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
PAGE 3
AMOUNT
750.00
1702.00
373.32
15.00
23.50
37.95
45.00
3200.00
1920.00
5120.00
649.00
172'
50.00
145.50
35.50
500.00
11.00
7.75
15.50
44.00
11.00
149.00
46.54
1065.96
325.00
3
RUN DATE 03/06/00 TIME 09:08:09
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
o3/o6/oo
ACCOUNTING PERIOD:
Sr 'ION CRITERIA:
9/00
CITY 0P C'~JP£RTIR0
CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
transac:.trans_date be:ween "02/26/2000' and #03/03/2000#
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
1020 575544
1020 575545
1020 575546
1020 575547
1020 575548
1020 575549
1020 575SS0
1020 575551
1020 575552
1020 575553
1020 S75553
1020 575553
1G. 575554
1020 575555
1020 575556
1020 575557
1020 575558
1020 575558
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575559
1020 575560
1020 575561
1020 575562
1020 575563
1020 575564
1020 575565
10~""-' 575566
ISSU~ DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
03/03/00 M
o3/o3/oo M
03/03/00 M
o3/o3/oo M
03/03/00 930
03/03/00 242
03/b3/00 243
03/03/00 1333
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 S
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 S
03/03/00 298
03/03/00 298
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 S
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
DRAIN BUSTERS, INC. 5506549
DUBOFF, JUNKO 580
DUC, AR, AVHIJEET 5800000
ELDRIDGE, MARVIS 580
DEBORAH ELLIS, ASCA 4249210
EMPLOYI~DEVEL DE~T 110
EMPLO194ENTDE~HOPI~ 110
ESCOMSOFTWARE SERVICES 6109854
F.A.MDOCENT COUNCIL 5506549
FOUR SF~ONS SU1TRCK~ 1100000
FOUR SEASONS Sb~IRO(~ 110
FOUR SEASONS SUNRO(~ 1100000
FRIEDbANDER, RAM 580
GANDHI, ANITA 5800000
GEVA, ORHI 5800000
GONZALES, ANGEHINA 580
GRAINGER 1108303
GRAINGER 1108303
GROZA, JANET 5800000
GROZA, JANET 5800000
HAN, JOURG 5800000
HAN, YOUNG 5800000
HAWKZNS,.NOEH 1108201
HILL, DEBORAH 580
HILL, J 5800000
HObLANI)ER, YONA 580
..... DESCRIPTION ......
TOILET/REPR/CASE/MNGT7
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFU~
RECREATION REFUND
TREE EVALUATION/SR/CNT
STATE WITHHOLDING
STATE DISABILITY
IMPLEMENTATION SERVICE
DOCENT/PRES/TRVH/PRGRM
WOODRIDGE REF. BLDG
WOODRIDGE BLDG PMT
WOODRIDGE BLDG PPrf
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
PARTS/SUP.733-495357-2
PARTS/SUP/733-495359-8
RECREATION REFUND
RECR~TION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
UP-DATE/RCRDS INV.0216
RECRKATION REFUND
RECREATION REFD~ID
RECRF2%TION REFUND
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
PAGE 4
AMOUNT
139.90
S0.00
11.00
59.50
763.33
13904.10
451.85
6250.00
175.00
.187.00
1.30
43.29
231.59
126.00
11.00
22.00
56.00
155.14
26.68
181.82
15.50
31.00
15.50
7.75
10.00
47.00
11.00
30.00
RUN DATE 03/06/00 TIME 09:08:10
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTZNO
03/06/00
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transacC.trans_date between -02/26/2000" and "03/03/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
1020 575567
1020 575568
1020 575569
1020 575570
1020 575571
1020 575572
1020 575573
1020 S75574
1020 575574
1020 575574
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575575
1020 575576
1020 575577
1020 575578
1020 575579
1020 575580
1020 575581
1020 575582
1020 575583
1020 575584
1020 575585
1020 575586
1020 575587
1020 575588
1020 575589
1020 575590
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 343
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 349
03/03/00 349
03/03/00 349
03/03/00 1087
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 806
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 M
03/03/00 1258
HSO, SHU CHIN 5800000
HU, ALICE 580
HUI, JOSEPH 5800000
I.A.E.I 1107503
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-4S 110
INAGAKI, HIROSHI 58Q0000
INAGAKI, HIROSHI 5800000
INTERIM PERSONNEL 1104300
INTERIM PERSONNEL 1107301
INTERIM PERSONNEL 1107301
IPMA WESTERN REGION CONF 1104510
ISHII, JANICE 5800000
ISHII, JANICE 5800000
IwA~HI, NOBUE 5800000
IWAHASHI, NOBUE 5800000
WENDELIa JIU4ES JOHNSON 'JR 1108312
JUNG, COLIN 1107301
ICAO, ALEXANDRA 5800000
KILPATRIC, DEBBIE 580
KIM, CHUNG 5800000
KIM, t-'HUNG 5800000
KIM, MOON 580
KIM, SOOK 580
KOBAYASHI, RIKA 580
Ki~IYAMA, MICHIKO 580
DONNA KREY 1103300
..... DESCRIPTION ......
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RENEW/IAEI 99-2000
DEFERRED COMPENSATION
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
DEBRAMILLER/RCPT
EVELYN WOLF/PLANNING
EVELYN WOLF/PLANNING
IPMACONFERENCE 043000
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
BACKFLOW CLEANING TEST
REIMB MEETING 3/1
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION RRFUND
RECREATION REFUND
PROCSNG/PHOTOS/iOOGFT/
SALES TAX
~.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
i~.oo
0.00
0.00
0.00
PAGE 5
AMOUNT
11.00
43.00
11.00
60.00
6897.24
15.50
31.00
144.00
390.00
30.00
564.00
550.00
15.50
7.75
15.50
75.00
180.00
11.00
57. O0
7.75
15.50
28. O0 .
41.00
100.00
50.00
18
RUN DATE 03/06/00 TIME 09:08:11
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
o3/o6/oo
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00
ION CRITERIA:
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
transact.trans_dace between "02/26/2000" and "03/03/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. vENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT
1020 575591 03/03/00 382 KWIK-KOPY PRINTING 5506549
1020 575592 03/03/00 M KWOK, GLADYS 110
1020 S75593 03/03/00 M KWON, YONG 580
1020 575594 03/03/00 M LAGUISMA, RIGIDA 5800000
1020 S75595 03/03/00 M LAU, EVAN 110
1020 575596 03/03/00 M LAU, TERRI S800000
1020 575597 03/~3/00 391 LEAGUE OF CALIF CITIES 1104300
1020 575598 03/03/00 M LEE, DENNIS & KATHERINE 110
1020 575598 03/03/00 M bEE, DENNIS & KATHERINE 1100000
TOTAL CHECK
1020 S75599 03/03/00 M LEE, GLORIA 110
1020 575600 03/03/00 M LEE, HUA 5800000
10 575601 03/03/00 M bEE, KENNETH 1100000
10, 575601 03/03/00 M LEE, KENNETH 1100000
1020 575601 03/03/00 M LEE, KENNETH 1100000
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575602 03/03/00 M LEE, TERESA 580
1020 575603 03/03/00 M LI, RICHARD 5800000
1020 575604 03/03/00 M LIN, HNA YU 580
1020 575605 03/03/00 M LIU, YING 5800000
1020 575606 03/03/00 M LONG, INGA 5500000
1020 575607 03/03/00 M HAHN, MARYANNE 580
1020 575608 03/03/00 M MARLIN, JEANNE
1020 575609 03/03/00 1238 MICRO C~R
1020 575609 03/03/00 1238 MICRO C~I'ER
1020 575609 07/03/00 1238 MICRO CENTER
1020 575609 03/03/00 1238 MICRO CENTER
1020 575609 03/03/00 1238 MICRO CBNTER
1020 575609 03/03/00 1238 MICRO CENTER
TOTAL CHECK
SS00000
1102401
1102401.
6104800
1102401
1102401
1102401
102,p'''' 575610 '03/03/00 M MOKBEL, A/~IEH
S800000
..... DESCRIPTION= .....
PRTNG/DLVRY/MARCH/NSWL
R6020 ENC.BOND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
INV.R3064 GRADING BOND
RECREATION REFUND
REGISTRN/CITYCLRKS/ASS
R6244 LEGAl, NOTICE
REZONING
R5435 ENCR.BOND
RECREATION REFUND
PERMIT#00010177
PERMIT#00010177
PERMIT#00010177
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
INV.# 709001
INV.# 2517228
NETWORKNG/SUPPLIES 713
INV.#161-SE-708999
INV.# 2705783/2698158
INV.#696575
RECREATION REFUND
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
PAGE 6
M4OUNT
308.51
S00.00
59.00
11.00
9400.00
11.00
285.00
200.00
229O,O0
2490. O0
500.00
11.00
104.90
117.00
35.10
257.00
132.00
52.00
70.00
150.00
325.00
16.00
39.00
1947.42
632.00
351.75
48.34
1723.65
4383.76
9086.92
11.00
RUN DATE 03/06/00 TIME 09:08:11
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
o3/o~/oo
ACCOUNTING PERIOD:
SELECTION CRITERIA:
9/oo
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
transact.crans_date between #02/26/2000" and "03/03/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT C~ECK NO
1020 575611
1020 575612
1020 S75613
1020 575614
1020 575615
1020 575616
1020 575617
1020 575618
1020 575619
1020 575620
1020 575621
1020 S75622
1020 S75623
1020 S75624
1020 575624
1020 575624
1020 575624
1020 S75624
1020 575624
TOTAJa CHECK
1020 S75625
1020 S75626
1020 S75627
1020 575620
1020 575629
1020 575630
1020 575631
1020 575632
1020 575633
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
03/03/00 M MONTA VISTA HIGH SCHOOL 110
03/03/00 M MORTAZAVI, LIANA 580
03/03/00 M MOWER, KATE 580
03/03/00 M MULTICHANNEL NEWS 1103300
03/03/00 M MURPHY, JANET 580
03/03/00 M N.A.P MCKEEVER, MARDI 1106500
03/~3/00 M NAKAO, MICHIYO 5800000
03/03/00 M NAKAO, MICHIYO 5800000
03/03/00 M NCGA C/O ~a, NNE TRIVITTE 5606640
03/03/00 M NEW CTR~AN NEWS 1107200
03/03/00 M NORTHERN CALIF. HAKKAAS SS0
03/03/00 494 OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN 1101500
03/03/00 501 OPERATING ENGINEERS #3 110
03/03/00 833 P E R S 110
03/03/00 833 P E R S 110
03/03/00 833 P E R $ 110
03/03/00 833 P E R S 110
03/03/00 833 P E R S 110
03/03/00 833 P E R S 110
03/03/00 M P.A.E.Y.C 5806349
03/03/00 M PATWARDHAN, JAYA S800000
03/03/00 S33 PEPS LONG T~RM CARE PROO 110
03/03/00 M PETROVA, MIRIAM 580
03/03/00 M PHILLIPS, ELIZABIrI"H 580
03/03/00 M PHILLIPS, SUZANNE 580
03/03/00 545 JEFF PlSERCHIO 5600000
03/03/00 M POI,GAR, DIAN~ 580
03/03/00 1043 PRENTICE H~LL 6104800
..... DESCRIPTION ......
R5509 REC.REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
INV.MC014754 SUESCRPTN
RECREATION REFUND
MEM~RSHP 2000 PMT
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
TRAINING
INV.021400 S. PIASECKI
RECREATION REFUND
SUPPLIES/09072912
UNION DUES
RETIREMENT
RETIREMENT
RETIREMENT
RETIREMENT
RETIREMENT
RETIREMENT
36PINS/STAFF/TANG
RECREATION REFUND
LONG TERM CARE
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
SUBSCRIPTION 372785618
SALES TAX
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.o0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0. O0
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
PAGE 7
AMOUNT
100.00
16.50
71.50
119.00
15.00
20.00
7.75
15.50
55.00
69.00
100.00
10
361.63
21216.30
67.68
305.65
64.56
2869.85
394.68
24918.72
144.00
8.50
359.07
133.00
49.00
95.00
148.32
22.00
85°_.
RUN DATE 03/06/00 TIME 09:08:12
- Fll~/~ClAh ACCOUNTING
03/06/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SF ION CRITERIA: ~ransact.~rans_date between #02/26/2000' and #03/03/2000#
FUND - 110 - GENERAL ~TND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 575634 03/03/00 1071
1020 575635 03/03/00 M
1020 575636 03/03/00 M
1020 575637 03/03/00 M
1020 575638 03/03/00 M
1020 S75639 03/03/00 M
1020 575640 03/03/00 617
1020 S75641 03/03/00 979
1020 S75642 03/03/00 633
1020 575643 03/03/00 M
102~ 575644 03/03/00 M
10, 575645 03/03/00 644
1020 575646 03/03/00 M
1020 575647 03/03/00 1749
1020 575648 03/03/00 M
1020 575649 03/03/00 M
1020 575650 03/03/00 M
1020 575651 03/03/00 658
1020 575652 03/03/00 M
1020 575653 03/03/00 M
1020 575654 03/03/00 677
1020 575655 03/03/00 M
1020 575656 03/03/00 M
1020 575657 03/03/00 M
102~-~ S75658 03/03/00 M
REPUBLIC ELECTRIC 1108530
RIVAILLE, MARE S80
ROEBINS, THOMAS MR.& MRS 5500000
SA~ARIA, ANJINI 5800000
SAHAY, ANJU 5700000
SAKAMOTO, CACHIKO 5800000
SAN JOSE BLUE 1107301
SAN JOSE, CITY OF 1108602
SANTA CLARA SHERIFF/RESE 1107405
SAUNDERS, ANN 5800000
SCHELLERo JAMES S80
SCREEN DESIGNS S806349
SHALOM, ETTI-ISH 5800000
SHANNON ASSOCIATES 1104510
SHARMA, ROHAN 5800000
SHIMOJIMA, ROBIN 5800000
SHUM, JOSEPHINE S80
SILVERADO SPRINGS BOTTLE 1104510
SOULES. KAREN 580
SPITSEN, JOAN 5500000
STATE STREET BANK & TRUS 110
STEPAHENKO, SASHA 5800000
S~PAHENKO, SASHA 5800000
SUGLYAMAo KYOKO 580
SUN, SAM 580
..... DESCRIPTION ......
REPLCD/UNDRGRND/STRLGH
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
SIZE REDCTN/CORNER P/N
TRF/SGNL/BOLLNGR RD
SHRF/SECRTY/BMR MTNG
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
T-SHRTS/YT~&TEEN WNT/C
RECREATION REFUND
CITY MGR.RECRUITMENT
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
DRIVER'S ED. REFUND
EMPLOYEE WATER
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
DEFERRED COHPENSATION
RECREATION REFUND
RECrEATIoN RE 1~'I~
RECREATION REFUND
RECREATION REFUND
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
RMOUNT
9600.00
30.00
110.00
11.00
86.00
11.00
16.13
2303.48
266.14
17.00
32.50
525.01
11.00
6371.48
11.00
11.00
70.00
122.s0
43.00
40.00
891.79
7.75
15.50
93.00
184.00
RUN DATE 03/06/00 TIME 09:08:13
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
03/06/00
ACCOUNTING PERIOD:
SELECTION CRITERIA:
9/00
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CHECK REGISTER ~ DISBURSEMENT FUND
transact.trans_date between "02/26/2000" and "03/03/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
lO2O 575859 o3/o3/oo .
1020 STSSSO 03/03/00 M
1020 575881 03/03/00 M
1020 575852 03/03/00 M
1020 575663 03/03/00 M
lO2O 575664 03/03/00 M
1020 575665 03/~3/00 M
1020 575686 03/03/0o M
1020 S75667 03/03/00 830
1020 5~5668 03/03/00 1154
1020 575669 03/03/00 M
1020 575670 03/03/00 840
1020 579671 03/03/00 M
1020 575672 03/03/00 M
1020 575673 03/03/00 M
1020 575674 03/03/00 M
1020 575675 03/03/00 302
1020 575676 03/03/00 M
1020 575677 03/03/00 M
1020 575678 03/03/00 M
1020 575679 03/03/00 M
TOTAJ~ CASH ACCOUNT
TOTAL FUND
TOTAL REPORT
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
TJtNG, CHARLES 110
TECHIKA, MADOKA 5800000
TECHIKA, MADOKA 5800000
TENGo ANNE 5800000
THE HOME CHURCH 110
THE WALL STREET JOURN~J~ 55G6549
TRINH, I~NG 5800000
~JTTLE, LUCETTA 580
UNITED SOIL ENGINEERING 4209114
UNITED WAY OF SANTA CIGAR 110
VIAUD, COSETTE 5806349
BERT VISKOVICH 1108001
VOEFE, SOPHIA 580
WADA, HIROYUKI 5800000
WADA, HIROYUKI 5800000
WARD, PKARL 5500000
WASHINGTON I~AL 110
WEGENER, MIKE S80
XUE, AIDONG 5800000
Z;~.RA, RACHEL 5800000
ZHONG, WEIHONG 580
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX
R#9279 ENER.BOND 0.00
RECREATION REFUND 0.00
RECREATION REFUND 0.00
RECREATION REFUND 0.00
R4744 REC.REFUND 0.00
2/26 SUBSCRPTN 0.00
RECREATION REFUND 0.00
RECREATION REFUND 0.00
REV/FOUNDTN/GRDG/PLN/M 0.00
EMPLOYEE DEDUCTIONS 0.00
II~#13195 MAT.&TAPES R 0.00
AIRFARE/2000APA N/P/C 0.00
RECREATION REFUND 0.00
RECREATION REFUND 0.00
RECREATION REFUND 0.00
RECREATION REFUND 0.00
DEFERRED COMPENSATION 0.00
RECREATION REFUND 0.00
RECREATION REFUND 0.00
RECREATION REFUND 0.00
RECREATION REFUND 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
PAGE 9
AMOUNT
500.00
15.50
31.00
11.00
500.00
106.09
11.00
93.00
500.00
136.75
735.00
38,
75.00
7.75
15.50
325.00
17956.92
145.00
11.00
11.00
43.00
208830.28
208830.28
208830.28
RUN DATE 03/06/00 TIME 09:08:13
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
RESOLUTION NO. 00-086
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
[,1ARCH 10w 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:
Direct"o~ ~Jf AdminiStrative Services
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting oft he 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
.... ! !
o3/1o/od ?
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 574493 V 01/07/00 880 TOOLS SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT 5706450
1020 575132 V 02/11/00 392 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CIT 1107301
1020 575262 V 02/18/00 391 LEAGUE OF CALIF CITIES 1101000
1020 575589 V 03/03/00 M KOMIYAMA, MICHIKO 580
1020 575609 V 03/03/00 1238 MICRO CENTER
1020 575609 V 03/03/00 1238 MICRO CENTER
1020 575609 V 03/03/00 1238 MICRO CENTER
1020 575609 V 03/03/00 1238 MICRO CENTER
1020 575609 V 03/03/00 1238 MICRO CENTER
1020 575609 V 03/03/00 1238 MICRO CENTER
TOTAL CHECK
1102401
1102401
1102401
1102401
1102401
6104806
1020 575680 03/07/00 455 HEATHER MOLL
5806249
1020 575681 03/10/00 1695
1020 575681 03/10/00 1695
1020 575681 03/10/00 1695
1020 575681 03/10/00 1695
1020 575681 03/10/00 1695
1020 575681 03/10/00 1695
TOTAL CHECK
3M TRAFFIC CONTROL MATER 2708405
3M TRAFFIC CONTROL MATER 2708405
3M TRAFFIC CONTROL MATER 2708405
3M TRAFFIC CONTROL MATER 2708405
3M TRAFFIC CONTROL MATER 2708405
3M TRAFFIC CONTROL MATER 2708405
1020 575682 03/10/00 3
A RENTAL CENTER 1108303
1020 575683 03/10/00 M
ABBOTT, TRACY 5800000
1020 575684
03/10/00 1743 AC LUMBER
5609105
1020 575685
1020 575685
1020 575685
TOTAL CHECK
03/10/00 13
03/10/00 13
03/10/00 13
ACME & SONS SANITATION C 1108303
ACME & SONS SANITATION C 5606640
ACME & SONS SANITATION C 1108321
1020 575686
03/10/00 17 ADIRONDACK DIRECT
5506549
1020 575687
1020 575687
1020 575687
1020 575687
TOTAL CHECK
03/10/00 1680 ADVANTAGE GRAFIX 1108601
03/10/00 1680 ADVANTAGE GRAFIX 1107301
03/10/00 1680 ADVANTAGE GRAFIX 1108101
03/10/00 1680 ADVANTagE GRAFIX 6308540
1020 S75688
03/10/00 21 ADVANTAGE SIGN & DESIGN 1108303
1020 575689
1020 575689
TOTAL CHECK
03/10/00 26 AIR FILTER CONTROL INC 1108504
03/10/00 26 AIR FILTER CONTROL INC 1108502
..... DESCRIPTION ......
TECH SUPPORT FOR 2000
REGISTRATION/C JUNG
REGISTRATION/S JAMES
RECREATION REFUND
INV.# 2705783/2698158
INV.# 709001
INV.#696575
INV.#161-SE-708999
INV.# 2517228
NETWORKNG/SUPPLIES 713
PAGE I
SALES TAX AMOUNT
0.00 -750.00
0.00 -290'.00
0.00 -290.00
0.00 -50.00
0.00 -1723.65
0.00 -1947.42
0.00 -4383.76
0.00 -48.34
0.00 -632.00
0.00 -351.75
0.00 -9086.92
RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 222.00
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
PARTS & SUPPLIES
RECREATION REFUND
INSTALL FENCE/GATE
TOILET RENTAL
PORTABLE TOILETS 2/00
TOILET RENTAL
PORTABLE PARTITION SYS
REPRODUCTION OF FORMS
DRAFT/EIR/DOC/VALLC/DE
REPRODUCTION OF FORMS
VEHICLE REPORT FORM
11.14 146.14
47.00 616.70
107.42 1409.50
30.87 40~ 09
144.44 II ?
1.16 ~. z2
342.03 4487.82
0.00 28.15
0.00 45.00
0.00 6012.00
0.00 247.01
0.83 168.83
0.00 154.13
0.83 569.97
0.00 1870.09
28.80 377.89
0.00 167.81
43.20 566.83
0.00 50.88
72.00 1163.41
7.43 582.43
0.00 161.08
0.00 182.90
0.00 34' qB
RENOVATE SR CTR SIGN
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:44
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 2
ACCOL~ING PERIOD: 9/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSE~ FUND
'CTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_dace between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
1020 575690
1020 575691
1020 575692
1020 575692
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575693
1020 575694
1020 575695
1020 575695
TOTAL CHECK
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
03/10/00 32
03/10/00 36
03/10/00 45
03/10/00 45
03/10/00 M
O3/lO/OO M
o3/io/oo s9
o3/i0/00 S9
1020 575696 03/10/00
1020 575697 03/10/00
i020 575697 03/10/00
1020 575697 03/10/00
1020 575697 03/10/00
575697 03/10/00
575697 03/10/00
1020 575697 03/10/00
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575698
1020 S75698
TOTAL CHECK
1020 S75699
1020 575699
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575700
1020 575701
1020 575702
1020 575703
1020 575704
1020 575705
ALCO PRODUCTS INC 6308540
ALLEN'S PRESS CLIPPING 1103300
AMERICAN~TL%FFIC SUPPLY 2708405
AMERICAN TRAFFIC SUPPLY 2708405
1020 575706
1020 575706
1020 575706
', CHECK
ANCHOR AUDIO, INC. 1106265
APWA ; 1108001
AR/gE SIGN CO 2708405
~ SIGN CO 1108501
M ATLAS, TED 1102401
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY
AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY
AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY
AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY
AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY
AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY
AU~TDMATIC RAIN COMPANY
5708510
5708510
1108407
1108407
5708510
1108303
5708510
03/i0/00 83
03/10/00 83
..... DESCRIPTION ......
SUPPLIES
FEBR.CLIPPINGS
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES/SIGNS
03/10/00 720
03/10/00 720
REPAIR ANCHOR SOUND/SY
ANNU;tL MEMBERSHIP
SUPPLIES
SIGNS
03/i0/00 M
03/10/00 M
03/10/00 M
O3/lO/OO M
03/10/0o 96
03/lO/OO lo6
03/10/00 113
03/10/00 113
03/10/00 113
EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
BA'r£z~IES PLUS 6308540 SUPPLIES
BA-i-r~IES PLUS 6308540 SUPPLIES
~A~T~R¥ SYST~ 6308540 PARTS
BATTERY SYSTEMS 6308540 ' PARTS
BAY ~REA DISTRIBUTORS 6308540
Bm~-r~ ROADS ~%~%ZINE 1108101
BIG GUY INC, BRIAN KELLY 110
BIG GUY INC.,BRIAN KELLY 110
BLACK MT SPRING WATER 5606680
BRIDGE RADIO COF~4UNICATI 1108501
BRUNSWICK HOMESTEAD LANE 5806349
BRUNSWICK HOMESTEAD LANE 5806349
BR~SWICK HOMESTEAD LANE 5806349
SALES TAX
AMOUNT
0.00 231.45
0.00 36.00
0.00 94.77
0.00 158.64
0.00 253.41
0.00 274.52
0.00 495.00
0.00 411.35
0.00 97.42
0.00 508.77
0.00 299.85
0.00 148.81
0.00 75.81
12.01 157.77
6.49 85.13
0.00 22.29
21.64 283.77
0.00 18.83
40.14 792.41
0.00 136.37
0.00 68.19
0.00 204.56
4.95 64.90
15.51 203.51
20.46 268.41
SUPPLIES 0.00 403.65
SUBSCRIPTION 0.00 20.00
R3342 PERF.BOND REFUND 0.00 500.00
R3335 REFUND DEV.FEE 0.00 200.93
BOTT'LED WATER 0.00 24.65
MORTOROLA RADIO REPAIR 0.00 159.73
BWLNG/WNTR/WNDRFL/OMP 0.00 189.68
TEEN/WNTROMP/BWLNG/2/2 0.00 75.35
BWLNG/WNTR/WNDRFL/CMP 0.00 107.51
0.00 372.54
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:44
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
..... DESCRIPTION ......
SALES TAX
PAGE 3
AMOUNT
1020 575707
1020 575708
1020 575708
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575709
1020 575710
1020 575711
1020 575712
1020 575712
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575713
1020 575714
1020 575715
1020 575715
1020 575715
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575716
1020 575717
1020 575718
1020 575718
1020 575718
1020 575718
1020 575718
TOTAL CHECK
03/10/00 821
03/10/00 121
03/10/00 121
03/i0/00 i22
03/10/00 M
03/10/00 125
03/10/00 127
03/10/00 127
03/10/00 M
03/10/00 1670
03/10/00 1476
03/10/00 1476
03/10/00 1476
03/10/00'M
03/10/00 144
03/10/00 144
03/10/00 144
03/10/00 144
03/10/00 144
03/10/00 144
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
1020 575719 03/10/00 149
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY INST 1104510
C.E.O. SERVICES INC 2204011
C.E.O. SERVICES INC 2204011
JUAN CABR2LL 5806449
CACEO 1104530
CALIF STATE COMPUTER STO 6104800
THE CALIFORNIA CHANNEL 1103500
THE CALIFORNIA CHA/qNEL 1103500
CALT~S 1108101
MATTHEW CAMISA 1108503
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 110
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 110
CANNON DESIGN GROUP 110
CASEY, ALLENE 5506549
CASH 5606620
CASH 5806649
CASH 1106100
CASH 5606620
CASH 5606680
CASH 5606640
CASH 1104510
CASH 5208003
CASH 1107503
CASH 1108001
CASH 1100000
CASH 1103300
CASH 1106100
CASH 1104100
CASH 6104800
CASH 1104300
CASH 1101070
CASH 1107200
CASH 1104000
CASH 1104400
NEW HORIZON'S BEST C~A
YOUTH DIRECTOR
YOUTH DIRECTOR
RECREATION PROGRAM
MEMBERSHIP TO CACEO 3X
ETHERLINK
BROADCAST FEES
BROADCAST FEES
PLANS
CONCRETE SLAB
PROF SVCS 1/00 R6241
PROF SVCS 1/31 R6121
PROF SVCS 12/99 R6121
0.00 650.00
0.00 750.00
0.00 750.00
0.00 1500.00
0.00 697.50
0.00 90.00
98.69 1294.99
0.00 213.47
0.00 205.92
0.00 419.39
0.00 62.00
0.00 6900.00
0.00 880.00
0.00 2' 6
0.00 9. ~0
0.00 4354.76
REFUND/TRIP OVERPMT 0 . 00 68 . 00
REDWOOD GRAPE STAKES
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURsEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PET~/ CASH REIMBURSFAWE
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
CASH SHORTAGE
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSm4E
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REiMBURSEME
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
0.00 225.00
0.00 8.64
0.00 24.06
0.00 98.51
0.00 71.77
0.00 21.92
0.00 224.90
0.00 66.77
0.00 5.00
0.00 54.00
0.00 20.00
0.00 5.00
0.00 16.21
0.00 53.78
0.00 20.93
0,00 37.02
0.00 29.00
0.00 3.2S
0.00 32.00
0.00 ' O0
0.00
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:45
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO . PAGE 4
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
· ~TION CRITERIA: transac=.~rans_da=e between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000m
FUND - 110 - GE~ FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
1020 575719
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575720
1020 575721
1020 575721
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575722
1020 575723
1020 575724
1020 575725
1020 575726
1020 575727
1020 575727
1020 575727
! ', CHECK
1020 575728
1020 575728
1020 575728
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575729
1020 575730
1020 575730
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575731
1020 S75732
1020 575733
1020 575733
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575734
1020 575735
1020 S75736
575737
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
03/10/00 149 CASH 1101000
03/10/00 1567
o3/io/oo i5o
03/10/00 150
CBC COAST BUSINESS COB~4U 4209524
CCS PLANNING & ENGINEERI 2709436
CCS PLANNING & ENGINEERI 4209525
03/10/00 155
03/i0/00 M
03/10/00 166
03/10/00 170
03/10/00
03/10/00 916
03/10/00 916
03/10/00 916
CENTRAL WHOLESALE NURSER 1108303
CENTURY BUSINESS SOLUTIO 1108601
KIMBERLY MARIE CLARK 5806449
GEORGE MACFARLANE CLOWAR 5806249
COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT 110
COMPUTER X~S XPRESS 6104800
COMPUTER XTI~AS XPRESS 6'104800
COMP~R 2C]~J~S XPRESS 6104800
03/10/00 183
03/i0/00 183
03/10/00 183
COT~N
COTTON
COTTON
SHIRES & ASSO IN 110
SHIRES & ASSO IN 110
SHIRES & ASSO IN 110
03/10/00 1130
03/10/00 M
O3/10/OO M
..... DESCRIPTION ......
PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME
03/10/00 984
03/10/00 191
03/10/00 194
03/10/00 194
INSTALLATION FEE
PROF SVCS THRU 1/31/00
PROF SVCS THRU 1/31/00
03/10/00 198
03/10/00 1776
03/10/00 209
03/10/00 211
SALES TAX
0.00 122.85
0.00 539.20
0.00 920.00
0.00 1860.00
0.00 957.83
0.00 2817.83
SUPPLIES 0.00 188.14
PHOTO SUPPLIES 0.00 36.49
RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 300.00
RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 110.00
INS PREMIUM 3/00 0.00 66.75
TONER CARTRIDGES 0.00 194.85
TONER CARTRIDGES 0.00 113.66
TONER CARTRIDGEs 0.00 227.33
0.00 S35.84
PROF SVCS R4783
PROF SVCS R5364
GEOLOGIC SURVEY R1733
COURT WORKS 5706450 COURTSERVE
CPRS DISTRICT IV 5806349 JULIA LAMY
CPRS DISTRICT IV 1106200 PEGGY FORD
CROSSROADS CHEVRON SERVI 6308540
CUPERTINO CHAMBER OF C0M2204011
CUPERTINO SUPPLY INC 1108501
CUPERTINO SUPPLY INC 1107405
CUPERTINO UNION SCHL DIS 5806349
D & M TRAFFIC SERVICES 6309820
DE ANZA SERVICES INC 1108501
DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF CA 110
CITY VEHICLES GASOLINE
TEEN LEADERSHIP
PARTS & SUPPLIES
PARTS & SUPPLIES
0.00 1345.50
0.00 1474.40
0.00 1000.00
0.00 3819.90
41.58 520.38
0.00 15.00
0.00 15.00
0.00 30.00
0.00 1631.66
0.00 56.21
0.00 83.18
0.00 571.61
0.00 654.79
0.00 869.14
264.00 3464.00
0.00 195.00
0.00 12252.04
FACILITY USAGE FEES
LA~OR & MATERIAL
SHAMPOO CARPETS/CITY
DENTAL INSURANCE
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:46
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000"
FUND - 110 - GEITEI~ FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 575738 03/10/00 1492 DF,NCO SALES COMPANY 2708405
1020 575739 03/10/00 850
1020 575739 03/10/00 850
1020 575739 03/10/00 850
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575740 03/10/00 222
1020 575740 03/10/00 222
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575741 03/10/00 223
1020 575742 03/10/00 1376
1020 575743 03/10/00 230
1020 575744 03/10/00 M
1020 575745 03/10/00 1434
1020 575746 03/10/00 239
1020 575746 03/10/00 239
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575747
1020 575748
1020 575748
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575749
1020 575749
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575750
1020 575751
1020 575752
1020 575753
1020 575754
1020 575754
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575755
1020 575756
DIDDAMS AMAZING PARTY ST 5806649
DIDDAMS AMAZING PARTY ST 5806349
DIDDAMS AMAZING PARTY ST 5806649
DKS ASSOCIATES 2709412
DKS ASSOCIATES 2709412
DON & MIKE'S SWEEPING IN 2308004
DUDLEY ACOUSTICS INC 2809213
DURHAM TRANSPORTATION 5806349
E & H THIRD FAMILY LP 110
EDW~RD S. WALSH CO. 1108407
ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS 1108530
ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTORS 1108530
O3/lO/OO 930
03/10/00 253
03/10/00 253
DEBORAR ELLIS, ASCA 4249210
EXCHANGE LINEN SERVICE 5806249
EXCHANGE LINEN SERVICE 5806249
03/10/00 260
03/10/00 260
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 1107301
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 1106100
O3/lO/OO M
03/10/00 M
O3/lO/OO 266
03/10/00 1526
03/10/00 274
03/10/00 274
FILEMAKER PRO ADVISOR 1103500
FORBES 6104800
RYAN FORBES 5806449
MIRIAM FRANK 5506549
FRY'S ELECTRONIC 1108315
FRY'S ELECTRONIC 1108315
O3/lO/OO 277
03/10/00 1275
JOHN FUNG 5806249
GARDEN CITY SUPPLY INC 1106265
..... DESCRIPTION ......
