Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
General Plan CC - 19939
The City of Cupertino
City of Cupertino
County of Santa Clara
AMENDMENTS BY CITY COUNCIL
As of June, 1993
Date Resolution No. Description
March 7, 1994 CC 9050 Text- Previous Policy 2-38 requiring Hillside Consolidation
was deleted
March 23,199, CC 9060 Map: Deletion of commercial requirement
C�
•
E
•
City of Cupertino
City Council
Nicholas Szabo, Mayor
Marshall Goldman, Mayor Pro Tempore
Wally Dean
Barb Koppel
Lauralee Sorensen
Barbara Rogers, Emeritus
Planning Commission
Donna Austin, Chairperson
Orrin Mahoney, Vice Chairperson
John Bautista
David Doyle
Paul V. Roberts
Daryl Fazekas, Emeritus
Don Mackenzie, Emeritus
Betty Mann, Emeritus
• Staff
Donald Brown, City Manager
Robert S. Cowan, AICP, Director of Community Development
Ciddy Wordell, AICP, City Planner
Colin Jung, AICP, Associate Planner
Michele Bjurman, Planner II
Thomas Robillard, Planner II
Vera Gil, Planner II
Mark Caughey, AICP, City Planner Emeritus
Yvonne Kelley, Administrative Secretary
Pam Eggen, Administrative Clerk
Ceilia Barron, Clerk Typist
Bert Viskovich, P.E., Director of Public Works
Glenn Grigg, P.E., Traffic Engineer
Blaine Snyder, Director of Finance
Steve Dowling, Director of Parks and Recreation
Barbara K. Brown, Assistant to the City Manager
Dorothy Cornelius, CMC, City Clerk
Consultants/Contributors:
Michael Fornalski, Graphic Design and Illustration
H. Stanton Shelly, Air Quality and Noise Impact Analysis
PRA Associates, Environmental Impact Consultants
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc., Transportation Impact Analysis
General Plan Registration Number
The City of Cupertino will periodically publish
updated information for this plan. This information will
be mailed to persons having registered plans. The
registration number of this plan was recorded as it was
distributed to you.
For your own records, please write in the space
provided the registration number that was attached to
the outside of this package when you received it.
Number:
0
0
n
LJ
•
•
Table of Contents
Section 1 Introduction
1-1 A Vision for Cupertino
1-1 A Livable Community
1-2 Preserve and Enhance Our Natural Heritage
1-3 Achieve Economic Diversity and Sustainability
1-3 Community Setting
1-3 Land Form
1-4 Built Form
1-4 Geographical Boundary of the Plan
1-5 The Planning Process
1-5 External Factors That Influence the Plan
1-6 Key Assumptions of the General Plan
Section 2 Land Use/Community Character
2-1 Introduction
2-1 Community Character
2-1 Major Issues and Goals
2-2 A. Community Identity
2-2 B. Regional Distribution of Jobs and Housing
2-2 C. Housing Demand
2-2 D. Traffic Management
2-2 E. Urban Fiscal Balance
2-2 F. Environmental Management
2-2 G. Human Comfort and Community Diversification
2-3 Community Identity
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
V
Table of Contents
•
Land Use/Community Character (continued)
2-6 Community Development
2-6 Development Regulation
2-11 Special Planning Areas
2-11 Town Center
2-11 Vallco Park
2-12 North De Anza Boulevard
2-12 Stevens Creek Boulevard
2-13 Monta Vista
2-15 Merriman and Santa Lucia Roads
2-15 Balance of Commercial, Office and Industrial Areas
2-16 Housing
2-16 Housing Variety
2-18 Privacy
2-19 Neighborhood Awareness
2-2o Economic Development
2-21 Urban Design
2-24 Building Form and Scale
2-26 Streetscape
2-28 Gateways
2-30 Urban Scenic Corridors
2-31 Sign Control
2-31 Rural Scenic Highways
2-31 Neighborhood Entries
2-32 Traffic Intrusion
2-32 Environmental Management
2-32 Preserving the Hillsides
2-38 Joint Hillside Planning
2-39 Flood Plain
2-40 Energy Awareness
2-40 Sun Control
2-40 Wind Control
2-41 Public Services and Facilities •
2-41 School Districts
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Table of Contents vii
Land Use/Community Character (continued)
2-42
Library Services
2-43
Aesthetic, Cultural and Historic Resources
2-46
The Land Use Map And General Policies
2-46
Land Use Categories
2-46
Residential
2-47
Commercial/Residential
2-47
Office
2-48
Commercial/Office/Residential
2-48
Industrial/Residential
2-48
Office/Industrial/Commercial/Residential
2-48
Quasi-Public/Institutional
2-48
Private Open Space
2-49
Private Recreation
2-49
Parks
2-49
Public Facilities
2-49
General Policies
Section 3 Housing
3-1 Population And Housing Profile
3-7
Community Profile
3-1
Population
3-1
Age Distribution
3-2
Ethnic Distribution
3-2
Employment
3-2
Jobs and Housing
3-4
Household Characteristics
3-4
Housing Units and Households
3-4
Type
3-5
Owner -Renter Distribution
3-5
Vacancy Rate
3-5
Overcrowding Conditions
3-5
Elderly and Handicapped
3-6
Female Heads of Household
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Table of Contents
Housing (continued)
3-6 Large Families
3-6 Farmworkers
3-6 Families and Persons In Need of Emergency Shelter
3-7 Subsidized Units At Risk To Convert To Market Rate Housing
3-8 Income Distribution
3-9 Housing Needs
3-9 Level of Payment Compared to Ability to Pay
3-10 Rehabilitation/Replacement
3-10 Accessibility
3-11 Energy and Housing
3-11 New Construction Need Based On ABAG Regional Housing Allocation
3-14 Adequate Sites Inventory
3-15 Vacant Sites
3-15 Underdeveloped Sites
3-15 Land Inventory Summary
3-16 Constraints To The Development Of Housing
3-16 Governmental Constraints
3-16 Land Use Controls
3-16 Codes and Enforcement
3-17 Infrastructure
3-17 Permit Approval Process
3-I8 Article 34
3-I8 Non -Governmental Constraints
3-18 Cost of Land
3-18 Cost of Construction
3-18 Availability of Financing
3-19 Goals, Objectives, Policies And Programs
3-20 Expand The Supply Of Housing
3-20 Policies
3-27 Programs
3-34 Preserve And Enhance Neighborhoods
3-34 Policies
3-36 Programs
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
Table of Contents
Housing (continued)
3-37 Promote Housing Accessibility
3-37 Policies
3-38 Programs
3-38 Evaluation Of 1990 Housing Element
3-39 Expand Housing Supply
3-44 Preserve And Enhance Existing Housing
3-46 Promote Housing Accessibility
3-46 Conclusion
3-47 Consistency With Other General Plan Elements
3-47 Description Of Public Participation Efforts
3-48 Appendix A: Sites for Housing Redevelopment Map
3-48 Appendix B: Description of Sites for Housing Development
3-5o Appendix C: Housing Units by Planning District
S Section 4 Transportation
4-1 Introduction
4-1 The Regional Perspective
4-2 The Local Perspective
4-7 Traffic Modeling
4-7 Traffic Controls on Additional Mitigated Development
4-9 Description of the Circulation Plan
4-11 Accommodating Alternatives to the Automobile
Section 5 Environmental Resources
5-1
Introduction
5-1
Open Space Planning
5-1
Conservation Planning
5-1
Conservation and Management of Resources
• 5-1
Agricultural Lands
5-3
Air Quality
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
x Table of Contents •
Environmental Resources (continued)
5-4 Principal Pollutants of the Air Basin
5-6 Wildlife and Vegetation
5-6 Streamsides
5-7 Grasslands
5-7 Brushlands
5-8 Foothill Woodlands and Forests
5-8 Impacts and Mitigation
5-9 Mineral Resources
5-12 Water Resources
5-12 Preservation of Watersheds
5-12 Groundwater Recharge Facilities
5-13 Other Water Resources
5-13 Urban Water Conservation
5-14 Nonpoint Source Pollution
5-15 Government Action
5-15 Energy Conservation
5-15 Regional Perspective
5-16 Residential Energy Use Mitigation Measures
5-17 Transportation Energy Conservation Practices
5-17 Open Space Resources
5-17 Public Open Space Management
5-17 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
5-18 Santa Clara County
5-18 Santa Clara County Parks Program
5-18 Santa Clara Valley Water District
5-19 Open Space Policies and Programs
5-19 Stevens Creek
5-21 Private Open Space Resources
5-21 Neighborhood Open Space Program
5-26 Definition of Need
5-27 Implementation
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
Table of Contents
Section 6 Public Health and Safety
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-1
Introduction
6-1
Seismic and Geologic Hazard
6-2
Earthquake Probability
6-5
Geologic Hazards
6-6
Acceptable Level of Risk
6-12
Policy Recommendations
6-14
Fire Hazard
6-14
Fire Services ,
6-14
Fire Hazards on the Urbanized Valley Floor
6-14
Relationship of Building Design and Materials to Fire Risk
6-15
Accessibility
6-16
Fire Hazards in the Foothills and Mountains
6-17
Building Codes
6-17
Road Access
•
6-17
Water Supply on Montebello Ridge and in Stevens Canyon
6-17
Water Supply for Foothill Regions Within the Urban Service Area
6-18
Water Supply for Foothill Regions
6-21
Flood Hazard
6-21
Flood Hazard from Rainstorms
6-22
Flood Hazard from Failure of Water -Storage Facilities
6-24
Flood Hazard From Landslides
6-24
Acceptable Level of Risk
6-24
Policies
6-26
Noise Pollution
6-26
Effect of Noise on People
6-28
Policy Framework
6-28
Land Use Compatibility
6-29
Transportation Noise
6-32
Local Streets/Neighborhood Protection
6-33
Train and Aircraft Noise
•6-33
Truck Traffic
6-34
Non -Transportation Noise Sources
6-34
Adjoining Dissimilar Land Uses
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
xii Table of Contents •
Public Health and Safety (continued)
6-36 Noise Attenuation
6-36 Barriers
6-37 Landscaping and Setbacks
6-38 Building and Site Design
6-38 Insulating Buildings From Noise
6-39 Crime
6-39 Park Design
6-40 Non -Residential Design for Defensible Space
6-41 Disaster Planning
6-41 The Cupertino Emergency Plan
6-43 Hazardous Materials
6-44 Hazardous Waste
6-45 Identification of Waste Stream
6-48 Public Utilities
6-48 Solid Waste
6-49 Waste Water
Section 7 Implementation
7-1 Introduction
7-1 Implementation Techniques
7-4 Land Use/Community Character Element
7-9 Housing Element
7-12 Transportation Element
7-14 Environmental Resources Element
7-17 Public Health and Safety Element
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
0
List of Figures
Section 1 Introduction
1-3 City of Cupertino Regional Location.
1-4 Figure 1-A. Cupertino Planning Area.
1-5 Figure 1-B. General Plan Process.
Section 2 Land Use/Community Character
2-1 Land Available For Development.
2-4 Figure 2-A. Urban Design Overlay.
2-10 Figure 2-B. Housing Reallocation.
2-14 Figure 2-C. Monta Vista Land Use Intensity.
2-22 Figure 2-D. Maximum Building Heights.
•
2-34 Figure 2-E. Hypothetical Development Plan for Inspiration Heights.
2-45 Figure 2-F. Cupertino's Heritage Resources.
Section 3 Housing
3-12 1988-1995 Projected Housing Need By Income Group To Meet Regional Need.
Section 4 Transportation
4-3 Figure 4-A. Average Daily Traffic Counts.
4-4 Figure 4-B. Primary Circulation Plan.
4-13 Figure 4-C. Bike Lanes.
Section 5 Environmental Resources
5-2
Figure 5-A.
Agricultural Uses.
5-7
Figure 5-B.
Vegetation Resources.
5-10
Figure 5-C.
Mineral Resource Areas in Cupertino.
5-20
Figure 5-D.
Existing and Proposed Public Open Space.
5-22
Figure 5-E.
Public Open Space in the Stevens Creek Flood Plain.
5-23
Figure 5-F.
Trail Linkages.
• 5-26
Figure 5-G.
Neighborhood Map.
5-29
Figure 5-H.
1990 Park Access Status.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN I xiii
xiv
List of Figures
•
Section 6 Public Health and Safety
6-2 Figure 6-A. Diagrams Exhibiting Faults Within the Cupertino Planning Area
Characterized By Horizontal (A) and Vertical (B) Displacements.
6-4 Figure 6-B. Apparent Intensity Map of the Cupertino Planning Areas, San Fran-
cisco Earthquake of 1906.
6-5 Figure 6-C. Hypothetical Intensity Map for a Maximum Probable Earthquake on
the Monta Vista Fault.
6-6
Figure 6-D.
Seismic and Geological Hazards.
6-7
Figure 6-E.
Cupertino Geology.
6-10
Figure 6-F.
Critical Facilities.
6-15
Figure 6-G.
Fire Service Area Boundaries.
6-19
Figure 6-H.
Water Service.
6-22
Figure 6-I.
Extent of Flooding as a Result of a "100 -Year" Flood.
6-23
Figure 6-J.
Extent of Flooding as a Result of Failure of Man -Made Water Storage
Facilities.
6-28
Figure 6-K.
Noise Contour Map.
6-31
Figure 6-L.
Land Use Compatability for Community Noise Environments.
6-32
Figure 6-M.
Equal Noise Level Contours. •
6-37
Figure 6-N.
Setback and Noise Reduction.
6-38
Figure 6-0.
Typical Structure Exposure to Noise.
6-39
Figure 6-P.
"Defensible Space" Park Design.
6-42
Figure 6-Q.
Areas Potentially Isolatable in a Seismic Emergency.
6-47
Figure 6-R.
Generalized Location of Potential Hazardous Waste Management
Sites.
Section 7 Implementation
7-2 Figure 7-A. Urban Service and Sphere of Influence.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
i
List of Tables
Section 2 Land Use/Community Character
2-7 Development Reallocation Table.
2-8 Retail Commercial Development Priorities.
2-8 Office/Industrial Development Priorities.
2-9 Residential Development Priorities.
Section 3 Housing
3-13
Number of Housing Units Needed 1990-1995.
3-14
Projected Housing Units 1990-1995.
3-15
Existing and Projected Housing Units.
•
Transportation
Section
4
4-4
Table 4-A. Traffic Service Levels.
4-5
Table 4-B. Street Hierarchy.
4-8
Table 4-C. Tiered Traffic Mitigation Program.
Section 5 Environmental Resources
5-24 Table 5-A. Park and Recreation Acreage by Neighborhood.
5-27 Table 5-B. Proposed Park Land Acquisition Program.
Section 6 Public Health and Safety
6-3
Table 6-A.
General Comparison Between Earthquake Magnitude and the Earth-
quake Effects Due to Ground Shaking.
6-4
Table 6-B.
Active and Potentially Active Faults and Their Earthquake
Characteristics.
6-8
Table 6-C.
Explanations: Geologic and Seismic Hazards Map of the Cupertino
Planning Area.
6-9
Table 6-D.
Acceptable Exposure to Risk Related to Various Land Uses.
6-11
Table 6-E.
Technical Investigations Required to Design Structures Based Upon
Acceptable Level of Risk for Various Land Use Activities.
6-27
is
Table 6-F
Sound Levels and Loudness of Illustrative Noises in Indoor and
Outdoor Environments.
6-30
Table 6-G.
Noise Exposure Index (Ldn, 60 dB and above).
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN I XV
xvl
List of Tables
Public Health and Safety (continued)
6-38 Table 6-H. Approximate Noise Reduction Achieved by Exterior of Common
Structures.
6-45 Table 6-I. Cupertino Waste Stream.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
E
OW
�-19
0
9
Section 1
Introduction
The City of Cupertino is charged with developing a set of long-range goals for the City's
physical and social development—goals that best meet the needs of its residents. This is
accomplished through a comprehensive General Plan that contains five elements: Land Use -
Community Character, Housing, Transportation, Environmental Resources and Public
Health and Safety. An Implementation section follows these elements.
A VISION FOR CUPERTINO
The General Plan foresees a future for Cupertino in which our growth
is carefully managed, thus maintaining and enhancing our quality of life,
protecting our natural heritage and ensuring long-term economic vitality.
The following details a vision for Cupertino and describes its major goals.
• A LIVABLE COMMUNITY
E
In order to create a nucleus for the community, Cupertino should fo-
cus planning and investment toward creation of a city core. That core will
serve as the physical, social and cultural center for the city. The core mani-
fests itself in the form of a revitalized retail and service sector, new restau-
rants, higher -density housing, public transit linkages along Stevens Creek
and De Anza boulevards and public open spaces -gathering areas.