VINYL MAT/SUPPLIES
GHOST WALK SUPPLIES
WINTR/WNDRFL/CMP/SUPPL
GHOSTWALK SUPPLIES
PROF SVCS THRU 12/31/9
PROF SVCS THRU 12/31/9
SALES TAX
PAGE 5
AMOUNT
0.00 79.04
0.00 367.09
0.00 38.18
0.00 71,36
0.00 476.63
0.00 4313.46
0.00 8698.22
0.00 13011.68
STREET SWEEPING 2/00 0.00 9850.80
CEILING PANELS 0.00 282.66
TRANSPORTATION WNT/CMP 0.00 663.35
REFUND DEV.FEE 0.00 9.02
PARTS & SUPPLIES 0,00 55.10
SUPPLIES 132.66 1822.00
SUPPLIES 13.48
146.14 1, ,75
0.00 190.66
0.00 23.48
0.00 98.73
0.00 122.21
0.00 49.61
0.00 16.25
0.00 65.86
TREE EVALUATION
CATERING PROGRAM
CATERING PROGRAM
DELIVERY CHARGES
SUPPLIES
RENEW SUBSCRTN.FILEMAK 0.00 83.00
SUBSCRIPTION 0.00 34.97
RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 1969.00
YOGA INSTRUCTION 0.00 320.00
SUPPLIES 0.00 402.31
PRINTER AND SUPPLIES 99.82 1309.79
99.82 1712.10
0.00 72.75
RECREATION PROGRAM
WIRE BASKETS/QCC COFFE
0.00 1~~ 41
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:46
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 6
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
~'CTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 GARDENI~ 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 GARDENLAND 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 GARDENL4%ND 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 GA~F~ 1108315
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 GARDEN~ 1108321
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 GARDEN~ 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 C~]~N'I~ 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 C~E~ 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 GARDEN'LAND 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 GARDE~ 1108314
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 G~EI~ 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 C4%RDF~ 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 GA~ENLAND 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 C4~RDEi~ 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 GARDF~ 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 G~E~ 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 GARDF/~ 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 G~ENLAND 5606620
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 GARDF~NLAND 5606640
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 C~E~ 1108321
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 GARDENI~ 6308540
1020 575758 03/10/00 281 G~E~ 5606620
575758 03/10/00 281 GARDE~ 6308540
~ CHECK
1020 575759 03/10/00 776
1020 575759 03/10/00 776
TOTAL CHECK
GCSWESTERN POWER & EQUI 6309820
GCS WESTERN POWER & EQUI 6308540
1020 575760 03/10/00 M GLOBAL KNOWI~E 6104800
1020 575761
03/10/00 1783 GOLDEN GATE TRUCK CENTER 6308540
1020 575762
03/10/00 291 GOLDEN TOUCH LANDSCAPING 1108314
1020 575763 03/10/00 296 F, ARENGOTTLEIB 5806449
1020 575764 03/10/00 1276 GOURb~T EXPRESS 5806249
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1108303
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1108530
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 GP, AINGER INC 1108314
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1108530
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 G~AINGER INC 1108530
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 GRANGER INC 1108501
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 (~AINGER INC 1108501
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 GRAINGER INC '5706450
1020 575765 ,03/10/00 298 GRAINGER INC 6308540
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 G~NGER INC 6308540
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1108315
575765 03/10/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1108530
..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX
AMOUNT
CREDIT 1/25/00 0.00 -2.46
PARTS 2.49 32.73
PARTS 5.32 69.81
SUPPLIES 0.00 151.30
EQUIPMENT/SUPPLIES 0.00 436.66
CREDIT 2/7/00 0.00 -69.02
PARTS 10.53 138.21
PARTS 0.37 4.87
PARTS 2.46 32.26
SUPPLIES 0.00 490.61
PARTS 7.26 95.24
PARTS 0.03 0.42
PARTS 9.07 119.00
PARTS & 1J~OR 5.12 152.20
PARTS 4.68 61.38
PARTS 1.05 13.74
PARTS & LABOR 0.54 117.13
PARTS 0.00 0.48
PARTS 0.00 18.95
PARTS & SUPPLIES 0.00 48.30
PARTS 6.23 81.77
PARTS · 0.00 72.99
SUPPLIES 13.58 178.18
68.73 2244.75
PORTABLE TOILET TRAILE 500.03 7167.03
SUPPLIES 0.00 96.02
500.03 7263.05
0.00
3DAY COURSE SF 4/3-4/5
1595.00
PARTS & SUPPLIES 0.00 193.55
LABOR AND MATERIAL 0.00
2100.00
RECREATION PROGP, AM 0.00 672.00
CATERING PROGRAM 0.00 111.10
SUPPLIES 0.00 34.34
SUPPLIES 0.00 34.35
SUPPLIES 0.00 34.34
SUPPLIES 1.59 20.95
SUPPLIES 4.74 62.19
SUPPLIES 0.00 34.35
SUPPLIES 6.43 84.39
PARTS & SUPPLIES 0.00 360.69
SUPPLIES 3.95 51.85
SUPPLIES 5.35 70.15
LADDERS/SUPPLIES 0.00 508.92
SUPPLIES 0.00 302.58
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:47
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTiN~
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1108314
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1108502
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 GRAINGER INC 5708510
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1108530
1020 575765 03/10/00 298 GRAINGER INC 1108504
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575766 03/10/00 313 H & H ATHLETIC TEAM SUPP 1108312
1020 575767 03/10/00 853 JERRY HAAG 1107302
1020 575768 03/10/00 320 KATHI F~%RKNESS 5806449
1020 575769 03/10/00 915 MARK HENDERSON 6104800
1020 575770 03/10/00 1086 JENNIFER HERRLINGER 1106500
1020 575771 03/10/00 1235 HIG~K LIFE INSURANCE 110
1020 575771 03/10/00 1235 HIGHMARK LIFE INSURANCE 6414570
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575772
1020 575773
1020 575774
1020 575775
1020 575776
1020 575776
1020 575776
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575777
1020 575778
1020 575779
1020 575780
1020 575780
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575781
1020 575781
1020 575781
1020 575781
1020 575781
TOTAL CHECK
03/10/00 337
03/10/00 1628
03/10/00 341
03/10/00 1761
'O3/lO/OO 995
03/10/00 995
03/10/00 995
HUSBANDS & ASSOCIATES 5208003
HYDROTEC IRRIGATION EQUI 1108312
ICE CHALET 5806449
INDUSTRIAL LAUNDRY SERVI 1108005
INSERV COMPANY 1108504
INSERV COMPANY 1108502
INSERV COMPANY 1108501
03/10/00 349
O3/lO/OO M
03/iO/O0 M
03/10/00 1657
03/10/00 1657
INTERIM PERSONNEL 1107301
JOSEPH KOVALIK 110
JOSEPH KOVALIK 110
JOSEPHINE'S PERSONNEL SE 5806249
JOSEPHINE'S PERSONNEL SE 5506549
03/10/00 369
03/10/00 369
03/10/00 369
03/10/00 369
O3/lO/OO 369
KELLY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 5708510
KELLY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 5708510
~ELLY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 1108506
KELLY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 2809213
KELLY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 2809213
..... DESCRIPTION ......
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
BALLAST/SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SALES TAX
PAGE 7
AMOUNT
0.00 47.73
13.05 171.33
12.06 158.18
0.00 537.98
8.26 114.77
55.43 2629.09
KWIK GOAL 123.34 1868.34
DEV,INTSTY.MANUAL REVI 0.00 1080.00
RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 576.00
REIMBURSEMENT 0.00 42.45
SR CTR PROGRAM 0.00 350.00
LIFE INSURANCE 3/2000 0.00 7092.80
LONG TERM DISABILITY I 0.00 4883.96
0.00 11976.76
CONCRETE SITE
LABOR & MATERIAL
RECREATION PROGRAM
SUPPLIES
WATER TREATI~_/~T 3/2000
WATER TREATMENT 3/2000
WATER TREATMENT 3/2000
290.61 4662.21
0.00 ~ dO
0.00 3154.00
57.35 784.85
0.00 159.49
0.00 159.49
0.00 159.49
0.00 478.47
0.00 390.00
0.00 1650.00
0.00 584.53'
0.00 389.50
0.00 389.50
0.00 779.00
0.00 35.17
0.00 22.89
0.00 136.96
0.00 25.79
0.00 137.67
0.00 3c~ 48
EVELYN WOLF/PLANNING T
R4952 REF/DEP PERF.BON
R4953 REFUND DEV.FEE
CATERING ST;LFF
CATERING STAFF
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
PARTS & SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:48
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 8
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: CIiECK REGISTER - DISBURSI~ ~
'CTION CRITERIA:
9/00
~ransact.trans_da=e between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000"
~ - 110 - GF~NERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT
1020 575782
03/10/00 1166 KERLEY'S HUNTING & FISHI 1108322
1020 575783 03/10/00 371 LISA KING 5806449
1020 575784 03/10/00 372 KINKO'S INC 1106647
1020 575785 03/10/00 373 KIRK XPEDX 1104300
1020 575785 03/10/00 373 KIRK XPEDX 1104300
1020 575785 03/10/00 373 KIRK XPSDX 1104300
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575786 03/10/00 M KOMIYAMA, SATOKO 580
1020 575787 03/10/00 1258 DONNA KREY 1103300
1020 575788
03/10/00 391 L~.GUE OF C~IF CITIES 1101500
1020 5'75789 03/10/00 400 LIFETIME TENNIS INC 5706450
1020 575790
03/10/00 1658 LI~'I'LER MENDSLSON P C 1104511
575791 03/10/00 403 ANGELO M LOMBAR/)O 1108602
575791 03/10/00 403 ANGELO M LOMB~ 1108602
~CHECK
1020 575792 03/10/00 1634 JII~ LOPEZ 1104510
1020 575793 03/10/00 M
MAYO CLINIC HEALTE LETTE 5506549
1020 575794 03/10/00 1602
1020 575794 03/10/00 1602
TOTAL CHECK
MBIA MUNISERVICES COMPAN 1100000
MBIA MUNISERVICES COMPAN 1100000
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
1020 575796
10~0 575796
575796
03/10/00 431 MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1106265
03/10/00 431 MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1101201
03/10/00 431 MC WHORTER'S OFFIC~ PROD 5706450
03/10/00 431 MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1108201
03/10/00 431 MC WHOR~R'S OFFICE PROD 1108101
03/10/00 431 MC WHOR~ER'S OFFICE PROD 1108201
03/10/00 431 MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 5506549
03/10/00 431 MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1106100
03/10/00 431 MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1101031
03/10/00 431 MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1108601
03/10/00 431 MC WHOR~R'S OFFICE PROD 1104510
03/10/00 431 MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 5706450
03/10/00 431 MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 5506549
03/10/00 431 MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1106647
03/10/00 431 MC WHOR~R'S OFFICE PROD 1106647
03/10/00 431 MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1108201
03/10/00 431 MC WHOR~R'S OFFICE PROD 2708405
03/10/00 431 MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 5806649
..... DESCRIPTION ......
SUPPLIES
RECREATION PROGRAM
SIGNS/LAMINATING
CREDIT 9/27/1999
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SALES TAX
AMOUNT
0.00 20.57
0.00 877.25
0.00 7.73
0.00 -788.09
36.17 474.32
42.79 561.04
78.96 247.27
RECRI~ATIONREFUND 0.00 50.00
REIMBUR~F/WENT 0.00 141.57
REGISTRATION/CONFERF, NC 0.00 325.00
TF~IS INSTI~UCTION 0.00 36374.41
SCO~ I~Z CASE 0.00 4924.49
CONSULTING FEE 2/18/00 0.00 70.00
REPAIR TRAFFIC SIGNAL 0.00 150.00
0.00 220.00
RE IMBURSF~NT
NEWSLETTER
TAX AUDIT SERVICES
TAX AUDIT SERVICES
0.00 366.00
0.00 24.0O
0.00 63.80
0.00 1250.00
0.00 1313.80
0.00 13.83
0.00 19.03
0.00 21.09
0.00 36.22
0.00 46.01
0.00 25.02
0.00 8.79
0.00 33.56
0.00 7.58
0.00 10.09
0.00 45.10
0.00 39.47
0.00 17.31
0.00 20.17
0.00 16.05
0.00 74.65
0.00 27.69
0.00 15.46
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
NAMEPLATE
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:48
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 9
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transac~.trans_date between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 575796 03/10/00 431
1020 575796 03/10/00 431
1020 575796 03/10/00 431
1020 575796 03/10/00 4hl
TOTAL CHECK
MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1107200
MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1106300
MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 5506549
MC WHORTER'S OFFICE PROD 1106647
1020 575797
03/10/00 900 MESITI-MILLER ENGINEERIN 1108501
1020 575798
1020 575798
1020 575798
1020 575798
1020 575798
1020 575798
1020 575798
TOTAL CHECK
03/10/00 437 METRO NEWSPAPERS 1104300
03/10/00 437 METRO NEWSPAPERS 1104300
03/10/00 437 METRO NEWSPAPERS 1104300
03/10/00 437 METRO NEWSPAPERS 1104300
03/10/00 437 METRO NEWSPAPERS 1101070
03/10/00 437 METRO NEWSPAPERS 1104300
03/10/00 437 METRO NEWSPAPERS 1104300
1020 575799
1020 575799
1020 575799
1020 575799
1020 575799
1020 575799
TOTAL CHECK
03/10/00 1238 MICRO CENTER 1102401
03/10/00 1238 MICRO CENTER 1102401
03/10/00 1238 MICRO CENTER 1102401
03/10/00 1238 MICRO CENTER 1102401
03/10/00 1238 MICRO CENTER 1102401
03/10/00 1238 MICRO CF~R 1102401
1020 575800
1020 575800
1020 575800
TOTAL CHECK
03/10/00 443
03/10/00 443
03/10/00 443
MILLENNIUM MECHANICAL IN 1108502
MILLENNIUM MECHANICAL IN 5708510
MILLENNIUM MECHANICAL IN 5708510
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
1020 575801
TOTAL CH~CK
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108314
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108312
03/10/00 444 MI1TFON'S LUMBER 1108504
03/10/00 444 MIITTON'S LUMBER 1108602
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108503
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 5708510
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108504
03/10/00 444 MI1TI'ON'S LUMBER 1108503
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 2708405
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108315
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 5708510
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 2809213
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108303
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 2708405
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108303
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LI~ER 5208003
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 2708405
03/10/00 444 MINTON'S LUMBER 1108530
1020 575802
03/10/00 447 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 1108201
..... DESCRIPTION ......
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
TANK REPLACEMENT PMT4
LEGAL PUBLICATION
LEGAL PUBLICATION
LEGAL PUBLICATION
LEGAL PUBLICATION
PUB . HRNG NTCE/PC
LEGAL PUBLICATION
LEGAL PUBLICATION
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
CREDIT 2/10/00
SERV.CALL~LIBR
SERVICE CALL/REPR/DUCT
SEEr. CALL INSPECT HEAT
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SALES TAX
AMOUNT
0.00 47.63
0.00 27.18
0.00 28.55
0.00 25.94
0.00 606.42
0.00 6345.09
0.00 110.00
0.00 570.00
0.00 47.50
0.00 77.50
0.00 250.00
0.00 42.50
0.00 90.00
0.00 1187.50
0.00 167.59
0.00 1556.06
0.00 1947.42
0.00 4383.76
0.00 6~o-00
0.00 4
0.00 86~.49
0.00 112.50
0.00 262.50
0.00 150.00
0.00 525.00
0.00 10.62
0.00 117.69
0.00 52.30
0.00 33.65
0.00 76.30
0.00 71.08
0.00 91.48
0.00 50.80
0.00 148.80
0.00 8.34
0.00 78.64
0.00 38.94
0.00 88.09
0.00 47.77
0.00 24.75
0.00 9.80
0.00 76.30
0.00 4.36
0.00 1029.71
UNIFORM SERVICE 0 . O0 2
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:49
- rINAMCIAL ACCOUNTZ.O
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 10
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
--''CTION CRITERIA: =ransact.trans_date between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 575802 03/10/00 447 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 1108201
1020 575802 03/10/00 447 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 1108201
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575803
03/10/00 465 MOUNTAIN VIEW GARDEN CEN 5606640
1020 575804 03/10/00 902 DAVID MOYER 1108315
1020 575805 03/10/00 1617 ~u'LTIGP. APHICS INC 5806249
1020 575806 03/10/00 1137 EILEEN MURRAY 1101500
1020 575807 03/10/00 471
1020 575807 03/10/00 471
1020 575807 03/10/00 471
1020 575807 03/10/00 471
TOTAL CHECK
M~fERS TIRE SUPPLY COMPAN 6308540
MYERS TiRE SUPPLY COMPAN 6308540
MYERS TIRE SUPPLY COMPAN 6308540
MYERS TIRE SUPPLY COMPAN 6308540
1020 575808
03/10/00 1191 NA~ANUR~ERY INC
1108408
1020 575809
575810
03/10/00 475
03/10/00 1550
NATION~tL CONSTRUCTION RE 1108312
ADONIS L NECESITO 1103501
1020 575811
1020 575811
1020 575811
1020 575811
TOTAL CHECK
03/10/00 484 NEW PIG CORP 1108005
03/10/00 484 NEW PIG CORP 1108005
03/10/00 484 NEW PIG CORP 1108005
03/10/00 484 BrEW PIG CORP 1108005
1020 575812
03/10/00 485 ~ TRAFFIC SIGNS 2708405
1020 575813
1020 575813
TOTAL CHECK
03/10/00 486
03/10/00 486
NOBLE FORD TRACTOR INC 6308540
NOBLE FORD TRACTOR INC 6308540
1020 575814
1020 575814
1020 575814
TOTAL CHECK
03/10/00 496 O'GRADY PAVING INC 2708404
03/10/00 496 O'GRADY PAVING INC 2708404
03/10/00 496 O'GRADY PAVING INC 2709435
1020 575815
03/10/00 494 OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN 1101500
1020 575817
1020 575817
1020 575817
1020 575817
1020 575817
1020 575817
10~, 575817
575817
03/10/00 981 ORC~h%RD S~PLY HArDWArE 1108303
03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLYHARDW~ 1108315
03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY F~%RDWARE 2708405
03/10/00 981 ORCHA~SUPPLY HARDWAR~ 6308540
03/10/00 981 ORC~SUPPLY }~ 1108315
03/10/00 981 ORC~ SUPPLY HARDWA~ 1106265
03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWI~RE 2708405
03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108303
..... DESCRIPTION ......
UNIFORM SERVICE
UNIFORM SERVICE
SALES TAX
AMOUNT
0.00 83.92
1.21 21.90
1.21 189.74
SUPPLIES 0.00 38.92
PROF.SERV/PESTCDE SPRA 0.00 1570.00
REPAIR ROLL LAMINATOR 0.00 206.83
REIMBURSF2~ENT 3/1 CONF 0.00 98.70
SUPPLIES 0.00 41.50
SUPPLIES 0.00 34.89
SUPPLIES 0.00 86.53
SUPPLIES 0.00 251.65
0.00 414.57
TREE PLANTING
PROFESSIONAL SVCS
ABSOREENTMATS
HAZ MAT SUPPLIES
HAZ MAT SUPPLIES
}{AZ MAT SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
PARTS/SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES/OIL
ASPHALT REPAIRS
ASPHALT REPAIRS
SPEED BUMP REPAIR
110.47 1449.47
0.00 41.65
0.00 225.00
0.00 1153.10
0.00 175.00
0.00 2171.26
0.00 383.95
0.00 3883.31
0.00 485.65
0.00 8.66
0.00 24.28
0.00 32.94
0.00 2011.75
0.00 2339.00
0.00 8000.00
0.00 12350.75
0.00 139.14
0RD.092089427-001
SUPPLIES 0.00' 23.21
SUPPLIES 0.00 53.82
SUPPLIES 0.00 34.01
ON TIME PMT DISCOUNT 0.00 -6.50
SUPPLIES 0.00 229.58
ON TIME PMT DISCOUNT 0.00 -6.50
SUPPLIES 0.00 46.49
ON TIME PMT DISCOUNT 0.00 -6.50
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:50
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 11
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERIL~ FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108312
1020 578817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108407
1020 575817' 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108312
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HA~WARE 1103501
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108314
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDW~ 1108407
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORC~ SUPPLY HA~DWARE 2708405
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108315
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108503
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108530
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 2708405
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORC~ SUPPLY HARDWARE 5706450
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108321
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108312
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108315
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108312
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD sUPPLY HARDWARE 1108503
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108315
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108303
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY H~WA~E 5806649
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108312
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108303
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108315
1020 575817 03/10/00 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108407
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575818 03/10/00 504 ORIENTAL TP~I%DING CO 1103300
1020 575819 03/10/00 507 DAN OSBORNE 1108503
1020 575819 03/10/00 507 DAN OSBO~/~E 1108503
1020 575819 03/10/00 507 DAN 0SBOR~IE 1108312
1020 575819 03/10~00 507 DAN OSBORNE 1108314
1020 575819 03/10/00 507 DAN 0SBOR~E 1108503
1020 575819 03/10/00 507 DAN OSBORNE 1108503
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575820 03/10/00 508 P E R S - HEALTH 110
1020 575820 03/10/00 508 P E R S - HEALTH 1104510
1020 575820 03/10/00 508 P E R S - HEALTH 1104510
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575821 03/10/00 511 PACIFIC BELL 1108501
1020 575822
03/10/00 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1108602
1020 575823
03/10/00 1699 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 4249210
1020 575824 03/10/00 1646 PAGENET 1104400
1020 575825 03/10/00 520 PAPERDIRECT INC 1103300
..... DESCRIPTION ......
ON TIME PMT DISCOUNT
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
ON TIME PMT DISCOUNT
ON TIME PMT DISCOUNT
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
ON TIME PMT DISCOUNT
ON TIME PMT DISCOUNT
ON TIME PMTDISCOUNT
ON TIME PMT DISCOUNT
ON TIME PMT DISCOUNT
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
'SUPPLIES
SALES TAX
0.00 -6.50
0.00 213.89
0.00 29.39
0.00 -6.S0
0.00 -6.50
0.00 410.05
0.00 49.96
0.00 -6.50
0.00 -6.50
0.00 -6.50
0.00 -6.50
0.00 -6.50
0.00 29.40
0.00 304.33
0.00 158.67
0.00 208.81
0.00 37.78
0.00 54.08
0.00 38.94
0.00 7.12
0.00 95.70
0.00 35~.25
0.00 1
0.00 2~..70
0.00 2601.89
0.00 53.90
PROGRESS PAYMENT 0.00 1360.00
INSTLTN/METAL HALIDE L 0.00 875.00
LABOR & MATERIALS 0.00 1280.00
LABOR & MATERIALS 0.00 385.00
LA~OR & MATERIALS 0.00 185.00
INSTLTN METAL HALIDE L 0.00 875.00
0.00 4960.00
0.00 39879.07
0.00 19942.06
0.00 293.88
0.00 60115.01
MARCH 2000 PREMIUMS
MARCH 2000 PREMIUMS
MARCH 2000 PREMIUMS
TELEPHONE SVCS 0.00 13.63
ELECTRIC 12/99 0.00 10.92
SR.CNTR.NEW ELECTRIC S 0.00 9528.50
PAGER SVCS 0.00 24.92
0.00 1~° 70
SUPPLIES
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:51
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 12
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
~'CTION CRITERIA:
9/00
~ransact.trans_date between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSU~ DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT
1020 575826 03/10/00 M
PARADISE POINT RESORT 1101500
1020 575827 03/10/00 913 PBS 1103500
1020 575828 03/10/00 913 PBS 1103500
1020 575829 03/10/00 M
PENINSULA BIBLE CHURC~ C 110
1020 575830 03/10/00 529 PENTAMATIONENTERPRISES 6109850
1020 575830 03/10/00 529 PENTAMATION ENTERPRISES 6109850
1020 575830 03/10/00 529 PENTAMATION ENTERPRISES 6109850
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575831
03/10/00 1782 PERFECT EDGE CUTLERY & C 1108407
1020 575832 03/10/00 535 PETERS-DE LAET INC 6308540
1020 575832 03/10/00 535 PETERS-DE LAET INC 6308540
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575833 03/10/00 542 PINE CONE LUMBER 2809213
1020 575833 03/10/00 542 PINE CONE LUMBER 1108501
1020 575833 03/10/00 542 PINE CONE LUMBER 1108501
575833 03/10/00 542 PINE CONE LU~BER 2809213
~ CHECK
1020 575834 03/10/00 545 JEFF PISERCHIO 5606640
1020 575835 03/10/00 547 PIZAZZ PRINTING 5506549
1020 575835 03/10/00 547 PIZAZZ PRINTING 5606600
1020 575835 03/10/00 547 PIZAZZ PRINTING 5806349
1020 575835 03/10/00 547 'PIZAZZ PRINTING 5806249
1020 575835 03/10/00 547 PIZAZZ PRINTING 5806449
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575836 03/10/00 1406 RANIES CHEVORLET 6308540
1020 575836 03/10/00 1406 RANIES CHEVORLET 6308540
1020 575836 03/10/00 1406 RANIES CHEVORLET 6308540
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575837 03/10/00 575 RECYCAL SUPPLY 5208003
1020 575838 03/10/00 M REICHART, ROSEMARIE 5506549
1020 575839
03/10/00 594 RIVERVIEW SYSTEMS GROUP 6309820
1020 575840 03/10/00 599
1020 575840 03/10/00 599
TOTAL CHECK
ROSS RECREATION EQ~T CO. 4209108
ROSS RECREATION EQ~T CO. 4209108
.10~0 575841 03/10/00 601 ROYAL BRASS INC 2708405
..... DESCRIPTION ......
SEMINAR 2000/SPRNG CON
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
THE CREATIVE AGE VIDEO
R5520 REFUND QCC DEPOS
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
IVC008400
SHARPEN PAPER
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
PROFESSIONAL SVCS
SPRING P&R SCHEDULES
SPRING P&RSCHEDULES
SPRING P&R SCHEDULES
SPRING P&R SCHEDULES
SPRING P&R SCHEDULES
CREDIT 2/3/00
PARTS
PARTS
RECYCLE BOXES
ADMISSIONS
SHUREGOOSENECK MIC
EQUIPMENT AND LABOR
LABOR &MATERIAL
SUPPLIES
SALES TAX
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
AMOUNT
171.35
150.00
75.00
100.00
0.00 1142.98
0.00 4449.71
0.00 600.00
0.00 6192.69
0.00 109.00
0.00 127.64
0.00 202.56
0.00 330.20
0.00 243.50
0.00 243.50
0.00 35.11
0.00 35.11
0.00 557.22
0.00 1705.00
0.00 442.47
0.00 236.29
0.00 2259.69
0.00 2259.69
0.00 2259.69
0.00 7457.83
0.00 -32.93
9.68 126.97
2.81 36.83
12.49 130.87
102.44 1570.80
0.00 69.00
101.19 1347.77
2265.20 31777.20
119.21 11469.79
2384.41 43246.99
0.00
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:51
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSE~ Ft~
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
1020 575842 03/10/00 602
1020 575843 03/10/00 M
1020 575844 03/10/00 345
1020 575844 03/10/00 345
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575845 03/10/00 M
1020 575846 03/10/00 308
1020 575847 03/10/00 638
1020 575848 03/10/00 1648
1020 575849 03/10/00 M
1020 575850 03/10/00 652
1020 575850 03/10/00 652
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575851 03/10/00 658
1020 575851 03/10/00 658
1020 575851 03/10/00 658
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575852 03/10/00 M
1020 575853 03/10/00 1523
1020 575853 03/10/00 1523
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575854 03/10/00 891
1020 575855 03/10/00 1421
1020 575856 03/10/00 1090
1020 575857 03/10/00 1090
1020 575858 03/10/00 1090
1020 575859 03/10/00 681
1020 575860 03/10/00 686
1020 575860 03/10/00 686
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575861
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
ROYAL COACH TOURS 5506549
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA M 1103300
SAN FRANCISCO ELEVATOR 1108501
SAN FRANCISCO ELEVATOR 1108502
SAN JOSE GIANTS 1104001
SANTA CLARA, COUN~"f OF 1107301
SARATOGA TREE SERVICE 1108302
SAVIN CORPORATION 1101070
SHARON HACK 110
SIERRA SPRING WATER COMP 1101500
· SIERRA SPRING WATER COMP 1106265
SILVERADO SPRINGS BOTTLE 1104510
SILVERADO SPRINGS BOTTLE 1104510
SILVERADO SPRINGS BOTTLE 1104510
SNYDER, ALLEN OR MIRIAM 5500000
JANA SOKALE 1108601
JANASOK~ 4209113
JOAN SPITSEN 5506549
STANLEY STEA~ER 1108504
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 1104300
STATE BOARD OF EQUA/~IZAT 1104300
STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 1104300
CONNIE BANDA STEVENS 5806449
DARRYL STOW 2204010
DARRYL STOW 2204010
03/10/00 1361 ~7{E STUNT RE~AL COMPAN 5806249
..... DESCRIPTION ......
TRANSPORTATION
PUBLICATION
ELEVATOR SVCS 3/00
ELEVATOR SVCS 3/00
PARK PACKER 4476
MICROFILMING CHARGES
INSPECTION OAK TREES
TRANSPARENCIES/9700COP
R3621 KEFUND QCC DEPOS
BOTTLED WATER
WATER 1/12-2/9/00
WATER
WATER
WATER
REFUND DONATION
PREPARE AGNDA/MINUTES
PROF SVCS 11/20-2/18
REIMBURSF24~
SHAMPOO CARPETS
ANNEXATION FEE 00-078
ANq~EXATION FEE 00-079
ANNEXATION FEE 00-077
RECREATION PROGRAM
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
EQUIP.RENTAL/CATERING
PAGE 13
S;%LES TAX AMOUNT
0.00 398.01
0.00 189.00 ·
0.00 140.01
0.00 47.24
0.00 187.25
0.00 2000.00
0.00 63.00
0.00 191.25
0.00 134.53
0.00 100.00
0.00 19.75
0.00 84.50
0.00 104.25
0.00 ~0
0.00 1~.00
0.00 100.50
0.00 386.50
0.00 100.00
0.00 515.55
0.00 2547.36
0.00 3062.91
0.00 93.60
0.00 380o00
0.00 300.00
0.00 300.00
0.00 300.00
0.00 400.00
0.0~ 750.00
0.00 750.00
0.00 1500.00
0.00 ~ ~3
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:52
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 14
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
--~TION C~ITERIA: transacc.crans_dace between "03/06/2000" and "O3/10/2000"
FT3ND - 110 - ~F..NERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT
1020 575862
03/10/00 692 SVI TRAINING PRODUCTS IN 6104800
1020 575863 03/10/00 695
1020 575863 03/10/00 695
TOTAL CHECK'
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5506549
SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5806249
1020 575864 03/10/00 700 TARGET SPECIAL%~f PRODUCT 1108312
1020 575864 03/10/00 700 TARGET SPECI~tL/~f PRODUCT 1108303
1020 575864 03/10/00 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108407
1020 575864 03/10/00 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108303
1020 575864 03/10/00 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108407
1020 575864 03/10/00 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108302
1020 575864 03/10/00 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108312
1020 575864 03/10/00 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108314
1020 575864 03/10/00 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108407
1020 575864 03/10/00 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108315
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575865 03/10/00 701 TARGET STORES 5806349
1020 575865 03/10/00 701 TARGET STORES 5806349
1020 575865 03/10/00 701 TARGET STORES 5606680
1020 575865 03/10/00 701 TARGET STORES 5806349
575865 03/10/00 701 TARGET STORES 5806349
~ CHECK
1020 575866 03/10/00 1763 /"AEATERFUN INC 5806349
1020 575867
03/10/00 880 TOOLS SYS/~MS Fd%NAGEMEIT~ 5706450
1020 575868
03/10/00 715 TRANSPORTATION SUPPLIES 6308540
1020 575869 03/10/00 830
1020 575869 03/10/00 830
TOTAL CHECK
UNIteD SOIL ENGINEERING 4249210
UNI~ SOIL ENGINEERING 4249210
1020 575870 03/10/00 1328 US TOY CO INC 1103300
1020 575871 03/10/00 738 V~T.T.~-Y 0IL COMPANY 6308540
1020 575872
03/10/00 739 VAT.T.~y SLURRY SEAL CO 2708404
1020 575873
03/10/00 746 VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS 5506549
1020 575874 03/10/00 750 VISION SERVICE PLAN 110
1020 575875
03/10/00 1559 WATKIN & BORTOLUSSI INC 2159620
1020 575876 03/10/00 M WENRIC'S 1108312
19~0 878877 03/10/00 771
878877 o3/lo/oo 771
~T~ VAT,T.~ SE~ITY 1108407
~ VAT.T.~Y SECURITY 1106265
..... DESCRIPTION ......
SVI TRAINING CDROM
SENIOR CENTER COFFEE S
CATERING PROGRAM
SUPPLIES
CREDIT 2/7/00
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
PRE-SCHOOL
POLAROID FILM
SUPPLIES
PRE-SCHOOL
PRE - SCHOOL
RECREATION PROGRAM
TECENICAL SUPPORT
PARTS & SUPPLIES
PROF SVCS 2/29/00
PROF SVCS
SUPPLIES SWING WEEK
FUEL
STREET MAIN~T~NANCE
SUPPLIES
VISION INSURANCE
LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENT
METAL DETECTOR
KEYS
KEYS. FOR Q.C.C.
SALES TAX
311.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
66.21
0.00
2.17
66.20
59.88
66.20
41.56
66.21
25.49
66.20
460.12
AMOUNT
4611.75
85.92
682.05
767.97
868.68
-433.00
28.45
868.67
785.64
868.67
545.36
868.68
334.51
868.67
5604.33
0.00 34.60
0.00 41.55
0.00 132.99
0.00 51.58
0.00 40.89
0.00 301.61
0.00 1380.00
0.00 750.00
0.00 189.57
0.00 175.00
0.00 175.00
0.00 350.00
0.00 413.75
0.00 316.28
0.00 38003.55
0.00 171.72
0.00 1932.10
0.00 4465.00
0.00 270.58
0.00 20.47
0.00 85.01
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:53
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
03/10/00 CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 9/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "03/06/2000" and "03/10/2000"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND
CASH ACCT CHECK NO
TOTA~ CHECK
1020 575878 03/10/00 774
1020 575879 03/10/00 780
1020 575880 03/10/00 782
1020 575881 03/10/00 784
1020 575882 03/10/00 1131
1020 575882 03/10/00 1131
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575883 03/10/00 790
1020 575884 03/10/00 793
1020 575885 03/10/00 794
1020 575885 03/10/00 794
TOTAL CHECK
1020 575886 03/10/00 802
1020 575887 03/10/00 1558
TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT
TOTAL FUND
TOTAL REPORT
ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DE[PT
WESTERN HIGHWAY PRODUCTS 2708405
WHEEL AWAY CYCLE CENTER 1102401
TRAVICE WHITTEN 4249210
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES 1108601
CIDDY WORDELL 1107301
CIDDY WORDELL 1107301
WORLD OF MUSIC 1106265
NANCY WULFF 5806249
XEROX CORPORATION 1104310
XEROX CORPORATION 1104310
ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPAN 6308540
JOSE ZUNIC~A JR 1106265
..... DESCRIPTION ......
ANCHORS/SLEEVES SUPPLI
SUPPLIES & MATERIALS
PROF/SERV/SR.CNTR/CELL
PROF SVCS 1/00
REIMBURSEMENT/HOTEL
APA CONFERENCE REIMBUR
RENTAL AUDIO EQUIPMENT
RECREATION PROGRAM
COPIER LEASE AGMT
BASE CHARGE 1/00
SUPPLIES
SECURITY STAFF 2/26/00
PAGE 15
SALES TAX AMOUNT
0.00 105.48
0.00 507.24
296.98 3896.70
0.00 3665.95
0.00 2386.85
0.00 65.67
0.00 500.O0
0.00 565.67
0.00 200.00
0.00 2400.00
70.57 926.04
93.27 1223.79
163.84 2149.83
0.00 J3
0.00 60.00
6252.47 443637.22
6252.47 443637.22
6252.47 443637.22
RUN DATE 03/10/00 TIME 09:00:53
- FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING
RESOLUTION ~ER 00-087
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 SALARIES
AND WAGES PAID ON
MARCH 03, 2000
WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Servi. ees, 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 fzom the funds set forth:
GROSS PAYROLL
Less Employee Deductions
NET PAYROLL
Payroll check numbers issued 46144 through 46357
Void check number
$345,749.48
$(113,825.76)
$231,923.72
C~TIFIED:
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
RESOLUTION NIJMBER 00-088
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 SALARIES
AND WAGES PAID ON
MARCH 17, 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 fi.om the funds set forth:
GROSS PAYROLL
Less Employee Deductions
$368,476.90
$(123,374.01)
NET PAYROLL
$244,735.89
Payroll check numbers issued 46358 through 46570
Void check number
Dit~ector of A~s'
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
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. ~
Meeting Date: March 20, 2000
SUBJECT:
Resolution of Intention to Amend the Contract with the California Public Employees'
Retirement System.
BACKGROUND:
Government Code Section 21023.5 was amended effective January 1, 2000, enabling
public agencies to amend their contracts with the Public Employees' Retirement System
(PERS) to provide public service credit for members who served in the Peace Corps or
America Corps: VISTA Service. The proposed contract amendment is not expected to
result in additional cost to the City of Cupertino.
The attached Resolution of Intention must be adopted by the City Council prior to the
required ordinance amending the contract with PERS.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt resolution.