The city core should facilitate social contact, provide good pedestrian and bicycle ac-
cess and foster the atmosphere for a night life. It will be an aesthetically pleasing area with
ample landscaping, lighting and street furniture. The core will be pedestrian oriented with
street level businesses, outdoor sidewalk vendors or cafe -style eateries, bicycle paths and
urban open space for key community gathering places. The core also will be a destination
area rather than a traffic thoroughfare.
Cupertino shall work with neighboring cities in partnership to find solutions to regional
housing needs. The City will actively pursue opportunities to build greater numbers and
varieties of housing that meets the needs of all Cupertino citizens, including young fami-
lies and seniors. Additionally, future housing should be affordable for Cupertino business
employees.
All new housing should meet strict design standards for landscaping and open space,
and should encourage attractive, high quality architecture, that is sensitive to the impact on
existing neighborhoods. New development in historical areas, such as Monta Vista, must
protect traditional character.
New residential development must foster neighborhoods, providing greater
opportunity for community identity and interaction within neighborhoods. New neigh -
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
1-z
Introduction
borhoods should be inviting to enter by foot and bicycle, and should not be dominated by
motor vehicle design elements.
Cupertino shall include the educational needs of its youth and consider schools as a
service of the City core. The outstanding quality of the public schools in Cupertino contrib-
utes significantly to the quality of the community. The excellence and vitality of the public
education system must, therefore, be maintained.
Preserve and Enhance Our Natural Heritage
Protecting and enhancing Cupertino's natural resources will ensure three critical goals:
1. Control urban sprawl by building more compact and transit -compatible residential and
commercial developments in the city core and along new public transit corridors.
2. Protect the ecological integrity of critical wildlife habitat and watershed lands.
3. Provide recreational opportunities for Cupertino and area residents.
•
The foothills within Cupertino's planning area are an important link in the regional
Bay Area greenbelt and the local greenbelt along the Santa Cruz Mountain range. Cupertino
shall achieve a continuous greenbelt of public and private lands to form a permanent urban
growth boundary. This greenbelt will link Stevens Creek Park, Deep Cliff Golf Course, .
McClellan Ranch Park, Blackberry Farm and Rancho San Antonio.
Cupertino shall aggressively seek state and local funds to purchase lands where needed,
and explore transfering development credits and conservation mitigation fees to some types
of developments as a means of permanently protecting valuable open space, while still pro-
tecting the rights of individual property owners.
Cupertino shall enter into a joint agreement with the County to govern the lands within
its sphere of influence. This agreement will be aimed at preserving sensitive views and
ridgelines by strengthening design guidelines and standards for hillside development. High
priority will be given to the protection of sensitive riparian and canyon areas.
For lands outside of the urban service area and within the city's sphere of influence,
Cupertino shall re -affirm its intent to maintain the County's protective hillside zoning.
Hillside or other environmentally sensitive land within the urban service area shall be zoned
and regulated appropriately. For these areas, the highest priority shall be to protect the land
in its natural condition and promote those uses which support and enhance a rural charac-
ter. Thus, important resources, such as natural vegetation, animal habitat, scenic beauty,
recreational areas, open space and public access will be preserved. Land use policy should
ensure public safety, health and welfare by avoiding development on or near areas of natu-
ral hazards or on environmentally sensitive areas, such as geologically unstable areas, wa-
tersheds, riparian corridors, wildlife habitat and community viewsheds.
Cupertino residents and others should have access and linkages to parks and open
space through bicycle paths and walkways. All new development should be evaluated to
ensure that such access and linkages to and between parks and open space is maintained. is
In order to achieve the above goals, Cupertino should not expand its urban service area
within the time frame of this General Plan.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
rI
LJ
J
Introduction
Achieve Economic Diversity and Sustainability
Cupertino strives for an economically sustainable business community. The city should
foster the development of new markets and a diversity of economic growth which will pro-
vide long term economic stability for the city. In order for businesses now located in
Cupertino to remain here in the long term, the city should allow higher density land uses in
business areas that are in close proximity to public transportation. The city should allow
reasonable growth and expansion within identified areas. The city and employers, work-
ing together, shall mitigate the adverse impacts that may accompany business expansion.
Cupertino shall continue to encourage and welcome corporate participation in com-
munity affairs, particularly in the promotion of housing and public transportation. The city
shall work with businesses to address the jobs/housing balance resulting from business ex-
pansion and job growth in Cupertino. Similarly, the city shall strengthen its commitment
to retaining a workforce necessary to sustain a healthy business climate. This will be ac-
complished by implementing policies designed to attract and retain business in Cupertino,
while encouraging responsible business growth.
At the same time Cupertino works to fos-
ter economic growth and diversity, the city must
determine an appropriate rate and amount of
growth so that growth enhances, rather than
detracts, from the quality of life. Cupertino
should define a balance of growth that benefits
the overall community.
Community Setting
Cupertino is located on the San Francisco
Peninsula. It was incorporated in 1955 and has
seen its land use shift from agriculture to homes
and industry. Cupertino was motivated to set
its original boundaries by residents who were
concerned that nearby cities' attempts to incorpo-
rate the area would submerge the community's
distinctive qualities and diminish home rule. In
this way, "community character' has been an
integral aspect of Cupertino since it was estab-
lished.
LAND FORM
Most of Cupertino is on level ground that
rises gently to the west. The incline increases
at the channel of Stevens Creek, forming a short
plateau near Foothill Boulevard. The plateau
ends at the foot of the steep Montebello system
of ridges, which extends along the west and
south edges of Cupertino, creating a dramatic
amphitheater backdrop to the valley floor.
MARIN °, 1 A`
�1
SAN
FRAN-
CISCO
II _
Italyy..
city
1 gib.+ ,Franeiseo',
\ Buy, \ j ALAMEDA
Sen MateoCiN \�
\
Fremont
�
V^ City
�Ml
r �. /Perk
Pana SAN MATEO
-0nan Pelo� `'q
�AIto�Mt. �A Mi
Cupertino \Yew _
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
�Seratoga
Gatoa
1-3
SANTA
CLARA
1-4
Introduction
BUILT FORM
Development in Cupertino from the late 1950s to the late 1960s generally concentrated
on homes. Since the mid-1970s, construction of industry has expanded dynamically. Jobs
are centered in new developments including Vallco Industrial Park, North De Anza Boule-
vard Industrial Park, City Center and the popular regional shopping mall, Vallco Fashion
Plaza. The east, north -central and central areas of town have had the newest and most in-
tensely urban development, while the southern and western areas have mostly retained a
moderate residential character and contain a greater proportion of older, well-established
neighborhoods.
GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARY OF THE PLAN
The boundaries are not simple. Figure 1-A shows the incorporated and unincorpo-
rated lands in Cupertino planning area. County lands are included because Cupertino land
use decisions affect its residents. Also, State legislation encourages cities to plan for all ar-
eas within their "sphere of influence." General Plan decisions will not legally bind people
who own property in County jurisdiction unless the property is annexed to Cupertino.
Annexation policy is explained in the Plan's Implementation Element.
Figure 1-A. Cupertino Planning Area.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
M�c�euw
ImUnincorporated Areas within
Urban Service Area
Urban Service Area Boundary
Boundary Agreement Line
•
0
•
Introduction
THE PLANNING PROCESS
There are four basic steps in developing a general plan.
1. Collecting data.
2. Developing alternative goals.
3. Evaluating alternatives.
4. Developing a plan to carry out the favored alternatives.
A high degree of public participation by residents, special interest groups and officials
is required to formulate goals. Each major General Plan revision has involved a Citizen Goals
Committee, whose recommendations are considered in the review process and largely re-
flected in the final General Plan document. The planning process must remain flexible to
allow social and economic changes beyond the control of local government. An annual Plan
review process achieves this flexibility by allowing the Planning Commission to set Plan goals
based on new information. A major overhaul of the Plan will become necessary if economic
and social changes are significant.
Evaluation
Background Goal Implemen-
`,,��111 � Data � Formulation � Akernatives � talion � II/r��,,
Feedback
''��U11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 � 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111��,,`
Figure 1-8. General Plan Process.
EXTERNAL FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE THE PLAN
The private market dominates land use. A public goal to increase stores, housing or
industry can only be carried out if the private sector will invest in the community. Com-
mercial and industrial investors will make their decisions based on factors that may or may
not be under the control of cities. For example: Commercial investors want a market analy-
sis that favors development, showing encouraging estimates of future population and house-
hold income and an acceptable level of competition from other commercial centers. The Plan
may designate a parcel of land for high-density residential use that may or may not be eco-
nomically possible because of public preferences for housing types. This explains that while
Cupertino has a great deal of control over land use, such decisions must relate realistically
to market forces. It is especially difficult for Cupertino or any other city when a desired land
use pattern may be possible in the future but not possible in the next one to five years. The
S difficulty comes because landowners may find immediate development more economical
due to taxes and possible lost income. In addition to marketplace constraints, the Plan is
heavily influenced by policies of other local governments and by actions of other govern-
mental agencies.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
1-5
1-6
Introduction
Regional agencies and local special districts are largely responsible for constraining
Cupertino's planning abilities. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District's policy of ac-
quiring significant acreage in the lower foothills next to the western City limit has set
Cupertino's growth boundary. The Cupertino Union School District Board's independent
actions on school closures also plays a major role in the City's park planning and affects the
social organization of residential neighborhoods designed around neighborhood schools.
Regionally, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Trans-
portation Commission (MTC) have prepared a joint transportation plan for Santa Clara
County. This plan influences not only future transportation methods and service levels but
also, and, therefore, the intensity of land use permitted on properties in Cupertino's juris-
diction. The Bay Conservation and Development Commission requires counties to prepare
waste water management plans that determine the location and extent of future waste dis-
posal sites. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) determines the
extent to which industry may emit pollutants into the air, thereby affecting the activities of
certain industries in Cupertino. Also BAAQMD influences all future growth, as the need
to comply with the Clean Air Act is related to the reduction of vehicle trips, or traffic.
KEY ASSUMPTIONS OF THE GENERAL PLAN
The General Plan's goals, policies and programs are based not only on the marketplace
and governmental constraints, but on key demographic, economic and social trends. Any
major changes in these trends may require the revision of the General Plan. The Plan must
be reviewed yearly because these trends often occur quickly.
•
Demographic Assumption The fertility rate, which is the number of children a woman •
will bear, decreased from about 2.1 in 1970 to about 1.62 in 1980 in the San Francisco Bay
Area. The fertility rate then increased each year thereafter, until it reached 2.09 in 1990, where
it is projected to stabilize. "Baby boom" children of the post -World War H era are rapidly
increasing the number of new households, but persons per household decreased from 2.75
in 1980 to 2.65 in 1990, according to ABAG.
Age Distribution There has been a dramatic shift in the percentages of age groups in
Cupertino between 1980 and 1990. Pre -teen and teenage populations declined while adults
and seniors increased dramatically. The median age in Cupertino was 32 years in 1980 and
increased to 36 years in 1990. Age distribution will play a major role in allocating money to
meet needs for particular age groups.
Economic Assumptions The private sector in Cupertino is dominated by high-tech
electronics and computer corporations. The City serves as a corporate headquarters and
center for research and development. Virtually no manufacturing takes place in the City,
because land and living costs are too high. Representatives of corporate businesses indi-
cate that the companies enjoy a competitive advantage by having facilities in Cupertino. This
is because highly skilled, sought-after employees prefer working and living in the Cupertino
area, with its moderate size and unique, balanced mix of high technology firms, retail cen-
ter, open space, quality schools and residential areas.
Cupertino's per capita retail sales compare very favorably with retail sales through-
out Santa County, although the gap narrowed in the late 1980s because of improvements to
nearby shopping centers.
Santa Clara County and the surrounding region is described in a 1992 study, "Joint •
Venture: Silicon Valley," as having "a number of significant warnings signs [which] indi-
cate a region out of balance. These include slower employment growth, weaker enterprise
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0 Introduction
•
formation, a decline in venture capital financing, slow growth in pre -competitive R&D, trans-
portation congestion, and a perceived decline in quality of life." In a special 1991 report on
the retail market, ABAG describes retail and wholesale trades in the 1990s as a "time of shake-
down and lean markets," partly attributable to falling disposable incomes and a weaken-
ing California and Bay Area competitive position. These observations lead to the conclusions
that economic growth is cyclical and that past economic strength is not guaranteed for the
future.
Major companies and the major retail center indicate their interest in remaining and
expanding in Cupertino. In general, job growth is expected to increase in the 1990s at a slower
rate than the 1980's. ABAG data show that job growth slightly diminished between 1980
and 1990, from 37,239 jobs in 1980 to 37,150 in 1990. Manufacturing and wholesale jobs
decreased during this period, while retail and service jobs increased. Manufacturing, which
includes research and development, is still the largest sector. ABAG's projections indicate
job increases through the 1990s and beyond. Jobs are projected to increase to 41,930 in 2000.
Balancing the City's revenues and expenditures is a factor affecting Cupertino's future.
Retail sales tax is a major contributor to Cupertino's revenues, so maintaining and attract-
ing retail business is an important goal. Assuring that new development is a financial ben-
efit to the City is also important, particularly if State funding sources decrease.
Lifestyle Trends Most Cupertino residents will continue wanting to live in single-family
homes and driving their cars, reinforcing the suburban nature of the City. But, with increas-
ing housing and land costs, and less reliance on the private automobile, along with shrink-
ing family sizes, a shift to higher -density housing and mass transit seems inevitable.
Assumptions Influencing Public Services The General Plan assumes that the western
and southern boundary of the urban service area will not be expanded in the foreseeable
future because of ownership patterns, and the City's interest in city -centered growth and
hillside protection. The Plan also assumes that there will be no major economic changes that
will significantly alter the ability of any major service provider to fulfill its function. Finally,
the Plan assumes that the City's financial mechanisms will not be limited to a point at which
City government would have severe difficulty providing essential services.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
1-7
E
0
u
Section 2
Land Use/
Community Character
Introduction
Planning how land is used within a community provides harmony among the differ-
ent uses and protects public health. Factors that must be included in this planning process
are the effects on property values, the vitality of business and manufacturing and the main-
tenance of a strong tax base for government and school operation.
This element unifies the other elements of the General Plan
Hillside
Residential
by providing an overall policy context for the other elements.
78%
The Land Use Element deals with the central issue of growth and
helps define the desired balance among the social, environmen-
tal and economic costs and benefits associated with that growth.
Commercial
4%
Residential
Community Character 5%
Office and
Cupertino has a special community character, a physical set- Industrial
ting and visual image that makes the City stand apart from its neigh- 13%
bors. This character contributes to the quality of life and sense of place enjoyed by people
who live and work here.
The goal of this element is to promote public and private efforts in maintaining and
improving Cupertino's community character. This is done by applying design policies and
principles to refine the City's image, avoiding visual contradictions that come from unguided
development and protecting irreplaceable natural resources.
Major Issues and Goals
Cupertino was incorporated in 1955; since then,
it has grown to the point that it can be considered de-
veloped. The transportation network is nearly com-
plete and the City's jurisdiction is fairly well settled.
Cupertino will expand mostly on scattered vacant
sites. This development must consider the character and
density of established neighborhoods. Other City develop-
ment is likely to occur in areas with outmoded and under-
developed land uses, which will be replaced by private
redevelopment activities. Local concerns and County and re-
gional urbanization will continue to influence decision making.
Cupertino
General
Plan
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Land Available For
Development.
(Source: 1993
Land Use Survey,
Cupertino Planning
Department)
2-1
2-2
Land Use/Community Character •
This element and its recommendations and policies are based on seven issues, each of
which will be discussed at length later in this section.
A. COMMUNITY IDENTITY
Cupertino is located in a broader urban area, the Santa Clara Valley. City bound-
aries blur unless distinguished by unusual land forms or built features. The City's
activity centers—De Anza College, Town Center/ Crossroads and Vallco Park—are
situated along Stevens Creek Boulevard. Vacant or partially developed sites along or
near Stevens Creek Boulevard represent an opportunity to create an identifiable down-
town for Cupertino.
B. REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF JOBS AND HOUSING
Jobs are concentrated in northern Santa Clara County; most homes are in south
Santa Clara County. Commute traffic congests major streets and is starting to spill over
into local streets and divide neighborhoods.
C. HOUSING DEMAND
Cupertino wants to house residents of all income levels. Expensive single-fam-
ily houses on large lots have been built by the private market at the cost of other forms
of housing. Rental and denser forms of housing may serve people whose households
and lifestyles don't fit into big, expensive houses. •
D. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
This element must balance two needs: the need to control development so it won't
overwhelm the road system and the need for a sound economic base.
E. URBAN FISCAL BALANCE
The land use mix must support public service by generating enough revenue and
the development must be arranged for efficient servicing. Fiscal zoning priorities may
clash with other community goals including providing housing for all income levels
and supplying non -emergency City services such as parks, recreation and library.
F. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Land that can be developed is in high demand. Unless there are fair but firm
restrictions to protect the public interest, health and safety, this demand threatens the
natural and visual resources of Cupertino. There are several features that are essen-
tial elements of the character of Cupertino and must be protected and preserved. Views
of the wooded hillsides of the Montebello Ridge of the Santa Cruz Mountains give the
City a green backdrop. The streamside environment of the Stevens Creek Flood Plain
and significant mature specimen trees must be considered carefully in the urban con-
text.
G. HUMAN COMFORT AND COMMUNITY DIVERSIFICATION
As traffic congestion gets worse and neighborhoods become more crowded, it's •
more important for government to protect the physical and mental health of residents
from these intrusive effects of urbanization. Social interaction and personal privacy
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
eLand Use/Community Character
in living spaces and in the City at large must be balanced. The City must also offer a
variety of educational, entertainment and cultural experiences throughout the day for
continuous community vitality.
Community Identity
The General Plan provides a blueprint for growth in Cupertino which maintains and
enhances the quality of life, protects the City's natural heritage and ensures long-term eco-
nomic vitality. This can be accomplished by creating land use controls that enhance
Cupertino's natural hillside setting, shape the built environment and provide for economic
development.
A CREATE A SENSE OF PLACE IN CUPERTINO BY ENCOURAGING A
DEVELOPMENT PATTERN THAT PROMOTES THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT
WITH UNIQUE LAND FORMS AND FEATURES THAT SATISFY THE
ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND AESTHETIC NEEDS OF ITS RESIDENTS.
Figure 2-A is an urban design overlay that establishes the fundamental direction for
this element. It defines the appearance and dominant activities of the desired land use pat-
tern. The diagram defines high-intensity nodes in Town Center and Vallco Park connected
• by lower -intensity, heavily landscaped suburban office and commercial centers. A pedes-
trian -oriented downtown, the Heart of the City, containing a mixture of land uses, is planned
on or near Stevens Creek Boulevard. The Sports Center, Memorial Park and De Anza Col-
lege campus form a green edge on the west side of Stelling Road to define the extent of of-
fice and commercial development and the transition to less intense land uses in the western
half of the City. The diagram also describes the hillside backdrop and Stevens Creek stream
corridor, both of which establish the character of the City. The design concepts are refined
in the urban design policy section.
Vallco Park and the industrial complex on North De Anza Boulevard are already in-
tensely urban. Town Center has potential for new urban activity. All three of these areas
have the potential for highly sophisticated buildings to enhance Cupertino's natural sky-
line; this will advance the long sought after goal of breaking up the current pattern of com-
mercial strip development.
Housing near major boulevards offers an opportunity to increase streetside landscap-
ing and experiment with interesting juxtapositions of architecture. Reserving space near
major streets for housing or open space says that Cupertino wants to diminish the
automobile's claim on disappearing vacant urban land and that community identity depends
on an around-the-clock population for a vital downtown. By providing for and encourag-
ing a balanced mix of land uses and intensities, the City can achieve a whole and complete
community.
■ Policy 2-1: Diversity of Land Use
Provide adequate land area for employment, housing, shopping, entertain-
ment, cultural activities, health care, personal services, recreation and open
space. Encourage mixed use development of commercial/office and housing.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-3
2-4 Land Use/Community Character 1
0
N. DeAnza Blvd. Light Vallco Light
Industrial and R&D Corridor Industrial R&D
Educational/
Conference Area
Monts Vista
Vallco /
Center
Urban Edge -
Office,
Retain Open
Shops,
Space Rural
i,.
Transition
S. Saratoga -Sunnyvale Rd.
Commercial Corridor, Low -
Intensity Commercial Office
�egena:
Vallco /
Center
Major Arterials and
Office,
Collector Streets
Shops,
FreewayalExpressways
:,.,, D
High Activity Centers
Stream Corridor
Hillside Backdrop
Figure 2-A. Urban Design Overlay.
Strategies
Commercial
Town
Vallco /
Center
Regional
Office,
Shopping,
Shops,
Office, Hotel/
Hotel
Conference
Stevens Creek Blvd. Vicinity
(Heart of the City)
Mixed Use Residential,
Office, and Commercial
High -activity commercial entertainment
uses are encouraged in Vallco Park and
Town Center. These uses shall be limited
in areas outside of the above centers.
Landscaped parkways required in the
corridors leading to the center of town.
Retain views of hillsides.
1. Regional and Shopping Node in Vallco Park. Provide a regional employ-
ment and shopping node within the Vallco Park planning area.
2. Link Public Open Space Nodes in Neighborhoods. Open space nodes
within individual neighborhoods should be linked visually and physically
to their surroundings to facilitate pedestrian and bicycle access and to help
defeat the "barrier" effect of travelways.
3. Neighborhood Retail Vitality. Encourage the economic vitality of exist-
ing neighborhood retailing uses through selective zoning of new centers,
and through careful definition of permissible uses.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
9 Land Use/Community Character
4. Encourage Diverse Evening Pursuits. Encourage diverse activities, includ-
ing evening hour services for entertainment, cultural and educational pur-
suits.
Cupertino is unusual in that it has no identifiable downtown and that most of its avail-
able commercial property is along Stevens Creek Boulevard. While Cupertino has numer-
ous amenities and activity centers, they are scattered throughout the City. There is no focal
point that creates a sense of place and serves as a source of City identity. The "Heart of the
City' concept represents a challenge to create a focal point, a downtown that reflects
Cupertino's character in a uniformly planned mixture of stores, housing and public facilities.
B CREATE A POSITIVE AND MEMORABLE IMAGE OF CUPERTINO BY
DEVELOPING A HEART OF THE CITY ON OR NEAR STEVENS CREEK
BOULEVARD AND VISUALLY AND FUNCTIONALLY LINKING THE MAJOR
ACTIVITY NODES ON STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD FROM HIGHWAY 85
TO THE EASTERN CITY LIMITS.
E Policy 2-2: Heart of the City
Coordinate the efforts of private property owners on or near Stevens Creek
Boulevard to plan and create a community focal point that expresses the
character of Cupertino through a diversity of uses, serving City residents
and scaled for pedestrians.
0 Strategies
1. Piecemeal Development along Stevens Creek Boulevard. Restrict piece-
meal development along Stevens Creek Boulevard and adjacent areas un-
til the City has adopted a specific plan for the area by means of a
broad-based, citywide planning process whereby property and business
owners, community groups and interested citizens all participate.
2. Heart of the City: Stevens Creek Boulevard Specific Plan. Prepare a Spe-
cific Plan for Stevens Creek Boulevard whose objective is to create an envi-
ronment which links activity nodes and creates a Heart of the City. The
Heart of the City represents a unique pedestrian -oriented activity center
which will be a positive and memorable gathering place for Cupertino citi-
zens. The Heart of the City shall be located on or near Stevens Creek Bou-
levard between Route 85 and the eastern City limits. The area of the heart
shall be limited to make it unique. The plan shall include the following el-
ements:
a) A land use plan specifying the type and arrangement of land uses to
promote pedestrian and business activity. Housing is strongly encour-
aged along the boulevard.
b) A design plan which provides for a pedestrian streetscape for the heart
and vehicular streetscape for the remaining sections of Stevens Creek
which link De Anza College, the Heart, City Center and Vallco Park. The
• design plan shall contain guidelines that foster pedestrian activity, a
sense of arrival and neighborhood protection.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-5
2-6
SEE POLICY 2-30
(STRATEGIES)
Land Use/Community Character •
c) A traffic management plan that examines intersection performance,
incorporates pedestrian and bicycling activities and provides for future
mass transit.
d) A detailed financing component that examines infrastructure costs and
strategies for funding.
e) A plan for park and recreation facilities.
An urban parkway to the Heart of the City should be developed to
create a sense of arrival. New development shall face the street with small
front setbacks. Median and property frontage landscaping should unify the
parkway effect.
The Crossroads intersection should be developed with a distinct sig-
nature to mark its City prominence. Such improvements may include the
siting of landmark buildings, street monuments or other public art works,
landscaping and special pavement.
Community Development
Development Regulation •
Historically, Cupertino has regulated development intensity in non-residential areas
to limit traffic congestion and control the intensity of building. This regulation was mainly
accomplished in two ways:
Floor Area Ratios (FARs): This determines buildable floor space by multiplying a
specific value (.25, .33, ...) times lot area. FARS limit only the total building area, but do not
necessarily dictate the shape or height of the structure.
Traffic Intensity Performance Standard (TIPS): This prohibits a development from
exceeding a specific vehicular trip rate. The standard limits activities to those that do not
exceed 16 one-way trips per acre.
The TIPS policy was generally applied to the North De Anza Boulevard and East
Stevens Creek Boulevard areas. Shopping centers that existed before December 1973, when
the "Core Area" General Plan amendment was passed, were exempted from the TIPS policy.
The FAR policy amendment, adopted in July 1983, was applied to all remaining commer-
cial, office and industrial zoned properties not subject to TIPS. Land -use intensity in the
Town Center area was regulated by a specific traffic generation accounting system based
on a specified combination of land uses.
Other features of the FARS and TIPS policies included the ability of private property
owners to transfer "unused" FAR or TPS to other properties with prior City approval and
allowing higher FARS for residential dwellings in non-residential areas, but not in TIPS - •
governed areas.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
J
Land Use/Community Character
These policies had numerous effects on the City. Non-residential building patterns
have typically been low profile and uniform in height, making it difficult to focus develop-
ment intensity to shape the City's built form and identity. Imbalances in commercial, of-
fice/industrial and residential development potential in relation to market demand have
resulted in under utilized commercial spaces, low office vacancies and high housing demand.
To address these issues, the development regulatory policies are revised as followed:
■ Policy 2-3: Development Reallocation
Development activity should be controlled 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. Socially beneficial development may be considered in addition to
these allocations, providing that traffic, housing and other impacts are evalu-
ated and mitigated if necessary.
Development Reallocation Table
Figure does not include 2,000,000 square feet of additional mitigated development.
This policy recognizes that a finite amount of development can take place
and still remain within the desired transportation level of service. The un-
committed development potential from less than buildout properties would
be "reallocated" to meet City development needs and goals. Development
allocations shall be made by the City in accordance with its development
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
SEE POLICY 2-22
2-7
Peak Hour
Reallocated General Trip Factor/
Land Use 1990 Committed Potential Plan 1000 sq.ft., Reallocated
Built Growth' Growth Buildout Room or DU Trips
a b c a+b+c d c'd
Retail
3,359,000 573,000 500,000 4,431,000 2.60 1,300
(sq. ft.)
Office/Ind 7,457,000 541,000 1,294,000 9,292,000" 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.
Figure does not include 2,000,000 square feet of additional mitigated development.
This policy recognizes that a finite amount of development can take place
and still remain within the desired transportation level of service. The un-
committed development potential from less than buildout properties would
be "reallocated" to meet City development needs and goals. Development
allocations shall be made by the City in accordance with its development
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
SEE POLICY 2-22
2-7
2-8
Land Use/Community Character
approval processes and the following development priorities tables. The
Development Intensity Manual will be modified to provide detailed pro-
cedures regarding development allocations.
Strategies
1. The City will modify existing Planned Development zones and area plans
and/or develop new specific plans to "freeze' building areas on each re-
tail commercial zoned or used property as of June 1, 1993. Future retail
commercial growth can 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 Priorities
SEE DEVELOPMENT
• Along or near Stevens Creek Boulevard to support the 250,000 sq. ft.
INTENSITY MANUAL
Heart of the City policy.
• Remodeling and development of major retail centers on 40,000 sq. ft.
5+ acre sites outside of the Heart of City and on major
arterial streets.
• Mixed use developments with residences outside of the 35,000 sq. ft.
Heart of the City.
• Development or revitalization of other commercial parcels. 50,000 sq. ft.
• Power Retailer (i.e. high volume discount retailer) 125,000 sq. ft.
• Full service hotel(s), appropriate location evaluated 500 rooms
at time of proposal
3. Office, Research and Development and Industrial growth listed in the De-
velopment Reallocation Table may be reallocated as follows:
Officetlndustrial Development Priorities
SEE DEVELOPMENT
• Development potential according to base FAR constraints 1,033,000 sq. ft.
INTENsrry MANUAL
and transferred development credits remains with existing
office and industrial parcels.'
• Town Center & Crossroads Corners 91,000 sq. ft.
• Measurex 20,000 sq. ft.
• Non -designated pool to be allocated based on the 150,000 sq. ft.
following priorities:
- Company with 1,500+ employees
- Company with City corporate headquarters
' Office and Industrial property owners may transfer unused development
potential from one property to another subject to prior City approval. Such
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Land Use/Community Character
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. Housing units listed in the Development Reallocation Table maybe reallo-
cated as follows:
Residential Development Priorities (See Figure 2-B)
• Residential density potential, based on existing general plan
residential land use designations, remains with existing
residential parcels.
• North De Anza Boulevard Area
• Valico Park
• • Stevens Creek Boulevard between Torre Avenue and Saich Way,
including the Town Center Planning Area
• Remainder of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Route 85 and
eastern City limits
• Bubb Road between Stevens Creek Boulevard and McClellan Road
•
516
150
500
300
200
150
• 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.
5. More refined criteria for evaluating projects which request a share of these
allocations shall be developed.
6. The square footage, room and dwelling 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
SEE DEVELOPMENT
INTENSrry MANUAL
2-10
Land Use/Community Character •
STEVENS
/ DeAnza
r College
I t
HOMESTEAD ROAD
C
� I
❑ w
City w w a \
N Hall
i w z 1
l. BOLLINGER RD
RAINBOW
PROSPECT
ROAD
Figure2-13. Housing Reallocation.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
Housing
Planning District
Units
West Stevens Creek lI
East Stevens Creek JJJ
j 200
®
North De Anza
150
®
Crossroads
300
Vallco Park
500
Bubb Road
150
Undesignated
184
Total
1,484
•
s
•
is
Land Use/Community Character
Special Planning Areas
TOWN CENTER
Function: A large-scale focal point for Cupertino in
the City's geographical and historical center.
Location: The southeast quadrant at the intersection
of De Anza and Stevens Creek Boulevards.
Development Activities: Offices, stores, entertainment
businesses, housing, cultural facilities and restaurants will be I
contained in buildings with varied form, combined with gener-
ous plazas. Mixed use buildings and government offices are
strongly encouraged. A 250 -room hotel complex has been previously
approved. Plans shall include areas for park and recreation facilities.
Town
Center
SEE 4-U-86
2-Z-83
2-11
Town Center developers are encouraged to submit development proposals which in-
SEE POLICY 2-2,
corporate, to the greatest extent possible, the maximum number of dwelling units al-
POLICY 2-25
lowed by the General Plan.
(STRATECIEs)
The maximum 45,000 sq. ft. of non-residential space designated for the site east of Torre
SEE STEVENS CREEK
Avenue shall be service oriented, professional office and/or community or local re-
BOULEVARD SPECIFIC
tailing activities.
PLAN
Building Heights: The maximum building height is defined by the City Center twin
towers. Maximum building height in other portions of this planning area is de-
fined by the heights listed in the building heights table.
Development Intensity: See development priorities tables.
VALLCO PARK
Function: Mixed use, highly urbanized regional commercial and employment
center.
Location: Area bounded by Stevens Creek Boulevard, Homestead Road, the east-
ern City limit line and the western properties fronting Wofe Road.
Development Activities: Vallco Fashion Park and the multiple -story financial center SEE 1-Z-83
are in place. A hotel complex, a conference facility
and related shops/services and additional office, it
industrial, residential and other ancillary uses may WN,a
be located in the Vallco Park Planning Area. PlansNA� g m
shall include areas for park and recreation facilities. m .m s c eB" a""
Building Heights: See building heights table.
Development Intensity: Base intensity is regulated by the fol-
lowing floor area ratios: Vallc
Office .37 FAR Park
Industrial .33 FAR= -
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-12 Land Use/Community Character •
SEE POLICY 2-25 The "Lester' property located in the northeast quadrant of Tantau Ave. and Stevens
(STRATE(IES) Creek Blvd, and the "Old Hotel Site" located in the southeast quadrant of Pruneridge Ave.
and Wolfe Road have no FAR development potential because development intensity was
transferred to other sites.
SEE STEVENs CREEK The Vallco Fashion Park regional shopping center site is allocated 535,000 sq. ft. of
BOULEVARD SPECIFIC additional mixed use commercial, office, industrial and/or hotel building space above the
PLAN 1,110,700 sq. ft. of space which existed on July 1, 1991. The precise mix of land uses shall be
determined via an approved use permit.
Tandem Computers is allocated 450,000 sq. ft. of additional office and industrial space
over and above the building areas allowed by designated FARS. The additional building area
may be allocated to areas located east of Wolfe Road, south of Pruneridge Ave., and north
of Stevens Creek Boulevard.
NORTH DE ANZA BOULEVARD
Function: Business offices and research and develop-
ment activity with some stores.