Willi~
Huma
te~
by:
~Voska
Resources Manager
Dortma v.,~rown
City Manager
Printed on Recycled Paper
RESOLUTION NO. 00-089
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CUPERTINO PROVIDING NOTICE OF AN INTENT TO APPROVE AN
AMENDMENT TO A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF
ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES'
RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
WHEREAS, the Public Employees' Retirement Law permits the participation of
public agencies and their employees in the Public Employees' Retirement System by the
execution of a contract, and sets forth the procedure by which said public agencies may
elect to subject themselves and their employees to amendments to said Law; and
WHEREAS, one of the steps in the procedures to amend this contract is the
adoption by the governing body of the public agency of a resolution giving notice of its
intention to approve an amendment to said contract, which resolution shall contain a
summary of the change proposed in said contract; and
WHEREAS, the following is a statement of the proposed change:
To provide Section 21023.5. (Public Service Credit for
Peace Corps or America Corps: VISTA Service) for
miscellaneous members.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Cupertino does hereby give notice of intention to approve an amendment to the contract
between the City of Cupertino and the Board of Administration of the Public Employees'
Retirement System, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto as an "Exhibit" and
by this reference made a part hereof..
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 20th day of March, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
CalPERS
EXHIBIT
California
Public Employees' Retirement System
AMENDMENT TO' CONTRACT
Between the
Board of Administration
California Public Employees' Retirement System
and the
City Council
City of Cupertino
The Board of Administration, California' Public Employees' Retirement System,
hereinafter referred to as Board, and the governing body of the above public agency,
hereinafter referred to as Public Agency, having entered into a contract effective August
16, 1967, and witnessed July 10, 1967, and as amended effective June 1, 1973, March
1, 1974, December 22, 1976, December 18, 1978, June 17, 1981, December 30, 1981,
September 19, 1991, January 7, 1993 and March 9, 2000 which provides for
participation of Public Agency in said System, Board and Public Agency hereby agree
as follows:
Paragraphs 1 through 13 are hereby stricken from said contract as executed
effective March 9, 2000, and hereby replaced by the following paragraphs
numbered 1 through 13 inclusive:
All words and terms used herein which are defined in the Public
Employees' Retirement Law shall have the meaning as defined therein
unless otherwise specifically provided. "Normal retirement age" shall
mean age 55 for local miscellaneous members and age 55 for local safety
members.
Public Agency shall participate in the Public. Employees' Retirement
System from and after August 16, 1967 making its emploYees as
hereinafter provided, members of said System subject to all provisions of
the Public Employees' Retirement Law except such as apply only on
election of a contracting agency and are not provided for herein and to all
amendments to said Law hereafter enacted except those, which by
express provisions thereof, apply only on the election of a contracting
agency.
Employees of Public Agency in the following classes shall become
members of said Retirement System except such in each such class as
are excluded by law or this agreement:
a. Local Fire Fighters (herein referred to as local safety members);
b. Local Police Officers (herein referred to as local safety members);
Co
Employees other than local safety members (herein referred to as
local miscellaneous members).
In addition to the classes of employees excluded from membership by
said Retirement Law, the following classes of employees shall not become
members of said Retirement System:
NO ADDITIONAL EXCLUSIONS
After March 1, 1974 and prior to January 1, 1975, those members who
were hired by Public Agency on a temporary and/or seasonal basis not to
exceed 6 months were excluded from PERS membership by contract.
Government Code Section 20305 supersedes this contract provision by
providing that any such temporary and/or seasonal employees are
excluded from PERS membership subsequent to January 1, 1975.
The percentage of final compensation to be provided for local
miscellaneous members for each year of credited prior and current service
shall be determined in accordance with Section 21354 of said Retirement
Law, subject to the reduction provided therein for service prior to
December 31, 1981, termination of Social 'Security, for members whose
service has been included in Federal Social Security (2% at age 55 Full
and Modified).
The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of
credited prior and current service for local safety members who elected to
continue under the provisions of Section 21366 shall be determined in
accordance with Section 21366 of said Retirement Law subject to the
reduction provided therein for Federal Social Security (One-half pay at age
55 Modified).
Public Agency elected and elects to be subject to the following optional
provisions:
ao
Section 21222.1 (Special 5% Increase-1970). Legislation repealed
said Section effective January 1, 1980.
b. Section 20965 (Credit for Unused Sick Leave).
10.
11.
Section 20614, Statutes of 1978, (Reduction of Normal Member
Contribution Rate): From December 18, 1978 and until June 17,
1981, the normal local miscellaneous member contribution rate
shall be 3.500%. Legislation repealed said Section effective
September 29, 1980.
do
Section 20690, Statutes of 1980, (To Prospectively Revoke Section
20614, Statutes of 1978), for local miscellaneous members only.
Section 20042 (One-Year Final Compensation) for local
miscellaneous members only.
Section 21024 (Military Service Credit as Public Service), Statutes
of 1976 for local miscellaneous members only.
go
Section 21573 (Third Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits) for local
miscellaneous members.
Section 21023.5 (Public Service Credit for Peace Corps or America
Corps: VISTA Service) for local miscellaneous members only.
Public Agency, in accordance with Government Code Section 20790,
ceased to be an "employer" for purposes of Section 20834 effective on
December 22, 1976. Accumulated contributions of Public Agency shall be
fixed and determined as provided in Government Code Section 20834,
and accumulated contributions thereafter shall be held by the Board as
provided in Government Code Section 20834.
Public Agency shall contribute to said Retirement SYstem the contributions
determined by actuarial valuations of prior and future service liability with
respect to local miscellaneous members and local safety members of said
Retirement System.
Public Agency shall also contribute to said Retirement System as follows:
ao
Contributions required per covered member on account of the 1959
Survivor Benefits provided under Section 21573 of said Retirement
Law. (Subject to annual change.) In 'addition, all assets and
liabilities of Public Agency and its employees shall be pooled in a
single account, based on term insurance rates, for survivors of all
local miscellaneous members.
bo
A reasonable' amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one
installment within 60 days of date of contract to cover the costs of
administering said System as it affects the employees of Public'
Agency, not including the costs of special valuations or of the
periodic investigation and valuations required by law.
A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one
installment as the occasions arise, to cover the costs of special
valuations on account of employees of Public Agency, and costs of
the periodic investigation and valuations required by law.
12.
Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be
subject to adjustment by Board on account of amendments to the Public
Employees' Retirement Law, and on account of the experience under the
Retirement System as determined by the periodic investigation and
valuation required by said Retirement Law.
13.
Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be paid
by Public Agency to the Retirement System within fifteen days after the
end of the period to which said contributions refer or as may be prescribed
by Board regulation. If more or less than the correct amount of
contributions is paid for any period, proper adjustment shall be made in
connection with subsequent remittances. Adjustments on account of
errors in contributions required of any employee may be made by direct
payments between the employee and the Board.
B. This amendment shall be effective on the
BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION?,~?;'''
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RET~I:~ENT SYSTEM
BY
KENNETH W. M~-z~¥ON, CHIEF
ACTUARIAL ~LOYER SERVICES DIVISION
PUBLIC %~YEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM
~ day of
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Witne,ss ~
Clerk
AMENDMENT
PERS-CON-702A (Rev. 8\96)
CITY OF
CUPEP INO
City Hau
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) ???-3262
FAX: (408) 777-3366
Agenda Item
SUMMARY
Date: March 20, 2000
Subject: Approval of recommendation from Telecommunications Commission for awarding a
public access grant.
Background: At its meeting March 1, the Telecommunications Commission reviewed an
application for a public access grant totaling $250. The commission has a $2,000 grants budget,
and funding for the proposal would come from that source.
The commission discussed the project with Charles Chadwick, who produces a program called
Ambient on Cable. The show spotlights the work of student, independent and experimental film
and video makers. The commission agreed with the producer that the show provides a showcase
for various art forms of sound and performance that is not otherwise readily available to
Cupertino residents.
Recommendation: The City Council approve the recommendation from the
Telecommunications Commission to award a $250 grant to access producer Charles Chadwick to
produce three to four episodes of Ambient on Cable for the public access channel.
Submitted By:
Donna Krey
Public Information Officer
City Manager
Printed on Recycled Paper
02/25/00
01:06 ~i3:4053~61255 Klnko's of Los ~atos
0O2
:' :City' of'CuPertinO::
TeleCOmmunications: C0mmisSion
GRANTAPPLICATION FORM.
:':: .:...:..:.'..:
.:: .: .::['..:.':.
':.,,: ::: :,., :'
.:'.::.,:: :...
'....: ,,:, :.:'.,:
'{ :.: .'::' :. :: '.)....
,::..:..,..::..:..,..:..:.:::::. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
,!::.:...:.':::::,
~j Z~
02/25/00 01:0?_FAX 4083561255 Kln~o's of Los Gatos ~003
GRANT STATEMENT: AMBIENT ON CABLE
Ambient on Cable lsa program dedicated to the transmission of student,
independent, and experimental film and video works. It also plays a role
i~ exposln~ the art forms of sound and performance to the public at large.
It has induced a response in ~ts viewers, and exposed Cupertino and bay
area residents ~O works of art tha~ ghey would hoc have ordinarily seen.
Thus, i: adds to the cultural diversity of Cupertino and other communities.
The iasc ~ran~ ~hat you were so ~enerou.~ to ~i~e me was put to ~ood use.
I: produced three half hour episodes that showcase~' tbs work of 5otb local
and international artists. I amnow askin~ for anotber ~rant in the amount
of $2~0 to pay for ~he followin~ items'.
film tO video transfer: $100
video Cape stock: $i50
I plan on producing another ~hree to four episodes with this amount. TS. ey
will be produced between the dace of ~ki~ request · and fall of this 7ear.
The show will as alwaTs be promoted Chroug5 f//ers', the in,'ex.et, and wot4
of mouth. With luck, my cont~cued efforts w~ll produce tbs. same sort of
response that has been receive~ thus far. Tbank .~ou forTour ti~e.
RESOLUTION NO. 00-090
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND AMONG THE
CITY OF CUPERTINO, THE CUPERTINO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SANTA CRUZ AND FOOTHILL DE ANZA
COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT SPONSORING THE OPERATION OF
LEADERSHIP CUPERTINO AND TOMORROW'S LEADERS TODAY
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council, at a regular meeting of
the City Council, held on March 20, 2000, at 10300 Tone Avenue, Cupertino, California,
a proposed agreement between and among the City. of Cupertino, the Cupertino Chamber
of Commerce, the University of California, Santa Cruz and Foothill De Anza Community
College District sponsoring the operation of Leadership Cupertino and Tomorrow's
Leaders Today and said agreement having been approved by the City Attorney;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Mayor and the City Clerk
are hereby authorized to sign the aforementioned 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 20~ day of March, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
AGREEMENT BETWEEN AND AMONG THE CITY OF
CUPERTINO, THE CUPERTINO CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE, THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SANTA
CRUZ AND FOOTHILL DEANZA COMMUNITY COLLEGE
DISTRICT SPONSORING THE OPERATION OF
LEADERSHIP CUPERTINO AND TOMORROW'S LEADERS
TODAY
This Agreement (hereinafter "Agreement") is made and entered into as of July
1, 1999, (hereinafter "Effective Date") between and among the City of Cupertino, a
California municipal corporation (hereinafter the "City"), the Cupertino Chamber of
Commerce, a non-profit corporation organized under the laws of the state of
California (hereinafter the "Chamber"), the University of California, Santa Cruz
(hereinafter "UCSC") and the Foothill-DeAnza Community College District
(hereinafter the "District"). The parties may also be referred to collectively as "The
Sponsors."
Recitals
This Agreement is made with reference to the following:
1. Effective September 1997, the City, Chamber, and the District entered into
an informal agreement to sponsor "Leadership Cupertino" (hereinafter "LC"), a ten-
month course to introduce citizens to government, quasi-government and not-for-
profit organizations with the purpose of encouraging and educating citizen
involvement in local political issues.
2. In 1999, UCSC joined as a 4th sponsor and another program was added for
youthful participants entitled "Tomorrow's Leaders Today" (hereinafter "TLT").
3. All four sponsors support the programs through cash contributions and in-
kind services. Administrative services for the programs are performed by the City.
4. Each program is administered by a paid executive director who works as an
independent contractor. Payments to the executive directors are advanced by the City.
The City is reimbursed for these costs by the Sponsors and other program revenues.
5. The overall supervision of both programs is accomplished by a "Steering
Committee" consisting of one or more representatives from each of the sponsors.
pc/dir/l/la. 1 (166)2-28-00 1
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions herein
contained, the Sponsors agree as follows:
1. Term and Termination
a) This Agreement shall commence as of the effective date and shall
continue thereafter for a period of one year unless earlier terminated in accordance
with this Agreement; provided, however, that this Agreement shall be automatically
extended for successive periods of one year unless a Sponsor shall have provided
written notice of non-renewal to other Sponsors no later than sixty (60) days prior to
the end of the one year period.
b) This Agreement may be terminated early by a simple majority vote
of the entire Steering Committee, or in the event that funds derived from all sources
of revenue are insufficient to fund either or both programs.
2. Budgets
Prior to the end of the City's fiscal year, the City shall submit to the
Sponsor a proposed budget, in substantially the same form as the 1999-2000 budget, a
copy of which is attached hereto. The Sponsors shall be responsible for approving an
annual budget for every year of operation of the program or programs.
3. Level of Contributions
The Sponsors will provide cash and in-kind contributions for ten (10)
month LC and TLT programs. The level of cash and in-kind contributions shall be
determined by the Steering Committee on an annual basis after the annual budget is
approved.
4. Payments to Executive Directors
The City will advance sums necessary to pay the executive directors of
the programs. The City will reimburse itself for these costs from the cash
contributions of the Sponsors, tuition payments, and donations.
5. Executive Directors - Independent Contractors
It is understood that the Executive Directors of the LC and TLT
programs shall at all times act as independent contractors of the Sponsors and shall
not be considered employees of any of the Sponsors. The contracts for said Executive
Directors shall be in writing and shall conform to the sample contract attached hereto.
6. Executive Director - Indemnity and Insurance
Any written agreement for the services of an Executive Director shall
contain a provision in which the Sponsors and the Executive Director indemnify,
defend, and hold harmless each other for the acts and omissions of the other. Said
pc/dir/l/la. 1 ( 166)2-28-00 2
written agreement shall also contain a provision requiring each Executive Director to
maintain professional liability insurance coverage with a responsible insurance carrier
approved by the Sponsors, in an amount of no less than $2,000,000. Said policy shall
name the Sponsors as additional insureds.
7. Claims and Litigation - Allocation of Obligations
In the event that any claim, demand, action, suit, or proceeding of each
and every kind is brought by any party who is not a Sponsor arising out of the
operation of the LC and/or TLT programs, the City will undertake the defense of the
same on behalf of all Sponsors. At the conclusion of each such proceeding above
described, the Sponsors shall forthwith reimburse on an equal basis the City for all
losses which are not covered by the insurance policy described in Paragraph 6 above,
including the deductible amount of the policy.
8. Compliance with Laws
All Sponsors shall observe and comply with all valid laws, ordinances,
statutes, orders and regulations now or hereafter made or issued respecting this
Agreement by any federal, state, county, local or other government agency or entity
having jurisdiction thereof.
9. Notices
Any notice, request, demand or other communication provided for
hereunder shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by First Class mail,
facsimile or overnight delivery and addressed as follows:
City:
Director of Administrative Services
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Facsimile (408) 777-3366
Chamber:
Executive Director
Cupertino Chamber of Commerce
20455 Silverado Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014
Facsimile (408) 252-0638
District:
DeAnza College
21250 Stevens Creek Blvd.
Cupertino, CA 95014
Facsimile (408) 864-8603
UCSC:
Marketing Director
University of California, Santa Cruz
10420 Bubb Road
Cupertino, CA 95014
Facsimile (408) 342-0164
Any Sponsor may change its address for receipt of notices under this
Agreement by notice given in the manner provided herein.
pc/dir/l/la. I (166)2-28-00 3
10. Amendments
This Agreement represents the entire understanding and expression of
the Sponsors' Agreement as to those matters contained herein, and supersedes all
other oral or written agreements with respect to such matters. This Agreement may
be modified only by a written amendment duly executed by the Sponsors.
11. No Third Party Beneficiary
This Agreement shall not be construed or deemed to be an agreement
for the benefit of any third party or parties. No third party or parties shall have the
claim or right of action under this Agreement for any cause whatsoever.
The Sponsors acknowledge and accept the terms and conditions of this
Agreement as evidenced by the following signatures of their duly authorized
representatives. It is the intent of the Sponsors that this Agreement shall become
effective as of July 1, 1999.
Approved as to Form:
City of Cupertino
Charles T. Kilian, City Attorney
University of California, Santa Cruz
Mayor, City of Cupertino
Attest:
City Clerk
Foothill-DeAnza Community College
District
By
Dean
Cupertino Chamber of Commerce
By:
Vice Chancellor
By:
President
By.
President
pc/alit/l/la.1 (166)2-28-00
4
CONTRACT FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
LEADERSHIP CUPERTINO
THIS CONTRACT is entered into on July 1, 1999, by and between the City of Cupertino,
a California municipal corporation (hereinafter the "City"), the Cupertino Chamber of
Commerce, a non-profit corporation organized under the laws of the state of Califomia
(hereinafter the "Chamber"), the University of California, Santa Cruz (hereinafter "UCSC"), the
Foothill-DeAnza Community College District (hereinafter the "District"); the parties may also be
referred to collectively as "The Sponsors", and Darryl Stow, hereinafter called "Consultant".
WHEREAS, the SPONSORS are in need of an executive director, and
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is qualified to perform the director's services for the
SPONSORS.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises herein, the parties hereto
COVENANT, PROMISE and AGREE as follows:
1. CONSULTANT shall perform the director services for the SPONSORS as set
forth in the attached description of said Office. It is understood and the parties
intend that the services described herein shall be provided on an annual basis for
the ten (10) month program.
2. CITY shall compensate CONSULTANT at the rate of seven .hundred and fifty
dollars ($750.00) per month for all work described herein plus the cost of
maintenance, two million dollars ($2,000,000) for professional liability insurance.
3. This contract shall commence on July 1, 1999, and shall continue in full force and
effect until June 30, 2000.
4. This contract may be terminated prior to the automatic termination date set forth
above as follows:
A. By mutual consent of the parties; or
B. By either party on delivery of written notice thereof to the other party with
or without cause and for any reason, whatsoever.
CONTRACT FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - LEADERSHI? CUPERTINO Page 2
5. If this contract is terminated under the provisions of Paragraph 4, CONSULTANT
shall be compensated only for the months worked and expenses incurred prior to
the effective date of termination.
6. The parties hereto agree and understand that this is a contract for'professional
services and shall not be assigned by either party in any manner. As such, it is
understood that CONSULTANT is an independent contractor and not an
employee of the SPONSORS. However, SPONSORS and the CONSULTANT
shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless each other for the acts and omissions
of the other.
7. This contract may only be modified by a written amendment hereto, executed by
both parties.
8. In the performance of the work authorized under this contract, CONSULTANT
shall not discriminate against anyone because of race, creed, color, ancestry,
religion, marital status, medical condition, age (over 40), physical or mental
handicaps, Veteran or non-veteran status, sex, or national origin.
9. This contract shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. It
constitutes the 'entire agreement between the parties regarding its subject matter.
This contract supersedes all contracts, proposals, oral and written, and all
negotiations, conversations or discussions heretofore and between the parties
related to the subject matter of the contract.
EXECUTED at Cupertino, California, on the day and year first written above.
CONTRACT FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - LEADERSHIP CUPERTINO Page 3
Approved as to Form:
City of Cupertino
Charles T. Kilian, City Attorney
Mayor, City of Cupertino
Attest:
'City Clerk
University of California, Santa Cruz
Foothill-DeAnza Community College
District
By. By:
Dean Vice Chancellor
By:
President
Cupertino Chamber of Commerce
By:
President
Darryl Stow
RESOLUTION NO. 00-091
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR RELINQUISHMENT
OF A PORTION OF STATE HIGHWAY 85
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council a Cooperative Agreement No. 4-
1816C, for relinquishment of a portion of De Anza Boulevard (superseded State Route 85) between
Prospect Road and Rainbow Drive; 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 20th day of March, 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
CUPE INO
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
FAX (408) 777-3333
Summary
AGENDA ITEM
AGENDA DATE March 20, 2000
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Permit Parking on Hyannisport Drive between Fort Baker Drive and Linda Vista Drive All Day and
Every Day of the Week.
BACKGROUND
On March 2, 2000 staff received a petition from the residents of Hyannisport Drive requesting
permit parking be implemented along Hyannisport Drive between Fort Baker Drive and Linda Vista
Drive. The gathered signatures represented over 2/3rds (77%) of the resident owners on this
segment of the street.
The neighborhood has discussed their traffic and parking problems. They have experienced
increased traffic and parking problems over the past years. Nearby streets, such as Fort Baker
Drive, Hyannisport Drive (east of Fort Baker Drive), Presidio Drive, and Wilkinson Drive all
currently have permit parking. This year, Kennedy Middle School has added the sixth grade student
population from Regnart Elementary School, which along with its recent remodeling, has increased
the parking and traffic impacts within this neighborhood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 00- ~7~- designating permit parking
every day on the north side of Hyannisport Drive between Fort Baker Drive and Linda Vista Drive.
JYVl
l~rector of
~ublic Works
Approved for submission:
Donald D. Brown
City Manager
Printed on Recyclecl Paper [ 0 '"'" [
RESOLUTION NO. 00-092
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
DESIGNATING PERMIT PARKING ALONG HYANNISPORT DRIVE
BETWEEN FORT BAKER DRIVE AND LINDA VISTA DRIVE
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, TO IT RESOLVED that said parking prohibition shall apply
every day of the week.
Street Name Side
Hyannisport Drive Both
Limits
Between Fort Baker Drive
and Linda Vista Drive
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 20~ day of March, 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
CUPEK,?INO
Parks and Recreation Department
Summary
Agenda Item Number / /
Agenda Date: March 20, 2000
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Request from the Payvand School of the Iranian Federated Women's Club for waiver of use fees
for a fundraiser to be held at 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 an Iranian New Year celebration, Nowruz 1379,
at the Quinlan Community Center on March 24, 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 which in this case total
$50.00.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City Council waive room rental fees in the approximate amount of $150.00 for the Iranian
Federated Women's Club and the Payvand School on March 24, 2000.
SUBMITTED BY
Stephen ~,. Dowling /
Director of Parks and Recreaton
APPR.(~D
Don~8'IS:. B,
City Manager
TY COUNCIL
Printed on Recycled Paper //~ /
1582
S. Stelling Rd., Cupertino, CA 95014 Tel:(408) 381-4268
March 11, 2000
Mr. Stephen Dowling
Director of Parks and Recreation
10300 Tore Ave.
Cupertino, CA. 95014
Dear Stephen,
The Payvand School was established based on our belief that Iranian American children
need, in addition to their American culture, to participate in a healthy community that
fosters their Iranian culture, heritage, traditions, and language. The "Payvand" school
provides educational instructions in reading and writing in Farsi, traditional Iranian
music, dance. "Payvand" also provides an environment where the Iranian/American
children can converse in Farsi with their peers. This school has been sponsored by Iranian
Federated Women's Club. It is nm by experienced teachers and volunteers. Payvand is
hosted by De Anza College.
The Payvand cultural school is seeking funding and support to bring our cultural
perspective to this wonderful diverse community by sponsoring the Iranian New year
celebration, Nowmz 1379, is scheduled at Quinlan Community Center in Cupertino on
March 24, 2000.
I would appreciate if you would be kind enough to wave the fee for using the community
room on that night.
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, President
CITY OF
CUPEI INO
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3212
Fax: (408~ 777-3366
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
SUMMARY
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER /2,,
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Application for Alcoholic Beverage License.
BACKGROUND
AGENDA DATE
Name of Business:
Location:
Type of Business:
Type of License:
Reason for Application:
Hilton Garden Inn Cupertino
10741 N. Wolfe Road
Hotel
On-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.
D ~d~I~ er
G :planningJmisedabchiltongardeninn
Printed on Recycled Paper
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 Pasco de San Antonio
Room 119
San Jose, CA 95113
(408)277-1200
DISTRICT SERVING LOCATION:
First Owner:
Name of Business:
Location of Business:
County:
Is premise inside city limits?
Mailing Address:
(If different from
premises address)
Type of license(s): 47
Transferor's license/name:
File Number: 363925
Receipt Number: 1272111
Geographical Code: 4303
Copies Mailed Date: March 7, 2000
Issued Date:
SAND HILL MANAGEMENT COMPANY LLC
HILTON GARDEN INN CUPERTINO
10741 N WOLFE RD
CUPERTINO, CA 95014
SANTA CLARA
Yes
30 E 4TH AVE
SAN MATEO, CA 94401
344737 /REED FRED K Dropping Partner: Yes
No
~ Transaction Typ~ Fee Type
47 ON-SALE GENERAL ] PERSON TO PERSON TRANSF P40
47 ON-SALE GENERAL ] ANNUALFEE P40
30 TEMPORARY RETAIl DUPLICATE NA
47 ON-SALE GENERAL ] STATE FINGERPRINTS NA
Master Dup Date
Y 0 03/07/00
Y 0 03/07/00
N 1 O3/07/00
N 1 03/07/00
Fee
$1,250.00
$695.00
$100.00
$39.00
Total
$2,084.00
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.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of SANTA CLARA Date: March 7, 2000
Under penalty of perjury, each person whose signature appears below, certifies and says: (!) 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 and that each of the above statements therein made are true; (3) that no person other
than the applicant or applicants has any direct ot 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 is not made to satisfy the payment of a loan or to fulfill an
agreement entered into more than ninety (90) days preceding the day on which the transfer application is filed with the Department or to gain or/.-,~
establish a preference to or for any creditor or transferor or to defraud or injure any creditor of transferor: (5) that the transfer application may/
be withdrawn by either the applicant or the licensee with no resulting liability to the Department. L
Applicant Name(s) Applicant Signature(s) ..~,~
SAND HILL MANAGEMENT COMPANY LLC ~--~' [~., , ~-~r~,voco~,o e ~o(:?)~(~b(%7~,~
ScottCarlton KennL-dy
- RESOLUTION NO. 00-096
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ACCEPTING GRANT DEED OF REAL PROPERTY FROM PIETRA SERENA
ASSOCIATES, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY,
LOCATED AT STEVENS CANYON ROAD, A PORTION OF PARCEL ONE
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino has approved the acquisition of
real property l~om Pietra Serena Associates, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, a
portion of Parcel One on Stevens Canyon Road; and
WHEREAS, Pietra Serena Associates, LLC has executed a grant deed which is in good
and sufficient form granting to the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California,
the fee title to that certain real property to be utilized for public purposes, situate in the City of
Cupertino and more particularly described in Exhibits A and B, attached hereto and made a part
hereof, a portion of Parcel One on Stevens Canyon Road; and
WHEREAS, Bert J. Viskovich, Director of Public Works, has been authorized to sign the
necessary documents to transfer title.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Cupertino hereby accept said
grant so tendered; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said
Grant Deed.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 20th day of March, 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
CUPE INO
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
FAX (408) 77%3333
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
AGENDA ITEM
Summary
AGENDA DATE
March 20, 2000
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Consideration of street name change from Sycamore Drive to Sycamore Court.
BACKGROUND
A petition was received from the residents to change the name of a portion of Sycamore Drive to
Sycamore Court. There are 12 homes affected; 9 out of 10 presently occupied signed the petition.
This request was submitted to emergency response agencies and they found no objection to the name
change.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 00- (.o ?_g
name from Sycamore Drive to Sycamore Court.
, which changes the street
ert )."Vis
irector o:
Public Works
Approved for submission:
Donald D. Brown
City Manager
/ -F''''!
Printed on Recycled Pa~er
RESOLUTION NO. 00-093
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ORDERING STREET NAME CHANGE WITHIN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
PURSUANT TO SECTION 5026 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA; CHANGE A PORTION OF SYCAMORE DRIVE TO
SYCAMORE COURT
WHEREAS, hearing on Resolution of Intention No. 00-063 was held on March
20, 2000, at a regular meeting of the City Council at 10300 Torte Avenue, Cupertino,
California;
WHEREAS, it appears that notice thereof was duly given as required by law; and
WHEREAS, from the evidence presented, both oral and documentary, it appears
to be in the best interests of the City to change the street name of Sycamore Drive to
Sycamore Court.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That any and all protests against said name change be and hereby are
overruled and denied.
2. That the name of Sycamore Drive, in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and
made part hereof, is hereby changed to Sycamore Court.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
That the City Clerk be and hereby is instructed and directed to cause a certified
copy of this resolution, attested to and sealed with the official seal of the City, to be
recorded with the County Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, California, forthwith.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 20th day of March, 2000, by the following vote:
Vote
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Members of the City Council
APPROVED:
City Clerk
Mayor, City of Cupertino
$1
35
S~
$1
.L H
I~ 'l%JI,$1, M I~I$'J,I.
CITY OF
CUPERTINO
AGENDA NO.//&
10300 'l'orrc Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3.308
FAX (408) 777-3333
Community Development Departmcnt
SUMMARY
AGENDA DATE Marcia 20,2000
SUMMARY:
Appeal by City Council member Don Burnett regarding 1-ASA-00, the Diocese of San
Jose application requesting placement of an entrance archway to the Gate of I-leaven
Cemetery on the property.
BACKGROUND:
The Design Review Subcommittee recommended approval of this request at its February
9, 2000 meeting.
The Planning Commission approved this application on February 14, 2000 as a consent
item.
Council member Bumett appealed this decision because "this location is in nay opinion a
serious violation of both the spirit and the letter of the agreement between the City and
the Diocese." (See Exhibit A for appeal letter.)
DISCUSSION:
The application is for an entry archway and columns at the entrance to thc (Jato of
Heaven Cemetery. Now that the round-about is installed in front of the entrance.
motorists have difficulty seeing the entrance as they approach the cemetery: thc round-
about is between the road and the entrance and partially obscures it.
The entrance feature consists of stucco columns and a wrought-iron, painted arch. 'l'hc
columns are tan and the arch is dark green. Lettering is anondized gold. The columns
have a stone base. The maximum height of the arch is 19'6". The columns arc 18' high.
The archway is set back approximately 90' from Cristo Rey Drive.
Construction requires the removal of a pine tree. The archway is ac[jacent to ancw
pedestrian trial, so signage is proposed to alert both cars and pedestrians to this
proximity. City abandonment of a portion of the right-of-way is required.
Printed on Recycled Paper
l&
Staff supported the proposal. Greater visibility is needed, and the Santa Clara Cmmtv
Parks staffhas no problems with the impact of the project on adjaccnt pad< land. ,,ks
shown on Exhibit B and the applicant's site plan, the archway is proposed directly below
the trail that crosses the public open space area; the archway would be located in thc
abandoned right-of-way and not in the dedicated public open space area. 'l'hc right-ol'-
way was not included nor calculated in the public open space acreage.
replacement trees are proposed, possibly in an area closer to Cristo Rcy I)rivc, .subjccl
sight visibility and staff approval.
The brightness of the tan color of the columns was discussed by the Design Review
Subcommittee. The two Commissioners (Harris, Stevens) ['blt the color was acceptable
because it matches the buildings at the cemetery and is not visible fi'om 1-280. Thc
proposed tan color of the columns is just below 70 light reflectivity value; as a reference',
a maximum of 70 is the highest acceptable number tbr hillside colors.
Subsequent to Council member Burnett's appeal, staff met with him and thc applicant
the site to discuss options. There was agreement that it'the archway wcrc movcd back
the existing cemetery property line, it would not provide the visibility the cemetery needs.
An option of locating a sign on the small knoll northwest ol'the proposed archway was
discussed.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Uphold the appeal and deny or modify I-ASA-00.
2. Deny the appeal and uphold 1-ASA-00.
Enclosures:
Planning Commission Resolution 5097
Exhibit A - Appeal letter
Exhibit B - Oak Valley Site Plan
Applicant's Site plan and elevation
(Material Board will be available at the meeting)
Prepared by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner
C"Steve P-Tasecki xl - -
Director of Community Development
G:planning/pdreportdcc/cc I asa00
Approved by:
Don Brown
City Manager
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 5097
1-ASA-00
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
APPROVING AN ARCHITEC~ REVIEW OF THE ENTRY ARCHWAY AND COLUMNS
AT 22555 CRISTO REY DRIVE (GATE OF HEAVEN CEMETERY)
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
1-ASA-00
The Roman Catholic Bishop of San Jose
22555 Cristo Rey Drive
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for an
Architectural and Site Approval, as described in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the changes are beneficial and compatible with the
surrounding area;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this
matter, the application no. 1-ASA-00, is here by 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 1-ASA-00 as set forth in the
Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of February 14, 2000, and are incorporated by reference
herein.
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on Sheet A1 dated 1/5/00 and accompanying material board.
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,
Resolution No. 5097 1-ASA-00 February 14, 2000
Page 2
reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has. begun. If
you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section
66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions.
3. REPLACEMENT TREES
Two 36" box replacement trees shall be planted near the entrance, as approved by staff.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 144 day of February, 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:
Con', Doyle, Harris, Kwok, Stevens
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/Steve Piasecki
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
/s/Andrea Harris
Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
g/planning/pdreport/rts/r ! asaO0
EXHIBIT A
2 2 2000
By.
Sunday, February20,2000
City Clerk Kim Smith,
Subject: Appeal of Director of Planning Commission Approval of Application 1-ASA-00
I wish to appeal the Planning Commission approval The Diocese of San Jose's
application 1-ASA-00 requesting return of public open space land of Rancho San
Antonio Park and placement of an entrance archway to the Gate of Heaven Cemetery on
this property immediately adjacent to the path into the park from the housing area.
This land was dedicated to public use in exchange for housing development on the
balance of the Diocese property in the Rancho San Antonio area. The Placement of the
archway in this location is in my opinion a serious violation of both the spirit and the
letter of the agreement between the City and the Diocese.
Don Bumett
cc: Steve Piasecki, Don Brown, Planning Commission, Mayor and Council,
CITY OF
CUPERTINO
Agenda Item No. / ~
SIYMMARY
Agenda Date: March 20, 2000
Applicant:
Property Owner:
Property Location:
City of Cupertino
Various
Citywide
Project Consistency with: General Plan yes Zoning/Specific Plan yes
Environmental Assessment: Exempt.
Application Summary: Amend the municipal code to shift all single family
residential review to the Residential Design Review Committee and to discuss the
Planning Commission Subcommittees.
BACKGROUND:
Two separate committees currently conduct architectural review of building sites
in the city. The Residential Design Review Committee (RDRC) reviews two-
story, single family homes with a floor area ratio exceeding 35% and deck
exceptions. The Design Review Subcommittee (DRS) reviews minor
modifications to commercial, industrial and Planned Development residential
building sites, as well as fence and sign exceptions. The RDRC has final decision
authority, while the DRS makes recommendations to the Planning Commission
for the final decision.
The RDRC and DRS review between one to three applications per month for each
committee. This is considerably below the number of applications anticipated
when these committees were formed. The Planning Commission agrees that
merging the RDRC and DRS into one committee, the Design Review Committee
(DRC), would simplify the design review process and clarify the roles of the staff.
Having one committee responsible for design review of all land uses in the city
would reduce the number of meetings held per month, the number of committees
on which the Planning Commissioners must serve and the number of meetings
staff must attend.
To avoid lengthening the review process, staff recommended to the Planning
Commission that the new DRC use the same procedure as the RDRC with final
review authority of two-story, single family homes over 35% floor area ratio and
deck exceptions. Staff also recommended that DRC authority be expanded to
include final decision authority on: minor architectural and site applications
(lighting, signs, landscaping, minor changes to buildings), fence exceptions, sign
exceptions, and individual homes in Planned Development zoning districts. This
change would shorten the review process by 1 to 2 weeks. The Planning
Commission preferred that ail items go to the Planning Commission for finai
approvai as discussed below.
DISCUSSION:
Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommends
that the Residentiai Design Review Committee and the Design Review
Subcommittee be consolidated into the Design ReView Committee. They further
recommend that the Design Review Committee have no final decision authority.
If the Committee were to recommend approvai of an item, the item would be
placed on the Planning Commission consent caiendar. This approach will delay
final decisions on residentiai review from 1 to 2 weeks. If the Committee were
divided or were against an application, the item would be placed on the Planning
Commission agenda for discussion.
The Committee membership would consist of two Planning Commissioners.
Currently, 2 members of the RDRC can vote to approve an application and the
decision is finai, unless appeaied. The Architecturai Adviser would advise staff,
the Design Review Committee and the Planning Commission on design review
applications. He would be present at meetings as needed. The Community
Development Director would have authority to place items on the Planning
Commission agenda instead of the Design Review Committee caiendar if the
items on the agenda were likely to take longer than 2 hours. The Committee's
workload and function would be reviewed by the Planning Commission in 6
months. A decision matrix has been completed and is included as Exhibit A.
City Council Committee Appointment: The committee composition would
include two Planning Commissioners, the Planning Commission vice chairperson
and one additionai Planning Commission representative (Exhibit 1, Section
2.90.10). Staff recommended participation of the vice chairperson instead of the
chair in order to reduce the chairperson's workload. The vice chairperson is
selected by the Planning Commission, and the additional Planning Commission
representative would be appointed by the Commission as well.
Currently the RDRC and the DRS members are appointed by the City Council.
The proposed amendments to the code would result in the committee members
being selected by the Planning Commission, not the City Council. The Planning
Commission wanted to make sure that the City Council supported this change. If
the City Council would prefer appointment authority, Section 2.90.10 should be
modified to remove the vice chairperson appointment provision, and to delete the
last line strike-through removing the Planning Commission appointment by the
City Council.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission, on a 5-0 vote, recommends that the City Council
approve the municipal code amendments, as shown in the attached Ordinance No.
· 1844.
Environmental determination: Exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act.
t_~/SteveX~iasecki ~ Don Brown
Director of Community Development City Manager
Enclosures:
- Ordinance No. 1844 of the City Council.
- Planning Commission Resolution No. 6009.
- Exhibits 1 - 14.
- Exhibit A: Design Review Decision Process Matrix.
- Planning Commission staff report and accompanying resolutions for the meeting
of January 24, 2000.
- Minutes from the Planning Commission meeting of January 24, 2000.
G/planning/pdr~po~¢cd202s¢cond
/'7--5
ORDINANCE NO. 1844
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTERS 2.32, 2.90. 16.28, 17.44, 19.28, 19.32, 19.36, 19.48, 19.56, 19.60, 19.64,
19.80, 19.132, AND 19.134 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE TO SHIFT DESIGN
REVIEW TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, the City initiated an application to amend various sections of the municipal code to
merge the Residential Design Review Committee and the Design Review Subcommittee; and
WHEREAS, the committees are presently separate but are only reviewing between 1-5
applications per month; and
WHEREAS, the merger would simplify the design review process, clarify the roles of the staff;
and reduce the number of meetings held per month; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Advisor would continue to advise staff, the committee and Planning
Commission on applications and would be present at meetings as needed; and
WHEREAS, upon due notice and after one public hearing the Planning Commission
recommended to the City Council that the amendments be approved according to Planning Commission
resolution 6009; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the municipal code sections are amended according to the Planning Commission
resolution 6009.
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 20th day of
March, 2000 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the
day of ,200_, by the following vote:
Vote
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
City Clerk
g:planning/res/¢cord202
Mayor, City of Cupertino
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 6009
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND CHAPTERS 2.32, 2.90. 16.28, 17.44,
19.28, 19.32, 19.36, 19.48, 19.56, 19.60, 19.64, 19.80, 19.132, AND 19.134 OF THE CUPERTINO
MUNICIPAL CODE TO SHIFT DESIGN REVIEW TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
SECTION I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a
modification to the municipal code, as described on 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 Planning Commission finds that the subject modification meets the following
requirements:
1) That the modification to the municipal code is in conformance with the General Plan of the City of
Cupertino.
2) That the merging of the Residential Design Review Committee and the Design Review
Subcommittee into the Design Review Commitiee will make more efficient allocation of Planning
Commission and staff time.
3) That the composition of the Residential Design Review Committee will ensure adequate Planning
Commission representation and create a more defined role for the Planning Director and the
Architectural Advisor.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this
matter, the application for change of zone 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 the Application to amend Municipal Code, as set
forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of February 28, 2000, are incorporated by
reference as though fully set forth herein.
Resolution No.
Page-2-
Amend Municipal Codes
Febmary28,2000
SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
Amend Municipal Codes regarding design review
City of Cupertino
Citywide
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
APPROVED EXHIBITS
Exhibits 1-10, modifying Chapters 2.32 (Planning Commission), 2.90 (Design Review
Committee). 16.28 (Fences), 17.44 (Signs), 19.28 (R1), 19.32 (Duplex), 19.36 (Multiple-Family
Residential R3 Zones), 19.48 (Planned Development PD Zones), 19.56 (General Commercial CG
Zones), 19.60 (Light Industrial), 19.64 (Public Building, Quasi-Public Building, Transportation),
19.80 (Accessory Structure), 19.132 (Administrative Approval of Minor Changes in Projects),
and 19.134 (Architectural and Site Review) of the Cupertino Municipal Code.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of February, 2000, at a Special Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS: Chairperson Harris, Corr, Kwok, Stevens and, Doyle.
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/ Steve Piasecki
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
/s/Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Andrea Harris, Chairperson
Cupertino Planning Commission
g:planning/res~203
Exhibit 1
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 2.32 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 2.32 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sections:
2.32.010
2.32.020
2.32.030
2.32.040
2.32.050
2.32.060
2.32.070
2.32.080
PLANNING COMMISSION
Established.
Term of office of members.
Vacancy or removal.
Chairperson.
Meetings.
Amendments--Records required.
Powers and functions.
Procedural rules.
2,32.070 Powers and functions.
The powers and functions of the City Planning Commission shall be as follows:
Establish as needed, a standing subcommittee of the Commission for the
purposes of conducting design review on projects that properly come before
the Commission for review, as required by Chapters 2.90, 19.132, 19.134 and
of the Cupertino Municipal Code. The Committee shall mak_e~.ng
recommendations to the Commission on matters pertaining to the design of a
project, and review design items that may be referred by the Planning
Commission te *me s,abcem_'v..L*t, ee for review and further comment.
G:Planning/Ord/DRC 2.32
Exhibit 2
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck throu,k,h.
Chapter 2.90
Res;.dent'."2! DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
Sections:
Established
Purpose
Terms of Office
Vacancy or removal Chairperson
Meeting--Quorum
Licensed Architect
Records--Agendas
Powers and Functions
Effect
2.90.10 Established.
The-R, grd-~mgi~Design Review Committee (~DRC) is established. The R, DRC
shall consist of, one P!2nning Cemmissioners er their 2!tern2te, the D~r,2,zt~'.' ~'
eentr2~t ,.v[th the C~ty the Planning Commission Vice Chair and one additional Planning
Commission representative, to be appointed by the Planning Commission. ()nc
additional member of the Planning Commission shall be desiBnated to serve as an
alternate in the absence of a Planning Commission member. This alternate mcmbcr shall
be selected b~ the Planning Commission. ~l'~
2.90.20 Purpose
The Design Review Committee shall endeavor to reduce the Commission's workload by.
simplifying its design review responsibilities, and incorporate professional architectural
advice where it adds value to the design review process. The Design Review Committee
shall include all aspects of site and architectural design, including:
1. The relationship of the building to its surrounding land uses and thc street:
2. Compliance with adopted height limits, setbacks, architectural and landscape design
guidelines;
3. Protection of surrounding land uses and the subject uses/'rom intrusive impacts, such
as, noise, glare, dust, chemicals, smells and visual disturbances.
4. Providing adequate parking and circulation for vehicles and pedestrians:
5. The overall quality and compatibility of the building materials and architecture with
the surroundings.
2.90.30 Terms of Office
Committee members serve at the pleasure of the City' Council. 'l'hc term of thc
Planning Commissioners is one year and shall end on January 15th of each year.
2.90.40 Vacancy or removal
The Any Planning r' .... ;oo; ...... _~ ~ Design Review Committee
member may be removed from the Committee by a majority vote of the City Council. If a
vacancy occurs including an expiration of a term, it shall be fi!!ed 53' th,2 .M:~.y'.~r'y:
appointedment by the Planning Commission +~ m,, ::ne::pired "'-"'; ...... '" "'" ' .......
2.90.50 Chairperson
The chairperson shall be the Planning Commission Vice Chair. The term shall bc
one year and shall begin on January 15 and be complete on January 15 o t' the tbllowing
year, or until a successor is duly appointed.
2.90.60 Meeting~Quorum
A. The I:?,DRC shall meet at dates and times prescribed by the committee. Meetings
shall be held at City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, Calitbmia. The committee
may adjourn any regular meeting to a date certain, which shall be specified in thc order
adjournment. When so adjourned, such meeting shall be a regular lnCeting flu' all
purposes.
B. Special meetings of the committee may be called at any time by the chairperson
by 2ny two any member of the committee upon written notice being given to all members
at least twenty4bur (24) hours prior to the meeting, unless notice is waivcd in writing by
each member.
C. A "'";"";*" ,-,c,h~ ~r~r~n Two Design Review Committee mcmbcrs o,'
member and the designated alternate, shall be present to Constitute a quorunl fro' thc
purpose of transacting the business of the committee. A...mq;r'r;r"..o .... .t unanimous vote o1' thc
quorum is required to approve any decision. A I' l vote or a 2:0 w~tc rccommcndinkz
denial of the application shall be automatically tbrwarded to the Planrfin[~ Commission
for their review. A 2:0 vote in fi~tvor of the application shall be automatically placed
the Planning Commission agenda as a Consent Calendar item.
D. The Community Development Director shall have authority to limit thc number o1'
items heard during one agenda session by continuing items to their next regular meeting
or forwarding items to the Planning Commission l'br their review.
2.90.70 Licensed Architect
The !icensed 2rc;:.itect me,..'nber A licensed architect, selected by tile City Council,
shall be retained to make recommendations to the Committee as necessary. The architect
shall be selected by the City Council and shall be compensated based upon a cram'act
with the City for .... ;~,~ ,,,.,, ..... a;,,. ~ ..........
2.90.80 Records~Agendas
A. The committee shall keep an accurate record of its proceedings and transactions
and shall render such reports to the City Council and Planning Commission as may hc
requested. The committee shall also comply with all requirements or the State of
California Open Meeting Law ( the Brown Act), including the preparation and posting of
meeting agendas.
B. The committee shall be furnished with a secretary employed by thc City to keep
accurate records of the committee. All records so prepared by the secretary shall bc filed
with the City Clerk.
C. A summary of each meeting shall be given to the Planning Commission in thc
form of a staff report.
2.90.90 Powers and Functions-
The powers and functions of the gDRC are as [bllows:
A. Under the provisions of Chapter 19.28 of the City's ordinance code, recommend
to the Planning Commission approval, modification, or denial of an application or request
for two story resi.dential development located in a Single Family Residential zoning
district, or .an individual single family home in a Planned Development Residential
zoning district th2t directly inco.'Tor2tes P,-! ordinance £t.',.nd2rds, unless deemed minor in
accordance with Chapter 19.132.
B. Under the provisions of Chapter 19.28 of the City's ordinance code, recommend
to the Planning Commission approval, modification, or denial o1" a requests lbr exceptions
from R-1 standards.
C. Under the provisions of Chapter 16.28 of the City's ordinance code, recommc,~d to
the Planning Commission approval, modification, or denial of a tixnce exception.
D. Under the provisions of Chapter 17.44 of the City's ordinance code, rccommcm. I
to the Planning Commission approval, modification, or denial of an application or request
tbr a sign exception.
E. Under the provisions of Chapter 2.32, 2.90, 17.44, 19.32, 19.36, 19.48, 19.56,
19.60, 19.64 and 19.134, of the City's ordinance code recom.'nend to thc I~lanning
Commission on building colors, minor modifications to buildings, landscaping, signs and
lighting for redevelopment or modifications to existing developments.
F. Under the provisions of 19.80 et' the City's ordinance code recommend to thc
Planning Commission approval, modification, or denial of applications lbr a second-story
deck exception in RI zoning districts.
G.._z. Perform other functions as the Planning Commission or City Council requires.
2.90.100 Procedural Rules
The .IKDRC may adopt from time to time such rules or procedures, as it may dccm
necessary to properly exercise its powers and functions. Such rules shall bo suhicct to
approval by the City Council before becoming eftkctive. All such rules shall bc kept on
file with the ch2irperson o.~' RDP. C and the City Clerk and a copy thereof shall bc
furnished to any person upon request.
2.90.110 Effect
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as restricting or curtailing any powers
of the City Council, Planning Commission or City officers.
G/plannin~ord/rdrc merge with drc
Exhibit 3
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 16.28 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 16.28 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
FENCES
16.28.030 Fence location and height for zones requiring site review.
A. The Planning Commission and City Council shall have the authority to require,
approve, or disapprove wall and fencing plans including location, height and materials in
all zones requiring design review.
16.28.060 Exceptions
A. Application and Fee. Application shall be made in writing to the Planning
Commission on a form prescribed by the Director of
Community Development. The application shall be accompanied by a fee as prescribed
by City Council resolution.
B. Public Heatings. Upon receipt of an application for exception, the Director of
Community Development shall set a time and place for a public hearing before the
Plarm!ng Cc.'v_-'.!sz~.en Design Review Committee and order the public notice thereof.
Mailed written notice... '...Said notice shall be mailed by first class mail at least ten
days prior to the P!~ming Cow_mission Design Review Committee meeting in which the
application will be considered.
The P!~2m!ng Commission Design Review Committee shall hold a public hearing at
which time the Ce.~._-'..issien Committee may recommend to the Planning Commission
that they grant the exception based upon the following findings ........ :
C. Appeals. Any application for exception which received final approval or
disapproval by the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council as
provided by Section 19.136.060 of this code.
O:Planning/ord/DRC 16.28
Exhibit 4
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 17.44 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL'CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 17.44 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
SIGNS
Sections:
17.44.010
17.44.020
17.44.030
17.44.040
17,44.050
17.44.060
17.44.070
17.44.080
17.44.090
Authority.
Application and fee.
Planning Commission review required
Findings for an exception
Action by the Planning Commission
Conditions for revocation of exception--Notice required.
Exception deemed null and void when--Notification required.
Appeals.
Reports to City Council.
17.44.010 Authority.
The Planning Commission may grant a sign exception in accordance with the
provisions of this chapter. (Ord 1789 § 1 (part), 1998)
17.44.020 Application and fee.
An application shall be made in writing to the Planning Commission on a form
prescribed by the Director.
17.44.030 Planning Commission review required.
A. An exception shall be scheduled for review by the P!~..-2ng Ce~_':'_2sz;.en Design
Review Committee, not later than thirty days after filing of application.
B. Mailed written notice of the hearing on the sign exception shall be given by the
Director of Community Development to all owners of record of real property (as shown
in the last assessment roi1) which abut the subject property, as well as property and its
abutting properties to the left and right, directly opposite the subject property and located
across a street, way, highway or alley. Mailed notice shall include owners of property
whose only contiguity to the subject site is a single point. Said notice shall be mailed by
first class mail at least ten days prior to the P!2~ing Com~!e_"!on Design Review
Committee meeting in which the application will be considered. The notice shall state
the date, time and place of the hearing, a description of the sign exception shall be
included in the notice. If the Director of Community Development believes the project
may have negative effects beyond the range of the mailed notice, particularly negative
effects on nearby residential areas, the Director, in his discretion, may expand noticing
beyond the stated requirements.
17.44.040 Findings for an exception
The Design Review Committee shall recommend to the Planning Commission that they
grant an exception based upon all the following f'mdings:
A. That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this title will result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of'this title;
B. That the granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare; and
C. That the exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification of
the prescribed regulations and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose.
(Ord. 1789 § 1 (part), 1998)
17.44.050 Action by Planning Commission.
The decision made by the Planning Commission is final unless appealed in accordance
with Section 17.44.080. (Ord. 1789 § 1 (part), 1998)
17.44.080 Appeals
A. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Planning Commission in the approval,
conditioning, denial, or revocation of an exception for a sign may appeal such a decision
in writing to the City Council.
D. Such appeals shall be heard by the City Council and scheduled on their agenda at
the time that other items regularly appear and scheduled on their agenda at the time that
other regular items appear
(Ord. 1789 § 1 (part), 1998)
17.44.090 Reports to City Council
The Director, or designated representative, shall make written reports on all exceptions
granted, denied, or revoked under this chapter. The reports shall be delivered to the City
Council within five calendar days from the date of the decision. (Ord. 1789 § 1 (part),
1998)
G:Planning/Ord/DRC 17.44
Exhibit 5
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.28 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-I) ZONES
Sections:
19.28.010
19.28.020
19.28.030
19.28.040
19.28.50
19.28.60
19.28.70
19.28.80
19.28.090
19.28.100
Purposes.
Applicability of regulation.
Permitted uses.
Conditional uses.
Site development regulations.
Lot coverage, building setbacks, height restrictions and privacy
mitigation measures for nonaccessory buildings and structures.
Permitted yard encroachments.
Exceptions for prescriptive design regulations.
Residential design approval.
Procedure for exceptions and residential design approvals.
19.28.80 Exceptions for prescriptive design regulations.
B. Issued by the r~.;,~,..,;~ r~o~;,,, ~>~,,,;~,,, o,,,,,,,,;,,,.~ Planning Commission.
The Residential Design Review Committee may recommend to the Planning Commission
the granting of an exception from the prescriptive design regulations described in Section
19.28.060 exclusive of Section 19.28.060 E4 (Hillside building heights) and Section
19.28.060 F (Privacy Protection) upon making all the following findings... ·
19.28.90 Residential design approval.
In the event that a proposed development of two stories exceeds a thirty-five percent floor
area ratio as prescribed in Section 19.28.060B, the applicant shall apply to the P. es~.dev.5_z!
Design P.e:qew Ce.-v._'v.!~ee Planning Commission for a special permit to allow for the
development; provided, however, in no event shall such application exceed a forty-five
percent floor area ratio ..... The P_es~.de:'_t'_'z! Des~.gn Re'.'[ew Ce~_-v_Jttee Planning
Commission may only grant a special permit upon making all of the following
findings...:
19.28.100 Procedure for exceptions and residential design approvals.
D. All decisions regarding approvals contained in this section may be appealed by any
interested party pursuant to Chapter 19.136. An appeal of the
Cemm;.~ee Planning Commission decision shall be processed .......
F. Concurrent Applications. Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter to the
contrary, any application for exception or residemial design review, which would be
issued by the Director of Community Development, the P_eg;.dent'.'21 Des'.'gn
Ce:v.m;.ttee, or the Planning Commission may at the discretion of the Director of
Community Development, be processed concurrently with other land use approvals.
G/planning/ord/drc 19.28
Exhibit 6
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck throu.ffh.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.32 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORI)AIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.32 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as I'ollows:
RESIDENTIAL DUPLEX (R-2) ZONES
Sections:
19.32.010
19.32.020
19.32.030
19.32.040
19.32.050
19.32.060
19.32.070
19,32.080
19.32.090
Purpose.
Applicability of regulations.
Permitted uses.
Conditional uses.
Height of buildings and structures.
Lot area and width.
Building coverage and setbacks
Permitted yard encroachments.
Architectural and site review.
19.32.090 Architectural and site review.
No building or structure shall be erected without Planning Commission review accm'dinLz
to Chapter 2.32 & 19.134. No building, structure, landscaping, pa,'king plan or sign shall
be structurally erected, altered, or enlarged, in an R-2 zone, without architectural and site
review before the Design Review Committee pursuant to Chapter 2.90 and 19. 134
the municipal code. (Ord 1779 § i(B), 1998)
G:Plannin~Ord/DRC 19.32
Exhibit 7
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTEK 19.36 OF THE CUPEKTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.36 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-3) ZONES
Sections:
19.36.010
19.36.020
19.36.030
19.36.040
19.36.050
19.36.060
19.36.070
19.36.080
Purpose.
Applicability of regulations.
Permitted uses.
Conditional uses.
· Conceptual plan.
Site development regulations.
Parking.
Architectural and Site Review.
19.36.50 Conceptual Plan
C. No building permit may be issued for development proposal of a v2c~-t property
presently zoned multiple-family residential until a conceptual development plan is
approved by the Planning Commission for the City of Cupertino in conjunction with a
public hearing for a conditional use permit.
19.36.080' Architectural and Site Review
No building or structure shall be erected without Planning Commission review according
to Chapters 2.32 & 19.134. No building, structure, landscaping, parking plan or sign
shall be structurally altered, or enlarged, in an R-3 zone, without architectural and site
review before the Design Review Committee pursuant to Chapter 2.90 and 19.134 of
the municipal code. (Ord 1779 § I(B), 1998)
G:Planning/ord/DKC 19.36
Exhibit 8
Proposed text is ~tnderlined. Deleted text is stmtck thrott.(qh.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPISRTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.48 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORI)AIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.48 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as I'bllows:
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) ZONES
Sections:
19.48.010
19.48.020
19.48.030
19.48.040
19.48.050
19.48.060
19.48.070
19.48.080
19.48.090
19.48.100
19.48.110
Purpose.
Applicability of regulations.
Establishment of districts--Permitted and conditional uses.
Conceptual development plans.
Action by the Planning Commission
Zoning or prezoning--Action by the City Council
Use permit required--Definitive development plan.
Action by the Design Review Committee.
Action by the Planning Commission.
Conditional use permitmAction by thc City. Council.
Modifications of the definitive development plan.
19.48.080 Action by the Design Review Committee
Individual single-family homes in a Planned Development Residential ×onin¢ district
two-story, single-family homes or additions that directly incorporate R-I (I 9.28)
ordinance standards and require an exception, shall be recommended to the I~lannin[~
Commission for approval, modification or denial by the Desi~.n Review Comnaittcc under
the provisions of chapter 2.90.
G:Planning/Ord/DRC 19.48
Exhibit
Proposed text is underlined.
Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.56 OF THE CUPEKTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.56 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG) ZONES
Sections:
19.56.010
19.56.020
19.56.030
19.56.040
19.56.050
19.56.060
19.56.070
19.56.080
Purposes.
Applicability of regulation.
Permitted uses.
Conditional uses.
Excluded uses.
Conditional use permit for new development.
Land use activity and site development regulations.
Interpretation by the Planning Director.
19.56.060 Conditional use permit for new development
A. Prior to the erection of a new building or structure in a CG zoning district, the
applicant must obtain a use permit from the Planning Commission unless the building
square footage is five thousand square feet or greater, in which case the conditional use
permit may only be issued by the City Council upon recommendation of the Planning
Commission.
B. Minor architectural modifications including changes in materials and colors
shall be reviewed by the Director of Community Development a~ specified in Chapter
2.90 and 19.132 of this code. If an application is diverted to the Design Review
Committee or the Planning Commission, the application shall be agendized for a Design
Review Committee or Planning Commission meeting as an architectural and site
application. (Ord. 1784 (part), 1998; Ord. 1687 Exh. A (pm), 1995)
G:Planning/Ord/DRC 19.56
Exhibit 10
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck throu,gh.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.60 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.60 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as tbllows:
LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (ML) ZONES
Sections:
19,60.010
19.60.020
19.60.030
19.60.050
19.60.60
19.60.70
19.60.80
19.60.90
Purposes.
Applicability of regulations.
Conditional uses.
Excluded uses.
Restrictions related to emissions.
Site development regulations.
Parking and loading standards - Conditional use permit.
Architectural and Site Review.
19.60.90 Architectural and Site Review
No building or structure shall be erected without Planning Commission review according
to Chapters 2.32& 19.134. No building, structure, landscaping, parking plata or sign
shall be structurally altered, or enlarged, in an ML zone, without architectural and site
review before the Design Review Committee pursuant to Chapter 2.90 and 19. 134 of
the municipal code. (Ord 1779 § I{B), 1998)
G/plannin~ord/drc 19.60
.Proposed text is underlined.
Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.64 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.64 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
PUBLIC BUILDING (BA), QUASI PUBLIC BUILDING (BQ) AND
TRANSPORTATION (T) ZONES
Sections:
19.64.010
19.64.020
19.64.030
19.64.040
19.64.050
19.64.060
19.64.070
19.64.80
19.64.090
Purposes.
Applicability of regulation.
Permitted uses in a BA zone.
Permitted uses in a BQ zone.
Conditional uses in a BQ zone.
Conditional uses in a T zone.
Requirement of a development plan.
Architectural and site review.
Site development regulations.
19.64.80 Architectural and Site Review.
Prior to the issuance of any conditional use permit in a BA, BQ, or T zoning district, the
proposed use shall be reviewed pursuant to 19.64.070 of this Chapter and Chapter
19.134. Under the provisions of Chapters 2.32, 2.90 & 19.134 the Design Review
Committee shall recommend to the Planning Commission on requests for modifications
to landscaping, lighting and the building from the approved development plan.
G/planning/ord/drc 19.64
/
Exhibit 12
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.80 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.80 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE
Sections:
19.80.030 & 40
19.80.30
j.
Second-story deck review
Site Development Regulations
Second story decks in R1 zoning districts are required to obtain an exception to
this ordinance by the *>~o~'~"*~ r~oo;~,,~ ~,o,,; .... r,,,,,,,.,,;~,~,~ Planning
Commission in order to address privacy protection to adjoining properties except
decks facing non-residential zoning districts and a right-of-way.
19.80.40 Second-story Deck Exception
All second-story decks are required to obtain a recommendation for approval of an
exception by the ~ Design Review Committee in order to protect the privacy of
adjoining properties. The goal of the exception requirement is not to require complete
visual protection but address privacy protection to the greatest extent while still allowing
the construction and use of an outdoor deck.
After a public hearing, the Planning Commission Ees!denfi~! Des~.gn Review Cemm:.~ee
may grant an exception to this ordinance upon making the following findings ......
G/p[anning/ord/drc 19.80
Exhibit 13
Proposed text is underlined.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CIJI}I_iR.'I'IN()
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.132 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORI)AIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.132 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as
follows:
ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL O F MINOR CHANG ES ! N P RO.I ECTS
Sections:
19.132.010
19.132.020
19.132.030
19.132.040
19.132.050
19.132.060
19.132.070
Purpose.
Definition of minor change.
Applicability of chapter.
Diversion of application for administrative apln-ow~l.
Suspension of time periods.
Noticing, review and approval process.
Reports.
19.132.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a unitbrm and orderly procedure for
expeditious administrative approval of minor changes to existing projects and plans.
(Ord. 1790 § 1 (part), 1998)
19.132.060 Noticing, review and approval process.
A. Design Review Referral.. The Director of Community Development, in his/her
discretion, may refer a or diverteat an application directly to the Desi~,n Review
Committee P!enning Ce.rv.::r..[ssien_for review and recommendation.
B. Mailed written notice of the Design Review Committee Ccmm[ssi:;:: hearing on
the application shall be given by the Director to all owners of record ot' real property (as
shown in the last assessment roll) which abut the subject property, as well as property and
its abutting properties to the left and right, directly opposite the subject property and
located across a street, way, highway or alley. Mailed notice shall include owners o1'
property whose only contiguity to the subject site is a single point. Said notice shall bc
mailed by first class mail at least ten days prior to the Design Review Committee
P!2nn[ng Cemm~.ss;.en meeting in which the application will be considered. The notice
shall state the date, time and place of the hearing. A description o1' thc apl'~lication shall
be included in the notice. If the Director of Community Development believes thc
project may have negative effects beyond the range o1" the mailed notice, particularly
negative effects on nearby residential areas, the Director, in his discretion, may c.xpand
noticing beyond the stated requirements.
Compliance with the notice provisions set l'brth in this section shal c{mstitutc
faith effort to provide notice, and failure to provide notice, and the l'ailure o1" any person
to receive notice, shall not prevent the City f¥om proceeding to consider
with respect to an application under this chapter.
C. Director of Community Development. Upon diversion, or upon receipt ol'the
Design Review Committee P12nn:.ng Cvmmissie'.-. recornmendation, the Director shall
expeditiously approve or disapprove the application in accordance with the same
standards and with the same power to impbse conditions as would have applicd to thc
Planning Commission or City Council.
D. Decision. The Director of Community Development shall render his/her decision
in writing, stating reasons therefor, and mail thereof to the applicant. Any aggrieved
affected person may appeal such decision in accord with the provisions o1' Chapter
19.136. Unless an appeal o['su~h a decision is filed within fburteen working days
following the mailing of the notice of decision, it shall become Ih'mi upon thc expiration
of said time period. (Ord. 1790 § 1 (part), 1998)
G:Plannin~Ord/DRC 19.132
Exhibit 14
Proposed text is underlined.
Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.134 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.134 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as
follows:
ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE REVIEW *
Sections:
19.134.010
19.134.020
19.134.030
19.134.040
19.134.050
19.134.060
19.134.070
19.134.080
19.134.090
19.134.100
19.134.110
Purposes.
Authority of the Design Review Committee
Authority of the Planning Commission
Application for architectural and site approval
Action by the Director
Notice of consideration
Action by the Planning Commission-Appeals
Limitations regarding Planning Commission decisions
Findings and conditions.
Revocation, extensions, and duration.
Reports
* Prior ordinance history: Ord. 1778.
19.134.010 Purposes.
This chapter is hereby enacted to provide for an orderly process to review the
architectural and site designs of buildings, structures, signs, lighting, and landscaping for
prescribed types of land development within the City in order to promote the goals and
objectives contained in the General Plan, to protect and stabilize property values for the
general welfare of the City, to maintain the character and integrity of neighborhoods by
promoting high standards for development in harmony therewith, and by preventing the
adverse effects associated with new construction by giving proper attention to the design,
shape, color, materials, landscaping and other qualitative elements related to the design of
developments and thereby creating a positive and memorable image of Cupertino. (Ord.
1791 § 1 (part), 1998)
19.134.020 Aut.hority of the Design Revie~v Committee.
Subject to the provisions of ti'tis chapter and to the general purpose and intent of this
title, the Design Review Committee shall recommend to the Planning Commission on
fence exceptions, sign exceptions, deck exceptions, two story ,'esidential development
with a floor area ratio over 35% located in a Single Family Residential zoning district,
exceptions in an Single Family Residential zoning district, an individual single lhmily
home in a Planned Development Residential zoning district, and erection, alteration or
addition to buildings, lighting, landscaping, signs, and in such zones where such review is
required.
19.134.030 Authority of the Planning Commission.
Subject to the provisions of this chapter and to the general purpose and intent of this
title, the Planning Commission shall decide on the architectui-al and site design.
landscaping, signs, and lighting for new development, redevelopment, or modification in
such zones where such review is required or when required by a condition to a t, se permit.
variance, or any other entitlement of use. (Ord. 1791 § I (part), 1998)
19.134.040 Application for architectural and site approval.
A. When architectural and site review is not part of another application for
development, a separate application l'br such review shall be made by thc owner el' record
of property for which the approval is sought.
B. The application shall be made to the Director ofCornmunitv I)cvclopment. on a
form provided by the City, and shall contain the tbllowing:
1. A description and map showing the location of the property t'or which thc
review is sought;
2. Detailed plans'as required by the Director showing the proposed development
or changes to occur on the property;
3. Such additional information as the Director may deem pc,'tinent and essential
to the application.
C. Any such application I:br review shall be accompanied by the fcc prescribed by
City Council resolution, no part ofwhicfi shall be refunded. (Ord. 1791 .ss I (pm't). 1998)
19.134.050 A. ction by the Director of Community l)eveiopment.
Unless otherwise provided by Section 19.04.090 regarding combined applicatio,~s, thc
following actions shall be taken by the Director to process an application under this
chapter.
A. Upon receipt of a complete application, the Director of Commu,~ity l)cvclopmcnt
shall, within thirty days from the date the application is deemed complete, cause thc
application to be agendized for consideration betbre either the Design Review Committee
or Planning Commission at a regular or special meeting, unless the application is divm'tcd
for administrative approval, pursuant to Section 19.132.030. Consideration o1" thc
application by the Planning Commission shall commence ~brty-five days el' thc date it is
set. (Ord. 1791 {} 1 (part), 1998)
19.134.060 Notice of consideration
Mailed written notice of consideration of any application under this chapter by the
Design Review Committee or Planning Commission shall be given by the Director to all
owners of record of real property (as shown in the last assessment roll) which abut the
subject property, as well as property, and its abutting properties to the left and right,
directly opposite the subject property and located across a street, way, highway or alley.
Mailed notice shall include owners of property whose only contiguity to the subject site is
a single point. Said notice shall be mailed by first class mail at least ten days prior to the
Design Review Committee or'Planning Commission meeting in 'which the application
will be considered. If the Director of Community development believes the project may
have negative effects beyond the range of the mailed notice, particularly negative effects
on nearby residential areas, the Director, in his discretion, may expand noticing beyond
the stated requirements.
Compliance with the notice provisions set forth in this section shall constitute a good-
faith effort to provided notice, and the failure to provide notice, and the failure of any
person to receive notice, shall not prevent the City from proceeding to consider or to take
action with respect to an application under this chapter.
B. The notice of consideration shall contain the following:
1. The exact address of the property, if known, or the location of the property, if
the address is not known, and the existing zoning district or districts applicable; 2. The time, date, place, and purpose of the consideration;
3. A brief description, the content of which shall be in the sole discretion of the
City, of the proposed project;
4. Reference to the application on file for particulars;
5. A statement that any interested person, or agent thereof may appear and be
heard.
Typographical errors in the notice shall not invalidate the notice nor any City action
related thereto. (Ord. 1791 § 1 (part), 1998)
19.134.070 Action by the Planning Commission - Appeals.
A. At the time and place set for consideration of the application, the Planning
Commission shall consider evidence for or against the application. Within a reasonable
time at, er conclusion of its consideration, the Commission shall make findings and shall
render a decision regarding the application which is supported by the evidence contained
in the application or presented at the meeting. The decision of the Planning Commission
is subject to appeal as provided in Chapter 19.136. (Ord. 1791 § 1 (part), 1998)
19.134.080 Limitations regarding Planning Commission decisions.
In its consideration of architectural and site applications, thc Planning Commission is
limited to considering and rendering decisions solely upon the issues described in Section
19.134.0;g3_0 and is precluded from considering or rendering decisions regarding other
planning, zoning, or subdivision issues with respect to the subjec'c property unless said
application is combined with the appropriate application or applications which address
those additional issues. (Ord. 1791 § 1 (part), 1998)
19.134.090 Findings and conditions.
A. The Planning Commission may approve and application only if all of the
following findings are made:
1. The proposal, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to
property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, general welfare, or convenience;
2. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of this chapter, the General Plan,
any specific plan, zoning ordinances, applicable conditional use permits, variances,
subdivision maps or other entitlements to use which regulate the subject property
including, but not limited to, adherence to the following specific criteria:
a. Abrupt changes in building scale should be avoided. A gradual transition
related to height and bulk should be achieved between new and existing buildings.
b. In order to preserve design harmony between new and existing buildings and
in order to preserve and enhance property values, the materials, textures and colors of
new buildings should harmonize with adjacent development by being consistent or
compatible with design and color schemes, and with the furore character of the
neighborhood and purposes of the zone in which they are situated. The location, height
and materials of walls, fencing, hedges and screen planting should harmonize with
adjacent development. Unsightly storage areas, utility installations and unsightly
elements of parking lots should be concealed. The planting of ground cover or various
types of pavements should be used to prevent dust and erosion, and the unnecessary
destruction of existing healthy trees should be avoided. Lighting for development should
be adequate to meet safety requirements as specified by the engineering and building
departments, and provide shielding to prevent spill-over light to adjoining property
owners.
c. The number, location, color, size, height, lighting and landscaping of
outdoor advertising signs and structures shall minimize traffic hazards and shall
positively affect the general appearance of the neighborhood and harmonize with adjacent
development.
d. With respect to new projects within existing residential neighborhoods, new
development should be designed to protect residents from noise, traffic, light and visually
intrusive effects by use of buffering, setbacks, landscaping, walls and other appropriate
design measures.
B. The Commission may impose reasonable conditions or restrictions which it deems
necessary to secure the purposes of the General Plan, and this title and to assure that the
proposal is compatible with existing and potential uses on adjoining properties. (Ord.
1791 § 1 (pm), 1998)
19.134.100 Revocation, extensions, and duration.
A. The revocation of any approval under this chapter is governed uqdcr thc same
procedures as described in Section 19.124. t00 regarding revocation, c×tcnsions, and
duration.
B. An architectural and site approval application granted under this chapter which
has not been used within two years following its approval, shall become null and void
and of no effect unless a shorter time period is specifically prescribed by the conditions
approval Such approval shall be deemed to have been "used" when actual substantial and
continuous construction activity has taken place upon the land pursuant to thc approval.