Location: Properties between Stevens Creek Boulevard
and Interstate 280 on North De Anza Boulevard.
as
Development Activities: Mixed use commercial, office,
North
industrial and residential. Plans shall include areas for •
De Anza
park and recreation facilities.
Boulevard
Building Heights: See building heights table.
SEE NORTH DE ANZA
SPECIFIC PLAN,
POLICY 2-25
Development Intensity: See development priorities
(STRATEGIES)
tables.
STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
Function: Mix of commercial retail centers and general
office buildings. Mixed use housing developments are
permitted.
Location: Stevens Creek Boulevard east of Highway
85 to the eastern City limit line.
Stevens Development Activities: Retail, offices and mixed use
Creek projects that include housing. Plans shall include ar-
Boulevard eas for park and recreation facilities.
SEE STEVENS CREEK Building Heights: 30 to 45 feet depending on distance
BOULEVARD SPECIFIC from adjacent residential neighborhoods. Taller build -
PLAN ings up fo 60 feet may be allowed at the Crossroads corners (at the intersection of De Anza
and Stevens Creek boulevards), except the southeast corner. 40
Development Intensity: Existing and zoned office uses have a base development entitlement
of .37 FAR. Commercial development requires a development allocation.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Land Use/Community Character 2-13
•
•
MONTA VISTA
Function: Monta Vista is the commercial and residential
district that predates Cupertino's incorporation. The
commercial district should serve as a commercial cen-
ter for Monta Vista and its adjoining neighborhoods.
Residential use areas should be retained and enhanced.
Location: The commercial area includes the north and south .'.._.-)
sides of Stevens Creek Boulevard from the Southern Pacific right-
of-way to Byrne Avenue and from Stevens Creek Boulevard south
to Granada Avenue and from Orange Avenue to the Southern Pacific
Railroad right-of-way.
The residential areas south of Stevens Creek Boulevard are bounded by Granada Av-
enue to the north, Byrne Avenue to the west, Imperial Avenue to the east, and
McClellan Road to the south. The residential area north of Stevens Creek Boulevard
is bounded by University Avenue to the north, Peninsula Avenue to the west, Alhambra
Avenue to the east, and Stevens Creek Boulevard to the south.
Development Activities: Mixed use commercial, office and residential on Stevens Creek
Boulevard. Balance of area is designated for a variety of residential types and densi-
ties. Refer to Area Plan inset on Land Use Map.
Building Heights: Two-story buildings with some three-story elements.
Development Intensity:
■ Policy 2-4: Land Use Intensity Regulation by FAR
Regulate land use intensity for properties described in Figure 2-C by a.33
Floor Area Ratio for industrial and office activities. Development intensity
for other non-residential use areas requires a development allocation.
0 Policy 2-5: Commercial Blight and Noise Intrusion
Work to ensure that blight and noise from commercial and industrial uses
do not intrude upon residential neighborhoods.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Monte
Vista
SEE MONTA VISTA
DESIGN GUIDELINES,
CITY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE 1270
(SOUTH OF STEVENS
CREEK BOULEVARD)
AND CITY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE No. 933
(PENINSULA AVENUE
AREA)
SEE POLICY 2-19,
POLICY 2-35
2-14
Comments:
The commercial district
is within the City lim-
its; the residential dis-
trict contains County
islands. Because the
jurisdiction is mixed
and them is desire to
retain the historical
atmosphere, the City
developed the Monta
Vista Design Guide-
lines which contain
explicit development
standards to carry out
this general policy
framework.
Land Use/Community Character
Monta Vista
Planning Are
M
BLVD.
Boundary Line Describing Area Where Commercial Activities Can
Occupy Office Buildings Constructed Based Upon a .33 Floor Area Ratio.
Retail Commercial Activity Requires a Development Allocation.
Boundary of Area Where Property Owners Can Obtain Credit for
On -Street Parking for Commercial Activities.
Refer to Land Use map diagram for special land use for old
"Monts Vista Hardware Site."
Figure 2-C. Monta Vista Land Use Intensity.
. Policy 2-6: Interconnected Access, Shared Parking of Individual Properties
Ensure that individual properties developed independently of surrounding
sites have interconnected pedestrian and vehicle access and shared parking.
M Policy 2-7: Housing Units Removed Under Eminent Domain
Require that housing units removed under eminent domain proceedings be
replaced on a one-for-one basis within the same geographical area and that
the people who were displaced can afford the units.
■ Policy 2-8: Architectural Barriers
Eliminate architectural barriers to pedestrian mobility.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
C�
•
• Land Use/Community Character
■ Policy 2-9: Residential Street Improvements
Maintain a semi -rural appearance with residential street improvements.
■ Policy 2-10: Neighborhood Landscaping
Preserve existing neighborhood landscaping features during redevelop-
ment. Emphasize on-site parking instead of street frontage parking.
0 Policy 2-11: Mixed -Use Development
Allow mixed-use development within the area bounded by Granada Av-
enue, Stevens Creek Blvd., Orange Avenue and the SP right of way to rely
on public parking on Pasadena and Imperial avenues to meet the off-street
parking needs for the commercial part of the project.
■ Policy 2-12: Storefront Appearances
Require commercial and office structures to exhibit a traditional storefront
appearance to the public street. Require buildings intended initially for
office use to be designed to accommodate future entrances from the side-
walk for retail shops. Do not permit the building to be separated from the
public sidewalk by extensive landscaping or changes in elevation.
• MERRIMAN AND SANTA LUCIA ROADS
E
Function: The area, subdivided in 1917, has du-
plexes and single-family homes. To recognize
standing viable duplexes, legally constructed du-
plexes may remain in the section of the planning
area that is planned for up to five units per acre and
will be rezoned to a duplex zoning district.
Location: Bounded by Santa Lucia Road, Alcalde Road,
and Foothill Boulevard.
BALANCE OF COMMERCIAL, OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS
Building Heights: Two stories, with some parts of buildings as high as three stories,
if the additional height can be found to add diversity and interest to the structure and
does not hurt surrounding land uses, especially residential districts.
Development Activities: Refer to Land Use Map.
Development Intensity: See development priorities tables and .33 FAR for office, and
.33 FAR for industrial.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-15
Merriman and
Santa Lucia
Roads
SEE DEVELOPMENT
INTENSITY MANUAL
2-16
Land Use/Community Character
Housing
Cupertino, like most cities, is organized into neighborhoods. Some neighborhoods have
a large variety of activities and others have fewer. Any neighborhood must be planned
carefully to be sure that its residents live safely and comfortably and that their property
investment is protected to a reasonable degree.
The choice of a home is as much an emotional as a financial investment. When people
feel they are part of their neighborhoods, and responsible to their neighbors, cooperative
relationships can flourish. Neighbors can help watch children at play and help protect prop-
erty against burglary and other crime. Property owners may also be encouraged to con-
tinue to maintain their homes to a high standard.
C ENHANCE AND PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF RESIDENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOODS.
HOUSING VARIETY
The private housing market is now geared to big, expensive homes on large lots to the
exclusion of higher -density housing. Since available housing dictates who moves into a city,
this trend will discourage households with different Lifestyles from living in Cupertino and
adding to its vitality.
Cupertino encourages a variety of housing types. People with low or moderate incomes
can be excluded from living in Cupertino when there is no suitable housing. These include
the elderly, the handicapped, newly formed households and students.
Current zoning regulations perpetuate the single-family detached house. However,
skilled designers can fit more intense residential buildings into scattered, empty lots with-
out harming the single-family neighborhood appearance.
0 Policy 2-13: Full Range of Housing Opportunities
Provide for a full range of ownership and rental housing unit densities, in-
cluding apartments and other high-density housing.
Strategies
1. Conversion of Commercial Lands to Residential. Encourage conversion
of commercially designated land to residential, subject to consideration of
design and existing neighborhood character and municipal services and
utilities.
2. Residential Property Development At Upper Limits. Require develop-
ment of residential properties at the upper limit of the permitted dwelling
unit intensity range if the neighborhoods are adequately protected from
noise, traffic, light and visually intrusive effects from the development.
3. Residential 'Development Exceeding Maximums. Allow residential de-
velopments to exceed planned density maximums if they meet a special
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
•
• Land Use/Community Character
0
community social goal and the increase in density will not overload neigh-
borhood streets or hurt neighborhood character.
0 Policy 2-14: Housing with Other Development
Consider housing along with non-residential development, permitting it in
addition to the non-residential development.
0 Policy 2-15: Scale of Residential Development
Ensure that the scale and density of new residential development and re-
modeling is reasonably compatible with the City's predominant single-fam-
ily residential pattern, except in areas designated for higher density housing.
Strategies
1. Residential Development Compatibility With Neighborhood. Develop-
ment intensity may be reduced below the minimum in the land use diagram
if neighborhood compatibility standards cannot be met.
2. Reduction of Building's Apparent Size. Keep visual intrusion into estab-
lished neighborhoods to a minimum and reduce the apparent size of the
building by using different land levels.
3. Neighborhood Compatibility Work Program. Staff shall work with the
Planning Commission to develop additional residential zoning and subdi-
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-17
2-18
SEE POLICY 2-35,
POLtciEs 4-6 AND 4-7
Land Use/Community Character •
vision controls to protect neighborhood character from incompatible new
residential construction. Possible tools include height limitations and an
indexed floor area ratio (FAR).
0 Policy 2-16: Compatibility of Lot Sizes
Ensure that zoning requests related to lot size consider the need to preserve
neighborhood land use patterns.
Strategy
Increase the minimum lot size if the proposed new subdivided lot size is
smaller than and not compatible with surrounding neighborhood.
M Policy 2-17: Housing Variation in the Urban Core
Encourage variations from the regulations of the zoning district for prop-
erties in the urban core area in housing type and increased density, mak-
ing sure that the development is consistent with the visual character of
surrounding buildings.
PRIVACY
A successful residential environment should give people a chance to socialize when
they choose to and space to be alone, both inside and outside the home. City attention to is
privacy consideration during the development approval process can go a long way to set
homesites apart from each other. Complete privacy is not possible in a city and people must
balance the need for isolation and the need to live within an urbanized area.
M Policy 2-18: Privacy in Site Design
Ensure that the site design for a residential project has private indoor and
outdoor spaces for each unit and common outdoor recreation space.
Policy 2-19: Neighborhood
Protection
Protect residential neighbor-
hoods from noise, traffic, light
and visually intrusive effects
from more intense develop-
ments with adequate buffering
setbacks, landscaping, walls, ac-
tivity limitations, site design and
other appropriate measures.
Strategy
For each planning area, create
zoning or specific plans that
consider the following measures
to reduce incompatibilities be -
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Lesser Separation
6'-
• Land Use/Community Character
•
Wing Wall
Fixed Shutters
� View
View
DenseFixed
Planting , Shutters
Privacy Controls
tween new development and existing residential neighborhoods: daylight
planes, minimum setback standards, landscape screening, acoustical analy-
sis, location and orientation of service areas away from residential uses and
limitations on hours of operation.
■ Policy 2-20: Minimizing Privacy Intrusion
Keep the sights and sounds of the neighbors from intruding on residents.
Techniques can include greater building setbacks, wing walls, window
shut-ters and non -transparent glass.
NEIGHBORHOOD AWARENESS
Burglary, vandalism, and other crimes occur in all neighborhoods. Investigating and
solving crimes is the job of the police; crime prevention is everyone's job. Design of new
buildings must include security measures, so that the people living or working there will
feel safe and so police won't have to respond to so many calls. Building design and place-
ment should let neighbors watch each other's properties and children's play areas.
■ Policy 2-21: Designing for Security
Use design techniques in new development and rehabilitation to increase
security and personal safety and to increase neighborhood awareness.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-19
SEE POLICY 6-39
2-20
SEE POLICY 4-3,
POLICIES 3-24 To 3-38
Land Use/Community Character
Balancing land use intensity against the traffic -carrying capacity of the street network
is a major emphasis of the City's land use policy. The policy, however, must also consider
the economic health of the community and find ways to encourage redevelopment of older
retail centers, as well as provide for the growth of the City's major employers. The devel-
opment priorities tables already provide an allocation of square footage to meet the needs
of small scale redevelopment and revitalization projects. The major employers, however,
have long term growth needs that must be reconciled with other City goals.
The objective of the development allocation policies is to ensure that desired develop-
ment will not overtax the transportation system. If an existing firm or property owner has
the ability to reduce the traffic generation of existing and future employees, or can cause an
increase in the roadway and/or transit capacity, the firm or property owner may increase
development potential beyond that allowed by FARs, approved TIPS credits or reallocated
space. The ability to expand beyond limits described above must also be based upon a find-
ing that the expanded project meets broad community goals.
0 Policy 2-22: Additional Mitigated Development
Development in addition to the stated development allocations may be
permitted if the development conforms to the transportation and housing
goals, promotes a positive civic image and provides sufficient economic
benefit to the City. This additional development should provide a land use
mix which results in sufficient financial return to the City, allowing it to
provide amenities to offset the negative aspects of increased growth. Pos-
sible mechanisms to ensure economic benefit include:
• redevelopment
• increased retail sales
• development fees
• new taxes and fees
• location of sales office in Cupertino
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
C
•
• Land Use/Community Character
Such additional development is capped at a maximum of 2,000,000 square
feet above the General Plan level.
The housing and transportation goals for additional mitigated development
are specified in the Housing and Transportation elements of this General
Plan. The overall objectives of this policy are: the protection of the commu-
nity from excessive automotive traffic and the noise and air pollution that
traffic generates; the creation of additional housing to alleviate housing
demand; and the promotion of economic development. The intent of this
policy is to provide development opportunities for major employers. The
2,000,000 square feet will be allocated to Apple Computer, Hewlett-Packard
and Tandem Computers accordingly:
Apple Computers 558,000
Hewlett-Packard 652,000
Tandem Computers 790,000
0 Policy 2-23: Monitoring for Over -Saturation
Continue to monitor development activity, fiscal effects and development
rates to avoid short-term over -saturation of the market.
The City's goal to achieve a balanced community is enhanced by the development and
operation of conference facilities to be located in a core area business and office center.
Conference facilities would:
1. Provide a meeting and gathering space for official functions that would otherwise be
held outside Cupertino.
2. Provide meeting and support services for corporations which are headquartered in the
City.
3. Strengthen the viability of a full service hotel, which in tum would provide fiscal ben-
efits to the City.
■ Policy 2-24: Conference Facilities
The City may enter into a relationship with a hotel/ conference facilities
developer to encourage such a center.
Urban Design
The Community Identity section of this Element outlined the urban design strategy
for the City. This section provides more specific guidance on the community's urban de-
sign expectations. Past planning has encouraged the development of attractive and inter-
esting environments that are sensitive to adjacent land uses. As the city matures, design
expectations will evolve. Current design policies will challenge the community to develop
the cohesive designs that create livable outdoor spaces and instill a sense of civic identity.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-21
REFER TO "TIER 2"
AND THE "HOUSING
MITIGATION PLAN"
FOR A DETAILED
DESCRIPTION OF
REQUIREMENTS TO
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF
ADDITIONAL MITI-
GATED DEVELOPMENT
Land Use/Community Character
0 Policy 2-25: Urban Focal Points
Intensify the focus of 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
1. 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 intrusion or be overwhelmed by
the scale of a building or group of buildings.
i I HOMESTEAD II ROAD
�� O
m
z
j w
m N I-
J // P m
p'1 STEVENS p
p CREEK BLVD l
LL
DeAnzo
College
0
a
M
m
m
ry m
30 Feet
lRAINBOW ® 30-45 Feet
DRIVE
L\ 45 Feet
\ \
PROSPECT ® 60 Feet
ROAD
60 / 75 Feet
I 120 Feet
Figure 2-D. Maximum Building Heights.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Residential setback
to be determined
•
L-1
•
a
COY w
o
Jm Null ¢
w
w
>
a
¢
z
J
J_
r
m
on
Residential setback
to be determined
•
L-1
•
0
Land Use/Community Character
2. Maximum Building Heights. The maximum height for new buildings in
Portions of planning areas abutting residential areas are subject to a 45 -foot
maximum height limit in addition to other measures to mitigate visual in-
trusion. The 45 -foot height area, as well as other areas, are graphically de-
scribed in the building heights map. In the Town Center, the maximum
existing building height is defined 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 (File 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 define 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.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-23
various planning areas is specified below:
Planning Areas
Maximum
Building Height
(Top of Parapet)
Typical Landmark
Town Center
Area west of Torre Ave. and north of Rodrigues
60' 75'
Area east of Torre Avenue
30' N/A
Southeast corner of Stevens Creek and De Anza
Remain as is, no
obstructed view of towers
Crossroads Corners (NW,NE,SW Corners)
60' N/A
Stevens Creek Blvd. (Stelling Rd. to east City limits)
30'-45' N/A
depending on distance
to residential
Vallco Park
Area facing freeway, west of Tantau Ave.
120' N/A
•
East side of Wolfe Road from
60' N/A
Highway 280 to Vallco Parkway
North Stevens Creek Boulevard Frontage
45' N/A
Remainder of Vallco area
60' 75'
North De Anza Blvd.
Area west of Bandley Drive and its northern
45' N/A
extension
East property frontage of North De Anza Blvd.
60' 75'
between Mariani Avenue and Highway 280
Remainder of North De Anza Blvd.
60' N/A
Portions of planning areas abutting residential areas are subject to a 45 -foot
maximum height limit in addition to other measures to mitigate visual in-
trusion. The 45 -foot height area, as well as other areas, are graphically de-
scribed in the building heights map. In the Town Center, the maximum
existing building height is defined 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 (File 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 define 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.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-23
2-2a
SEE POLICY 2-2
Land Use/Community Character
Landmark buildings are buildings of prominent community stature that
incorporate uses, activities and spaces encouraging public gatherings and
uses. To qualify as landmark buildings, proposed projects should be of very
high quality 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 per-
forming arts centers.
c) Inclusion of ground level, outdoor public gathering places that feature
pedestrian amenities and public art.
d) Inclusion of uses that promote social gatherings and interaction, such
as restaurants or entertainment activities.
Rooftop mechanical equipment and utility structures may exceed stipulated
height limitations if they are enclosed, centrally located on the roof and not
visible from the adjacent streets.
The zoning code shall be reviewed and revised as necessary to implement
these General Plan height policies.
3. Vallco Park Focal Point. To better integrate the Vallco Park Fashion Mall •
with the surrounding community and emphasize its role as a focal point,
encourage any new retail development at Vallco Park, south of Highway
280, to provide outdoor shopping experiences in continuity with the present
indoor shopping. New office development should also provide outdoor and
pedestrian -oriented designs. To achieve this, development review should
consider:
a. Active retail uses facing the street or outdoor pedestrian corridor with
appropriate connections to the interior mall shopping activity.
b. Parking designed and sited to avoid creating pedestrian barriers and
shopping islands.
c. Buildings sited to develop a strong street presence.
d. Projects including pedestrian amenities: landscaping, furniture, foun-
tains, canopies, special paving materials and other features to enhance
pedestrian activity.
Building Form and Scale
Cupertino encourages variation in form, scale and intensity of building activity. Ar-
eas of high-intensity development offer the greatest opportunity for innovations in construc-
tion and the City encourages creative approaches to large-scale site planning. •
The size, color, material and design of buildings—and the placement on their sites—
result in a cumulative design statement that shapes the image of the City. Figure 2-A de -
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
Land Use/Community Character 2-25
scribes the two high-intensity nodes at Town Center and Vallco Park. The links between
Town Center, Vallco and other activity centers in the City must be weighed along with a
consideration of the design relationship between various use types. The City does not im-
pose a specific architectural style; it seeks a variety of building forms and materials.
Cupertino stresses the need to establish design harmony between differing uses, for example,
between commercial and residential.
D ENCOURAGE A DEVELOPMENT PATTERN FOR THE COMMUNITY THAT ^A TI
WILL PROMOTE A VARIETY OF SCALE AND FORMALITY IN BUILDINGS ��"�,J ll.e
AND THAT WILL FACILITATE ACCESS TO ALL PARTS OF THE
COMMUNITY BY ALL SEGMENTS OF THE POPULATION.
. Policy 2-26: On -Site Environments
Emphasize attractive, on-site environments during the development review
process by giving careful attention to building scale and mass, landscap-
ing, placement, screening of equipment and loading areas and related de-
sign considerations.
Strategies
1. Low -Profile Building Heights. Ensure that building height reflects
Cupertino's low -profile design. Consider buildings taller than two stories
in locations that are already urban in character or where otherwise speci-
fied.
2. Monotonous and Monolithic Building Appearance. Through the City's
development review process, encourage sensitive design and site planning
that avoids monotonous and monolithic buildings. Design and site plan-
ning techniques should include articulation and segmentation of the wall
and roof planes, pedestrian -scaled building details, visual openings in the
wall plane, smaller building footprints, appropriate building and story set-
backs and hierarchical landscaping. If the project has many buildings, they
should be grouped to create a feeling of spatial unity. Multi -Story
Commercial
3. Parking Placement in New Development. Encourage develop-
ers of commercial, office or industrial sites to look into underground
parking or consider placing the building above ground -level park-
ing. Review the design of the below -level parking facilities with the
City's police agency to minimize crime potential.
4. Development Review. In the City's development review process for ma-
jor projects, require:
• computer simulated modeling and photomontage of development pro-
posals
• architectural review by a City staff or consulting architect. A separate
architectural review fee should be charged in addition to standard ap-
plication fees.
5. Design Guidelines. Consider developing thematic architectural design
guidelines for different areas in the City.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Underground
Parking
2-26 Land Use/Community Character •
Generally, abrupt changes in building scale should be avoided. A more gradual tran-
sition between buildings of one and two stories and low-rise to mid -rise buildings should
be achieved by using three-story and four-story buildings at the edge of the project site.
Provide Transition Between Low Buildings and
Mid- and High -Rise Structures
al7'r
Preferred Avoid
■ Policy 2-27: Public Open Space Development
SEE POLICY 5-53 Encourage development of residential and public open spaces on lands next
to major streets to give a balanced variety of land uses, to increase the hous-
ing supply and to break current or potential strip development patterns.
Streetscape
Cupertino's streets heavily influence the City's form and the lifestyles of people who •
live here. Streets can form neighborhood boundaries and add to the sense of community,
but they can also compartmentalize and cut off other areas, causing isolation.
Streets become barriers when they are difficult to cross, thus closing off one neighbor-
hood from another. According to studies, speed, even more than the volume of traffic, greatly
influences the activities of people who live nearby. Families with young children want to
live somewhere else and people who do live near major streets often decide not to have pets
because of traffic dangers.
* " r Because of past decisions
and the growth of neighboring
cities, Cupertino is cross -di-
' vided by a grid of major streets
with a high-volume carrying
prz� III capacity to accommodate
a*,
through commute traffic. The
gyp, roadway network is probably
the most serious threat to the
i- integrity of Cupertino's com-
munity character. Traffic dan-
ger,odor, noise and the
stacking effect of cars at peak
times disrupt activities along
the streets. Taken to extremes,
the major streets could turn
Cupertino into a random col-
lection of individual neighbor -
4 hoods.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0
Land Use/Community Character
A city designed around automobiles works and looks entirely differently from one built
for a variety of transportation. People who live in a city designed for cars don't have much
opportunity to use other forms of transportation.
Street improvement design is guided by these standards:
a. Ensure that De Anza Boulevard leading to the center of Cupertino remains park -like
through 50 -foot landscaped parkways, landscaped medians and abundant on-site land-
scaping.
b. Limit entrances and exits to properties to avoid disrupting landscaped continuity and
traffic flow.
C. Provide on-site coordination of driveways and parking aisles to allow access to sec-
ondary streets and traffic signals and to keep disruption of traffic flow to a minimum.
d. Hide off-street parking from public view as much as possible. Determine the required
number of off-street parking spaces for multiple -story projects in the Core Area along
with specific development proposals.
People notice when they are in a different city by looking at its streets. Cupertino can
distinguish itself from the outlying fringes of Sunnyvale and San Jose by avoiding the strip
development—an unbroken continuity of commercial and office buildings with intense
daytime activity where the automobile is king.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-27
SEE POLICY 2-32
SEE POLICY 2-29
2-28 Land Use/Community Character 0
_. rnior -
CUPERr1Np
Strategies
Gateways
Gateways are important in creating a
memorable impression of a city, often us-
ing formal elements -arches, fountains, ban-
ners or landscaping. Gateways may also be
dramatic without constructed devices and
are not always found at the city limits. For
example, the street overcrossing at
Lawrence Expressway and Stevens Creek
Boulevard is a definite gateway to the east
edge of Cupertino, even though the
overcrossing is not in Cupertino.
■ Policy 2-28: Community
Gateways
Review properties next to com-
munity entry points when they
are developed or redeveloped
to reflect the gateway concept.
Large numbers of curb cuts can im-
pede traffic flow on busy streets as drivers
enter travel lanes indiscriminately. Land-
scaping themes along the street frontage
maintain a stronger visual continuity with
fewer curb cuts.
0 Policy 2-29: Curb Cuts
Minimize the number of drive-
way openings, or curb cuts, in
each development.
SEE POLICY 45 1. Shared Driveway Access. Encourage property owners to use shared drive-
way access and interconnected roads on specific properties where feasible.
Require driveway access closures, consolidations or both when a non-resi-
dential site is remodeled.
2. Direct Access From Secondary Streets. Encourage owners of property with
frontages on major and secondary streets to provide direct access to drive-
ways from the secondary street.
3. Temporary Curb Cuts On Non -Residential Sites. Permit temporary curb
cuts on a non-residential site subject to the City finding that the opening is
necessary for public safety. These temporary openings may be closed and
access to the driveway made available from other driveways when sur-
rounding properties are developed or redeveloped.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
9
Sita A Cit. R
■ Policy 2-30: Street Improvement Planning
Land Use/Community Character
Two -Frontage Site
Access
From
m
Secondary � (TT7f711-j
Street
Only z. 1I11jIij w;
m
Major Street
Plan street improvements such as curb cuts, sidewalks, bus stop turnouts,
bus shelters, light poles, benches and trash containers as an integral part of
a project to ensure safe movement of people and vehicles with the least
possible disruption to the streetscape.
Strategies
1. Sidewalk Access to Parking or Buildings. Examine sidewalk access to
parking areas or building frontages at the time individual sites develop to
40 regulate entry to the site at a central point. Sidewalks should generally be
no wider than five feet, except in the Heart of the City where increased
pedestrian activity necessitates wider walkways.
2. Bus Stop Turnouts in Street Frontages. Require bus stop turnouts, or par-
tial turnouts, within the street frontage of a new or redeveloping site. This
could contain benches and trash containers for the comfort of people wait-
ing for a bus. Follow Santa Clara County Transit District specifications for
improving bus stops.
■ Policy 2-31: Parking Area Layout
Include clearly defined spaces for pedestrians in parking lots so that foot
traffic is separated from the hazards of car traffic and people are directed
from their cars to building entries.
Store
pShade Along Path
Entry•1■ G
_ „•�,
foil
.IIIIIWI11011AUUnnlAmuuua�e;;t�rsr,:sauxunl�j
Is
JMinimum
5 Ft. Wide
Pedestrian Path
B
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
SEE POLICY 2-2
2-29
Strategies
k,
Urban Scenic Corridors
Hoping to lessen the visual disruption
of Cupertino's image caused by the City's two
major boulevards, the City Council requires
an extensive landscape setback next to De
Anza Boulevard from Stevens Creek Boule-
vard to Route 280. This will lead the observer
to or from the pedestrian -scale shopping en-
vironment of Town Center through an in-
tensely planted parkway that motorists
driving cars can enjoy.
■ Policy 2-32: Boulevard Landscaping
Setback
Require properties fronting North De
Anza Boulevard to provide a land-
scaped front setback of 50 feet from the
face of the curb, excluding parking lots.
1. Reduction of Landscaping Width. Consider reducing the 50 -foot width
according to the size of the project frontage and the scale and the type of
the proposed development.
2. Views of Plantings From Passing Cars. Select and arrange plantings so
that they can be viewed by people driving cars.
. Policy 2-33: Roadway Design to Offset Barriers
Encourage using design techniques and development controls to offset the
divisive barrier effects of major roadways.
Strategies
1. Small Buildings Near Residences. Build smaller buildings on land next
to streets that lead to residential neighborhoods.
2. Crosswalk Marking and "Chokers." Mark crosswalks with pavement
treatment scaled to the speed of the street and use "chokers" to narrow the
street crossing.
3. Parkway Setback and Town Center. Do not allow the parkway setback to
extend into the Crossroads intersection commercial district or into the fu-
ture commercial development in Town Center.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0
•
Urban Scenic Corridors
Hoping to lessen the visual disruption
of Cupertino's image caused by the City's two
major boulevards, the City Council requires
an extensive landscape setback next to De
Anza Boulevard from Stevens Creek Boule-
vard to Route 280. This will lead the observer
to or from the pedestrian -scale shopping en-
vironment of Town Center through an in-
tensely planted parkway that motorists
driving cars can enjoy.
■ Policy 2-32: Boulevard Landscaping
Setback
Require properties fronting North De
Anza Boulevard to provide a land-
scaped front setback of 50 feet from the
face of the curb, excluding parking lots.
1. Reduction of Landscaping Width. Consider reducing the 50 -foot width
according to the size of the project frontage and the scale and the type of
the proposed development.
2. Views of Plantings From Passing Cars. Select and arrange plantings so
that they can be viewed by people driving cars.
. Policy 2-33: Roadway Design to Offset Barriers
Encourage using design techniques and development controls to offset the
divisive barrier effects of major roadways.
Strategies
1. Small Buildings Near Residences. Build smaller buildings on land next
to streets that lead to residential neighborhoods.
2. Crosswalk Marking and "Chokers." Mark crosswalks with pavement
treatment scaled to the speed of the street and use "chokers" to narrow the
street crossing.
3. Parkway Setback and Town Center. Do not allow the parkway setback to
extend into the Crossroads intersection commercial district or into the fu-
ture commercial development in Town Center.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0
•
is
Land Use/Community Character
Sign Control
In order to keep its streets attractive, Cupertino rejects the modem merchandising tech-
nique of directing business signs at drivers frequently and from as far away as possible. The
City is also de-emphasizing commercial strip development. So, business signs visible from
the streets are limited to those necessary to identify a business site, rather than to advertise
from afar. This sign control also connects the Vallco-North De Anza Boulevard -Town Cen-
ter areas along the City's major streets by keeping sign disruption to a minimum.
Rural Scenic Highways
Most of the significant rural roads are outside City
jurisdiction and are covered by the County Scenic High-
way Preservation Policy. Montebello and Stevens Can-
yon Roads in the western foothills and the upper segment
of Regnart Road at the south edge of the City are among
these streets. The scenic integrity of these rural roads can
be protected by significant frontage setbacks, reduced
right-of-way and reduced carrying capacity, while still
permitting adequate public access to their unique beau-
ties.
2-31
SEE SIGN ORDINANCE
Neighborhood Entries
Well-defined entrances are essential to neighbor-
hoods. They aid public safety because drivers are likely
to slow down and pay closer attention when they know
they are entering a residential area. A gateway that is
appropriately styled and in keeping with neighborhood
scale can help residents feel a part of the neighborhood.
. Policy 2-34: Neighborhood Gateways
Define neighborhood entries through architecture, landscaping, or land
forms appropriate to the formal or rural character of the neighborhood.
Discourage electronic security gates, walls and fences because these isolate
individual developments.
Strategy
Standing Housing and New Development. Identify standing housing
groups while the area is being redeveloped so that they can be enhanced
by modifying the street pattern, the street landscaping or by other tech-
niques.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-32
SEE POLICY 4-7
Land Use/Community Character •
Traffic Intrusion
Cars intrude into local neighborhood streets at peak traffic hours from Cupertino's
many major boulevards and streets. There are several ways to minimize this intrusion, in-
cluding building streets so that they connect circuitously, rather than directly, to major
streets; using street "diverters" that direct or eliminate turns; and allowing variations in
pavement width to discourage speeding and emphasize crosswalks.
E Policy 2-35: Neighborhood Traffic Pattern Investigation
Investigate neighborhood traffic patterns comprehensively and find solu-
tions to protect neighborhood streets from through -traffic spillover.
Environmental Managemi
E PROTECT THE
ENVIRONMENT AND THE
PERSONAL SAFETY OF THE
CITY'S RESIDENTS.
It is necessary to respect irreplaceable natural assets which define community charac-
ter. Sometimes, careful design controls can cause buildings to complement and enhance the
natural terrain. For example, the landmark Maryknoll Seminary is situated on a prominent
ridgeline and accents the wooded setting. In other cases, such as in the Stevens Creek Flood
Plain, the land's natural plants should be left undisturbed as a break in the urban pattern.
Preserving the Hillsides
Cupertino's hillsides are an irreplaceable resource shared by the entire Santa Clara
Valley. Building a low -intensity residential development in the foothills would give the
I
Land Use/Community Character
towners of these houses an interest in preserving the natural environment. This kind of de-
velopment would be limited to high-income households; this is in compliance with the broad
goal of providing housing opportunities to all economic segments of the community.
Cupertino is trading off housing opportunity for low-income and moderate -income house-
holds for the preservation of a natural resource that benefits the region.
E Policy 2-36: Foothill Development
Apply a slope -density formula to very low -intensity residential develop-
ment in the hillsides. Density shall be calculated based on the foothill modi-
fied, foothill modified 1/2 acre, and the 5-20 acre slope density formulae.