C. The Planning Commission may extend such time for a maximum or'one
additional year only upon application filed with the Director bet'ore thc expiration o1' such
limit as may be specified by the conditions of approval.
D. All decisions related to revocation and extensions of approvals contained in this
section are subject to the appeals procedure contained in Chapter 19.136. (Ord. 1791 § 1
(part), 1998)
19.134.110 Reports.
The Director shall make written reports to the City Council describing l~lanning
Commission decisions under this chapter to be forwarded to the City Council within
calendar days from the date of such decisions. (Ord. 1791 § I (part), 1998)
G:Plannin~Ord/DRC 19.134
Exhibit A
DESIGN REVIEW DECISION PROCESS
DIRECTOR OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PLANNING
COMMUNITY RECOMMENDS TO THE COMMISSI()N
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING COMMISSION
APPLICATION TYPES APPLICATION TYPES AIq'LICATI()N TYI'I,].%
Minor Modifications: Architectural & Site Applications: New httilding.~' in
Has authority through Duplex, Commercial
ordinance 19.132 to Minor changes to a site or buildings in Duplex, (<5,()00 .SCl. Ii.), Industrial
decide upon minor Commerc!al, Industrial, Quasi-Public, Multi-Family (<10,000 .sCl. Ii.). Quasi-
modifications to projects Zoning Districts. Public, Multi-Family
in a Planned Zoning Districts.
Development, and R1-C New buildings lighting, colors, signage and
Zoning District. An landscaping.
alteration or
modification of an
existing plan, RI Deck Exceptions l~lOl'(J l/t[lrl ont° Nin.,41c
development' or project Sign Exceptions I,ktmily I'[otrtc in
which is substantially
inferior in bulk, degree
or importance to the Two-story Single Family homes in R-1 Zoning
overall dimension and District which exceed 3.~ %.,[loor area rrtiio and
design of the plan, other R-l exceptions
development or project
with no Change proposed
for the use of the land in
question, no change -.
proposed in the Fence Exceplionx De.vi.g/? Revic'n,
character of the structure ( 'om/nil/cc'
or structures involved, /'t'c'otrt//tt'/td~t/itntx.
and no variance An Individual Single Family Home in Plm?nc, d ( 'ondiliomd !/.vc
required. Development Pcrn'/ilx, ( ;c/'lCl'~// Phil/
Minor Modificalionx referred by/he Direclor of /lmendmenl.v.
Community Development Suhdivi,~'ion,v, clc..
Temporrtry Use Permits
Variances
G/plannin~misc¢l/dcsign review matrix
CITY OF
CUPEI INO
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM
Applicant:
Location:
City of Cupertino
Citywide
Agenda Date: January 24, 2000
Application Summary: Amend the Municipal Code to shift all single family
residential review to Residential Design Review Committee and to discuss the
Planning Commission Subcommittees.
BACKGROUND
Two separate committees currently conduct architectural review of building sites
in the city. The Residential Design Review Committee (RDRC) decides two-
story, single family homes with a floor area ratio exceeding 35%, while the
Design Review Subcommittee (DRS) recommends to the Planning Commission
on modifications to commercial, industrial and Planned Development residential
building sites, as well as fence and sign exceptions. The Committees were
created to reduce the Planning Commission workload.
When the RDRC was established, the City anticipated as many as eight single
family home applications per month. Actually, the number of applications has
been only two to three per month. The DRS was established to review the details
of a project and include: lighting, 'landscaping, building color or minor
modifications to buildings. The DRS has had between one to three applications
per month, which is considerably below the anticipated number of applications.
Staff is interested in merging the functions of the RDRC and the DRS into one
Committee entitled Design Review Committee (DRC).
DISCUSSION
Simplification of the Design Review Process: The merger of the RDRC and DRS
into one committee, the DRC, will simplify the design review process and will
clarify the roles of the staff. One committee responsible for design review for all
land uses in the city reduces the number of meetings held per month, the number
of committees the Planning Commission must participate in and the number of
meetings staff must attend. An exhibit has been prepared (Exhibit A), which
shows types of applications and review authority under the proposed Committee
configuration. In summary, the Planning Commission would continue to have
final authority on all design review related to a conditional use permits (new
commercial (<5,000 sq.ft.), industrial (<10,000 sq.ft.), quasi-public, duplex and
apartment buildings (<8 units)). The Design Review Committee would have the
final authority on two story single family homes with a floor area ratio greater
than 35%, single family homes in a Planned Development Zoning District (e.g.,
Oak Valley), deck/fence/sign exceptions, landscaping, lighting, building
materials/colors and minor modifications that go beyond the Planning Director
authority. Fence and sign exceptions are currently recommended by the DRS to
the Planning Commission but staff is recommending under the Committee merger
that this function be finalized by the DRC.
Committee Composition: The present voting arrangement gives the Director of
Community Development and the Architectural Advisor decision making
authority on the RDRC. Staff feels that both of these positions should be limited
to advisory only. Removing the staff from a decision-making role will necessitate
appointing another Commissioner to the Committee. The Architectural Advisor
will continue his current role in'DRS by participating in the early phases of a
project's design. The Advisor's comments would be included in the staff report to
the Committee, along with Planning staff's comments. The Committee would
have final decision authority if unanimous. Otherwise, the project would be
considered a denial and would automatically be placed on the Planning
Commission agenda for their review. Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission Vice-Chair and one additional Planning Commission representative
on the DRC.
Clarification of R-1 Ordinance: The Single Family Residential (R-I) ordinance
requires that all new two story homes or additions to two-story homes over 35%
floor area ratio obtain discretionary review. Through discretionary review a floor
area ratio up to 45% may be granted. The Residential Design Review Committee
has reviewed five applications since its origination, three of which are for requests
over 35% floor area ratio. The Committee wants guidance for making floor area
ratio decisions between 36%o - 45%0. The Committee wants clarification on
whether the basis for the decision should focus primarily on the design of the
proposed building or the building square footage as compared to existing homes
in the neighborhood. For example, the proposed design may fit well into a
neighborhood; there is good transition between it and the adjacent homes and the
scale and architectural features are similar. However, the proposed floor area ratio
is higher than the adjacent homes in a neighborhood. If the Planning Commission
believes that the design should prevail, then direction is requested on whether it is
the street elevation that is most important or all the elevations. If the Commission
feels that the square footage is more important, then direction is requested on how
much latitude should be considered. Or, the Commission could clarify that the
decision be based on an equal blend of these two factors.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommend to the City Council adoption of the Model Resolution and its
associated exhibits, which:
1. Approve the merger of the RDRC and DRS into one Committee.
2. Remove the architectural advisor and Planning Director from a decision-
making role of the Residential Design Review Committee and appoint another
Commissioner to the Committee.
3. Agree that the DRC will have final review authority on: architectural and site
applications, fence/deck/sign exceptions, two-story single family homes in R-
I zoning district which exceed a 35% floor area ratio, and individual single
family homes in Planned Development Residential districts.
4. Direct staff to return in one year with the status of the Committee
performance.
Clarify for the RDRC floor area ratio decisions for homes that exceed a 35% floor
area ratio
Enclosures:
Planning Commission Resolution
Exhibits 1 - 10
Exhibit A: Proposed Design Review Decision Tree-
Prepared by: Michele Rodriguez, Planner II
Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director
g:/planning/pdrepo~pc/202.1
2-Z-99
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO.
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND CHAPTERS 2.32, 2.90. 16.28, 17.44,
19.32, 19.36, 19.48, 19.56, 19.132, AND 19.134 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE TO
SHIFT DESIGN REVIEW TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
SECTION I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a
modification to the municipal code, as described on 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 Planning Commission finds that the subject modification meets the following
requirements:
1) That the modification to the municipal code is in conformance with the General Plan of the City of
Cupertino.
2) That the merging of the Residential Design Review Committee and the Design Review
Subcommittee into the Design Review Committee will reduce the Planning Commission workload,
simplify the design review process and clarify the roles of the staff on the Committee.
3) That the composition of the Residential Design Review Committee will ensure adequate Planning
Commission representation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this
matter, the application for change of zone is hereby recommended for approval; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in th'is resolution are based
and contained in the public hearing record concerning the Application to amend Municipal Code, as set
forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of January 24, 2000, are incorporated by
reference as though fully set forth herein.
Resolution No.
Page-2-
Amend Municipal Codes
January 24, 2000
SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
Amend Municipal Codes regarding design review
City of Cupertino
Citywide
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
APPROVED EXHIBITS
Exhibits 1-10, modifying Chapters 2.32 (Planning Commission), 2.90 (Design Review
Committeee). 16.28 (Fences), 17.44 (Signs), 19.32 (Duplex), 19.36 (Multiple-Fmnily Residential
R3 Zones), 19.48 (Planned Development PD Zones), 19.56 (General Commercial CG Zones),
19.132 (Administrative Approval of Minor Changes in Projects), and 19.134 (Architectural and
Site Review) of the Cupertino Municipal Code.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of January., 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:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
David Doyle, Chairman
Cupertino Planning Commission
g:planning/res/203
xhibit 1
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 2.32 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 2.32 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
PLANNING COMMISSION
Sections:
2.32.010
2.32.020
2.32.030
2.32.040
2.32.050
2.32.060
2.32.070
2.32.080
Established.
Term of office of members.
Vacancy or removal.
Chairperson.'
Meetings.
Amendments--Records required.
Powers and functions.
Procedural rules.
2.32.070 Powers and functions.
The powers and functions of the City Planning Commission shall be as follows:
H. Establish as needed, a standing subcommittee of the Commission for Design
Review. The Planning Commission shall decide appeals of the Design Review
Committee for the purposes of conducting design review on projects that properly come
before the Ccmmissic'n Design Review Committee for review, m:king recemmen~2tiens
,,. ,~,,~ c',,,-~,i~o; ...... ** ..... ,.,,,;,,;.,. ,,. ,h~. a,,c;,., and conduct design review of a
project, .-,~a reviewing ,,,,4 .......
c~,,~.~;~o;~,, ,~, ,~ .... ~,~,,~,~;**~ ~' ...... ; ...... a ........ ~ as required by Chapters 2.90,
19.132, 19.134 and of the Cupertino Municipal Code.
G:Planning/Ord/DRC 2.32
E.,ahibit 2
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
Chapter 2.90
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
Sections:
Established.
Terms of Office
Vacancy or removal Chairperson
Meeting-Quorum
Licensed Architect
Records-Agendas
Powers and Functions
Effect
2.90.10 Established.
The P. esidenti2! Design Review Committee (gDRC) is established. The gDRC
shall consist of, eno two Planning Commissioners or his or her alternate, the Director of
c,,, ..... ~,,, Deve!epment ~,,- ~,;o ,-,- r,,~,. ?.!temzte, ,~,a ~,,,~ llt~.noo,.t .,,---hit,.,-*
contrzct oath the City an.d shall include the Planning Commission Vice Chair and one
additional Planning Commission representative. The Planning Commission members
shall be appointed by the City Council.
2.90.20 Terms of Office
Committee members serve at the pleasure of the City Council. The term of the
Planning Commissioners is one year and shall end on January 15th of each year. The
term of office of the ............. .,,.,4,;,,.,., ;o ,,,^_ years.
2.90.30 Vacancy or removal
The Planning Commissioners ~ may be removed by a majority vote of
the City Council. If a vacancy occurs including an expiration of a term, it shall be filled
by the Mayor's appointment for the unexpired portion of the term.
2.90.40 Chairperson
The chairperson shall be one of the Planning Commissioner members. The term
shall be one year and shall begin on January 15 and be complete on January 15 of the
following year, unless the term of the officer as a member of the Planning Commission
expires sooner, and until the successor to each is duly appointed.
2.90.50 Meeting-Quorum
A. The gDRC shall meet at dates and times prescribed by the committee. Meetings
shall be held at City Hall, 10300 Torte Avenue, Cupertino, California. The committee
may adjourn any regular meeting to a date certain, which shall be specified in the order of
adjournment. When so adjourned, such meeting shall b~ a regular meeting for all
purpose.
B. Special meetings of the committee may be called at any time by the chairperson or
by any two members of the committee upon written notice being given to all members at
least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the meeting, unless notice is waived in writing by
each member.
C. ...... a ,-,,~;~,,4,,,j .... ~ ,,~-,~,~ ........... ~,r~t>r, Both members shall be present to constitute a quorum for
the purpose of transacting the business of the committee. A majority vote of the quorum
is required to approve any decision of the committee. A tie vote constitutes a denial of
any application or request. A denial is automatically forwarded to the Planning
Commission as a New Business item.
2.90.60 Licensed Architect
The licensed "_~c?.'tect member A licensed architect shall make recommendations
to the Committee. The architect shall be selected by the City Council and shall be
compensated based upon a contract with the City for a period not exceeding two years.
2.90.70 Records--Agendas
A. The committee shall keep an accurate record of its proceedings and transactions
and shall render such reports to the City Council and Planning Commission as may be
requested. The committee shall also comply with all requirements of the State of
Califomia Open meeting law ( the Brown Act), including the preparation and posting of
meeting agendas.
B. The committee shall be furnished with a secretary employed by the City to keep
accurate records of the committee. All records so prepared by the secretary shall be filed
with the City Clerk.
2.90.80 Powers and Functions
The powers and functions of the RDRC are as follows:
A. Under the provisions of Chapter 19.28 of the City's ordinance code, approve,
modify, or deny applications or requests for two story residential development located in
a Single Family Residential zoning district, or a individual single family home in a
Planned Development Residential zoning district ,h,,, r~;,-~t-*ly; ....... *,~t- I~ 1
erd;.nznce st2nd2rds, unless deemed minor in accordance with Chapter 19.132.
B. Under the provisions of Chapter 19.28 of the City's ordinance code, approve,
modify, or deny applications or requests for exceptions from R-1 standards.
C. Under the provisions of Chapter 16.28 of the City's ordinance code, approve,
modify, or deny applications or requests for fence exceptions.
D. Under the provisions of Chapter 16.28 of the City's ordinance code, approve,
modify, or deny applications or requests for sign exceptions.
E. Under the provisions of Chapter 19.32, 19.36, 19.56 and 19.134, of the City's
ordinance code for minor building modifications, landscaping, signs and lighting for new
developme, nt, redevelopment or modification in such zones where such review is
required.
F. Under the provisions of 19.80 of the City's ordinance code approve, modify, or
deny applications for deck exceptions.
G. Under the provisions of 19.32 & 19.36 modify or deny minor modifications of
duplex and multi-family buildings.
H.~. Perform other functions as the City Council requires.
2.90.90 Procedural Rules
The I?d2)RC may adopt from time to time such rules or procedures, as it may deem
necessary to properly exercise its powers and functions. Such rules shall be subject to
approval by the City Council before becoming effective. All such rules shall be kept on
file with the chairperson of P,,I)RC and the City Clerk and a copy thereof shall be
furnished to any person upon request.
2.90.100 Effect
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as restricting or curtailing any powers
of the City Council, Planning Commission or City officers.
G/planning/ord/rdrc merge with dfc
Exhibit 3
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 16.28 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 16.28 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
FENCES
16.28.030 Fence location and height for zones requiring site review.
A. The Design Review Committee, Planning Commission and City Council shall have
the authority to require, approve, or disapprove wall and fencing plans including location,
height and materials in all zones requiting design review.
16.28.060 Exceptions
A. Application and Fee. Application shall be made in writing to the P1 ........ o
Cemm~.o_den Design Review Committee on a form prescribed by the Director of
Community Development. The application shall be accompanied by a fee as prescribed
by City Council resolution.
B. Public Hearings. Upon receipt of an application for exception, the Director of
Community Development shall set a time and place for a public hearing before the
P!-_nv.~.ng Cem.'v2_~den Design Review Committee and order the public notice thereof.
Mailed written notice ...... Said notice shall be mailed by first class mail at least ten
days prior to the P!a."m~.ng Cem.'v..~zden Design Review Committee meeting in which the
application will be considered.
The Planning Ce.'v.m~.rden Design Review Committee shall hold a public heating at
which time the Ce.'v...'?.L°.den Committee may grant the exception based upon the
following findings:
C. Appeals. Any application for exception which received final approval or
disapproval by the Pla.'m~.ng Ce.'v.m~-rden Design Review Committee may be appealed
to the Ci2y Ceund! Planning Commission as provided by Section 19.136.060 of this
code.
G:Planning/Ord/DRC 16.28
/7-d°
Exhibit 4
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 17.44 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 17.44 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
SIGN EXCEPTIONS
Sections:
17.44.010
17.44.020
17.44.030
17.44.040
17.44.050
17.44.060
17.44.070
17.44.080
17.44.090
Authority.
Application and fee.
Design Review Committee review required
Findings for an exception
Action by the P!~_nn.;ng Cemm'.'se;.en Design Review
Committee
Conditions for revocation of exeeptionmNotiee required.
Exception deemed null and void whenmNotifieation required.
Appeals.
Reports to C'.'~' Ce'_'ne;.! Planning Commission.
17.44.010 Authority.
The P!mn_-.'.'ng Ce.'v_'v..'.'zs~.en Design Review Committee may grant a sign exception in
accordance with the provisions of this chapter. (Ord 1789 § 1 (part), 1998)
17.44.020 Application and fee.
An application shall be made in writing to the P!2n_".'.'ng Ce_,v_'v..issien Design Review
Committee on a form prescribed by the Director.
17.44.030 Pl-__nn:'v_g Ce.-v.m'.'ss~.ev. Design Review Committee review required.
A. An exception shall be scheduled for review by the P!m-.ning Ce.':v_.'v.~.s_°~.en Design
Review Committee, not later than thirty days after filing of application.
B. Mailed written notice of the hearing on the sign exception shall be given by the.
Director of Community Development to all owners of record of real property (as shown
in the last assessment roll) which abut the subject property, as well as property and its
abutting properties to the left and right, directly opposite the subject property and located
across a street, way, highway or alley. Mailed notice shall include owners of property
whose only contiguity to the subject site is a single poini. Said notice shall be mailed by
first class mail at least ten days prior to the P!2nn~_ng Cvmmlssien Design Review
Committee meeting in which the application will be considered. The notice shall state
the date, time and place of the hearing, a description of the sign exception shall be
included in the notice. If the Director of Community Development believes the project
may have negative effects beyond the range of the mailed notice, particularly negative
effects on nearby residential areas, the Director, in his discretion, may expand noticing
beyond the stated requirements.
17.44.040 Findings for an exception
The Pl~nn~.:'.g Cemmiss~-en Design Review Committee may grant an exception based
upon all the following findings:
A. That the literal enforcement of ihe provisions of this title will result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title;
B. That the granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare; and
C. That the exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification of
the prescribed regulations and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose.
(Ord. 1789 § 1 (part), 1998)
17.44.050 Action by m........~...~,:, Cemm:'ss~.en Design Review Committee.
The decision made by the P!"2m'.'ng Ce.,z'._m~.ss;.~n Design Review Committee is final
unless appealed in accordance with Section 17.44.080. (Ord. 1789 § 1 (part), 1998)
17.44.080 Appeals
A. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the P!2.'ming Ce.'z'.~'z'..iss'.'en Design Review
Committee in the approval, conditioning, denial, or revocation of an exception for a sign
may appeal such a decision in writing to the City Council.
D. Such appeals shall be heard by the City Ce,.z'nc~.! and sehedu!ed on their agend2 2t
,h,. ,;,,.o ,h~, ~,h~, Pl~ing Co~ission ;* ........ ~-~ ........ ~d scheduled on ~eir
...... fl Planning Commission
17.44.090 Reports to C~.B' r, ..... ·
The Director, or designated representative, shall make written reports on all exceptions
granted, denied, or revoked under this chapter. The reports shall be delivered to the Cig,
C. oua~ PI.arming Commission within five calendar days from the date of the decision.
(Ord. 1789 § 1 (part), 1998)
G:Planning/DRC 17.44
EXHIBIT 5
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.32 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapt.er 19.32 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
RESIDENTIAL DUPLEX (R-2) ZONES
Sections:
19.32.010
19.32.020
19.32.030
19.32.040
19.32.050
19.32.060
19.32.070
19.32.080
19.32.090
Purpose.
Applicability of regulations.
Permitted uses.
Conditional uses.
Height of buildings and structures.
Lot area and width.
Building coverage and setbacks
Permitted yard encroachments.
Architectural and site review.
19.32.090 Architectural and site review.
No building, structure, or sign shall be erected, structurally altered, or enlarged, nor
shall any landscaping or parking plan be implemented or modified, in an R-2 zone,
without arc~2tecmra! 2nd site review design review by the Design Review Committee
pursuant to Chapter 2.90 and 19.134 of the municipal code. (Ord 1779 § i(B), 1998)
G:PlanningdOrcl/DRC 19.32
EXHIBIT 6
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck thr,ough.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.36 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF TI-IE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.36 of the Municipal Code of Cupertin.o is hereby amended to read as follows:
MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAl, 0t-3) ZONES'
Sections:
19.36.010 ' Purpose.
19.36.020
19.36.030
19.36.040
19.36.050
19.36.060
19.36.0'/0
19.36.080
Applicability of regulations.
Permitted uses.
Conditional uses.
Conceptual plan.
Site development regulations.
Parking.
Architectural and Site Review.
19.36.50 Conceptual Plan
C. No building permit may be issued for development proposal of a vacant property
presently zoned multiple-family residential until a conceptual development plan is
approved by the Planning Commission for the City of Cupertino in conjunction with a
public hearing for a conditional use permit.
19.36.080 Architectural and Site Review
Signs, landscaping or parking plans and minor modifications to buildings may be
erected, structurally altered, enlarged or modified with design review by the Design
Review Committee pursuant to Chapter 2.90 and 19.134, unless a conditional use permit
is required. Then the Planning Commission shall decide on the action.
G:Planning/DRC 19.36
EXHIBIT 7
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.48 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.48 of. the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (I'D) ZONES
Sections:
19.48.010
19.48.020
19.48.030
19.48.040
19.48.050
19.48.060
19.48.070
19.48.080
19.48.090
19.48.100
19.48.110
Purpose.
Applicability of regulations.
Establishment of districtsmPermitted and conditional uses.
Conceptual development plans.
Action by the Planning Commission
'Zoning or prezoning--Action by the City Council
Use permit requiredmDefinitive development plan.
Action by the Design Review Committee.
Action by the Planning Commission.
Conditional use permitmAction by the City Council.
Modifications of the definitive development plan.
19.48.080 Action by the Design Review Committee
Individual single-family homes in a Planned Development Residential zoning district or
two-story, single-family homes that directly incorporate R-1 (19.28) ordinance standards,
shall be approved, modified or denied by the Design Review Committee under the
provisions of chapter 2.90.
G:Planning/Ord/DRC 19.48
EXHIBIT 8
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.56 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.56 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows:
GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG) ZONES
Sections:
19.56.010
19.56.020
19.56.030
19.56.040
19.56.050
19.56.060
19.56.070
19.56.080
Purposes.
Applicability of regulation.
Permitted uses.
'Conditional uses.
Excluded uses.
Conditional use permit for new development.
Land use activity and site development regulations.
Interpretation by the Planning Director.
19.56.060 Conditional use permit for new development
B. Minor architectural modifications including changes in materials and colors shall
be reviewed by the Director of Community development as specified in Chapter 19.132
or 2.90 of this code. If an application is diverted to the Design Review Committee or the
Planning Commission, the application shall be agendized for a Design Review
Committee or Planning Commission meeting as an architectural and site application.
(Ord. 1784 (part), 1998; Ord. 1687 Exh. A (part), 1995)
G:Planning/Ord/DRC 19.56
EXHIBIT 9
Proposed text is underlined.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.132 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.132 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as
follows:
ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF MINOR CHANGES IN PROJECTS
Sections:
19.132.010
19.132.020
19.132.030
19.132.040
19.132.050
19.132.060
19.132.070
Purpose.
Definition of minor change.
Applicability of chapter.
Diversion of application for administrative approval.
Suspension of time periods.
Noticing, review and approval process.
Reports.
19.132.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a uniform and orderly procedure for
expeditious administrative approval of minor changes to existing projects and plans.
(Ord. 1790 § 1 (part), 1998)
19.132.060 Noticing, review and approval process.
A. Design Review Refen'al. The Director, in his discretion, may refer a diverted
application directly to the De. sign Review Committee for review and recommendation.
B. Mailed written notice of the Design Review Committee hearing on the application
shall be given by the Director to all owners of record of real property (as shown in the last
assessment roll) which abut the subject property, as well as property and its abutting
properties to the left and right, directly opposite the subject property and located across a
street, way, highway or alley. Mailed notice shall include owners of property whose only
contiguity to the subject site is a single point. Said notice shall be mailed by first class
mail at least ten days prior to the Design Review Committee meeting in which the
application will be considered. The notice shall state the date, time and place of the
hearing. A description of the application shall be included in the notice. If the Director
of Community Development believes the project may have negative effects beyond the
range of the mailed notice, particularly negative effects on nearby residential areas, the
Director, in his discretion, may expand noticing beyond the stated requirements.
Compliance with the notice provisions set forth in this section shall constitute a good-
faith effort to provide notice, and failure to provide notice, and the failure of any person
to receive notice, shall not prevent the City from proceeding to consider or to take action
with respect to an application under this chapter.
C. Director of Community Development. Upon diversion, or upon receipt of the
Design Review Committee recommendation, the Director shall expeditiously approve or
disapprove the application in accordance with the same standards and with the same
power to impose conditions as would have applied to the Planning Commission or City
Council.
D.__:. Decision. The Director ihall render his decision in writing, stating reasons
therefor, and mail thereof to the applicant. Any aggrieved or affected person may appeal
such decision in accord with the provisions of Chapter 19.136. Unless an appeal of such
a decision is filed within fourteen working days following the mailing of the notice of
decision, it shall become final upon the expiration of said time period. (Ord. 1790 § 1
(part), 1998)
G:Planning/Ord/DRC 19.132
EXHIBIT 10
Proposed text is underlined. Deleted text is struck through.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING CHAPTER 19.134 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Chapter 19.134 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as
follows:
ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE REVIEW *
Sections:
19.134.010
19.134.020
19.134.030
19.134.040
19.134.050
19.134.060
19.134.070
19.134.080
19.134.090
19.134.100
19.134.110
Purposes.
Authority of the Design Review Committee
Authority of the Planning Commission
Application for architectural and site approval
Action by the Director
Notice of consideration
Action by the Planning Commission-Appeals
Limitations regarding Planning Commission decisions
Findings and conditions.
Revocation, extensions, and duration.
Reports
* Prior ordinance history: Ord. 1778.
19.134.010 Purposes.
This chapter is hereby enacted to provide for an orderly process to review the
architectural and site designs of buildings, structures, signs, lighting, and landscaping for
prescribed types of land development within the City in order to promote the goals and
objectives contained in the General Plan, to protect and stabilize property values for the
general welfare of the City, to maintain the character and integrity of neighborhoods by
promoting high standards for development in harmony therewith, and by preventing the
adverse effects associated with new construction by giving proper attention to the design,
shape, color, materials, landscaping and other qualitative elements related to the design of
developments and thereby creating a positive and memorable image of Cupertino. (Ord.
1791 § 1 (pan), 1998)
19.134.020 Authority of the Design Review Committee.
Subject to the provisions of this chapter and to the general purpose and intent of this
title, the Design Review Committee shall review fence exceptions, sign exceptions, deck
exceptions, two story residential development with a floor area ratio over 35% located in
a Single Family Residential zoning district, an individual single family home in a Planned
Development Residential zoning district,minor modifications to buildings, landscaping,
signs, and lighting for new development, redevelopment, or modification in such zones
where such review is required.
19.134.030 Authority of the Planning Commission.
Subject to the provisions of this chapter and to the general purpose and intent of this
title, the Planning Commission shall review the architectural and site design, la~a~c, aa.~
o; ..... A l;.rl-,,;,.,-, r ....... de'.'e!e~m, ent, redeve!e~ment, ,~,- ,-~.-,,~;~,-~*;,~,- in such zones
where such review is required or when required by a condition to a use permit, variance,
or any other entitlement of use. (Ord. 1791 § 1 (part), 1998)
19.134.040 Application for architectural and site approval.
A. When architectural and site review is not part of another application for
development, a separate application for such review shall be made by the owner of record
of property for which the approval is sought.
B. The application shall be made to the Director, on a form provided by the City, and
shall contain the following:
1. A description and map showing the location of the property for which the
review is sought;
2. Detailed plans as required by the Director showing the proposed development
or changes to occur on the property;
3. Such additional information as the Director may deem pertinent and essential
to the application.
C. Any such application for review shall be accompanied by the fee prescribed by
City Council resolution, no part of which shall be refunded. (Ord. 1791 § 1 (part), 1998)
19.134.450 Action by the Director.
Unless otherwise provided by Section 19.04.090 regarding combined applications, the
following actions shall be taken by the Director to process an application under this
chapter.
A. Upon receipt of a complete application, the Director shall, within thirty days from
the date the application is deemed complete, cause the application to be agendized for
consideration before either the Design Review Committee or Planning Commission at a
regular or special meeting, unless the application is diverted for administrative approval,
pursuant to Section 19.132.030. Consideration of the application by the Planning
Commission shall commence forty-five days of the date it is set. (Ord. 1791 § 1 (part),
1998)
19.134.060 Notice of consideration
Mailed written notice of consideration of any application under this chapter by the
Design Review committee or Planning Commission shall be given by the Director to all
owners of record of real property (as shown in the last assessment roll) which abut the
subject property, as well as property, and its abutting properties to the left and right,
directly opposite the subject prope~'ty and located across a street, way, highway or alley.
Mailed notice shall include owners o£property whose only contiguity to the subject site is
a single point. Said notice shall be mailed by first class mail at least ten days prior to the
Design Review Committee or Planning Commission meeting in which the application
will be considered. If the Director of Community development believes the project may
have negative effects beyond the range of the mailed notice, particularly negative effects
on nearby residential areas, the Director, in his discretion, may expand noticing beyond
the stated requirements.
Compliance with the notice provisions set forth in this section shall constitute a good-
faith effort to provided notice, and the failure to provide notice, and the failure of any
person to receive notice, shall not prevent the City from proceeding to consider or to take
action with respect to an application under this chapter.
B. The notice of consideration shall contain the following:
1. The exact address of the property, if known, or the location of the property, if
the address is not known, and the existing zoning district or districts applicable; 2. The time, date, place, and purpose of the consideration;
3: A brief description, the content of which shall be in the sole discretion of the
City, of the proposed project;
4. Reference to the application on file for particulars;
5. A statement that any interested person, or agent thereof may appear and be
heard.
Typographical errors in the notice shall not invalidate the notice nor any City action
related thereto. (Ord. 1791 § 1 (part), 1998)
19.134.070 Action by the Planning Commission - Appeals.
A. At the time and place set for consideration of the application, the Planning
Commission shall consider evidence for or against the application. Within a reasonable
time after conclusion of its consideration, the Commission shall make findings and shall
render a decision regarding the application which is supported by the evidence contained
in the application or presented at the meeting. The decision of the Planning Eommission
is subject to appeal as provided in Chapter 19.136. (Ord. 1791 § 1 (part), 1998)
19.134.080 Limitations regarding Planning Commission decisions.
In its consideration of architectural and site applications, the Planning Commission is
limited to considering and rendering decisions solely upon the issues described in Section
19.134.0;~30 and is precluded from considering or rendering decisions regarding other
planning, zoning, or subdivision issues with respect to the subject property unless said
(7- X-?
application is combined with the appropriate application or applications which address
those additional issues. (Ord. 1791 § 1 (part), 1998)
19.134.090 Findings and conditions.
A. The Design Review Committee or the Planning Commission may approve and
application only if all of the following findings are made:
1. The proposal, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to
property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, general welfare, or convenience;
2. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of this chapter, the General Plan,
any specific plan, zoning ordinances, applicable conditional use permits, variances,
subdivision maps or other entitlements to use which regulate the subject property
including, but nbt limited to, adherence to the following specific criteria:
a. Abrupt changes in building scale should be avoided. A gradual transition
related to height and bulk should be achieved between new and existing buildings.
b. In order to preserve design harmony be ,t)veen new and existing buildings and
in order to preserve and enhance property values, the materials, textures and colors of
new buildings should harmonize with adjacent development by being consistent or
compatible with design and color schemes, and with the future character of the
neighborhood and purposes of the zone in which they are situated. The location, height
and materials of walls, fencing, hedges and screen planting should harmonize with
adjacent development. Unsightly storage areas, utility installations and unsightly
elements of parking lots should be concealed. The planting of ground cover or various
types of pavements should be used to prevent dust and erosion, and the unnecessary
destruction of existing healthy trees should be avoided. Lighting for development should
be adequate to meet safety requirements as specified by the engineering and building
departments, and provide shielding to prevent spill-over light to adjoining property
owners.
c. The number, location, color, size, height, lighting and landscaping of
outdoor advertising signs and structures shall minimize traffic hazards and shall
positively affect the general appearance of the neighborhood and harmonize with adjacent
development.
d. With respect to new projects within existing residential neighborhoods, new
development should be designed to protect residents from noise, traffic, light and visually
intrusive effects by use of buffering, setbacks, landscaping, walls and other appropriate
design measures.
B. The Committee or the Commission may impose reasonable conditions or
restrictions which it deems necessary to secure the purposes of the General Plan, and this
title and to assure that the proposal is compatible with existing and potential uses on
adjoining properties. (Ord. 1791 § 1 (part), 1998)
19.134.100 Revocation, extensions, and duration.
A. The revocation of any approval under this chapter is governed under the same
procedures as described in Section 19.124.100 regarding revocation, extensions, and
duration.
B. An architectural and site approval application grmated under this chapter which
has not been used within two years following its approval, shall become null and void
and of no effect unless a shorter time period is specifically prescribed by the conditions of
approval Such approval shall be deemed to have been "used" when actual substantial and
continuous construction activity has taken place upon the land pursuant to the approval.
C. The Design Review Committee or the Planning Commission may extend such
time for a maximum of one additional year only upon application filed with the Director
before the expiration of such limit as may be specified by the conditions of approval.
D. All decisions related to revocation and extensions of approvals contained in this
section are subject to the appeals,procedure contained in Chapter 19.136. (Ord. 1791 § 1
(part), 1998)
19.134.110 Reports.
The Director shall make written reports to the Planning Commission describing the
.Design Review Committee decisions or the City Council describing Planning
Commission decisions under this chapter to be forwarded to the City Council within five
calendar days from the date of such decisions. (Ord. 1791 § 1 (part), 1998)
G:Planning/Ord/DRC 19.134
Exhibit A
DESIGN REVIEW DECISION TREE
PLANNING DESIGN REVIEW PLANNING CITY COUNCIL
DIRECTOR COMMITTEE COMMISSION
APPLICATION TYPES APPLICATION TYPES APPLICATION TYPES APPLICATION TYPES
Minor Modifications: Architectural & Site New buildings in New buildings in
Has authority through Applications: Lighting, Duplex, Commercial Duplex, Commercial
or~linance 19.132 to Signs, Landscaping, (<5,000 sq.ft.), Industrial (>5,000 sq.ft.), Industrial
decide upon minor Building Colors and (<10,000 sq.ft.), Quasi- (> 10.000 sq.ft.), Multi-
modifications to projects Minor Changes to Public, Multi-Family Family (>8 units) '
in a Planned Buildings in Duplex, Zoning Districts (<8 Zoning Districts.
Development, and R1-C Commercial, Industrial, units).
Zoning District. An Quasi-Public, Multi-
alteration or Family Zoning Districts.
modification of an Fence Exceptionst
existing plan, Deck Exceptions Use Permits Some Use Permits
development or project Two-story Single Family
which is substantially homes in R-1 Zoning
inferior in bulk, degree District which exceed
or importance to the 35%floor area ratio
overall dimension and Sign ExceptionsI Appeals of the Design Appeals of the Plannip~'
design of the plan, Review Committee. Commission.
development or project
with no change proposed
for the use of the land in
question, no change
proposed in the
character of the structure
or structures involved,
and no variance
required.
Temporary Use Permits Individual Single Family
Homes in Planned
Development
Variances Minor Modifications by
the Planning Director
Deferred to Committee.
G/planning/misc¢l/design rewew mamx
' Previously recommended by DRS to PC. Proposed by staffas final authority under DRC.
I
Comnlission Minutes 4 .la,m; 2()0()
colors lilly for a residential care home, although the Llarker color down thc visihilitv
of the the road. He said he supported tile ivory color way out. hov, cvcr. hc
was not oppose, keeping tile existing color if that ~vas the apl choice.
Com. Kwok said
~ recommendation relative to )aint color was acceptable.
Com. Corr also said that
:ceptable.
Chair Harris said that it was a high
was in favor of staff's
~ty project that had to exist within ti community, and she
MOTION: Com. ~ moved to approve
SECOND: CoT'Stevens
NOES: ~fiair Harris
ABSENT: /~ Com. Doyle
VOT.,~ Passed
C~. Doyle returned to the meeting.
13-U-97 (M) tis modilicd
o
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
Amend Municipal Code regarding review o f single family
residential applications
City of Cupertino
Citywide
Amend the Municipal Code to shift all family residential review to residential design rcvic~v
committee and to discuss the Planning Commission Subcommittees
Continued from Planning Commission meeting of Jantiary I O. 2000
Request continuance to meeting of Janttrlry 24, 2000
Staff Presentation: Ms. Michelle Rodriguez, Planner II, said that tile t~vo isst,cs for discussion
included the simplification of the design review process and the interpretation as requested hy Ibc
Residential Design Review Committee. She reviewed the composition of thc Residential I)csign
Review Committee (RDRC) and the Design Review Subcommittee (DRS) and thc functions and
responsibilities of each as outlined in the attached staff report. Staff proposes a merging of thc
two committees into one committee as the number of applications received since Iht inccplion
the committees was significantly lower than anticipated. Tile purpose of' tile one commillcc would
be to simplify the design review process, clarify the role of staff; and reduce thc nun~bcr
monthly meetings for the Planning Commission and staff.
Ms. Rodriguez reviewed the Design Review Decision Tree matrix which outlined thc I, roposcd
role and functions of the Planning Director, Design Review Committee, Planning Commission and
City Council. She explained the proposed reconfiguration of the committee, and clarified thc R-I
Ordinance as outlined in the staff report.
Staff recommends that the two com~Tfittees be merged into one committcc; remove Iht
architectural advisor and Planning Director from a decision-making role, and appoinl one
additional Planning Commissioner to the new committee; that the I~lanning Commission ag,'cc Ihill
the new committee should be the final authority on ftmctions outlined in the mat,'ix reviewed: aqd
Plmming Commission Minutes 5 .lammrx 2.1. 2000
direct staff' to return within one year with a status report' on tile commillcc I'tmclions and ils
performance.
Ms. Rodriguez answered questions relative to the flmctions of tile two i-}ri2scnl commillccs and Iht
proposed combined committee.
Chair Harris requested that a member of tile present RDRC discuss thc process, timclincs, ami
benefit of the architectural advisor. Com. Doyle said that it was a working meeting, thc applicanls
typically brought in their multiple pages of drawings and i nl:ormatio,1 and the faro i ly wottltl ,'tv
it with tile committee. He said the process per application varied from one hour I'or a porch. Io 1-
1/2 to 2 hours for homes. He questioned what the cornmittee was attempting to accomplish since
the process became very tedious and time consuming. Com. Doyle said that he felt il' thc
architect had a recornmendation for a change that is required fi'om him, hc should bc prcscm
discuss it.
Chair Harris opened the meeting for public input; there was no one present who wished to speak.
Chair Harris summarized tile issues: (I) Whether or not to combine tile two commillccs; (2)
Whether to take the houses from tile diocese requiring individual review because riley :u'c iu a I'l)
and move them to the comrnittee and keep tile other committee, or move lilt)sc m'chilcclu,'al
review items back to the Planning Commission since there aren't that many; (3) Will ~l~c :u'chitcct
do tile work ahead of time so that the RDRC would have a more finished product when they mci?
(4) What is the feeling about staff's recommendation on the design review itscll': should Ibc
following be addressed: the front that f,aces tile right of way, look tit till I'our clcvalions rclalivc Io
design, look at the relationship of the property to tile otlmr properties.
Chair Harris noted that a 2:0 decision at the review committee could become a 3:2 tit thc boa,'d il'
it went to the Planning Commission. She said that having that be the final authority on everything
was a big shifting of the work of tile Planning Commission, especially il' it was thc final apl'n'cwal
for modifications that the Director ,,vas not comfortable doing himself.
Com. Stevens said the concept of combining tile two 'committees was al,proprialc: however, hc
felt that the approval should be recommendation for the consent calendar rather than approv:d in
all cases; the Planning Comrnission should accept those as a consent item but not Ibr apl')row~l iu
its entirety. He said that the Planning Director's position is tile staff's rccommcndatkm, which is
either approval or denial. Com. Stevens said he felt it should be identical tbr thc architect as Iht
architect is the most important person, especially relative to residential, and hc preferred thru thc
architect be present at the meeting in order to answer questions, and his review should bc
provided. He said that relative to the architecture vs. FAR combination, they tire intertwined aud
all four sides should be reviewed in all cases, not just isolated situations. Thc review would bc Iht
same review that would be given in the Planning Cornmission. Relative to presence o1' a (.lUOrUnl.
Com. Stevens said that he felt it should be if a representative m- alternate were present would I')c
adequate, not both. Relative to workload, he recommended three applications per meeting: over
three would go to the Planning Commission.
Com. Kwok said that he was not opposed to the merger of the two committees; however, hc
expressed concern about the length of the meetings and recommended a maximt,n of two ilcms
per meeting. He said there were merits on two Pla,ming Commissione,'s being involved in thc
decision making process, but it should not exclude feedback from tile architectural advisor.
Planning Commission Minutes . .hmu;u') "4.2Ulll)
said, as suggested, that he would prefer it oil an as-needed basis il' there wcrc any ilcms (hm u, crc
recomrnendations t'or changes, tile advisor should be there to give the pros and cons and why Ibc
recommendations are changed. Relative to No. 3, he expressed concern about giving iht
committee the final approval, since the Commission is charged with tile decision making decision
process about any exceptional cases, and if necessary, there should be a consensus, discussion,
and input t'rom all commissioners, rather than put the burden on tile two commissioners. I Ic
concurred that it could be put on the consent calendar. Relative to tile timeline for a status report,
he suggested six months and return i the workload is too heavy.
CmT~. Doyle said that the merger of tsvo committees was appropriate; but limit thc meetings
three items per month. He expressed concern that there may be too many items. Hc said hc
in favor of the changes in the voting membership as the Planning Commissioners ,hake thc
decisions that are supposed to reflect the decisions of the City Council and community; and thc
Director and the architect are the staff people who are the experts who craft thc decision. I Ic said
final decisions, unless appealed was a suitable start, but consent calendar might he mm'c
appropriate, with flexibility being the key; architectural advisor should be in attendance.
Mr. Piasecki commented on the workload, stating that one of the precepts o~' the concept is that thc
architectural advisor's input would be available to tile applicant much earlier in thc process and
they would be able to adjust the plans and resolve isstles early oil with the expectation of bringing
fewer issues to the committee. He said it should shorten the amount o~' time spent ,'cvicsviqg each
application in detail and hopefully have more of a consensus between tile architectural :~dvisor ami
the applicant.
Com. Corr said he was not opposed to Items I and 2 as it fits in svith svhat has been discussed. I lc
said he was not in favor of final authority being given to tile 2 commissioners on ~hc committee,
but that the recommendation be presented on the consent calendar of the I~lanning Commission
agenda. He expressed concern about getting involved in designing houses, which is mn Ihcir role.
He said they should be looking at tile design o1" all l"our elevations, and in tm'ms o1' thc FAR, il is
written in the codes. Com. Corr said that he was not opposed to a one year committee rcporl,
because ii" a backlog occurs, tlley could request something sooner. I-lc suggested nol more Ih;in
three applications per meeting, noting that two ~vere preferable.
Chair Harris said she teared it was too ITILICll work for tile committee and ~vould like lo sec a
report in six months showing how many hours each meeting took and how many issues came
forward and what the categories were. She said that she was supportive o1' thc con.$olidatim~ il' it
went forward on the consent calendar, to reduce the workload or tile Planning Co,mnission. hul
not shift the responsibilities to two of the commissioners. She said she was itl Ihwu' or raking ~hc
houses in the planned developments and adding to that Committee it' it is m~t a bm'dun; il' i~ is a
burden then it should come back to the Planning Commission to do tile architccturals,' which do
not take long. Chair Harris said she concurred with the Planning Director's recommendation that
the architect get involved ahead of time, and work with the applicant's architect and stall' so thru il
is presented to the committee as arnore finished product. She said she was not in I'avor o1' Ibc
word "denial" as she felt two people with different views was not a denial, but a dil'l'crcnl view,
and the vote in itself is a vote to bring it to the Planning Commission. She recommended that thc
language state that
a 1:1 vote is a vote to bring it before the committee, not a vote to deny. Chair I. hlrris said she I'cll
the workload of 3 applications per meeting was overbearing, and that 2 to 3 was mom rcastmahlc,
with staffdeciding what time it would take, with a 2 hour maximum.
Planning Commission Minutes ? .I;mum'x 24. £()i)()
A discussion ensued regarding tile committee membership. Clmir Harris said Ilml because ~1' her
duties as Chairperson o1' tile Planning Commission, sim could m)t sci'vt on lilt ct~nlJnillcc.
concurred with staff's recommendation that it be a task or' the Vice Chai,'. Com. Stevens said
Felt there should be continuity witll the two Planning Commissioners serving on Iht commitlcc.
one being the Vice Chair, an experienced commissioner. Chair Harris noted lhat thc
were made through the year 2000. She recornmencled Com. Doyle till tile scat because hc has
served on it for six months and was already appointed to do that work through thc vcar
Com. Stevens would also serve on the committee.
Chair Harris recommended that the item be continued to tile January 31st meeting to enable slal'l'
tO bring the actual wording in the ordinance. She summarized that the recommendation is to
consolidate the two committees to not have final review rest with that commitlcc but rather bring
tile items forward for consent calendar if tile vote was 2:0; it' the vote was I:l it would come Io
the Planning Commission as a regular item; that the architect and the Planning Di,'cctm' bc
advisory capacities and do their work in advance, and be present if necessary~ that thc architecture
be considered on all four sides, and in relation to the adjacent properties: and thc si×c al.so bc
reviewed in light of' what is around it and how it fits in. Relative to workload, make st,re it is 2-
1/2 hours maximum, 2 meetings per month; and it' in excess, it needs to bc part o1' thc I~lanning
Commission
review or needs to be presented to the committee.
Com. Doyle questioned tile design size issue, and whether it was the intent o1' thc committee
a design compatibility review of tile homes from an architectural standpoint, or is il lo make sm'c
that the size of the project and way it is executed is harmonious with thc ncighborhm~d.
Harris said most of the commissioned said they wanted the architecture reviewed in light o1' thc
surroundings which includes not only size issue but also compatibility.
Following discussion, there was consensus that a six month revie~v period was approp,'iatc relative
to the isstie of workload.
MOTION:
SECOND:
VOTE:
Com. Kwok moved to continue the amendment of thc municipal code Itl thc
January 31,2000 Planning Commission meeting
Com. Corr
Passed 5-0-0
There was a discussion about the representatives to tile Environmental Review Comlnittcc and thc
Housing Committee. Chair Harris noted that Corns. Doyle and Stevens woukl be on thc I)csign
Committee; in light of that, Com. Stevens would give up the Enviromnental Review Committee
and Com. Corr said he would transfer, to the Housing Committee: Com. Kwok has agreed Itl lake
on the Housing Committee and Com. Corr has agreed to take on tile ~nvironmental I~,cvicw
Committee. Relative to the alternates, Com. Stevens said he would like to remain as an alternate
on the ERC; Com. Corr said he would be alternate to the HOusing Committee, and Com. Kwok
would serve as an alternate on the Design Review Committee. Discussion of the next twt~ special
meetings ensued. Chair Harris reminded all present of the January 3 Ist meeting begin,ting at 6:1){I
p.m. There will also be a special meeting on Saturday, February 5th fi'om I0 a.m. until 12
Meeting for the development intensity manual - prior to tile Feb. 28th meeting; Feb. 28th meeting
to start at 6:00 to 7:00; regular meeting begins at 7:15 p.m.
/AW OFFICES OF
STEVEN D. HOi~F~AN
20370 TOWN CENTER LANE, SUITE I00
CUP~]~T[NO, CA.LZFO]E~NI.~ 95014
TELEPHONE
March 13, 2000
HAND-DELIVERED
City Clerk
City of Cupertino
City Hall
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Re: Petition for Reconsideration
MAR .1. 3 2000
t By__ ^cs,M,L.,'
Honorable Major and Council Members:
The City Clerk has asked that I submit any additional material to you which I
would like to have considered in connection with the Reconsideration Hearing to
be held on March 20, 2000. In connection with this hearing, kindly consider the
following:
Unapproved use of park parking lot: This hearing for reconsideration is not
and should not be considered the hearing that is required by law in
connection with some exceptional use of Varian Park. The appropriate
manner by which approval is given by the City, is by means of an
application submitted for such use. No application has been submitted by
the District or the YMCA. This hearing is only one to determine whether.
there has been a violation of the Cupertino Municipal code. I have
previously submitted copies of the code and pointed out the provisions of
that code which require submission of an application to the City and
approval by the City before such use is allowed. The code specifically
provides for notice and oppommity to be heard by the affected neighbors.
Again, this hearing is not a substitute for the hearing that should have taken
place when the District intended to use the parking lot in connection with the
first day-care center building which was constructed in 1989 or the
subsequent building which was erected in 1996. I have consistently
requested the City take note of this since the first building went up.
city2.1tr
City Clerk
March 13, 2000
Page 2
Impact: As a property owner adjoining the park, I have been and continue
to be severely impacted by the extraordinary use of the park parking lot.
When my wife and I moved to our property I studied the park and knew that
the Varian Park was a neighborhood park used primarily by people in the
neighborhood and not those driving to the park. There was little, if any, use
of the park parking lot by park users. We decided to purchase our property
based on that study with the knowledge that any change in the park use or
the park parking lot would have to be in compliance with the City code and
that we would be given a notice and opportunity to be heard before any use
was allowed. The City's allowance of the unapproved use without permit or
application gives the message that activities considered by the City to be in
the public good should not be required to go through the City approval
process and the City can make that determination on its own without a
public hearing and without compliance with its own Municipal code. This
is clearly a deprivation of the constitutional right to due process and the due
process' protections built into its own Municipal code.
Traffic Study: Assuming that the Council is considering, for purposes of this
hearing, the extent of traffic in the park generated by daycare use, traffic
studies clearly show that the District/YMCA use of the Varian Park parking
lot is not diminimus use as determined by the City Manager. Such use is
significantly more than any use of the park. Enclosed please find an
informal though accurate traffic study which shows a minimum use by day-
care users of 153 cars between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. and
7:30 p.m. on January 11, 2000. This translates into a minimum of 306 car
trips a day. Additional traffic is certainly present between 11:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. In contrast, car traffic for users of the park amounts to 9 cars
during the same period or 18 car trips per day. The impact on the park is
certainly hard to ignore in view of these facts. What more would it take for
the City to recognize that it has a duty to hold a public hearing and to
require the District/YMCA to submit an application for approval allowing for
the required public hearing process to go forward?
4. Video: Enclosed please find a video taken of the Varian Park parking lot
city2.1tr
which shows the impact on the p. ark and the visual impact fi.om my yard.
A video was not earlier available as my video camera was continually in and
out of the repair shop. It is hard to ignore that both the Park parking lot and
the quiet use and enjoyment of my property is severely impacted by this
continuing and ongoing use. The video is taken during the cold winter
months when park use is at a minimum. During wanner weather, the park
users use the parking lot and the congestion, noise and other traffic problems
are greatly enhanced.
I appreciate your consideration of the enclosed materials and the issues involved
in this matter.
Respect?ully submitted,
Steven D. Hoffi~-_~pplicant/Appellant
SDH:mn
Enclosures
cily2.1l~
Facts:
DATE: 1-11-2000
CARS PER HOUR
6 - 6:30:
6:30 - 7:00
7:00- 8:00
8:00 - 9:00
9:00- 10:00
11:00 - 12:00
12:00- 1:00
1:00- 2:00
2:00 - 3:00
3:00- 4:00
4:00 - 5:00
5:00 - 6:00
6:00 - 7:00
7:00- 7:30
7:30 - 8:00
CARS USING VARIAN PARK PARKING LOT
14 Parking stalls, including 1 handicap stall.
Typically 3 to 6 stalls are used for Day Car use from 6:30/7:00am to 6:30/7:00pm
Represents # of times all stalls were full during times indicated
FOR DAY CARE USE
1
11
15
39
6
11
20
29
19
2
not recorded
FOR PARK USE
Totals:
153
Minimum # of car trips:
306
18
TELEPHONE
(,4.08) 252-5~)00
LAW OFFICES OF
Sa~¥E~ D. Homv>xA~
20370 TOWN CENTER LANE, SUITE IOO
CI~P~!RTI~TO, CALII~OIL~TIA 95014
January 11, 2000
JAN 1 1 2000 ~
FACSIMILE
(408) 252-5906
City Clerk
City of Cupertino
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Re:
Petition for Reconsideration
of Determination by City on January 3 Denying Appeal of Steven
Hoffman and Upholding Decision of City Manager Regarding Use of
City Park Facilities by the Cupertino Unified School District for
Commercial Day Care Center Operations
Dear Clerk:
This will serve as a request for reconsideration of the denial of my appeal which
request for reconsideration is made on the following grounds.
The denial of my appeal is an affirmation by the City Council of the
decision of the City Manager dated October 11, 1999 as well as the denial
of my request for code enforcement by letter dated June 7, 1999 from the
City Attorney. My request for reconsideration and my objections to both
letters are set forth below:
Cite Manager Letter of 10/11/99:
(1) The letter mischaracterizes the nature and extent of use of the
park.
(2) The traffic studies do not support the conclusion.
(3)
The facts do not support the conclusion that the day care center
does not adversely affect the availability of the parking lot for
city.l~
City Clerk
January 11, 2000
Page 2
park activities.
(4)
The Cupertino Municipal Code section 19.68.030(E).and read
together with the other provisions of the code does not allow
such parking by the District without an application nor does it
stand for the proposition that the parking lot facilities need only
be sufficient to serve the park.
(s)
The existing Joint Use and Maintenance Agreement between the
City and the School District does not specifically recognize and
approve the location of the day care center as stated.
(6)
The spirit of the Joint Use Agreement does not specifically
authorize the City to cooperate with the District in violation of
its own City code to make available parking, but rather suggests
that the District might allow the City use of the District's
parking facilities.
(7)
The suggestion that any action taken by the City to prohibit
pickup and delivery of children at the parking lot will move the
problem closer is a suggestion that an alternative has been
presented when no such alternative has been presented. There
has been no notice or opportunity to be heard, there has been
no application by the District, the suggestion by the City
concerning other available alternatives when no application has
been filed is in violation of the Brown Act, is a conflict of
interest and is tantamount to having the City represent the
District as one and the same entity. Incorporation of the matters
raised in the letter dated September 1, 1999 from Steven D.
Hoffman to Don Brown? submitted in evidence at the hearing.
(8)
Incorporate by reference all objections and grounds in response
to letter of Charles Killian dated June 7, 1999.
city.itt
city. Itt
Objections to Findings Set Forth in Letter of Charles Killian Dated
June 7, 1999:
(1)
Incorporation is made by reference to my letters to Charles
Killian dated May 27 and June 10, 1999 both of which were
submitted in evidence at the hearing on appeal.
(2)
Each finding set forth in such letter is inaccurate and incomplete
and the evidence submitted at the Appeal Hearing did not
properly support the findings in such letter. In addition, the
findings set forth in the June 7, 1999 letter are not supported by
any evidence and/or any evidence presented at the Appeal
Heating. Specifically, and without limitation.
(a) More than a "small portion of the Varian Park parking
lot" is used; the parking lot is used by more than just parents;
the use of the parking lot is not "diminimus vis-a-vis park
usage", the use of the park parking lot is significant, ongoing,
continuous, complete and more than any other use of the
parking lot;
(b) The finding that "parents temporarily parking along the
curb" is not an accurate or complete finding nor is it supported
by the evidence. Evidence presented suggested that the park
parking lot was used by parents, teachers, delivery tracks, buses,
cleaning crews for day care cleanup, family nights, summer
camps, etc. and that such parking was not temporary. (Staff
uses the parking all day).
(c) There was no evidence that any effort by the City to "stop
parents from temporarily parking at that location would create
more serious impact", no alternatives have been presented, no
public hearing has been held concerning the alternatives, no
application has been filed by the District.
(d) Although the existing joint Use and Maintenance
Agreement between the City and the School District may
recognize the location of the day care center it does not
City Clerk
January 11, 2000
Page 4
recognize the use of the park parking lot to service the day care
center. In addition, no evidence was presented that the spirit of
that agreement envisions cooperation between the City and
School District and certainly does not envision use of the park
parking lot. There was no evidence submitted that "parents
have utilized a small portion of the Varian Park parking lot".
The determination by the City is not supported by the
proposition that "to prohibit parents from parking along the curb
... may violate the spirit of the Joint Use and Maintenance
Agreement" without any evidence submitted in that regard.
Relevant Evidence Which Was Improperly Excluded (Or Not Considered) at
Appeal Hearing Or Any Prior Cit3' Hearing:
The City refused to consider alternatives that would mitigate the
effects complained of by appellant. These would include proposals to
limit the nature and extent of the use of the parking lot; limitation of
future expansion and future use of the parking lot; measures to
mitigate the loss and property value complained of by appellant,
measures that would have provided appellant a buffer f~om the noise
and congestion and visual impact of the excessive use of the park
parking lot.
bo
There was no appropriate party at the hearing who had valid standing
to comment, including the District and the YMCA as neither had
submitted an application to the City for approval for use of the park
parking lot.
Co
The City failed to state what, if any, evidence was excluded or not
considered.
do
The Council ignored the violation by the YMCA of the written
agreement between the District and the YMCA (submitted at the
hearing) showing that the park parking lot is not mentioned in the
city. l~'
eo
agreement for use of the day care center. That agreement also calls
for the YMCA to comply with all ordinances, laws and statutes. The
YMCA has failed to abide by City ordinance.
The evidence submitted by Charles Corr, Director Facility
Modemization, provides further evidence for the upholding of the
appeal. The day care use is a commercial day care center. The
YMCA pays the District to use the day care buildings. The letter
indicates that the District selected the site because it was in close
proximity to "curb parking on Varian Way." However, it clearly
chose the site because of its proximity to the Varian park parking lot.
Since it intended to use the park it was and continues to be incumbent
on the District to apply for permission. That letter admits day care
use of the park and makes no mention of an application to the City.
f. The City failed to consider mitigation measures, alternatives or
compromises with Appellant.
go
All facts and reasons set forth in paragraphs 1, 4, 5 through 14 are
incorporated.
city.ltr
Facts Which Demonstrate That The Ci_ty Council Proceeded Without, Or In
Excess Of Its, Jurisdiction:
There is no application by the School District to use the park parking
lot in connection with the day care use or day care building. The City
has ruled in favor of an entity not properly requesting permission for
illegal activities.
There has been no properly noticed public hearing by the City to
change or modify the use of the park parking lot.
All facts and reasons set forth in paragraphs 1, 4 and 5 through 14 are
incorporated.
Facts Which Demonstrate That The City Council Failed to Provide A Fair
Hearing:
a. Insufficient Time to Submit Argument: I was not provided sufficient
City Clerk
January 11, 2000
Page 6
time to fully explain or submit facts concerning the appeal or the
underlying request. Although this evidence could have been
presented, it was not allowed by time limitation at the hearing.
The City failed to abide by and allow Appellant to comply with its
own appeal procedure.
Co
The
park
the
City accepted evidence on continuation of day care use of the
parking lot without an application for permission pending from
District, the YMCA or any other person.
do
The City failed to gather or consider sufficient evidence to support its
ruling.
eo
The evidence submitted fails to support the findings and conclusions
of the City.
The City made a determination that safeguards should be put into
place but established no procedure for same.
go
One council member remarked that the matter had previously been
considered at the School Board level.
The council mistakenly resolved the issue of whether the day care
center should continue but failed to determine independently whether
the day care could properly use the park parking lot without an
application or separate approval.
The City ignored the fact that the District attempted to circumvent the
law (knew from the beginning when it constructed the day care
buildings that it intended to use the public park parking lot) but failed
to apply to the City for permission and therefore has "unclean hands".
The Council failed to find whether there was a violation of law or
absence of the violation and failed to set forth findings of fact or
city.l~-
findings of law except determining that it was in the best interest of
the community that the Disthct be allowed to continue to use the park.
ko
The City failed to provide applicant with all of the evidence submitted
or considered and failed to allow applicant/appellant to address such
facts and evidence.
Facts were presented showing improper use of the Park well after dark
and as late as midnight and beyond Monday through Friday, clearly
in violation of park rules (which require no use after sunset) but such
facts and others were ignored by council.
No time was allowed for rebuttal to the inaccurate, incomplete or
misleading remarks made by Charles Corr.
no
Council ignored the relevant testimony of Butt Viskovich which
confirmed that there is a bad parking situation at the park and that
park users must sometimes wait for parking spots.
The Council ignored the purpose of the Cupertino Municipal Code
which was to safeguard the property owners adjoining the park and to
balance their interest which cannot be done without a proper
application submitted by the District, notice and opportunity to be
heard.
po
All facts and reasons set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5 through 14 are
incorporated.
The City Failed To Rule On Whether The District's Use Of Varian Park
Parking Lot Was A Violation Of Its Municipal Code.
The City Failed To Rule On Whether, If There Is A Violation Of The
Municipal Code, The City Would Enforce Its Own Code, And If Not, Why
Not.
The City Failed To Rule On Whether The District's Use Of The Varian Park
Parking Lot Was Without Permission Or Consent By The City. If By
Consent, The City Failed To Rule On The Nature and Extent Of The
Permissible Use, If Such Consent Was Offered Without Application. By Its
Ruling, The City Improperly Ruled, Expressly Or Impliedly, That The
ciW. l~'
City Clerk
January 11, 2000
Page 8
District Can Use The Entire_ty Of The Varian Park Parking Lot (And
Possibly The Entire Park) For School Purposes And/Or Any Other Purpose
It So Desires, Without Limitation, Number, Time Or Purpose And/Or
Without Regard To Traffic And Safety Issues And Without Regard To The
Rights Of Adjoining Property_ Owners.
o
The Ci_ty Ignored The Evidence That The District Previously Promised To
Give The Neighbors, Including Appellant, Notice And Opportunity To Be
Heard Prior to Installing A Second Day care Building, But Failed To Do So.
The Ci _ty's Ruling Violates The Equal Protection Clause Of The State And
Federal Constitution.
10.
The Ci~'s Ruling Violates The Due Process Provisions Of The State and
Federal Constitutions.
The City's ruling constitutes a taking without due process, including,
without limitation, inverse condemnation of appellant's property and
the property of all residents of Varian Way.
11.
The Ci_ty Ignored The Issue Of Whether There Would Have Been Any
Available Alternatives Had The District Applied For A Permit To Use The
Varian Park Parking Lot Prior To Erection Of Either Or Both Of The Day
care Buildings. Also The District Has Limited The Alternatives By
Circumventing The Application Procedure And The Requirement Of Notice
And Opporttmi _ty To Be Heard By The Neighbors And Adjoining Property_
Owners As Provided In The Municipal Code.
12.
The Cupertino Municipal Code Has Been Clearly Violated. Appellant
Incorporates By Reference All Provisions Of The Municipal Code.
13. Each ground upon which the original denial was based is not supported.
14. Appellant Does Not Have The Burden Of Proof To Establish A Violation Or
The Obligation Of The Ci_ty To Enforce Its Own Code. The District/YMCA
city.ll~
has the burden to show compliance with code, approved application or other
permission obtained in accordance with City Code.
The Council's consideration of this petition for reconsideration is greatly
appreciated.
Respe~6~ully submitted,
Steven D. Hoffin~Applicant, Appellant
SDH:mn
ciry. l~-
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 March 20, 2000
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Reconsideration of determination by the City Council on denying the appeal of Steven Hoffman and upholding
the decision of the City Manager regarding use of city park facilities by the Cupertino Unified School District
for commercial day care center operations
BACKGROUND
The staff has conducted a traffic survey on Varian Way to evaluate Mr. Hoffman's concerns. The traffic
volumes are consistent with the present uses and are well below the capacity of the roadway. The parking lot
has been and continues to be observed by me two weekdays per week during the evening peak period for the last
few years. Based on my observation, there is sufficient parking available for the users of Varian Park, and
therefore, no impact exists on Varian Park.
The 14 parking stalls currently available meet the current demand. There may be only a short duration, during
peak periods, that one might have to wait for an available spot, but because there is rapid turnover during these
times, no one is deprived of a parking space within a reasonable time.
The above is also supported by the video presented by Mr. Hoffman, that during heavy periods, turnover occurs
where one might wait for a reasonable time while a stall is being vacated. Mr. Hoffman's volume count is
consistent with the City's count. However, since his count is in 1-hour increments, one cannot conclude that
there is a lack of availability of parking stalls that would have a direct impact on Varian Park users.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is my opinion that on the basis that park users are provided sufficient parking spaces as verified by visual
observation, and to my knowledge, no complaints have been received regarding parking at Varian, that there is
no requirement to restrict parking at Varian Park.
Director of Pt~blic Works
Cupertino
Office of the City Attorney
10320 $. DeAnza Blvd.,//ID
Cupertino, CA 95014
Ph: (408) 777-3405
Fax: (408) 777-3401
March 15, 2000
Charles T. Kilian
City Attorney
Eileen Murray
Assistant City Attorney
Honorable Mayor and Members
of the City Council
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Re: Petition for Reconsideration of Steven Hoffman
Dear Mayor and Councilpersons:
Mr. Hoffman's petition for reconsideration will be heard at your March 20th
Council meeting. In addition to the evidence already presented, I have attached
copies of two letters l~om the attorney for Cupertino Union School District
regarding this matter which had previously been sent to the City and to this office
which were not in the original Council packet, but which were previously provided
to Mr. Hoffman's attorney.
I have also taken the liberty of preparing a resolution for the Council's consideration
which provides proposed findings to support your decision. These findings were
derived from your earlier discussions regarding the appeal at previous Council
meetings as well as any new evidence presented at this hearing. You should review
the proposed findings carefully to make certain that the findings are the findings of
the City Council, and not those of the City Attorney or staff.
In addition, in response to Mr. Hoffrnan's ten page letter listing 54 separate issues
dated January 11, 2000, and to his three page letter listing 4 additional issues dated
March 13, 2000, I have prepared an attachment to the resolution which addresses
Printed on Recycled Paper
The Honorable Mayor and
Members of the City Council
March 15, 2000
Page 2
each allegation. Again, these responses should be considered as responses by the
City Council and therefore should be read carefully before adoption.
I will be happy to answer any questions at the next Council meeting.
Sincerely,
Charles T. Kilian
City Attorney
ss
Enclosure
RESOLUTION NO. 00-095
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CUPERTINO DENYING THE PETITION
OF STEVEN D. HOFFMAN SEEKING COUNCIL
RECONSIDERATION OF ITS DETERMINATION
DENYING HIS APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE
DECISION OF THE CITY MANAGER
REGARDING THE USE OF A CITY PARK
PARKING LOT FOR PICK-UP AND DELIVERY OF
CHILDREN UTILIZING THE CUPERTINO UNION
SCHOOL DISTRICT DAY CARE CENTER
Whereas, the City of Cupertino owns and operates a public park known as Varian
Park, including an adjacent parking lot which serves the park; and
Whereas, the Cupertino Union School District owns and operates a school facility
known as Stevens Creek Elementary School which is adjacent to Varian
Park; and
Whereas, on said school site the Cupertino Union School District through its non-
profit provider, the YMCA, operates a student day care center pursuant to
the authority of section 8469 et al. of the California Education Code which
both authorizes and requires the appropriation of space in newly
modernized elementary schools for school care programs; and
Whereas, both Varian Park and the school property are served by a public street
known as Varian Way which extends from Ainsworth Drive and which
dead ends into the Varian Park parking lot; and
Whereas, many parents of children who attend the school's day care center utilize,
during limited hours the Varian Park parking lot for the purpose of dropping
off and picking up their children to and from the day care center; also a
small number of employees of the day care center utilize the Varian Park
parking lot for limited time parking; and
PC/DIR/H/R 3-8-00
Whereas, Steven D. Hoffman is one owner of a single-family residence located at
22230 Varian Way directly across the street from the school property. To
the east of Mr. Hoffman's property is Varian Park; and
Whereas, on April 22, 1999, Mr. Hoffman requested in a letter addressed to the
City's public works director that the City take "enforcement action to stop
illegal traffic and use of the park parking lot."; and
Whereas, Public Works Director Viskovich both orally, and in writing through the
City Attorney's office, informed Mr. Hoffman that he intended to take no
further action with respect to his request; and
Whereas, pursuant to section 1.16.020 of the City's ordinance code, Mr. Hoffman
appealed Mr. Viskovich's determination to the Cupertino City Manager,
Donald Brown; and
Whereas, on October 11, 1999, the City Manager denied Mr. Hoffman's appeal in
writing; and
Whereas, on October 19, 1999, Mr. Hoffman appealed the City Manager's
decision to the City Council; and
Whereas, on November 15, 1999, the City Council heard Mr. Hoffman's appeal
and continued the appeal hearing to January 3, 2000 in order to consider the
written evidence presented by Mr. Hoffman, city staff, representatives of
both the Cupertino Union School District and the YMCA as well as other
members of the public; and
Whereas, the City Council after further hearing on January 3, 2000 denied Mr.
Hoffman's appeal; and
Whereas, Mr. Hoffman has requested that the council reconsider his petition under
the provisions of section 2.08.096 of the City's ordinance code; and
Whereas, the City Council hearing date set for February 2, 2000 to consider Mr.
Hoffman's request was continued to March 20, 2000 by mutual agreement;
and
PC/DIR/H/R 3-8-00 2
Whereas, the City Council has considered all the relevant evidence presented by
the parties at all hearings, including evidence presented at the March 20th
reconsideration hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
1)
Mr. Hoffman's Petition for Reconsideration of the City Council's
determination of January 3, 2000 is DENIED.
2)
In making its determination, the City Council adopts the following specific
findings:
a. Based upon parking and traffic studies conducted by the City, the
current use of the Varian Park parking lot by some parents as a pick-up and
delivery point for children walking to and l~om the day care center as well
as the minimal use of the parking lot for a small number of day care
employees do not unreasonably adversely affect the availability of adequate
parking for park activities.
b. The current use by some parents in using the Varian Park parking lot
as a pick-up and delivery point for children walking to and from the day
care center does not constitute an illegal use of park property by the
Cupertino Union School District or the YMCA inasmuch as this activity is
beyond the reasonable or practical control of those agencies. Therefore,
neither agency is required to apply to the City for any type of permit for this
type or level of parking at Varian Park. This finding does not preclude the
City requiring the School District to apply for permits to use the City's
parking lot should the intensity of use by day care employees and
contractors be increased in the future.
c. The use of the park parking lot for the above-described purposes
does not violate Chapter 19.68.030E of the City's ordinance code inasmuch,
parking lot facilities need only be sufficient "as necessary for park usage."
Mr. Hoffman has failed to demonstrate that park usage has been adversely
impacted in anyway by the above-described ancillary uses.
d. While it is true that at certain times of the day, there is substantial
traffic and congestion on Varian Way, any prohibition of the use of the
Vafian Way parking lot for pick-up and delivery of children to and from the
day care center would create more congestion on Varian Way directly in
PC/DIR/H/R 3-8-00
3
3)
front of Mr. Hoffman's home and the homes of his neighbors thereby
creating more serious traffic impacts in the area.
With respect to Mr. Hoffman's ten page petition for rehearing, the City
Council adopts the specific responses to the petition attached to this
Resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Cupertino
this day of
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
APPROVED
2000 by the following vote:
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Mayor, City of Cupertino
PC/DIR/H/R 3-8-00
4
/,F z o
RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR REHEARING
Allegations Response
Paragraph 1 .a.(1) Since the appeal to the Council involved a de-novo
City Manager's letter hearing, the City Manager's determination is moot except
rnischaracterizes the insofar as it provides evidence to support the City
nature extent of use of Council's decision. The Council based upon its own
the park view of the evidence submitted properly determined the
nature and extent of use of the park.