Actual lot sizes and development areas will be determined through zoning
ordinances, clustering and identification of significant natural features.
0 Policy 2-37: Special Hillside Protection Area
The 5-20 acre slope density designation shall provide special hillside pro-
tection to form a continuous open space/very low density buffer west of
the existing urban/suburban development pattern. The area shall include
the Kaiser property, the Diocese property, Regnart Canyon area, Inspira-
tion Heights area and other similar properties.
■ Policy 2-38: Previously Designated Very Low Density: Semi -Rural 5 -Acre
• Properties previously designated Very Low -Density Residential: Semi -
Rural 5 -Acre Slope Density Formula as described in the amendment to the
1976 General Plan concerning the land use element for the hillside area may
be subdivided utilizing that formula. Properties previously subdivided in
conformance with the Very Low -Density Residential: Semi -Rural 5 -Acre
Slope Density Formula have no further subdivision potential for residen-
tial purposes.
■ Policy 2-39: Rezoning in Inspiration Heights
Rezone the shaded area shown in Figure 2-E from R1-10 to RHS.
Policy 2-40: Existing legal lots in foothill modified and foothill modified 1/2
acre slope density designations.
Existing, vacant legal lots are not considered buildable in the foothill modi-
fied and foothill modified 1/2 acre slope density designations if they are
substandard in lot size. They are also considered unbuildable if develop-
ment is proposed on slopes greater than 30%, or on any other areas where
studies have determined the presence of health and safety problems; this
also applies to lots in any R-1 zoning district in the City. An exception pro-
cess will be created for an applicant to seek discretionary approval for an
unbuildable parcel.
Over 200 acres of vacant land exist on the Diocese property in the western area of
• Cupertino. It is partially bordered by County park and Midpeninsula Open Space District
lands, and contains such natural features as a riparian corridor, steep, wooded slopes and
visually sensitive open lands. Most of the land is subject to Williamson Act contract. While
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-33
SEE "SLOPE DENSITY`
DOCUMENT
PREVIOUS POLICY
2-38 REGARDING
HILLSIDE PARCEL
CONSOLIDATION WAS
DELETED BY COUN-
CIL RESO. 9051.
CURRENT POLICY
ADOPTED ON MARCH
7,1994,13Y COUNCIL
REso. No. 9050.
2-34
Land Use/Community Character
TERMINATION OF I
L
�ALCALDE ROAD l ALCALDE ROAD
O
S POP
Rezone Area from �5 D
v R1-10 to RHS Qo�D o = N
o a o LJ
� 0
L W
9 �
CO 9
9
o��0 90
yPa'P 'o 0
J
i
PORTOIA ROADS 2
OP �O %
�tiOP S� W
�G�Q? h RryERS�pE'
Pito
RO'10
Figure2-E. Hypothetical Development Plan for Inspiration Heights.
park purchase of the property is a top priority, should future development be proposed, the
following policy shall apply.
0 Policy 2-41: Diocese Property Protection
Apply all hillside protection policies to the Diocese Property, and specifi-
cally protect the prominent knoll on the northeast side of the property and
the steep, wooded southwest corner of the property.
E Policy 2-42: Urban Service Area Boundaries
The current urban service area shall not be expanded. The intent of this
policy is to limit future development to lands within the existing urban ser-
vice area.
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE, Tr I ■ Policy 2-43: Clustering Development in Major Subdivisions
Lots in major subdivisions in the 5-20 acre slope density designation shall
be clustered, reserving 90% of the land in private open space to protect the
unique characteristics of the hillsides from adverse environmental impacts.
The project shall keep the open space area contiguous as much as possible.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
E
is
• Land Use/Community Character
Strategy
Change the Municipal Code to include this requirement. Require that sig-
nificant natural features, such as vegetation, slopes over 30%, creeks and
water courses, faults, landslides and prominent ridgelines be shown so that
the area for clustered development can be determined. Require an open
space easement or an open space zoning district on the 90% undeveloped area.
■ Policy 2-44: Private Open Space Zoning
Establish a private open space zoning district which would allow an owner
to designate portions of his property for open space with provisions for trail
easements, maintenance standards and other items consistent with preserv-
ing the property in its natural state while retaining it in private ownership.
0 Policy 245: Clustering Development in Minor Subdivisions
Encourage clustering of development for minor subdivisions in the 5-20 acre
slope density designation. Encourage reserving and dedicating 90% of the
land in private open space to protect the unique characteristics of the hill-
sides from adverse environmental impacts. The project shall keep the open
space contiguous as much as possible.
Strategy
Change the Municpal Code to include these guidelines.
Policy 2-46: Hillside Building Standards
Establish stricter building and development standards for the hillside area
which, among other things, would provide that views of the ridgelines re-
main unobstructed and that designs, colors and materials for homes and
other structures blend with the natural hillside environment.
0 Policy 247. Ridgeline Visibility
No structures shall be located on ridgelines if visible from new and established
valley floor vantage points unless it is determined that significantly greater
environmental impacts would occur if structures are located elsewhere.
Strategy
Amend the Municipal Code to state that structures shall not disrupt the
natural silhouette of ridgelines as viewed from new and established van-
tages points on the valley floor. Consider the addition of new vantage points
such as Foothill Boulevard, McClellan Road, Rainbow Drive, Bubb Road and
Regnart Road.
Policy 2-48: Location of Structures
Locate proposed structures to minimize the impacts on adjacent hillside
properties and public open space.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-35
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE, CHAPTER
19.24
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE, CHAPTER
19.40
2-36
SEE POLICY 6-1
SEE POLICY 240
Land Use/Community Character •
Policy 2-49: Avoidance of Geologic Hazards
Identify geological hazards on sites proposed for development and avoid
or limit development in those areas.
Strategy
Amend the Municpal Code to reflect these policies.
0 Policy 2-50: Reducing Visible Mass
Effective visible mass shall be reduced through such means as stepping
structures down the hillside, following the natural contours, and limiting
the height and mass of the wall plan facing the valley floor.
Strategy
Incorporate color, materials and height requirements into the Municipal
Code.
Policy 2-51: Outdoor Lighting
Outdoor lighting should be low intensity and shielded to minimize illumi-
nation off-site. •
Policy 2-52: Building Heights
Provide development standards which limit the height and visual impact
of structures.
Strategy
Amend the Municipal Code to further limit the height requirements, includ-
ing overall height and the perceived height of multiple levels from the
downhill elevation perspective.
0 Policy 2-53: Steep Slopes
No structures or improvements shall occur on slopes greater than 30% un-
less an exception is granted.
Strategy
Amend the Municipal code to include this requirement
There will be some scarring from hillside development as roads, housing sites and
public and private subdivision improvements are graded. So, improvement standards must
balance the need to furnish adequate utility and emergency services against the need to
protect the hillside, vegetation and animals. Roads should be narrowed to avoid harming
trees and streambeds. Grading should be kept to a minimum by prohibiting mass grading
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Land Use/Community Character
for building sites and by allowing narrow driveways, instead of public streets, to serve more
than one lot.
0 Policy 2-54: Rural Improvement Standards in the Foothills
Require rural improvement standards in the residential hillside zoning or-
dinance and the hillside subdivision regulations to preserve the rural char-
acter of the hillside.
Strategies
1. Mass Grading in New Construction. Follow natural land contour and
avoid mass grading in new construction, especially in flood hazard or hill-
side areas. Grading large, flat yard areas shall be avoided.
2. Retaining Significant Trees. Retain significant specimen trees, especially
when they grow in groves or clusters, and integrate them into the devel-
oped site.
The Montebello foothills at the south and west boundaries of the valley floor are a scenic
backdrop to the City, adding to its sense of scale and variety of color. It's impossible to
guarantee an unobstructed view of the hills from any vantage point, but people should be
able to see the foothills from public gathering places.
. Policy 2-55: Views for Public Facilities
Design and lay out public facilities, particularly public open spaces, so they
include views of the foothills or other nearby natural features, and plan
hillside developments to minimize visual and other impacts on adjacent
public open space.
Strategy
Development Near Public Open Space. Remove private driveways and
building sites as far as possible from property boundaries located next to
public open space preserves and parks to enhance the natural open space
character and protect plants and animals.
When highly sensitive natural areas such as those subject to floods, brush fires, earth-
quakes and landslides become part of a city, human life must be protected.
Policy 2-56: Hillside Development Proposal Analysis
Subject proposals for hillside development to prior investigation by profes-
sional consultants so that environmental dangers can be noted and solutions
suggested to lessen potential hazards.
Policy 2-57: Land Disturbance During Development
Be sure that natural land forms and significant plants and trees are disturbed
as little as possible during development. All cut and fill shall be rounded
to natural contours and planted with natural landscaping.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-37
SEE MUMCIPAL
CODE, CHAPTER
I8-1.13
SEE POLICIES 5-13
THROUGH 5-16
SEE POLICIES 5-15,
5-16, POLICY 6-22
2-38
Land Use/Community Character •
Strategy
Amend the Municipal Code to include the two new requirements. Specify
a maximum quantity of allowed cut and fill to help define an acceptable
grading quantity.
Most of the hillsides in Cupertino's planning area are unincorporated and undevel-
oped, so County policies dictate their final land use. County policies provide for low den-
sity residential, agricultural, park, open space and wildlife uses, as well as mineral resource
extraction. Clustering and dedication of open space are required for residential develop-
ment. Most policies are compatible with Cupertino's, except for those relating to expan-
sion of mineral resource areas, which conflict with the City's hillside protection and
compatible land use policies.
County development, particularly if located near Cupertino's urban fringe area, should
consider Cupertino's General Plan. Visual impacts, road access, traffic impacts and other
service demands should be assessed in consultation with Cupertino's plans and personnel.
0 Policy 2-58: Santa Clara County General Plan
Hillsides policies found in the Santa Clara County General Plan in effect in
1992 are included in the Cupertino General Plan by reference and are ap-
plicable to the unincorporated hillside area. These policies are incorporated
because they are consistent with hillside protection goals. If changes are
proposed in the County plan which are inconsistent with the City's hillside
protection goals, then the City should protest those changes as well as not
incorporate them into the City's General Plan.
E Policy 2-59: County Development
County development, particularly if located near Cupertino's urban fringe
area, should consider Cupertino's General Plan.
Joint Hillside Planning
Cupertino is interested in maintaining the County's current resource protection poli-
cies. Since the County Board of Supervisors can change these policies without Cupertino's
or neighboring cities' approval, means are sought to provide greater control. One approach
is to create a joint powers agreement among the County and the neighboring cities, through
which common agreement could be reached on long-term hillside policies. Cupertino will
need to take a leadership role in convening affected jurisdictions.
E Policy 2-60: Joint Powers Agreement
Explore a joint powers agreement involving the cities of Cupertino, Los
Altos Hills, Palo Alto, Saratoga and Santa Clara County for the purpose of
hillside protection in the unincorporated area.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
Land Use/Community Character
Flood Plain
Stevens Creek and its streamside are among the natural elements that have the most
influence on Cupertino's character. The creek strongly defines the boundary between the
urban and rural parts of the City, extends a note of unspoiled beauty into the heart of the
developed valley floor and gives many residents and visitors a space for play, relaxation or
study of the creek's plant and animal life. At times, however, floods can pose a risk to the
City.
Land uses in the flood plain should allow the public access to the creek, but should
prohibit materials that would restrict the free flow of creek waters or significantly disturb
the streamside environment.
0 Policy 2-61: Existing Uses in the Flood Plain
Allow commercial and recreational uses which are now exclusively within
the flood plain to remain in their present use or to be used for agriculture.
. Policy 2-62: Non -Recreational Property to Residential
Designate non -recreational properties to become residential with up to five
units allowed under these conditions:
. a. Forbid structures designed for forced human habitation, such as dwell-
ing units, in the natural flood plain. The natural flood plain is defined
by the General Plan based on data from the Santa Clara Valley Water
District. Unfenced volleyball courts, picnic tables and similar recre-
ational uses may be constructed within the natural flood plain.
b. Base the maximum number of dwelling units allowed on each prop-
erty or group of properties on the numerical designation range on the
General Plan Map. Land in the flood plain can be credited in an amount
not to exceed one dwelling unit per gross acre to determine the num-
ber of dwelling units on each property or group of properties consoli-
dated into one development plan. If part of the parcel is outside the
flood plain, the maximum density will be six dwelling units for each
gross acre. This policy makes it impossible for a relatively small par-
cel to get a high density status as a result of one dwelling unit per acre
density credit from a relatively large area within the flood plain. The
total number of units allowed will be based on the ability of the appli-
cant and designer to integrate the development into the natural envi-
ronment of Stevens Creek and the adjacent residential neighborhoods.
c. Require residential development plans to incorporate the Stevens Creek
trail described in the public parks section of the General Plan.
Policy 2-63: Land In Natural Flood Plain
• Allow public and quasi -public land in the natural flood plain after review
of a specific zoning or use permit application.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-39
SEE POLICY 6-20
AND MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 16.52
SEE POLICY 5-28,
POLICY 540
2-40
SEE POLICY 3-57,
POLICY 3-59
lw
Land Use/Community Character •
Energy Awareness
Site and building design can save energy by using the benefits of the seasonal climate
and controlling its disadvantages. This section discusses a few of the many different ways
to make homes more comfortable and reduce energy needed for heat and cooling.
SUN CONTROL
California requires cities to consider solar access when reviewing subdivision design.
To increase the daily number of hours of sunlight, builders are encouraged to orient pri-
vate outdoor spaces to the south, east or west sides of a site, preferably with two unobstructed
views. Private outdoor spaces also need to be sheltered from the sun. Trellises, awnings,
landscaping and the height and position of neighboring buildings should be studied to pro-
tect against excessive shadow on yards, assuring equitable access to sunlight's benefits.
EPolicy 2-64: Solar Access and Protection
Ensure that all homes have an acceptable balance of access to the sun and
protection from it, as well as control of prevailing winds.
WIND CONTROL
Cupertino's prevailing winds blow from the northwest across San Francisco Bay.
Winds reach their peak in the afternoon; the City's low buildings and relatively flat ground
do not slow them down. The breezes give relief from warm temperatures, but high winds
discourage the use of outdoor areas. So, careful site design can break up wind patterns and
reduce their speed to produce gentler, more refreshing breezes.
Prune Lower
Vegetation To
® < Promote
Circulation
1
ted' %//j
s
..ter+
North Wind
Plant Mass and
Garage and
Blank Walls On
North To Break
Cold Breezes
Wall andVegitation
Windbreak
Trellis -101—"Sun Pockets"
Deciduous Trees
Sun For Outdoor
Turn Buildings 450
Allow Winter Sun To
Filter Living
To Prevailing Wind
Provide Warm
and Arrange In
Interior and Provide
Clusters To
Summer Shade
Reduce Velocity
and Channel
Summer Breezes
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Land Use/Community Character
•
Public Services and Facilities
An important part of Cupertino's quality of life is the high standard of public services
and facilities enjoyed by residents and workers in Cupertino. This section discusses schools
and the library. Other services and facilities: police, fire protection, utilities and waste dis-
posal are discussed in the Public Health and Safety Element of this Plan.
SCHOOL DISTRICTS
Cupertino is served by excellent public education institutions. Cupertino Union School
District, Fremont Union High School District and Foothill -De Anza Community College
District provide nationally acclaimed elementary, secondary and post -secondary education,
respectively. This group of school districts is one of the primary attractions of Cupertino
for home buyers, particularly families with school-age children.
While the City is not directly involved in the provision of education, it does control
growth and development which can affect schools by increasing student enrollment beyond
the means of schools to service them. It is thus crucial for the City to continue working with
its school districts to maintain their current high quality.
M Policy 2-65: Planning for Schools
Recognize the financial impact of increased development on the school dis-
tricts' ability to provide staff and facilities. Work with the districts to as-
sure that the continued high level of school services can be provided prior
to granting approval for new development.
■ Policy 2-66: Busing Access to the Hillsides
If busing continues, encourage district staff to become more involved in
hillside roadway design to meet the minimum standards required for bus-
ing access.
■ Policy 2-67: Pedestrian Access
Create pedestrian access between new subdivisions and school sites.
■ Policy 2-68: Permit Data for Schools
Continue to provide school districts with building permit data, which will
enable the Districts to record the type of construction, location and their
square footage to plan for future schooling needs.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-41
2-42
Land Use/Community Character
0 Policy 2-69: De Anza College
De Anza College
Allow land uses not traditionally considered part of a college, such as lodg-
ing or conference facilities and institutional office and research facilities, to
be built at De Anza College. Final determination of the intensity, character
and ultimate desirability will be evaluated with regard to the effects on traf-
fic and the consistency with the college's educational nature.
LIBRARY SERVICES
The Cupertino Library is another important public resource, with 37,312 Cupertino
residents holding library cards. The library is operated by Santa Clara County Library Sys-
tem, but funded through library -dedicated property taxes and City general fund revenues.