Paragraph 1.a.(2) The City Council has relied on the testimony of its Public
The traffic studies do not Works Director Bert Viskovich in this regard, including
support the conclusion, his most recent staff report. Mr. Hoffman has not
introduced any relevant parking studies which contradict
those conducted by Mr. Viskovich. Mr. Hoffman did
present a study of traffic volumes along Varian Way.
However, the issue is the availability of parking for
park usage and not general traffic along a public street.
Paragraph 1.a.(3) See the testimony and report of Bert Viskovich to the
The facts do not support contrary.
the conclusion that the
day care center does not
adversely affect the
availability of the parking
lot for park activities.
Paragraph 1.a.(4) See findings b and c of this Resolution.
Municipal Code Section
19.68.030E together with
other provisions do not
allow such parking by the
District without an
application nor does it
stand for the proposition
that parking facilities
need only be sufficient to
serve the park.
Paragraph 1.a.(5) The City Council disagrees with this statement; however,
The existing Joint Use more importantly, the statement is irrelevant since the
And Maintenance Petitioner is only seeking to prohibit parking in the park's
Agreement between the parking lot.
City and the School
District does not
specifically recognize
and approve the current
location of the day care
center.
Paragraph 1.a.(6) The City Council disagrees with this statement, however,
The spirit of the joint Use more importantly, the statement is irrelevant, since the
Agreement does not City Council's determination is not based upon this
specifically authorize the finding.
City to cooperate with
the District.
Paragraph 1.a.(7) Petitioner has furnished no legal authority for this novel
The suggestion that any theory.
action taken by the City
to prohibit pick-up and
delivery of children will
move the problem closer
to Mr. Hoffman's
property constitutes a
violation of the Brown
Act, and a violation of
conflict of interest laws.
Paragraph 1.a.(8) The letter from the City Attorney to Mr. Hoffman dated
Incorporates all June 7, 1999 described the position of city staff regarding
objections and grounds Mr. Hoffman's request. The City Council's de novo
contained in letter from determination makes both the letter and Petitioner's
the City Attorney six argument moot.
months prior to the City
Council's decisions.
Paragraph 1.b.(1) See last response.
Incorporation of
objections to staff
findings made by
Petitioner six months
prior to the City
Council's determination.
2
Paragraph 1.b.(2)
a) Besides pick-up and Other than a few parking stalls used by some day care
delivery of children, staff, there has been presented no evidence of other usage.
some of the parking lot is The City Council finds that a small number of staff using
used for other day care the parking lot is de minimis. (See finding b in the
center purposes. Resolution)
b) The parking lot is See above response
used for day care
purposes other than pick-
up and delivery of
students.
c) The City has not This is a true statement. The City has no plans to attempt
attempted to stop parents to stop parents from dropping off and picking up children
from temporarily parking to and from the day care center by parking in the park
in the park parking lot parking lot. No alternatives, public hearings, or
nor have there been applications by the District are required.
presented any
alternatives, no public
hearings have been held,
or any application filed
by the District.
d) The existing Joint Use The City Council disagrees with this statement; however,
and Maintenance more importantly, the statement is irrelevant since the
Agreement between the City Council did not use this evidence as a basis for its
City and the District decision.
recognizes the day care
center, it does not
specifically recognize the
use of the park parking
lot. Therefore,
prohibiting parent
parking does not violate
the "spirit" of the
agreement.
Paragraph 2.a. City staff have reviewed alternatives with respect to both
The City has refused to parking and the traffic congestion on Varian Way and
consider alternatives have concluded that, at the present time, no change in the
which would mitigate the present parking situation is warranted. The City Council
effects complained of by agrees with staff determination.
Petitioner.
Paragraph 2.b. All interested parties may speak to the City Council
Neither the District, the regarding this matter.
YMCA, nor any other
person, other than the
Petitioner, had any
standing to speak at the
appeal hearing.
Paragraph 2.c No evidence was excluded and all evidence was
The City failed to state considered for what it was worth.
what, if any, evidence
was excluded or not
considered.
Paragraph 2.d The City is not a party to the agreement between the
The Council ignored the YMCA and the District. For the reasons specified in the
violation by the YMCA findings contained in this resolution, the City Council
of the written agreement concludes that neither the YMCA or the District is in
between the District and violation the city's ordinance regarding parking at Varian
the YMCA showing the Park.
park parking lot is not
mentioned in the
agreement. The City also
ignored the YMCA's
violation of city
ordinances.
Paragraph 2.e The Council is of the opinion that the day care use by the
The District is a District is a proper use as an adjunct to its school use;
commercial day care however, whether it is a "commercial" day care center or
center and the selection not is irrelevant for purposes of this appeal. Furthermore,
of the location of the day the City has no legal authority to regulate the location of
care center was in part the Center nor does it intend to inquire into the motives of
due to its close proximity the School Board in selecting its location.
to the Varian Park
parking lot.
Paragraph 2.f See answer to Paragraph 2.a
The City failed to
consider mitigations,
alternatives or
compromise with
Petitioner.
Paragraph 2.f Incorporation of all responses.
Incorporation of all facts
and reasons
4
Paragraph 3.a None is required.
There is no application (see finding b of the City Council Resolution)
by the School District to
use the park parking lot
in connection with the
day care use.
Paragraph 3.c Incorporation of responses
Incorporation of facts and
reasons
Paragraph 4 Petitioner has had abundant time. The first hearing by the
Petitioner was not City Manager was scheduled on August 17, 1999, but was
provided sufficient timerescheduled to September 2, 1999, at Petitioner's request.
to fully explain or submit At the said hearing, Petitioner submitted a bound volume
facts concerning the containing approximately fifty pages of material. At the
appeal, appeal hearing, by the City Council on November 15,
1999, Petitioner submitted the same volume plus other
documents. The hearing was continued to January 3,
2000 to allow Petitioner to submit other documents.
As part of his rehearing petition, Petitioner had the
opportunity to submit additional evidence, but did not do
so. Petitioner was given substantial time to explain or
submit facts to the City Council. In addition, Petitioner
has failed to inform the City Council of what specific
evidence he now wishes to introduce which he could not
have introduced at earlier proceedings.
Paragraph 4.b Petitioner fails to state specifically what rule or regulation
The City failed to abidewas not followed by the City concerning the Petitioner's
by and allow Petitioner to appeal.
comply with its own
procedure.
Paragraph 4.c No such application is required.
The City accepted
evidence on continuation
of day care use of the
parking lot without
application for
permission to use it by
the YMCA or the
District.
5
Paragraph 4.d While the City is gathering additional evidence
The City failed to gather concerning the traffic and traffic congestion on Varian
or consider sufficient Way, a public street, the Council determines that it has
evidence to support its adequate information to resolve the limited issues of
ruling, this appeal. Namely whether the City should prohibit
day care center parents from parking in its parking lot.
Paragraph 4.e The City Council disagrees. The City Council has the
The evidence submitted discretion to determine which evidence is trustworthy and
fails to support the which is not.
findings and conclusions
of the City.
Paragraph 4.f The City made no such determination.
The City made a
determination that
safeguards should be put
into place but established
no procedure for the
same.
Paragraph 4.g Irrelevant
One Council member
remarked that the matter
had previously been
considered at the School
Board level.
Paragraph 4.h See finding b of the City Council Resolution.
The Council mistakenly
resolved the issue of
whether the day care
center should continue
but failed to determine
independently whether
the day care could
properly use the park
parking lot without a
separate approval.
6
Paragraph 4.i The City Council disagrees with the assertion that the
The City ignored the fact District attempted to "circumvent the law."
that the District
attempted to circumvent
the law and failed to
apply to the City for
permission and therefore
the District has "unclean
hands."
Paragraph 4.j The City Council disagrees. See this Resolution.
The Council failed to
find whether there was a
violation law and failed
to set forth findings of
fact or conclusions of
law.
Paragraph 4.k Petitioner fails to specify what evidence was not made
The City failed to available to him. Petitioner fails to establish that at any
provide Petitioner with previous hearing, he requested any additional information
all of the evidence or requested additional time to respond to any such
submitted or considered evidence.
and failed to allow
Petitioner to address such
facts and evidence.
Paragraph 4.1 This assertion is not germane to Petitioner's appeal.
Facts were presented Violations of park rules are prosecuted by the City in the
showing improper use of normal course of its code enforcement program.
the park well after dark
and as late as midnight
and beyond Monday and
Friday, in violation of
park's rules.
Paragraph 4.m No rebuttal was requested by either Petitioner or his
No time was allowed for attorney.
rebuttal to the remarks of
Charles Corr.
Paragraph 4.n The City Council did not ignore the fact that Varian Park
City Council ignored theand the parking lot are sometimes crowded or congested;
testimony of Bert however, it has found that the pick-up and delivery of
Viskovich which children to the day care center and parking lots use by
confirmed that there wassome day care employees is only one element of the
a bad parking situation at congestion problem on Varian Way which has existed for
the park and that park many years. In addition, any congestion of the parking
users must sometimes lot which occurs during those limited times of parental
wait for parking spots, pickup and delivery is alleviated by the quick mm over in
spaces.
Paragraph 4.0 The City Council disagrees. By allowing parents to
The Council ignored the check-in and pick-up their children and by allowing some
pm'pose of Cupertino day care center employees to use the parking lot at the
Municipal Code which is park, the City is encouraging those parents and those
to safeguard the property teachers not to park or make u-roms on a public street
owners adjoining the directly in front of Petitioner's home.
park and to balance their
interest which cannot be
done without a proper
application submitted by
the District.
Paragraph 4.p Incorporation of all responses.
Incorporation of all facts
and reasons.
Paragraph 5 See findings and conclusions of this Resolution.
The City failed to rule of
whether the District's use
of Varian Park's parking
lot was a violation of its
code.
Paragraph 6 See response above
The City failed to rule on
whether, if there is a
violation of the municipal
code, the City would
enforce its own code,
and, if not, why not.
Paragraph 7 See finding b in this Resolution.
The City failed to rule on
whether the District's use
of the parking lot was
without consent of the
City ....
8
Paragraph 8 Irrelevant to this proceeding.
The City ignored the
evidence that the District
previously promised to
give the neighbors notice
and opportunity to be
heard prior to installing, a
second day care building,
but failed to do so.
Paragraph 9 Petitioner fails to specify the basis for this assertion.
The City's ruling violates
the equal protection
clause of the state and
federal constitution.
Paragraph 10 Petitioner has cited no legal authority for this novel
The City's ruling violates theory.
due process because it
constitutes a "taking" of
Petitioner's property.
Paragraph 11 To determine the validity of the City appeal, the City
The City ignored the Council is not required to make a finding one way or the
issue of whether there other regarding these assertions.
would have been any
available alternatives had
the District applied for a
permit ....
Paragraph 12 See prior responses.
The City Municipal Code
has been dearly violated.
Paragraph 13 See prior responses.
Each ground for denial is
not supported.
Paragraph 14 In the context of this appeal, the Petitioner has the burden
Petitioner does not haveof proving his assertions.
the burden of proof, to
establish the City's
obligation.
9
RESPONSE TO PETITIONER'S LETTER OF MARCH 13, 2000
Allegations Response
Paragraph 1 This is not a hearing to consider an exceptional use of
This appeal is not a Varian Park
hearing for exceptional
use of Varian Park.
Paragraph 2 Varian Park, like most other public parks in the City,
As a property owner, have become increasingly popular. Most residents who
Petitioner has been reside in homes adjacent to a park or on public streets
"severely impacted" by which serve a park, are subjected to increased intensity
the "extraordinary use of of use. Varian Park has had a substantial increase in its
park parking lot." use over the last 11 years when Mr. Hoffman purchased
his home several years ago, he must have realized that
the potential for increased intensities were present.
Paragraph 3 See report of Bert Viskovich
Submission of an
informal traffic study.
Paragraph 4 See report of Bert Viskovich
Video
10
HOGE, FENTON, JONES & APPEL, INC. ~'~
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SIXTY SOUTH MARKET STREET, SUITE 1400
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95113-2396
TELEPHONE (408) 287-9501
FACSIMILE (408) 287-2583
September 8, 1998
Hon~Michael Chang
a~d City Council, City of Cupertino
?0300 Torre Avenue
//Cupertino, CA 95014
Re:
Extended Student Care Proqram at Stevens Creek
Elementary School, and letter from Steven D. Hoffman
of July 2, 1998
Dear Mayor Chang and City Council Members:
I represent the Cupertino Union Elementary School District
in a lawsuit brought against the District by Steven Hoffman, in
which he complains of a single modular classroom addition to an
existing student care center at Stevens Creek Elementary School.
I have now seen a copy of Mr. Hoffman's July 2, 1998 letter to
you also complaining of the student care center and characteriz-
ing it as a "commercial day care center." Based on my
understanding of the facts as set forth below, I believe the
letter contains many factual inaccuracies which, if left
uncorrected, could create certain misconceptions. Therefore, I
feel compelled to set the record straight.
The School District has not developed a "commercial" day
care center at Stevens Creek Elementary School, as Mr. Hoffman
alleges. As practically all elementary school districts do, the
District does provide extended day care services for its students
at that site in two modular classroom buildings and, like most
school districts do, the District contracts with a non-profit
organization, in this case the Y.M.C.A., to operate the program.
The extended care center has been operating at Stevens Creek
since 1989. In 1996, the District added a second modular
classroom building because of continued demand for quality
extended day care for District students.
This activity is a perfectly appropriate and-
specifically authorized school use under the CalifOrnia Education
M:\62565\LET-29.KDH
Honorable Mayor Michael Chang
August 12, 1998
Page Two
Code, and creates no zoning issues whatsoever. The Education
Code allows any school district operating an elementary school to
provide its facilities for extended day care services, and to
contract with an operating agency for the purpose of providing
those services. (Education Code section 8469.) In fact, when
constructing or modernizing elementary school buildings, school
districts are required by law to provide appropriate space to
accommodate school child care programs. (Education Code section
17264.) A school district may also lease its facilities to an
outside provider for the purpose of providing extended day care
services. (Education Code section 8469.5) A district may also
grant the use of its facilities as a civic center for chil~ care
or day care programs, as well as supervised recreational
activities. (Education Code section 38131(4) and (6).) As you
are probably aware, in addition to these child care programs a
school district may properly grant the use of its facilities for
the conduct of community recreation programs. (Education Code
sections 10900, 10910.)
As you can see, then, the extended day care program at
Stevens Creek Elementary School is hardly a "non-school
commercial day care use" as alleged by Mr. Hoffman. It is a
statutorily authorized, and indeed required, use of school
property. My understanding is that the Stevens Creek Elementary
School property is zoned Public Building (BA). This zoning
accommodates educational or recreational facilities in the City.
(Municipal Code section 19.64.010.) It permits buildings and
other uses on land owned or utilized by a school district. (See
Municipal Code section 19.64.030.) The extended student care
center is not a conditional use requiring a development plan or
architectural and site review under the Municipal Code. (See
Municipal Code sections 19.64.070 and 19.64.080.) As you may
know, because the School District is a state agency, construction
projects on its property, specifically including the addition of
modular buildings, must be approved by the Office of the State
Architect, not by the City.
Mr. Hoffman also complains that the extended care center
operates during the summer. Of course it does. There is summer
school, and even if a child is not in summer school a working
parent's need for quality extended day care does not disappear
during the summer. Students at Stevens Creek naturally continue
to attend the extended care center during the summer.
To the extent that during the summer the Y.M.C.A. might also
offer educational, recreational, or other special child
development programs at the Stevens Creek site, that would also
be a recognized and authorized school use of school property
M:\62565\LET-29.1~DH
Honorable Mayor Michael Chang
September 8, 1998
Page 3
under the Education Code. In addition to providing its
facilities for community recreational activities, any district
may establish and maintain child development programs for its
students (and students from other districts), and may permit the
use of its facilities for that purpose. (Education Code sections
8322 and 8327.)
A "school building" under the Education Code is one that is
used, or designed to be used, for elementary or secondary school
purposes, as opposed to buildings whose primary use is for
purposes other than educational ones. (See Education Code
sections 17283 and 17286.) The California Legislature has
recognized the great need to provide for the education and care
of children while the parent is at work, and has declared that it
is in the interest of the State and its people to provide
assistance to school districts for the construction of additional
childrens' centers, including leased portable buildings.
(Education Code sections 16261 and 16262(d).) It is regrettable
that Mr. Hoffman has chosen to mis-characterize and attack such a
vital and appropriate use of school property as extended day
care. I invite the City to inspect this program if it should so
desire, and would ask that the City then inform Mr. Hoffman that
this use of school property fully complies with City of Cupertino
zoning ordinances.
I also feel compelled to correct certain other
misconceptions that may have been created by Mr. Hoffman's
letter. First, the extended student care center at Stevens Creek
consists of two buildings, not three. I confess that I am
somewhat confused as to Mr. Hoffman's allegations concerning the
center's purported "use" of Varian Park. Because there is
parking on Varian Way, it is not necessary for parents to use the
marked Varian Park parking lot across from the center to deliver
or pick up their children. If parents do so on occasion, and
their doing so is improper, the District cannot control that
behavior without employing someone to watch over the lot and
enforce the City's laws, which would be beyond the scope of the
district's authority. Similarly, if drivers do indeed speed down
Varian Way as alleged by Mr. Hoffman, that is beyond the
District's control. The City may wish to investigate this
allegation and to rigorously enforce the posted speed limit.
From all appearances, Varian Way is a public street all the
way to its dead end. I understand from speaking with Mr.
Viscovich that, despite those appearances, part of Varian Way may
technically lie within the Varian Park plot. If so, and if Mr.
Hoffman truly objects to parents using that part of the street to
M:\62565\LET-29. KDH
Honorable Mayor Michael Chang
September 8, 1998
Page 4
drop off and pick up their children, it seems to me that the
logical solution would be for the City to dedicate for public use
that portion of Varian Way (including sidewalks) which is
technically within the park but which appears to be public
street, i.e., to the end of the cul-de-sac excluding the clearly
marked Park parking lot. It seems to me that this solution would
recognize the apparent character of the street as well as its
current and historical use. (I am informed that persons properly
using the school field for recreational purposes after school and
on weekends also park along Varian Way.) Such a dedication would
also have far less impact upon Mr. Hoffman and his neighbors than
if Varian Way were to be blocked off, forcing traffic to park
and/or turn around immediately in front of their homes.
With respect to Mr. Hoffman's complaints about the student
care buildings themselves, the District has repeatedly offered to
plant screening trees and foliage, and has done so. The district
has consistently told Mr. Hoffman it would consider further
mitigation measures if requested. The ball is in his court.
I hope this letter has been of help to you in clarifying the
situation at Stevens Creek Elementary School. This extended day
care center is not in any way a "year-round commercial use on
school property" as repeatedly alleged by Mr. Hoffman. It is a
common and perfectly appropriate school use under the Education
Code and is completely consistent with the City of Cupertino's
zoning regulations. I would respectfully request that the City
indicate the same to Mr. Hoffman.
Very truly yours,
James R. Hawley
CC:
Charles Killian (City Attorney)~
Burr Viscovich (Director of Public Works)
Charles Corr (Cupertino Union Elementary School District)
M :\62565\LET-29. KDH
JAMES R. HAWLEY
HOGE, FENTON, JONES & APPEL, INC.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SIXTY SOUTH MARKET STREET, SUITE 1400
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95113-2396
TELEPHONE (408) 287-9501
FACSIMILE (408) 287-2583
DIRECT DIAL: 408 947.2452
February 11, 1998
Charles T. Kilian
City Attorney, City of Cupertino
10320 South DeAnza Blvd., Ste. 1-D
Cupertino, CA 95014
Re:
Hoffman v. Cupertino Union School District
Our File Number: 2543.62565
Dear Mr. Kilian:
Thank you for takinG the time to discuss the above-
referenced matter with me last week over the phone. As you know,
I represent the Cupertino Union School District in a lawsuit Mr.
Hoffman has brought against the District arising from the
installation of a single-room addition to the existing Student
Care Center at Stevens Creek Elementary School. As I informed
.you, the first unit of the Student Care Center has been there for
about ten years. About two years ago, the District added one
more room directly adjacent to the existing unit. The Student
Care Center is operated by a non-profit organization, the
Y.M.C.A. This arrangement is expressly recognized and approved
in the Government Code and Education Code. Mr. Hoffman contends
that the addition to the Student Care Center violates the
provisions of CEQA and that it is a nuisance. The District
contends that as a single classroom addition to an existing
school, the recent addition was categorically exempt from CEQA.
The District plans no further additions to the Student Care
Center.
As you also know, Marc Hynes represents Mr. Hoffman in this
matter. I have now had a chance to review his February 4, 1998
letter which was the subject of your phone call. As I informed
you, I am attempting to work with Mr. Hynes to resolve this
lawsuit in an amicable and cost-effective manner. The District
has been willing to provide measures to mitigate some of the
effects Mr. Hoffman feels the Student Care Center has.had upon
his property. However, the District is unwilling to make any
monetary contribution to Mr. Hoffman because it does not believe
M:\62565\LET-24,KDH
Charles T. Kilian
February 13, 1998
Page 2
the Center constitutes a violation of CEQA or a nuisance.
Mr. Hynes' suggestion, as embodied in his letter, is that
the City abandon a section of old Crescent Road which lies just
outside his existing property line and dedicate that land to him.
My understanding from a meeting that was held at the property
some time ago is that this arrangement is attractive to Mr.
Hoffman because it would allow him to move his fence line and to
plant some mature screening trees between his property and the
Student Care Center. The District certainly has no objection to
such a plan if that would re~olve this lawsuit. Zn fact, as Mr.
Mynes states on pages two and three of his letter, the plan would
have certain practical appeal and effect.
However, although the School District supports Mr. Hynes'
efforts on behalf of Mr. Hoffman, I feel compelled to point out
certain inaccuracies in Mr. Hynes' letter. Neither the Y.M.C.A.
nor the District is in any way "using" Varian Park for private
non-park use, as Mr. Hynes suggests. I am a bit confused by the
statement that the School District has never obtained permission
to use the parking area for such use. My understanding is that
most, if not all, parents double-park on the street next to the
school campus when they pick up their children from the Y.M.C.A.
Center. Some of these parents may use the parking area to turn
around after they have done so. It is probably not inconceivable
that when there is no other room, some parents may occasionally
park in the Varian Park parking area while they dash across the
street to pick up their children. I hardly think this
constitutes "use" of the park for private non-park use, such as
would raise a land use issue.
I should also point out that the Student Care Center does
not constitute the use of a public facility for private revenue-
producing purposes. The Y.M,C.A. is a non-profit organization
which provides this public service in the face of a crying need
for competent, consistent and responsible day care for young
students. The Government Code and Education Code specifically
contemplate and approve the use of school property for before and
after school care, and I hardly need to tell you that such an
arrangement is the rule rather than the exception in districts
all over the Valley. All students who attend the Y.M.C.A.
Student Care Center at Stevens Creek Elementary School are
students there. The recent addition to this Student Care Center
is categorically exempt from CEQA. Because of this fact, and
because of the fact that the use is specifically approved and
encouraged in the Government Code and Education Code, the
addition presents no land use issues, whether environmental or
M:\62565\L~-24.KDH
Charles T. Kilian
February 13, 1998
Page 3
zoning related.
That having been said, the District approves of Mr. Hynes'
ideas with respect to the abandonment of old Crescent Road. It
is the District's understanding that Mr. Hoffman might be
inclined to settle this lawsuit if a buffer zone in between his
property and the Student Care Center could be created, as
suggested in Mr. Hynes' letter. I understand from speaking with
Mr. Hynes, and now with you, that the City would not be inclined
to abandon old Crescent Road and dedicate the property to Mr.
Hoffman without consideration. Moreover, my understanding from
you is that the City would be looking for a sum in the $40,000.00
to $60,000.00 range, depending upon calculations specific to the
property at issue. Although Mr. Hynes seems to suggest in his
letter that the School District would be providing this
compensation, the District has informed me that it cannot
consider purchasing land for Mr. Hoffman's benefit. Any
consideration would have to come from him.
However, certain other options occur to me, as we briefly
discussed over the phone. First, I would think Mr. Hoffman might
be interested in knowing whether the City would consider a
dedication for certain limited purposes, subject to building or
other restrictions running with the land, that might require
significantly less in the way of compensation to the City. If
so, such an option might be attractive to Mr. Hoffman.
Also, you indicated that the City might be expanding and/or
improving Varian Park in the future. If the City were to include
in such plans landscaping and/or other measures to effectively
screen the Park from Mr. Hoffman's property, this would also
mitigate the impact he claims the Student Care Center has upon
his property.
I would appreciate the opportunity explore the issues raised
by Mr. Hynes with you and/or City representatives in the near
future, if possible. Perhaps a meeting at the School site,
involving the interested parties, would be appropriate.
M :\62565\LET-24. KDH
Charles T. Kilian
February 13, 1998
Page 4
Kindly give me a call when you have had a chance to review
this letter and to discuss its contents with your clients.
Very truly yours,
%G~ FENTON, JONES & APPEL, INC.
R. Hawley
JRH:kdh
CC:
Mark Hynes
Dennis Ward
The Honorable Mayor Michael Chang
City Council, City of Cupertino
M :\62565\LET-24. KDH
CITY OF
CUPEI INO
SUMMARY
Agenda No.
Agenda Date: March 20, 2000
SUBJECT:
Offer from Apple Computer to provide a cash amount to be used for community programs or
facilities, including artwork, in lieu of installation of artwork on the Apple campus.
BACKGROUND:
On November 19, 1990, the City Council approved a use permit to construct the Apple Computer
world headquarters located at the southeast corner of Highway 280 and De Anza Boulevard, per
the Planning Commission resolution number 4305. Condition 22, of resolution 4305, requires
installation of public art up to a maximum cost obligation of $100,000 (see attached excerpt of
Resolution #4305, condition #22). Implementation of the condition is at the option of the City
Council.
In April 1993, Apple received approval to install 8 computer related "giant" icons to be located
in a sculpture garden on the Apple campus, adjacent to Mariani Avenue (see attached City
Council minutes dated April 6, 1993). The art was installed at the end of 1993.
In 1998, the art was removed because the icons were in need of repair and they wcrc considered
to be dated (see San Jose Mercury News article dated May 29, ! 998).
On September 8, 1998, the City Council approved a request by Apple Computer to delay
installation of a replacement art project for 18 months (see attached letter of September 21.
1998). The extension was due to expire on March 8, 2000.
On February 28, 2000, Apple Computer submitted a letter offering to pay an in-lieu Ibc o1'
$100,000 that could be used for public programs or facilities including public art (see attached
letter dated February 28, 2000).
/q_l
Offer from Apple Cornputer to provide a cash amount to be used tbr community progr~u~as
facilities, including artwork, in lieu of installation ol'artwork on thc Apple campus.
March 20, 2000
Page 2
In the February 28, 2000 letter, Apple Computer proposes to modi/'y the existing public art
condition in the following ways:
1. Allow Apple to pay a tee of $100,000 in-lieu of constructing an art project.
2. Expand the activities that the money may be spent on to include programs and I'~tcilities its
well as art projects.
3. Provide that the expenditure be agreed upon by Apple and the City Council. [ J~l(.ler the
present condition, the City Council has sole attthority to either approve or deny thc i-)rojcct.
4. The proposal offers to limit the in-lieu fee to $100,000, with no adjustment l:t)r intlation or
other costs. Even a modest inflation rate of 4% per year compounded through 1~)99, would
equal 142% of the 1990 value.
On February 22, 2000, the Apple proposal was referred to the Fine Arts Commission to oht:~in
their input prior to the City Council review of this request (see attached excerpted minutes). 'l'he
Fine Arts Commission voted to recommend that the City Council accept thc ol'['cr to 13~ly rm i~-
lieu fee with the following conditions:
1. Designate the in-lieu fee I-'or public art only (i.e. do not expand the allow~blc expenditures
include other facilities or programs).
2. Do not use the money to augment costs of the Four Seasons Corner public art project.
3. Concentrate the art expenditure in one location (i.e. do not split it among dilTcrent sites).
4. Designate the Fine Arts Commission to manage the selection and installation ol'thc art.
DISCUSSION:
Apple representatives indicate they are proposing the in-lieu payment to bring some
this long outstanding commitment and to increase the potential uses ol' thc I'und,s. 'I'hcv
expanding the eligible projects will increase the ability to identit? a ~utu~lly agrcctdM,: pro. jeer ~'
program. Also, payment of an in-lieu fee enables the City Council to select a project and
location of significance to the entire community.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff believes the offer is made in good faith and should be accepted by the City Council as thc
most expeditious manner to fulfill the condition of approval. The Council should re,solve the
following questions relating to implementation off the otter:
1. Should the eligible activities be expanded beyond public art to include other public l~,~cilitics
or programs?
Offer from Apple Computer to provide a cash amount to be used tbr community 13rograms or
facilities, including artwork, in lieu of installation or'artwork on the Apple Calllptls.
March 20, 2000
Page 3
2. Should the in-lieu payment be adjusted tbr inflation? Additionally, if all in-lieu payment is
accepted, the city will be responsible for tile long-term maintenance cost I'm' thc art pro. i¢ct.
Staff suggests the Council request that Apple pay an in-lieu lee of $1202)00, to partially
offset inflation and maintenance costs.
3. Decide if the in-lieu payment can be used tbr the Four Seasons public art pro. jeer. 'Iht I:inc
Arts Commission recommends the payment not be used for the Four Seasons Comer public
art project.
4. Should the in-lieu payment be concentrated on one site, as recommended by thc l"inc Arts
Commission?
5. Should the Fine Arts Commission manage the selection and installation or'thc art?
SUB~_q~ED~_ PPROVAL:
Community Development
SUBMITTED BY:
Don Brown, City Manager
Enclosures:
Excerpt from Resolution # 4305 (condition 22)
City Council minutes dated April 6, 1993
San Jose Mercury News article dated May 29, 1998
City clerk's letter dated September 21, 1998
Letter from Apple Computer dated February 28, 2000
Excerpted minutes from the Fine Art's Commission dated February 22, 2000
~he devel~ sh~l ~,~{t a cc~orehe~sive latin%scape plant/rig sign for
f~! rmview by th~ Archit~urml and Site Approval O~mittee prior
attenbio~ to the following details:
b)
which may t~
r. M.i.NtJT~ OF ~ A.PR.I~ 6, 1993 .~G'U'L,A~ CTTY COU'NCH., MI.n-I'[N0
Dec.
granted
IsC reading
Ord. 162t
I
Apple,
Inc.
reading of Orcl~mx~ No. 1621: 'An Onlinance 0fthe Ci~ ~I
of~c Ci~ ofC~no ~ng Tide 19 of~c Cu~no M~
C~c ~ R~ing P~b 35~I~ ~ 35~I~7 from ~ Z~c to
RI-10,~ Z~e; ~t~ on hSc Ne~ Side of ~in ~e ~t of Fclt~
(A~ti~m No. I-Z-93 - Ci~ ofCu~ino).'
Director cf Community Devcl~ent Cowan sa/d he sees this as a cl~m'~-up mart~,-r.
There be/ng no public input., Mayor Szal~ brought di.~ussion to Council.
It was moved by Count. Goldman, seconded ~ Ur, mc. Sorcnsen and passed unartimously
to al~:rovc thc granting ora Nega. tivc Declasation.
It w~ moved by Counc. Goldman, sceonded by Cou.nc. Koppel and passed unanimo.~sly'
to approve the appli¢~_tion po' Planning Commission Resolution No. 4452.
It was moved by Counc. Goldman, seconded by Counc. Koppel and p~s.s~l unanimo~ly
to read Ordinance No. 1621 by title only and thc City Clerk's reading to conatimte the tim
reading thereof.
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
14. None.
ARCHTFECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS
15. None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
16. None.
NEW BUSINESS
17.
Approval of public art project propased by. Ak'pie, Inc.; to be located on the
northcmt comer of Mariani Avenue a~d Infinite Loop.
Following presentatien of thc steff' re-port by thc City Clerk, Ed Stcllingsma, Apple
Computer Senior Project Manager, introduced Scott Kyi~' of Stmsmaru'Ih'ejza who
reviewed previous projects completed by thc firm. Itc then reviewed a r,~dering and site
location of' the proposed Apple art pmjec~ It will consist of eight icons constructed of
fiberglass and aluminum. These seem to be thc best, longest l~ting materia/s.
It was moved by Counc. Goldman, seconded by Counc. Koppel and passed tmanimoualy
to accept ~c pm~:~sal as submitted. Thc Fine Arts Commission and Apple were
commended for uhcir work.
Apple's eight giant Macintosh statues are now just a memory
BY SOD[ MARDESICH
~[e~u O' News Staff Writer
The eight giant s~tues o~ Macintosh
computer ico~ ~ ~ced ~e pubic
p~k ou~ide Apple Computer ~c.'s
m~ c~p~ ~ Cupe~o ~ve been re-
moved by ~e comply, m~g ~e d~
n~e of ~o~er ~bol of ~e onc~
proud computer maker.
The whirn.sical sctflpmres, which ~-
cluded a giant hand, a paintbrush a~d
Clan~, the "dogcow"-- al~o known ~s
"Moo{"-- came to symboEze Apple to
many of t~e company's followers. The
icon~, designed under the first watch of
Apple interim Chief Executive Steve
Jobs in 1984, gave the Mac a friendly
face to u~ers who were not computer
wiz~rd.s. The e~rty took and feel of the
Mac garnered an Lnten-~e loyalty among
Removal of the sculptures Tuesday is
just the latest of' ma. ny changes by the
' See ICONS, Page 4A
SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS I From Page One I FRIOAY, MAY 29, 1998
Mac,symbols are now just a.memory
· ICONS
from Page lA '
company, wlfich hnd defined the
unique corporate culture of the
Silicon Valley. In recent months,
Apple has stripped away several
employee perks that IL~t set it
apart, then were copied by others
valley companies.
Gone arc the six. week sabbatl.
c-ds dcdicatcd umployces earned '
after five years with Apple. Gone
~re Otc pets employec~ brought
to work, since they spent so little
thue at home. Smokers h=ve been
as.ked to leave company property
to tnke a cigarette brcak. Also.
gone is Apple's historical Libraz7,
Cumed over to Starfford last year.
Even the famous six-colored
Apple logo ha.s become mono-
chromatic in some advertise-
me~tl~ ~utd on some products.
Yet Jobs, the colorful co-found-'
· ho returned to Apple last
~ .~r when Ute compmw bought
his Next Software Inc:, has done
less frivolous things, besides hir-
ing a new chef to improve the c,~-
eteria dhfing fare. He's led Apple
through two quml. e~ of profit-
ability, and overseen the develop-
ment of the new eye-catehhtg
iMac, Apple's lower-cost comput.
er offering. Even the employee
attrition r~te ha~ decreased.
An Apple spokeswoman said
the sculptures were in need of re-
pair a~td the compmw'h~d decid-
ed it was thne for something new~
"rhey went up when we built the
can~pus (hi 1993)," ~mid spokc~.
wom-,~ Rhona H~fllton. "We de-
cided we wanted to update, the
park."
Apple h~ no plans for m't to re-
place the sculptures, although a .i
condition for Apple to receive a
building pemfit by the city of Cu-
pertino was that the compn,ty
provide public ~t in the p~k.
"I know they've had a lot of
clmnges over there," said Do,ma
Krey, a spokeswoman for Cupcr-
MERCURY NEW~ FILE PHOTOGRAPH
Apple employee Anne'Jones walks past the icon marking Apple's Mac OS8 oPerating syslem. The
sculptures came to symbolize Apple to many o; the company's followers.
tine. "Maybe there is somebody
that dkln't miderstand, but they
are going to be requLred to put
some public art up as a condition
of their penuiL"
The 6-to-I~- foot fiberglass
structures became a favorite
stoppigg .spot for busloads of
cmitera-toting tourists.. They'd
pose neut the gimtt fiberglzss
pencil or watch. Some fares even
paid hontage to Ute garden a~d its
huge icotts on tl~eir Web pages.
Oue Web site features "Jory's Ap-
ple lcot~ Garden Adventure" ~ a
series o{ photographs of the gar-
den and its sculptures.
Not all Apple 'employees 'and
Mac ~mera loved thc sculptures,
.however. Jeremy Rot'nzLein, n
:
fornter Apple engineer, s~d col-
leagues thought it was a little too
contmerciaL "When w,e fu~t saw
it, our fl~t reaction was mostly
along the lines of, 'What an ugly,
horrible piece of seE-serving
pseudo-art.'"
[,any Tesh,x, Apple's' former
chief scientist and now president
of. Stagecast SoRware Inc., said
that while over time it made him
softie, he still thought it was "friv-
olous.''
But, many Mac users were
bothered by the chm~ge..
"It's little things like th~ that
gave Apple whatever character it
had," said Jolu~ Wl~a-ton, a Mac
u~er mid Apple shareholder.
"Man~ement should be encour-
aging more of that scuff, not ac-
tively dismmtUing what they've
· already geL"
"Ifs really a passing ohm age,"
sa/d Thn Bajarin~ presidenL of
Creative Strategies, a market re-
search linu in Campbell "rile
sndley faces ..eld the icon gardett
rcprcscttted what w~ the Apple
· Of old. I. Uthtk htone selL/e,
SI.eve's saying, "hey guys, grow
up."
One Mac fan was optimisti~
abouC the charge. Scott J. Fdcper,
a graduate sLudcnt in computer
science at SLanford who spent a
summer intemh~g at Apple, said,
"Maybe they'll replace Ute icons
w/th ~omething more currcnC :.~
they change the world agalu."
trim)
Ci~ Hall
10300 Ton'¢ ^¥enu¢
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408) ??%3223
FAX: (408) 777-3366
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
September 21, 1998
Bob Hecox, Vice President
Real Estate, Construction, and Facilities
Apple Computer, Inc.
1 Infinite Loop
Cupertino, CA 95014-2084
REQUEST BY APPLE COMPUTER INC. TO DELAY RE-INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC
ART LOCATED ON APPLE GATEWAY CAMPUS
At the City Council's September 8, 1998, regular adjourned meeting, they granted Apple Computer an eighteen
(18) month period in which to file an application with the city to re-introduce public art.
If there are any questions regarding this letter, feel free to contact us or the Community Development
Department.
Sincerely,
Marie Preston, Adminish'ative Clerk
City Clerk's Office
Cc: Community Development
February 28, 2000
The Honorable City Council
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Lane
Cupertino, CA 95014
RE: Public Art Requirement -- Use Permit for Apple's Worldwide Headquarters
in Cupertino
Ladies and Gentlemen:
At the Cupertino Council's September 8, 1998, regular adjourned meeting, the Council granted
Apple Computer an eighteen (18) month period (ending on March 8, 2000) within which to file
an application with the City to re-introduce public art.
During the last several months, Apple representatives have met with Cupertino public officials
to discuss alternatives to public art which would meet Apple's obligations under the conditions
of the Use Permit. These meetings generated a number of thoughtful, creative solutions.
Based on these discussions and after consideration within Apple, it is our proposal that we fulfill
our obligation under the Use Permit by remitting the sum of One Hundred Thousand Dollars
($100,000) to the City, to be allocated among community programs or facilities, including art
work, as mutually agreed upon by the Council and Apple.
If you would like to discuss this further, please contact me at (408) 974-1013 or Bob Hecox at
(408) 974.-8.828.
Allen D. Moyer
Vice President, Real Estate and Development
CC:
Bob Hecox - Apple
Cathy Hutchinson Foster - Apple
Michelle Wright - Apple
Don Brown - Cupertino, City Manager
Steve Piasecki - Cupertino, Director of Community Development
Kimberly Smith -Cupertino, City Clerk
February 22, 2000
EXCERPT FROM TIlE DRAFT MINUTES
Fine Arts Commission
Page 3
The City Clerk requested input from the commission regarding Apple Computer's letter of
February 28 regarding their public art requirement on the Worldwide Headquarters property.
The commission unanimously recommended that if Apple wishes to provide an in-lieu fee of
$100,000, the Fine Arts Commission will manage the selection and installation of public art,
which will be for a site-specific commissioned work with a value of $100,000. The
commission also recommended that the in-lieu fee not be split up for a number of smaller
projects, nor used to augment the Four Seasons Comer public art project.
~1: ....... Update budget narratives for 2000-2001 fiscal year.
Cont~ meeting of March 28.
OLD BUSINES~
A. Cherry Blossom~l.
Kund~gi reported that s'he,.had contacted two private schools about the opportunity
to participate in the smdent'a~banner project. One of those schools is interested and
the other has not yet replied. Ki2md..argi will confirm what additional supplies are
~ng the banners, a~t,~nal arrangements will be made at the March
meeting. ~
ADJOURNMENT ~
The meeting was adjourned at 8:34 p.mI ~
Dorothy Steenfott
Recording Secretary
CITY OF
CUPERTINO
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
FAX (408) 777-3333
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Summary
AGENDA ITEM
AGENDA DATE
March 20, 2000
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Authorizing selection of steering committee for new Cupertino library building.
BACKGROUND
The next step toward building a new library building in the Civic Center is to appoint a Library
Building Steering Committee to begin the process. The composition of the Committee should include
various community groups.
The following groups are suggested for your consideration and approval:
2 City Council members:
Planning Commissioner:
Neighborhood representative:
Youth Sports:
Friends of the Cupertino Library:
Library Commissioner:
2 Community-at-large members:
2 Santa Clara County Library staff:
3 Public Works staff:
Michael Chang, Sandra James
Charles Con'
Dorothy Stow
Bob Joyce, CYSA Soccer
Jean Gallup
To be selected by the Commission
City Council to appoint
Mary-Ann Wallace, Julie Farnsworth
Carmen Lynaugh, Bob Rizzo, Bert Viskovich
Upon confirmation of all members, the Committee's first order of business will be to develop an RFP
and interview architects.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the member list for the Library Building Steering
Committee.
fert J. ~sl~ ~'vicl~
firector oC~blic Works
Approved for submission:
Donald D. Brown
City Manager
Printed on Recycled Paper c~ 0 ~ /
CITY OF
CUPEP TINO
SUMMARY
Agenda No. ,~2~/
Agenda Date: March 20, 2000
SUBJECT:
Development criteria for convening commercial land use to office land use.
BACKGROUND:
On November 15, 1999, the City Council authorized the owners of the Santa Barbara (irill site
pursue a General Plan Amendment to change the use from commercial to office (sec attached
minutes and staff report dated November 15, 1999). The attachments to thc staff rcpm't discuss
the criteria contained in the Municipal Code trbr initiating a general plan amendment.
On December 27, 1999, Bill Hagman filed an application tbr a general plan amendment and a
use permit to demolish the existing 8,000 square foot Santa Barbara Grill Restaurant and
construct a three-story 40,000 square foot ofrice building. The City Council action on November
15, 1999, presumably anticipated an amendment of the General Plan to accommodate the transli2r
of allowable square footage.
Several other property owners have approached the City about expanding their square Ibotagc
beyond the limits permitted in the General Plan.
DISCUSSION:
The General Plan identifies allowable floor area ratios, some additional speci tic parcel
allocations and land use "pool" allocations. These allocations are used to determine how much
square footage of a particular land use is permitted on a site or within a designated arca.
Most of the allowable square footage in the General Plan is committed to a particular site (c.g.
the Compaq property or Vallco Fashion Park), or a planning area (e.g. Stevens Creek Iloulcvm'd
Specific Plan area). The only remaining land use pool with any sizable amount of uncommitted
square footage is commercial.
Development criteria for converting commercial land use to office land usc..
March 20, 2000
Page 2
The General Plan does not provide comprehensive criteria that would be used to consider a
transfer from the pool allocation, if such transfers are permitted. Staff Prepared the attached
memo dated March 10, 2000, that suggests seven criteria that should be used to evaluate density
or square footage transfers in the core area of the community.
Council Member Burnett prepared the attached memo, dated March 5, 2000, recommending that
the City not permit transfers of square footage from commercial to office or industrial uses.
RECOMMENDATION:
There are two issues that need resolution:
1) Should any transfer of square footage be permitted [Yom one area or land use category
to another?
2) If land use transfers are allowed, then what are the criteria that the City would usc to
evaluate a transfer?
Staff seeks City Council guidance on these issues so that we can advise prospective applicants
for general plan amendments that require added square footage.
The applicants for the Santa Barbara Grill application have been advised of this discussion and
plan on attending.
Steve Piasecki, Director of
Community Development
SUBMITTED BY:
Don Brown, City Manager
Enclosures:
City Council minutes, staff report and attachments dated November 15, 1999
Development Criteria memo dated March 10, 2000
Memo from Council Member Bumett dated March 5, 2000
Page 4 Cupertino City Council November 15, 1999
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
20.
Santa Barbara Grill site - 10745 North De Anza Boulevard. Request to initiate a public
hearing for a general plan amendment to allow existing commercial retail site to be
developed as office space.
Community Development Director Bob Cowan reviewed the staff report. He explained
that this parcel had not been successful as a retail site. Another parcel to the south also
suffered from very poor access, and the restaurant on that location was tom down and
converted to an office use.
Mr. David Wheeler, local CPA and past president of the Chamber Of Commerce,
explained that this restaurant has been the Santa Barbara Grill for one year, and before
that it was Sports City for nine years. None of those businesses has done well, especially
in the evening hours. In fact, Santa Barbara Grill is currently in Chapter 11 trying to
reorganize. Although they have won several "Best Restaurant in the West Side" awards,
when the other restaurant use converted to office space this location was severely
impacted. It is also a difficult site for a retail use because access is too difficult, and the
parcel appears to be too small for housing. They propose a landmark style office building
which would make an good impression at the city's gateway.
Cowan said if council chooses to initiate the general plan amendment hearing, it will not
prohibit this parcel from being designated for housing. Bumett noted that the site is
roughly the same size as the old fire station location where housing will now be placed,
so it is his current preference that this spot also be used for housing. Chang agreed that
the potential for housing at this location should be explored. The city council members
expressed regret at the loss of a fine restaurant.
James moved to adopt staff's recommendation. Chang seconded and the motion can/ed
unanimously. The recommendation was to initiate a general plan amendment hearing at
which the following analysis will be made:
· The impacts of converting retail to office be assessed in terms of determining whether
it would result in diminished pool of retail space which would not meet the City's
retail (fiscal) objectives
· To evaluate the possible aesthetics relative to the general plan design objectives and
the North DeAnza Boulevard conceptual plan.
21.
Appeal of the Planning Commission decision regarding applications 8-U-99 and 21-EA-
99 of HOK Architects (for Symantec Corporation). The application requested a use
permit to construct a 1,750 sq. ft. addition (Learning Center) to an existing office building
located at 20330 Torre Avenue. (Mayor Wally Dean, appellant.) (Continued from
November 1.)
CiTY 0F SUMMARY
CUPEP INO
Agenda No.
Agenda Date: November 15, 1999
SUBJECT:
Request lbr General Plan Amendment to change land use on the "Santa Barbara Grill" site [Yom
general retail to office. The project site is located at 10745 North DeAnza Boulevard.
A letter from Mr. Michael Del Monico and David Wheeler addressed to Mayor Wally Dean is
'attached for your consideration. The letter seeks permission to initiate a general plan hearing to
· consider modification to the land use section of the general plan to allow office development on
the existing retail site. Although the land use diagram for the general plan and zoning map allow
a mixture of land uses including office development, the development allocation tables define
permitted land use intensity. The values were derived by applying floor area ratios to the land
use pattern which was in place in 1991 (the plan was ultimately adopted in December 1993).
The subject site was designated retail.
With regard to retail commercial, the existing retail building area tbr each parcel was frozen.
Future development potential for retail was collected into a pool to be reallocated based upon
· development objectives. (Please refer to the attached general plan excerpts) The applicant's
request is to demolish an existing restaurant building and to build an office development. In
order to accomplish that objective, the applicant must either obtain a transfer of office
development potential from another site or seek a general plan modi fication to allow conversion
of retail credits to office and to apply that credit to his property. Your attention is drawn to
general plan pages, 2-9 and 2-26 which state that the policy to all'ow the conversion ol' retail pool
space to office was only granted to the northeast corner of DeAnza Boulevard and Stevens Creek
Boulevard. This was done to promote the redevelopment of the Crossroads.
Criteria for adoption of General Plan
'ttae ctty's mumctpa! fiode section 2~1.02.025 contains criteria that the City Council should use to
determine whether a general plan amendment is warranted. The applicant's letter of November
3, 1999 states that the site has been used as a restaurant tbr fifteen years and that despite winning
several awards, the restaurant has failed and is in Chapter I t-bankruptcy reorganization. The
applicants have concluded that the location of and the access to the site are not conducive
retail use. The applicant's letter of November 3 does not directly address three criteria, however
one cOuld conclude that the property owners could not have foreseen that the original
commercial designation and subsequent construction of a restaurant would not be successful duc
to the lack of good access. In staff's perspective, lack of access would be particular true R~r a
non-restaurant retail use.
Printed on Recycled Paper
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recognizes the fact that three restaurants have failed on the subject site and in mid 1980 a
relatively new, large restaurant building located next door was demolished and replaced by an
office. Staff recommends that the City Council initiate the hearing and that at the hearing the
following analysis be conducted prior to making a decision regarding the amendment itsel fi
o. The impacts of converting retail to office be assessed not in terms of determining whether it
would result in diminished pool of retail space which would not meet the City's retail
(fiscal) objectives.
· To evaluate the possible aesthetics relative to the general plan design objectives and thc
North DeAnza Boulevard conceptual plan.
State law mandates that a mandatory element of the general plan can be amended no more than 4
times per year. Since the amendment will most likely be completed in the year 2000, 3
, additional amendments can be scheduled in year 2000 including the comprehensive general plan
· amendment scheduled for the spring.
SUBMITTED BY:
SUBMITTED BY:
Robert S. Cowan, Director of
Community Development
Don Brown, City Manager
Enclosures:
Letter from Michael Del Monico dated November 3, 1999
General Plan excerpt (pages 2-7 through 2-9 and 2-26)
Excerpt from Section 20.02.025 of the Municipal Code regarding General Plan Amendment
g/plannin~cc/gpchangc
Michael Del Monaco
1070 Commercial St.,'S~e. 107
San Jo'se, CA 95.112
Santa Barbara Grill, LLC
10050 N. Foothill Blvd., Ste. 200
. Cupertino, CA ~5014
November 3,~1999 .
His Honor, Mayor Wally Dean
Cl~pe,-tino City Hall
103'00 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Dear Mayor Dean: ,
We are requesting City Council and Planning ~ommission approval o~a general plan amendment for the
site located at 10745 NOrth De.Anza Boulevard. The existing, zoning i~ Planned Development (General
Commercial, Light Inrush'iai and Residential 4-I 0 Dwellings per Acre), and the general plan land Use
design, ation is Office, Industrial, Commercial and Residential. We are requesting a change to the
development reaIlocatior~ policies to'permit the demolition of the existing restaurant to be replaced with an
office building which is consistent with the City's policies and goa)s.
Currently, and for the past 15 years, the site has been used as a restaurant. The' current restaurant, Santa ,.
Barbara Grill, is in chapter 11-bankruptcy reorganization. The failure ofthexestaurant is not an operational
issue as the restaurant has won several awards. This has simply proven to be an inappropriate use for this
site as three different restaurant tenants have failed ~)ver the years. The location of and access to this site are
not adequat~ for retail use. , .'
We have thoroughly analyzed all other potential uses for this site and have determined that an office use
would be the most appropriate because'of the circulation and location, and it is consistent with the adjacent
uses. Our proposal for this very visible site is for a three-story 30,000 square foot office building with a
parking structure, part of which &ill be subterranean. We will ~rovide the necessary parking and satisfy the
setback and he;ght requirements for this area and rise. The quality of our design for the proposed project'
will be suitable for this gateway to the City of Cupertino, and will be a design the City of.Cupertino will be
proud of.
Wc hereby request that on November 15', 1999, .the City Council initiate a public hearing to consider the
general plafi amendmint to allow office development at 10745 North De Anza Boulevard.
Sincerely,
MICHAEL DEL MONACO . C
M~chael Del Monaco · · °. David'Wheeler
Fax ¢,08.'~D3.$98Z
Land Us*e/Community Character
These policies had numerous effects on the City.. Non-residenthl building, patterns
have typically been low profile and uniform in height, .makin$ it difficult to focus deve2op-
ment intensity to shape the City's built form and identity. Imbalances irt commerdal, of-
rice/industrial and residential development potential in relation to market demand have
resulted in under u Hli~ed commercial spaces, iow office vacancies and high housing demand.
To ad&ess these issues, the development regulatory policies are revised as foLlmazad;-
· Policy 2-3: DevelopmzntReaItocation
· Development activity ~hould be corttrolled so that the City-street system is
not overwhelmed with traffic and the desired transportation level of ser-
vice is maintained. To meet the City's goals and priorities, the remaining
uncommitted development potential that achieves the City's transportation
goals should be reallocated as shown below. Further adjustments to these
allocations may be necessary to ensure that the City's transportation goals
are met.
Dev¢1opraent Reallocation Table .
Land Use 1990
Built
Peak Hour
Reallocated General Trip Factor/
Committed Potential Plan 1000 sq.ft., Reallocated
Growtho~ Growth Buildout Room or DU Trips
a b c a+b.+c d c*d
Retail 3,359,000 573,000 500,000 4,431,000ra 2.60 1,300
(sq. ft.)
Office/Ind 7,457,000 541,000 1,294,000 9,292,000m 1.70' 2,200
(sq. ft.)
Hotel 277 250 500 1,027 0.40 200
(rooms)
Housing 17,460 584 2,000 20,044 0.80 1,600
(DU)
Total 5,300
Committed growth refers to growth potential that has been approved through use
permits, vesting maps and/or development agreements, but has not been built as of
1990. The committed growth will be reallocated by the City if a use permit expires or
the project is determined to be Inconsistent with the General Plan.
.~'~These numbers are flexible due to the ability to convert retail space to office space at
Lthe northeast comer of DeAnza/Stevens Creek Boulevards, as described in Policy 2-24.
This poUcy recognizes that a finite amount of development cart take place
and still remain within the desired transportation level of servic~ The un-
committed development potential from less than buildout properties would
be 'reallocated" to meet City development needs a_nd goals. Development
allocations shall be made by the City irt accordance with its development
approval processes and the following development priorities tables. The
1/98 THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Sg~ PoucY 2-24
(snu,~'~, 2)
2-7
2-8
Housing or mixed-use
development is
courased on commer-
cial sites which do not
have existh~g commer-
cial development po-
tential, particularly if
the sites are urdikely to
· receive commercial
development alloca-
tions shown in the
Retail Commercial
Development Priorities
table.
SEE DE~.O~
Land Use/Community Character
II I
Development Intensity Manual will be modified to provide detailed pro-
cedu~es regard.Lng deyelopment allocatior~.
The City will modify exi.st:i~g Planned Development zones a_nd area plans
and/or develop new specific plans to "freeze" building areas on each re-
tail commercial zoned or used property as of lu_ne 1, 1993. Futttre retail
commercial growth cart occur in areas that have allocated retail growth.
Future retail commercial growth will not be regulated by FAR standards.
Growth will be dependent upon allocation of space from retail commercial
development priorities table.
2. New retail commercial growth listed in the Development Reallocation Table
may be allocated as follows:
Retail Commercial Development Prioriflesm
· Along or near Stevens Creek l=ioulevard to support the
Heart of the City policy.
· Remodeling and development of major retail centers on
5+ acre sites outside of the Heart of City and on major
arterial streets.
· Mixed use developments with residences outside of the
Heart of the City.
· Development or revitalization of other commercial parcels.
· Power Retailer (i.e. high volume discount retailer)
· Full service hotel(s), appropriate Iocaiion evaluated
at time of proposal
250,000 sq. ff.
40,000 sq. ft.
35,000 sq. ft.
50,000 sq. ft.
125,000 sq. ft.
500 rooms
These'numbers are flexible due to the ability to convert retail space to office
space at the northeast comer of DeAnza/Stevens Creek Boulevards, as
described in Policy 2-24.
Office, Research and Development and Industrial growth listed in the De-
velopment ReaLlocation Table may be rea.llocated as follows:
Office/Industrial Development Prioritle~'~
Development potential according to base FAR constraints
and transferred development credits remains with existing
office and industrial parcels.*
· Town Center & Crossroads Comers
· Measurex
Non-designated pool to be allocated based on the
following priorities:
- Company with 1,500+ employees
- Company with City corporate headquarters
1,033,000 sq. ft.
91,000 sq. ft.
20,000 sq. ft.
150,000 sq. ft.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
(.
1/98
1/98
Land Use/Community Character
II
Office and Industrial property owners may tran.sfer unused development
potential from one property to another subject .to prior City approval. Such
properties must be zoned Planned Development and the degree of transfer is
determined in part on the permitted land use intensity of the transferring site.
New development will be subject to traffic mitigation measures as stringent as
those imposed on the Apple Gateway Project (file no. 11-U-90).
Property owners possessing bonus square footage authorized by the 1983
General Plan retain such square footage.
The base FAR for industrial designation on the General Plan Land Use
' Diagram is 0.33. The designation for office and office/R&D is .37.
{4)
These numbers are flexible due to the ability to convert retail space to office
space at the northeast comer of De Anza/Stevens Creek Boulevards, as
described in Policy 2-24.
Housing units listed in the Development Reallocation Table may be reallo- '
cared as follows:
Residential Development Priorities (See Flgure 2-B)
Residential density potential, based on existing general plan 516
residential land use designations, remains with existing
residential parcels.
· North De Anza Boulevard Area 150
· Vallco Park 500-560(s)
· Heart of the City Specific Planning Area 500
· Bubb Road between Stevens Creek Boulevard and McClellan Road 1'50
· Undesignated pool 184
Housing in the North De Anza Boulevard and Bubb Road areas shall generate
no more peak hour traffic than the office/industrial uses it replaces.
60 Additional units may be transferred from the undesignated category to
accommodate applications 14-U-96 and 15-U-96.
More refined criteria for evaluating projects which request a share of these
allocations shall be developed.
The square footage, room and dw~lllng unit allocations of the development
priorities tables may be reviewed by the City on an annual basis to ensure
that the development priorities meet City needs and goals.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-9
S~ DEVE'LOPM~'4'F
Ih-m~sr~
Land Use/Comrnunil~ Character
II
I Policy 2-24: Urban Focal .Points
Intensify the focus o~ urban development in Vallco Park, North De Anza
Boulevard, Town Center, and Stevens Creek Boulevard planning areas,
subject to design and transportation network controls.
Strategies
Multiple-Story Buildings and Residential Districts. Allow construction
of multiple-story buildings in Vallco Park, Town Center, Stevens Creek
Boulevard and North De Anza Boulevard if it is found that nearby residen-
tial districts will not suffer .from privacy in~.'u.sion or be overwhelmed by
the scale of a building or group of buildings.
Maximum Building Heights and Setback Ratios. The maximum height
and setback ratios for new buildings in various planning areas are sped-
lied in Figure 2-D.
Portions of planning areas abutting residential areas are subject to a 4S-foot
maximum height limit in addition to other measures to mitigate visual in-
trusioru The 45-foot height area, as well as other areas, are graphically de-
scn'bed in the building heights map. In the Town Center, the maximum
existing building height is delined by the City Center twin office towers.
In the Vallco Park area, the maximum committed building height is defined
by the Vallco Fashion Mall expansion (file no. 9-U-90), which is subject to a
development agreement. The Tandem Jackpot project ~ile No. 13-U-88),
approved at the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau
Avenue, is specifically exempted from the above new height limitations and
would de. fine the maximum existing building height in the Vallco Park area
if built This height exception applies to the current use permit and any
permit extension granted by the City. At the northeast corner only, allow a.
conversion of retail to office/cornmerr-iM space, provided that there is a sub-
~tanti~ retail presence on ti'tat site. The maximum height of landmark build-
mg si'tail 6e 75 ft. with substantial easement for dedication of open space
for public gatherings consistent with the Stevens Creek Plan, provided other
dements of the General Plan, including traffic, are satisfied. The Sandhffi
Properties Hotel, Use Permit 15-U-96, approved at the souf. hwest corner of
Wolfe Road and Prune. ridge Avenue, is specifically exempted from the
height limitations.
Landmark buildings are buildings of prominent community stature that
incorporate uses, activities and spaces encouraging public gatherings and
uses. To Cl~ll _C'y as landmark buildings, proposed projects should be of very
high cl-nllty architecture, building materials and finishes and conform to at
least three of the following criteria:
a) Location on a major street frontage.
b) Inclusion of cultural facilities such as art galleries, museums and pe~-
forming arts centers.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
1/98
occur per year under the provision of California
Government Code Section 6~358, the City Council
may initiat~ consideration of a proposed general
plan amendment upon written request by the Plan-
ning Commission or any interested person. S~id
writmn request shall be filed with the Director of
Corem .uai.ty Development and submitted to the City
Council at.a reg~l:~r m~ting by the Director within
forty-five days of its filing.
The City Council may initiat~ the process to
consider such a general plan amendment proposal
when it finds that the proposal ~ benefit the City
and is compatible with the existing general plan
policies and goals. In addition, the proposal should
meet at least one of the following criteria:
1.' The proposal appears to mppbn the existing
general plan go.~ and objectives (although the
degr~ of public benefit could not be fully ascer-
tained until the project is fullylassessed);
2. The proposal represents an unfore.seen land
use trend that h~ not been previously consi~
3. The existing general plan policy which pre-
cludes the proposal is based upon outd,t~ or inac-
cura~ information.
Upon initiating the consideration of a general
plan amendment under this subsection, the City
Council will immedi~t~_ly refer the proposal to the
Planning Commission for its recommen_d.~6ons un-
der the procedures described in the California Gov-
ernment Code.
With respect to proposals commenced by an
· interested party, the City Council shall require that
an amount equil to the estimated cost of preparing
the proposed general plan amendment be deposited
with the City prior to its preparation. (Ord. 1664 §
1 (pan), 1994)
588-104
Memo
To:
From:
CC:
Date:
Re:
Mayor Statton and Members of the City Council
Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Deyelopment
Donald Brown, City manager
Fdday, March 10, 2000
Development Cdteda
-BACKGROUND:
The Cupertino General Plan assigns development intensities based on allowable floor area ratios, allocations to
specific sites and land use "pool allocations" of development not designated for specific parcels.
In December, the City Council authorized a Gene?al Plan amendment to review a proposal to demolish the
8,000 square foot Santa Barbara Gdll restaurant and construct a new three-story 40,000 office building. This
proposal requires an allocation of 40,000 square feet of office development which does not exist and must be
transferred from another development pool such as commercial. Several othe~ property owners have
approached the city asking to develop their office sites beyond the allocations permitted in the General Plan.
These properties will also need to obtain square footage from one of the "pool allocation" categories allowed in
the General Plan. The General Plan pools include residential, hotel and commercial.
There is a remaining "pool allocation" of 496,183 square feet of commercial area which is detailed below:
Affected Cateqory or Area Square Foota.qe
current
Initial 1993 allocation
Heart of the City (Stevens Creek Boulevard) 250,000 189,614
Remodeling and development of retail centers outside the Heart 40,000 97,911'
of the City.
Mixed-use developments including residential located outside of 35,00~) 33,606
the Heart of the City..
Development or revitalization of other commercial parcels 50,000 50,052
Power Retailer (high volume discount retailer) 125,000 125,000
Total 500,000 496,183
Hotel 500 rooms 585 rooms
* The number increased due to demolitions (e.g. tennis center and restaurant)
The city has a "Development Intensity Manual" that describes the floor area allocation system and
defines "amenity space." However, the manual does not discuss specific cdteria to determine when
and how projects may be allowed to use some of the commercial square footage allocation.
Development Cr~tena
Marcl~ 10, Z000
Page 2
DISCUSSION:
Staff prepared seven cdteda that should be considered for any project that proposes to use some of
this commercial square footage identified in the General Plan. These cdteria are geared to provide
high quality projects and ensure the city revenue base expected from the General Plan is not
diminished from any transfers of this space.
Council Member Burnett prepared a memo recommending that no transfers be allowed. If the Council
prefers to not transfer any of the commercial square footage then we will need to advise the Santa
Barbara Gdll applicants that the General Plan does not provide any mechanism to accommodate their
project. Then the only option for redevelopment of their site is to convert the existing commercial into
an equivalent amount of office (approximately 12,200 square feet, based on peak hour traffic) or
develop a mix of office and residential uses.
RECOMMENDATION
If the City wishes to consider allocating or converting commercial space to office uses, then staff
believes there should be clear criteda outlining the City's expectations for developments using Ibis
space. Attached are seven cdteda that cold be used to evaluate each application to use some of this
space. The Planning Commission is currently reviewing the "Development Intensity Manual" which
outlines the procedures for allocating space permitted by the General Plan. The Cib/Council could
direct that the attached draft cdteda be considered in conjunction with this review.
Enclosures:
Exhibit A: City Council Policy Regarding Allocation of Commercial Space
Exhibit B: Memo from Council Member Burnett, dated March 5, 2000
St~.e/Piase~k~i --
Director of Community Development
Approved by:
Donald. Brown
City Manager
H: Development Cdteda
· Page 2
City Council Policy Regarding Allocation of Commercial Space
Background
Several property owners are seeking an allocation of office space to expand or redevelop
their sites. The city will consider allocating some of the commercial pool of square footage in
exchange for extraordinary design and development amenities; and demonstration that the
project will not have other adverse impacts, such as, significant traffic, housing or noise
impacts.
Criteria
The policy is flexible and enables-the City Council to grant one element greater weight or
value for a particular site,-..-The following criteria will be used to assess the commercial
development allocatiS'~': ',
1)
2)
Fiscal
The applicant m~ust dem¢
equivalent amount of reta
Istrate the prdposal will result in a net fiscal benefit over an
commercialCsquare'footage. For smaller allotments (less
than 50,000 square feet)i the appli,~'ant can propose direct annual payments if the
tenants of the 6ffice spa',;e do not generate sale taxes. For larger projects, the
applicant must ~Ommit t~ locating !a world or '~:egional ~sales office with significant
business to business andle-commerce sales activity. A development agreement will
be required to insure that the sal~s activity or direct paYments will be maintained
over the life of tl~e projecLi
Housing ~ ?
CupeKino is commiEe8 to encouraging sufficient housing development to
accommodate */ . ,~..
the new workers a~racted to jobs in the community. The ABAG
Regional H~.ing~N~eds Assessment emphasizes the need to ensure that housing
producti~"¢~'~eps pace with job generation. The applicant seeking an allotment of
commercial square footage should assist local housing effoKs so that the added
employees generated from office .uses will not exacerbate the jobs/housing
imbalance. The project applicant can chose to unde~rite the provision of the
additional housing by contributing to a local non-profit housing development, paying
an additional in-lieu fee into the Cupe~ino housing fund or incorporating housing into
the development application.
3) Traffic
New office development has the potential to generate more traffic than retail
commercial space or could shift traffic fi:om one area of the city to another. The
applicant should demonstrate they can offset the generation of traffic through site
improvements, direct payments to the City to fund an area-wide improvement or
transportation demand management (TDM) techniques.
City Council Policy Regarding Allocation of Commercial Space
4) Urban Design
5)
6)
7)
The applicant should demonstrate that the project furthers Community objectives by
incorporating high-quality design that promotes a consistent design theme or vision
for a street or area. Gateway sites are expected to incorPorate elements that
announce entry into the City or the district, such as extensive public plazas,
architectural features to announce entry and city entrance signs.
Building and Site Design
New office buildings that seek an allotment from the unused commercial base must
incorporate.exemplary architecture, site planning, and landscaping that significantly
enhanc'e~s the individual site and Sets an example\for, buildings that follow. Buildings
. ~, ....... ~/ ~1 - .~ ......
should be located next-to the str, eetscape to prowde a ws~ble ~nteracbon w~th the
, . 1 ~ . ;1 i . · . .
street. The~arch~teqture shoUld ~corporate h~gh-quahty natural matenals such as
, . ~1.'
marble, s~-one and~bnck. Windows. sl~ould be,'. detaded i to match the chosen
~ ! ,' I . I ~ ' . ' . .
arChitectural'style. Landscaping should complement the onentabon and design of the
building a~d provide screeni~rom'C"~c~jacent otherwise incompatible uses (e.g.
pa~'king lots,!lnterstate 280, residential uses~ etc) The applicant should evaluate off-
· t . ~ .~ '' '
s~te landscaping (e.g. medians) that can enhance the community gateway or buffer
· { ' ~
~mpacts on~ adjacent~uses.
Public Amenities ~
Th~9 ! l
propo~sal must :!ncorporate significant public.amehlt~es that enhance the public
view and ~tilization/of the sit~. For instance;~public plazas, fountains, open space,
' ~. . t ' ! .---~" . . · .
public art, pedestna..n connec_t?ns along the pubhc nght of way and through the s~te.
The applicant couJd propose'to solve other neighborhood deficiencies. For instance,
a developer ma~/~propose to purchase square footage to be added to a neighborhood
par~.pr~m'Stall sound walls to protect an adjacent area from noise. Additionally the
applicant shall demonstrate that the plan enhances bicycle and pedestrian
circulation.
Corporate Citizenship
Developments that use some of the commercial square footage allocation should be
exemplary corporate citizens. Participation with local public agencies, non-profits,
schools and service organizations helps foster a greater sense of corporate
citizenship. Accordingly, the City expects that businesses will make their facilities
available (i.e. propose public access to corporate meeting space, open space or
other facilities, where practical). Companies must actively participate and interact
with the Cupertino community including committing to work with the local school
districts to enhance equipment, training and offering potential internship or other
employment opportunities.
p
Sunday, March 5, 2000
Memo
To: Mayor Statton and City Council
From: Don Bumett
Subject: Commercial Space Allocation Policy
Steve Piasecki has provided us with a draft of a proposed policy for allowing conversion
of commercial space to office use (attached). Steve has' covered the applicable criteria
for making land use decisions well. However, since this is to be a specific policy, I would
prefer to make it more concise and pointed. My proposed policy statement would be
something like this:
It is Council's basic policy not to allow a conversion of land use from
commercial (retail) to office or industrial' use. Office/industrial growth would
generate more employees than commemial uses with additional adverse
effects:
· Any conversion would exacerbate the severe housing shortage that now
exists in the City. The newly hired workers would be faced either with
exorbitant housing prices or a commute of several hours a day.
· Citizens as well as all the workers currently employed in Cupertino would
be harmed by the increased traffic. We are at the point where all analysts
are in agreement that additional traffic will have an ever more severe
impact on travel times.
Given these conditions, conversions of land use to office or industrial
purposes are not in .the best interests of the community.
Many. of the criteria listed by Steve are important parts of good corporate citizenship and
deserving of admiration. Nevertheless corporations should not be encouraged to think
that the Council would allow these to override basic community needs in land use
planning.
In my opinion the only land use change that has any overall advantage to this community
· 'is conversion from other uses to housing. Steve's proposed policy would give prospective
applicants more encouragement to apply for other types of conversion than would be fair
to them based on my beliefs. I am anxious to hear of your opinions regarding this issue.
Don Burner
Cc: Don Brown, Steve Piasecld
Sunday, March 5, 2000
Memo
To: Mayor Statton and City Council
From: Don Burnett
Subject: Housing Policy
We did not get a chance to discuss land use at our goals workshop, I would like Council
to discuss this issue before we make some ofimportant decisions that are coming our
way. I feel it is very important that Council provide direction to staff as to what our
collective position is particularly with respect to use conversions and housing density. In
this regard I think a little history is appropriate.
When the General Plan was approved in1993, one feature was a requirement to provide
about 2500 housing units. This number had been assigned to Cupertino by the state and
was included in the Plan as a requirement for State approval of our General Plan.
Subsequently, in order to help us meet that goal staff began encouraging developers to
maximize the number of units included in housing developments. When the Council
became aware of this it directed that this be stopped. It became Council policy to instead
try and minimize the number of housing units provided. As far as I recollect that was the
last direction given to staff on this issue.
I feel that a "minimize housing" policy is not in the best interests of the community. I
would like the Council to reexamine this issue so as to provide staff with direction as to
what our policy is to be with respect to land use and housing. Whether we reaffirm a
minimal housing policy or change to one of encouraging more density or adopt some
other policy must be a group decision.
I propose that we agendize a discussion of this issue for one of our upcoming meetings. I
don't see a need to alter the general plan here. The issues are interpretation and our
attitude toward amendments.
'Don Burnett
Cc: Don Brown, Steve Piasecki