In 1988, the building was remodeled to add an additional 11,546 sq. ft., for a total build-
ing area of 37,000 sq. ft. The library is experiencing a significant increase in circulation (119%)
since the reopening of the building.
If the use of the library continues to rise, library staff will have to make choices to ac-
commodate demand. Library staff has two options: either purchase more shelving and delete
seating or remove items from the collection either by discarding them or placing them in
long term storage. If the City of Cupertino requires a higher level of service (building, staff
and materials) than available from normal funding sources, then cooperation between the
County of Santa Clara and City of Cupertino will be needed to achieve this level.
■ Policy: 2-70: Library Service Level
Recognize that if the community desires a higher level of library service, that
this would require cooperation between the County of Santa Clara and City
of Cupertino in expanding library services and facilities if deemed necessary.
■ Policy 2-71: Library Planning
Integrate and coordinate the library system into all applicable General Plan
policies, such as transportation, pedestrian and bike trails.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
•
• Land Use/Community Character
■ Policy 2-72: Improving Library Service
Encourage the library to incorporate new technology to improve service
levels at the library system.
Encourage the adjustment of library collections and programs to meet the
needs of Cupertino residents, businesses and ethnic populations.
■ Policy 2-73: Library Expansion
Actively seek methods to increase library facilities.
AESTHETIC, CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
Cupertino is a relatively modern city, having incorporated in 1955. This date tends to
obscure earlier events that were important in the development of the community.
Before European settlement, Native Americans resided in the area, along streams and
creeks and in nearby clusters of oaks. The area was first explored by Spanish soldiers and
later settled by numerous European immigrants who recognized the potential of the fertile
land and converted it to a thriving agricultural economy.
Today, Cupertino is part of a world -renown high technology center, known as Silicon
• Valley, and is home to several companies producing leading edge computers and software.
Historic properties show Cupertino's past. These sites remind residents of the color-
ful people who built and occupied them, creating stronger ties between today's Cupertino
residents and yesterday's.
0
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-43
2-44
-vi0 , '1 1
Land Use/Community Character •
Most of the historically significant properties are in private ownership, so there is no
public pressure to remove them or change sites in a way that obscures historic character.
Where feasible, private owners and City government can work together to find creative al-
tematives to the destruction of historic properties.
A successful example of this cooperation is the rehabilitation of the De La Vega stable
in the Rancho Deep Cliff residential subdivision. The "Tack House' was refurbished ex-
tensively inside but its exterior remains much the same. It is the 61 -home community's rec-
reation center and meeting hall.
F PRESERVE HISTORICALLY AND ARCHAEOLOGICALLY SIGNIFICANT
STRUCTURES, SITES AND ARTIFACTS TO INSTILL A GREATER SENSE OF
HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL AWARENESS AND COMMUNITY IDENTITY.
■ Policy 2-74: Landmark Rehabilitation
Undertake an active partnership with private owners of landmark structures
to rehabilitate the buildings for public or semi -private occupancy and re-
tain their historic character.
Strategies
1. Restoration of Historic Properties. Encourage and aid private efforts to
restore historic properties by allowing flexible interpretation of zoning or- •
dinance and code standards not essential to public health and safety when
they would make the restoration easier and more economical. These could
include reduced on-site parking provisions or lesser setback distances.
2. Historic Property Zoning Category. Create a historic property zoning cat-
egory to regulate the unique aspects of historic preservation and to make
it easier for private owners to obtain the tax advantages that are offered for
preserved property in such zones.
0 Policy 2-75: Archaeologically Sensitive Areas
For development sites in areas likely to be archaeologically sensitive, such
as along stream courses and in oak groves, the City development review
process should require a specific investigation to determine if significant
archaeological resources may be affected by the project, and should also
require appropriate mitigation measures in the project design.
E Policy 2-76: Native American Burials
Recognize that Native American burials may be uncovered in unexpected
locations and that State law prescribes the appropriate actions to take upon
discovery of such burials during construction, including stoppage of work
in surrounding area, notification of appropriate authorities and reburial of
remains in an appropriate manner.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0
0
Land Use/Community Character
ns Crerk \ r-t�-:
■Community Landmarks:
A.
Kaiser Permanente
B.
Downtown Monta Vista
C.
Cupertino Historical Museum
D.
J
Community Center,
Sports Complex
E.
De Anza College
ns Crerk \ r-t�-:
■Community Landmarks:
A.
Kaiser Permanente
B.
Downtown Monta Vista
C.
Cupertino Historical Museum
D.
Memorial Park,
Community Center,
Sports Complex
E.
De Anza College
F.
De Anza Industrial Park
G.
Cupertino Civic Center
H.
Vallco Fashion Park
I.
Vallee Industrial Park
Figure 2-F. Cupertino's Heritage Resources.
■ Policy 2-77: Heritage Trees
• Historic Sites:
1. Perrone Ranch Stone Cellar,
now part of Ridge Vineyards
2. Montebello School, 1892
3. Picchetti Brothers Winery and Ranch
4. Maryknoll Seminary
5. De La Veaga Tack House
6. Enoch J. Parrish Tank House
7. Replica Baer Blacksmith Shop
8. Doyle Winery Site (foundation only)
9. Louis Stocklmeir Home
10. Site of Elisha P. Stephens home, 1850,
now part of Blackberry Farm
11. Gazebo gingerbread trim, Memorial Park
12. Le Petit Trianon
13. Union Church of Cupertino
14. Cupertino De Oro Club
15. St. Joseph's Church
16. Matt Jugum House, 1900
Protect and maintain heritage trees in a healthy state. A heritage tree list
shall be established and periodically revised to include trees of importance
to the community.
G CREATE A CIVIC ENVIRONMENT WHERE THE ARTS FREELY EXPRESS OUR
INNOVATIVE SPIRIT, CELEBRATE OUR RICH CULTURAL DIVERSITY AND
INSPIRE INDIVIDUAL AND COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION.
• Policy 2-78: Public Arts
Stimulate opportunities for the arts through cooperative relations between
local business and the City.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-45
SEE MUMCIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 14.18
V
2-46
Land Use/Community Character
Strategies
1. Consider conditioning development approvals with a requirement to in-
stall works of public art for public and private non-residential projects of
100,000 square feet or more.
2. Promote publicly visible artworks in public and private development and
gateways to the City.
3. Follow Public Art guidelines to maintain an appropriate cultural milieu.
4. Encourage the development of artist workspace.
The Land Use Map And General Policies
The Land Use Map of the General Plan illustrates the policies in this element and in
other elements that play a major role in guiding urban development. The map cannot be
used alone because it illustrates the text, which should be used along with it.
The General Plan Map illustrates the general form of Cupertino in terms of space allo-
cation and intensity of land use activities. In contrast, the Municipal Zoning Map divides
the City into very precisely drawn land use categories. Zoning districts have precisely writ-
ten standards governing permitted activities and development forms. A series of policy
statements accompany the planning text to guide the public and government officials in
establishing precise zoning boundaries to pinpoint permitted activities.
California law requires that the zoning map and zoning regulations be consistent with
the General Plan Map and text. The zoning map and regulations must be brought into con-
formity with the General Plan within a reasonable period after it is adopted.
Land Use Categories
Patterns and symbols, defined on the map legend, are used on the General Plan Map
to identify land use categories, the road system, major land features and significant public
and private facilities.
Here is a description of each land use category:
RESIDENTIAL
Areas suitable for dwellings, divided into five sub -categories based on dwelling unit
density and expressed as the number of dwellings permitted on each gross acre. The Gen-
eral Plan does not define whether the dwellings are to be owned or rented by their inhabit-
ants or whether they are to be attached or detached.
•
SEE "SLOPE DENsrry" Very Low Density: Intensity is based on applying one of three slope -density formu- •
DocumENT lae—Foothill Modified, Foothill Modified 1/2 Acre, or Foothill 5-20 acre. This classifica-
tion is intended to protect environmentally sensitive areas from extensive development
and to protect human life from hazards related to flood, fire and unstable terrain.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Land Use/Community Character
Low Density: 1-5 units on each gross acre. This category is intended to promote
a suburban lifestyle of detached single-family homes. Planned residential communi-
ties can be incorporated into this category if the development form is compatible with
adjoining residential development.
Medium Low Density: 5-10 units per gross acre. This category accommodates
more intensive forms of residential development while still being compatible with the
predominant single-family detached residential neighborhood. This development can
be successfully incorporated into a single-family environment.
Medium High Density: 10-20 units per gross acre. This category provides greater
opportunity for multiple -family residential developments in a planned environment.
This range usually results in traffic volumes and buildings that are not compatible with
single-family residential neighborhoods. These developments should be located on
the edges of single-family residential communities where utility services and street
networks are adequate to serve increased densities.
High Density: 20-35 units per gross acre. This promotes a wide range of hous-
ing choices in multiple -family dwellings. The intensity requires that the category be
used only at locations with adequate utility services or transit or both. The develop-
ment may result in structures with three or four levels and underground parking. This
category offers maximum opportunity for housing choice, especially for people who
want a city environment.
• COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL
This designation allows primarily commercial uses and secondarily residential uses
or a compatible combination of the two. Commercial use means retail sales, businesses, pro-
fessional offices and service establishments with direct contact with customers. This applies
to commercial activities ranging from neighborhood convenience stores to regionally ori-
ented specialty stores. Retail stores that would be a nuisance for adjoining neighborhoods
or harmful to the community identity would be regulated by the commercial zoning ordi-
nance and use permit procedure.
Residential densities are not specified because of the flexibility needed to develop resi-
dential uses in primarily non-residential areas. Smaller commercial parcels in existing resi-
dential areas may be redeveloped at densities compatible with the surroundings. Residential
development is subject to the numerical caps and other policies described in the develop-
ment priorities tables.
OFFICE
This designation encompasses all office uses referenced in the City's Administrative
and Professional Office Zone including administrative, professional and research and de-
velopment activities.
Prototype research and development is permitted if it is conducted along with the of-
fice functions of a business. Prototype R&D is defined as research and development activi-
ties that lead to the development of a new product or a new manufacturing and assembly
• process. Products developed, manufactured or assembled here are not intended to be mass
produced for sale at this location.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-47
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 19.28
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTERS
19.32 AND 19.44
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 19.36
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPrER 19.56
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 19.76
2-48 Land Use/Community Character 0
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 19.64
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 19.24
Guidelines for Prototype Research and Development., The type, use and storage of hazard-
ous material for prototype R&D or assembly is regulated by the Uniform Building Code,
the Uniform Fire Code and any new ordinance or other regulation that controls hazardous
materials.
The building must not present the appearance that a prototype R&D or assembly pro-
cess is in place. There will be no exterior storage and receiving facilities will be small. Gen-
erally, no more than 25 percent of the total space occupied by the firm will be devoted to
this activity.
COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/RESIDENTIAL
This designation applies to the mixed use areas which are predominantly commercial
and office uses. Supporting residential uses may be allowed when they are compatible with
the primarily non-residential character of the area. Residential densities are not specified
because of the flexibility needed to develop residential uses in primarily non-residential
areas. Residential development is subject to the numerical caps and other policies described
in the development priorities tables.
I N DU STR IA UR ESID ENTIA L
This designation allows primarily industrial uses and secondarily residential uses or
a compatible combination of the two. Industrial use refers to manufacturing, assembly and
research and development. Administrative offices that support manufacturing and whole-
saling are included.
Residential densities are not specified in the non -hillside areas because of the flexibil-
ity needed to redevelop existing industrial areas for residential living. Residential devel-
opment is subject to the numerical caps and other policies described in the development
priorities table.
OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL
This designation applies to areas that are primarily office uses and industrial uses.
Commercial uses should be ancillary and supportive of the office and industrial base with
the exception of larger parcels which may be used for regionally oriented stores. Residen-
tial densities are not specified because of the flexibility needed to develop residential uses
in primarily a non-residential area. Residential development is subject to the numerical caps
and other policies described in the development priorities table.
QUASI-PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL
This designation is applied to privately owned land involving activities such as a pri-
vate utility, a profit or non-profit facility giving continuous patient care, an educational fa-
cility or a religious facility.
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
This designation is applied to privately owned lands used for low -intensity, open space
activity such as hiking, walking or picnicking. Other, more intense, uses deemed compat-
ible with this designation may be approved through the use permit procedure.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
OLand Use/Community Character
PRIVATE RECREATION
This designation is applied to privately owned land used for outdoor recreation.
PARKS
This designation is applied to land owned by the public and used for recreation.
PUBLIC FACILITIES
This designation is applied to land used or planned to be used by a governmental en-
tity for a public purpose.
General Policies
The loose format of the General Plan Map makes it necessary to enact general land use
policies to guide City officials and others in formulating private and public land use deci-
sions.
■ Policy 2-79: Boundaries Between Land Uses
Base boundaries between land use classifications generally upon lot lines
• of established land use activities, public streets, and constructed or natural
physical barriers or a combination of any of these. Show the precise bound-
ary on the zoning map.
Policy 2-80: Residential Density Ranges on the Map
Recognize that residential density ranges on the General Plan Map and its
legend show the desired development intensity for a general area. Also
recognize that the actual gross dwelling unit density may be slightly dif-
ferent if the properties reflect the general development character of neigh-
boring properties.
Policy 2-81: Public and Quasi -Public Activities and Land
Allow public and quasi -public activities to be located within any land use
designation in the General Plan upon zoning review approval to ensure
compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood and the street and util-
ity system capacity. Allow residential land uses in areas designated for
quasi -public uses with appropriate zoning changes.
■ Policy 2-82: Closed School Site Use
Designate all public school sites for public use provided that schools that
are closed may be used for quasi -public or institutional activities or both,
or for housing. The dwelling unit intensity and development pattern shall
reflect the character of the surrounding residential districts. The future of
unused school sites shall also reflect the park acquisition program in the
Environmental Resources Element.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
2-49
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPPER 19.72
SEE POLICY 2-13
SEE PLANNING
COMM. RESO. 2616
POLICY 5-52
2-50
REFER TO DRrvE-UP
FACILITIES DESIGN
POLICY
Land Use/Community Character
■ Policy 2-83: New Drive -Up Services
Permit new drive -up service facilities for commercial, industrial or institu-
tional use only when adequate circulation, parking, noise control, architec-
ture features, and landscaping are compatible with the visual character of
the surrounding uses and residential areas are adequately buffered. Fur-
ther evaluate any proposed site for conformance with other goals and poli-
cies of the Plan.
. Policy 2-84: Late -Evening Entertainment Activities
Discourage late -evening entertainment activities such as cocktail lounges,
recreational facilities and theaters in the relatively narrow depth of Stevens
Creek Boulevard properties, but encourage them in Town Center, Vallco
Park and other large properties that are isolated from residential districts
and can provide internal security.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
1]
©"IM11 'EAlM
avo
0C
7n•�.
0
0
0
Section 3
Housing
INTRODUCTION
State Housing Element law (State of California Government Code, Article 10.6) identifies the
type of information that must be included in a community's Housing Element. Included in
these requirements are an analysis of the housing stock and households, estimates of Regional
Housing Needs, evaluation of past progress in meeting Housing Element goals and, projected
goals, policies and programs. The Housing Element must be periodically reviewed for certifi-
cation by the State Department of Housing and Community Development. Because much of
the information required for State certification is statistical and must be updated every five
years, Cupertino has prepared a separate Technical Document that supplements the General
Plan. The Technical Document includes the data required for State compliance and is incor-
porated by reference here as part of the General Plan.
This chapter includes a summary of some of the more significant information found in the
• Technical Document. Following that summary is a complete listing of the goals, policies and
programs for the 2001-2006 time frame of the Housing Element.
COMMUNITY PROFILE
POPULATION AND HOus[iUOLDS
Since its incorporation in 1955, the City of Cupertino's population has increased significantly.
In 1955, the population of the incorporated area was less than 2,500 people. The 2000 U.S.
Census data indicates that the population of Cupertino had increased to a total of 50,546 per-
sons. ABAG (Association of Bay Area Governments) estimates that the population in the City
and its sphere of influence will increase by 19% between 2000-2020. The population for
Cupertino and its sphere of influence in 2020 is estimated to be 66,400 persons.
The ethnic composition of Cupertino's population has become more diverse in recent decades.
The most significant change has been the increase in the Asian -American
population. In 1980, Asian -Americans represented 6.9% of Cupertino's
population. However, in 2000, the proportion of Asian -
Americans in Cupertino's population had increased yr
to 44% of the total population.
For purposes of evaluating housing supply and M,Public p
Healttiian><.
l
s d ,
demand, it is helpful to translate population fig- � �,#= Safety�,;
ures into household data. The U.S. Bureau of the
Census defines a household as all persons who t37€r'' Cupertino
occupy a housing unit, which may include single General
persons living alone, families related through marriage ms's Plan 4
Landlu
or blood, and unrelated individuals living together. The yCommuriniify "Tran{
• 2000 U.S. Census data indicated that there were a total �'Characte�-� T�
of 18,204 households in Cupertino. Approximately 75%
ipJ.]t'71 �+�i1F
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN 1 3-1
3-2
TRENDS IN
POPULATION,
HOUSING UNITS
AND HOUSEHOLD
SIZE
Housing
of those households were classified as "family" households and the remaining 25% were
"non -family" households (primarily individuals living alone).
It is estimated that 13% of all Cupertino households can be classified as "lower income house-
holds. This 13% figure includes 1,547 households who are estimated to be very low-income
and 801 low-income households. In 2001, a household of four persons with a maximum in-
come of $43,650 annually was considered very low-income, or if their income didn't exceed
$69,050 annually, they would be considered low-income.
Household size has remained relatively flat in recent decades. In 1980, the average house-
hold size in Cupertino was 2.75 persons per household. Between 1980-90, the average house-
hold size decreased to 2.60 persons per household. However, by 2000, the average household
size reverted back to the 2.75 persons per household figure.
60
50
40
30
20
10
Q,r.'t`�WIa5`LMM�'r�al-Z
.�ancd3!1�T3';'si�v��..�-+rT�...
'ocs.'y"L.kFf'D, 4080 77"a"�!�tIOAd7
�� (6!a:.� ��'�';-*2t rr _d�«,..z,cr'.. ....:tw•..�b�il�.v _� 1'.?tcr}<
�'�al..r'�Y d+ • N6 �a•2'6 "" r - +a2.75�
1970 1980 1990 2000
Source: U.S. Census 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000
Population
-�- -Housing Units
Household Size
HOUSING UNITS
Cupertino's housing stock was primarily built in the decades after World War II and reflects
its suburban, residential character. There were a total of 18,682 housing units in Cupertino
in 2000 and the majority of those units were single-family housing units.
Housing costs are expensive in Cupertino. In January, 2001, the median sales price for a single-
family home in Cupertino was in excess of $1 million dollars. For the same general time pe-
riod, the average rent for a multi -family rental unit was $2,353 per month. These costs far
exceed the ability of very low and low income households to pay for affordable housing. It is
estimated that in 2001 at least 1,651 lower income households were "overpaying" for hous-
ing (paying more than 30% of their income for housing costs).
From 1990-2000, a total of 2,074 new units were added to Cupertino's housing stock. This
represents a production rate of approximately 200 units per year. The new construction ob-
jective from the City's previous Housing Element for the 1990-95 time frame was not achieved.
Only 10% of the estimated 2,587 units to be produced were actually developed.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
u
•
•
•
Housing
PROJECTED HOUSING NEEDS
1. NEW CONSTRUC'T'ION
A) ADEQUATE SITES FOR ABACI ESTIMATED NEw CONSTRUCTION NEED
ABAG has estimated that the City needs to provide adequate sites to accommodate 2,720 units
for the time period of 1999-2006. After adjusting for the housing units already provided
between 1999-2001, the revised estimate is that adequate sites are needed for 2,325 units from
2001-2006, or 465 units per year. Based on the fact that the City during the past decade has
added an average of 200 units per year to the housing stock, this 5 -year goal of 2,325 units will
need to be aggressively pursued from 2001-2006.
B) BALANCED COMMUNITY OF JOB AND HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES
One of the most challenging issues facing Cupertino is the goal of achieving a better balance
between jobs and housing in the community. In 2001, ABAG estimated that there were 2.4 jobs
for every household in Cupertino. This ratio indicates that Cupertino is a "job rich" community
and there is a need to achieve a better balance between jobs and housing. In order to achieve
this, Cupertino needs to monitor the number of new jobs created in relationship to the number
and type of housing units also being developed
is
2. AFFORDABLE HOUSING
The goal of adequate sites for 2,325 new units for 2001-2006 is further refined by estimating the
number of units needed for very low, low and moderate income households. Adequate sites at
appropriate densities need to be provided to accommodate housing units affordable to the
following household income groups.
X30 USfl1-1OL. iI I;N CO M1=
CA:I I:GORI'
1V UbT111�R
OP L.JN I'I'ti
Very Low-Iacomc
378
Units
Low-Incorr(.c
188
L3,nirs
Moderaxe- Income
626
Units
Above Moderate- Inc oxne
1,133
Uizits
TOTAL
2,325
Uxvirs
3. CONSERVATION OF EXISTING HOUSING
The City's existing rental stock provides a source of affordable housing for lower and moder-
ate income households. In 2001, there were 292 rental units with affordability controls in
Cupertino. In addition, there were 3 group homes providing housing for a total of 25 persons/
• households. One of the most significant needs during the 2001-2006 time period is to con-
serve the existing rental housing stock. In particular, the City will monitor the potential
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
3-3
3-4
( f�� '60 1
Housing •
conversion of any affordable units to market rate, specifically the 100 unit Sunnyview devel-
opment (affordability subsidies are scheduled to expire in 2004).
4. SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS
Some of the households that have special housing needs in Cupertino include homeless,
elderly and disabled households. The City needs to continue its relationship with special
need providers and to support the provision of additional housing opportunities where
feasible.
5. EQUAL ACCESS TO HOUSING
A fundamental right is the ability for all persons to have equal access to housing, regard-
less of factors such as religion, ethnicity, age or sexual orientation. It is important that the
City continue to ensure equal access to housing and to support groups and organizations
that provide fair housing counseling/ information services.
Goals, Policies and Programs (2001-2006)
THE FOLLOWING PAGES INCLUDE GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
DESIGNED TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS AS IDENTIFIED ABOVE AND IN THE
HOUSING ELEMENT TECHNICAL DOCUMENT.
A EXPAND THE SUPPLY OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS FOR ALL ECONOMIC
SEGMENTS.
0 Policy 3-1: Sufficient Residentially Zoned Landfor New Construction Need
Designate sufficient residentially -zoned land at appropriate densities to pro-
vide adequate sites that will meet ABAG's estimate of Cupertino's new con-
struction need of 2,325 units for 2001-2006. Included with that need are the
following objectives:
Units Affordable to Very Low Income:
378
units
Units Affordable to Low Income:
188
units
Units Affordable to Moderate Income:
626
units
Units Affordable to Above Moderate Income:
1,133
units
TOTAL
2,325
Units
N Implementation Program 1: Housing Units by Planning District
Encourage residential development in the following planning districts; as
ADEQUATE SITES provided below. Residential development in these planning districts
FOR HOUSING includesmixed-use, multi -unit residential, and single-family residential at a
density of 15-35+ units per acre. Adequate infrastructure is currently avail-
able to all districts.
(Please see map on page 73, which identifies the locations for the proposed units by
Planning District.)
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
•
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
Quantified Objective:
Heart of the City District 433 Units at 35 Units per Acre (12.5 Acres)
North DeAnza District 150 Units at 35 Units Per Acre (4.25 Acres)
Bubb Planning District 150 Units at 15 Units Per Acre (10 Acres)
Homestead District 605 Units at 50 Units Per Acre (12 Acres)
Undesignated 40 Units at 20 Units Per Acre (2 Acres)
TOTAL 1,378 Units
0 ImplementationProgram2: Land Use Designations
Housing
In order to allow for the number of units as identified in Program #1 (Hous-
ing Units by Planning Districts), some parcels of land in the specified Plan-
ning Districts will need a change in land use designation or zoning. The City
• will change land use designations/zoning to reflect at least the density range
of 15-50 units per acre on those parcels during the 2001-2002 update of the
General Plan.
Time Frame: 2001-2002
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
Quantified Objective:
North DeAnza District: Revise zoning so that all 4.25 acres are zoned
at a minimum of 35 units per acre.
Bubb District: Revise zoning so that all 10 acres are zoned at
a minimum of 15 units per acre.
Homestead District: Revise zoning of 2 acres to 50 units per acre so
that a total of 12 acres are zoned at 50 units per
acre.
0 Implementation Program 3: Existing Inventory ofResidentialParcels
Include the existing inventory of residentially -zoned parcels that have been
identified as vacant, underdeveloped or infill parcels in addressing the Re-
gional Housing Need.
• Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
3-5
3-6
Housing •
Quantified Objective:
439 Units at <15 Units Per Acre, 29 Acres Total
182 Units at 15-20 Units Per Acre, 12 Acres Total
326 Units at 20-35+ Units Per Acre, 16 Acres Total
E Implementation Program 4: Second Dwelling Unit Ordinance
Evaluate and revise, if necessary, the Second Dwelling Unit Ordinance to en-
courage the production of more second units on residential parcels. Evalu-
ate existing parking, square footage minimums and other requirements to
determine whether revisions would encourage the development of more sec-
ond units.
Time Frame: 2001-2002 Evaluate and revise program, if
necessary
2001-2006: Continue to implement program
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
Quantified Objective: 25 Second Units Produced, 2001-2006 •
Policy 3-2: Identify' sitesfor500 additional housing units (units in addition to the
2,325 unit Regional Housing Need Allocation) as part of the General Plan Update,
subject to analysis of traffic and other related impacts.
Implementation Program 5: General Plan Update
During the General Plan Update of 2001-2002, sites will be evaluated to pro-
vide 500 dwelling units, in addition to those identified for the Regional Hous-
ing Need Allocation. Sites will be evaluated based on environmental impacts
and traffic analysis. If these impacts are determined to be minimal, the City
may choose to designate sites for up to 500 housing units.
Time Frame: 2001-2002
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
Quantified Objective: 80 Very Low Income Units
40 Low Income Units
135 Moderate Income Units
245 Above -Moderate Income Units
500 Total Units
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
• Housing
B DEVELOP HOUSING THAT IS AFFORDABLE FOR A DIVERSITY OF
CUPERTINO HOUSEHOLDS.
® Policy 3-3: Implement the City's Housing Mitigation Plan, which addresses
affordable housing needs for owner and renter housing in the community. Assign
priority to households who live or work in Cupertino for BMR units produced
through the plan or affordable housing units built with mitigation fees.
® Implementation Program 6: Housing Mitigation Plan -Office and Industria I
Mitigation
The City will continue to implement the "Office and Industrial Mitigation fee
program. This program requires that developers of office and industrial space
pay a fee which will then be used to support affordable housing for families
who work in Cupertino but live elsewhere. These fees are collected and then
deposited in the City's Affordable Housing Fund. The City will conduct an
updated "nexus" study to determine whether the manner in which fees are
calculated is still appropriate.
Time Frame: 2002-2003 Conduct updated nexus study
2001-2006 Implement Mitigation Plan
• Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
® Implementation Program 7. Housing Mitigation Plan -Residential Mitigation
The City will continue to implement the "Housing Mitigation" program: This program ap-
plies to all new residential development of one unit or greater. Mitigation includes either the
payment of an in -lieu fee or the provision of a Below Market Rate (BMR) unit or units. Projects
of 10 units or more must provide on-site BMR units. Projects of 9 units or less can either build
a unit or pay an in -lieu fee. Implementation of the program shall include:
a) priority for occupancy to households who reside, work, attend school or have family in
Cupertino;
b) additional priority for households with wage earners who provide a public service; spe-
cifically, employees of the City, local school district and public safety agencies;
c) utilize City's Affordable Rent Schedule as a guideline in setting rents for new affordable
housing;
d) update the rent schedule each year as new income guidelines are received and determine a
uniform method for allowing rent adjustments for affordable housing;
e) allow developers to meet all or a portion of their BMR requirement by making land avail-
able for the City or a non-profit housing developer to construct affordable housing;
f) require BMR units to remain affordable for a minimum of 99 years;
g) enforce the City's first right of refusal for BMR units, and
h) revise the program requirement from 10% to 15% immediately upon adoption of 2001 Hous-
ing Element.
Time Frame: Immediately: Increase 10% BMR requirement to
15% upon adoption of element
• 2001-2006: Implement Program
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
3-7
1441 W-4011
AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
PROVIDED BY
HOUSING
MITIGATION PLAN
3-8
AFFORDABLE
HOUSING FUND
Housing •
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
Quantified Objective: 159 very low income units
159 low income units
53 median income units
53 moderate income units
0 Implementation Program 8: Affordable Housing Fund
The City's Affordable Housing Fund provides financial assistance to affordable housing
developments. "Requests for Proposals' (RFPs) will be solicited from interested parties to
develop affordable units with housing funds. Affordable housing funds will be expended
in the following manner (ranked in order of priority):
a) Finance affordable housing projects in Cupertino.
b) Establish a downpayment assistance plan that may be used in conjunction with the BMR
program or to make market rate units more affordable. The assistance should be in the form
of low interest loans and not grants.
c) Establish a rental subsidy program to make market rate units more affordable.
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
Quantified Objective: 40 very low income units; 40 low income units •
Policy 3-4: Encourage the development of a diverse housing stock that provides a
range of housing types (including smaller, moderate cost housing) and affordability
levels. Emphasize the provision of housing for lower and moderate income house-
holds and, also, households with wage earners who provide a public service (e.g.
school district employees, municipal and public safety employees, etc.)
Implementation Program 9: Mortgage Credit Certificate Program
Participate in the countywide Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) Program.
This program allocates mortgage credit certificates to first-time homebuyers
to purchase housing units. Due to the high cost of housing units, in Cupertino,
it is estimated that most of the County's MCCs will be used in the City of San
Jose, where there are more low cost housing units available for sale.
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: Santa Clara County Mortgage Credit Certificate Pro
gram
Quantified Objective: 1-2 Households Assisted Annually
E Implementation Program 10: Move -In forLess Program
The Tri -County Apartment Association is managing this program which rec-
ognizes the high cost of securing rental housing. The program is geared to
classroom teachers in public or private schools who meet income criteria.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
Housing
Apartment owners/ managers who agree to participate in the program require
no more than 20% of the monthly rent as a security deposit from qualified
teachers.
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: Tri -County Apartment Association and City of
Cupertino
® Implementation Program 11: Surplus Propertyfor Housing
In conjunction with local public agencies, school districts and churches, the
City will develop a list of surplus property or underutilized property that
have the potential for residential development, compatible with surrounding
densities. Additionally, long-term land leases of property from churches,
school districts and corporations for construction of affordable units shall be
encouraged. Further, the feasibility of developing special housing for teach-
ers or other employee groups on the surplus properties will also be evaluated.
Teacher -assisted housing programs in neighboring districts, such as Santa
Clara Unified School District, will be reviewed for applicability in Cupertino.
Time Frame: 2002-2003: Develop list of surplus properties and
evaluate feasibility of developing residential units on
properties.
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
® Implementation Program 12: JoWHousing Balance Program
In 2001, ABAG's estimate of the City's job/ housing ratio was 2.4 jobs to ev-
ery household. The goal is to reduce this ratio during the time frame of this
Housing Element. Further, the City will evaluate the feasibility of develop-
ing a policy and/or program that conditions approval of job producing ac-
tivities to housing production.
Time Frame: 2002-2003:Develop procedure to evaluate job-produc
ing development proposals. Evaluate feasibility of
policy and/or program that ties new job production to
housing production.
2002-2006: Implement procedure
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
® Policy3-5: Pursue and/orprovidefundingforthe construction orrehabilitation of
housing that is affordable to very low, low and moderate income households. Ac-
tively support and assist non-profit and for-profit developers in producing afford-
able units.
S Implementation Program 13: Affordable Housing Information and Support
• The City will provide information, resources and support to developers who
can produce affordable housing. Information will be updated on a regular
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
]OBS AND
HOUSING
BALANCE
3-9
3-10
Housing •
basis in regard to available funding sources and be distributed to all inter-
ested developers. In addition, information regarding additional City incen-
tives such as the Density Bonus Program (see program #14) will also be
provided and updated on a regular basis. Further, the City will involve the
public from the beginning of an affordable housing application so that there
are fewer objections to the project as it goes through the City approval pro-
cess.
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
Policy 3-6: Maintain and/or adopt appropriate land use regulations and other de-
velopment tools to encourage the development of affordable housing. Make every
reasonable effort to disperse units throughout the community but not at the expense
of undermining the fundamental goal of providing affordable units.
E Implementation Program 14: Density Bonus Program
The City's Density Bonus Program provides for a density bonus and addi-
tional concessions for developments of 6 or more units that provide afford-
able housing for families and seniors. Included in the concessions are
reduced parking standards, reduced open space requirements, reduced set-
back requirements, and approval of mixed use zoning. The City will change •
the Ordinance definition of affordable unit to housing costs affordable at 30%
of household income for very low and low-income households.
Time Frame: 2002-2003 Change affordability definition
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
0 Implementation Program 15: Regulatory Incentives
The City will continue to waive park dedication and construction tax fees for all affordable
units. Parking standards will also be discounted for affordable developments. For mixed-use
and higher density residential developments, the Planning Commission or City Council may
approve deviations from the Parking Regulations Ordinance of the Cupertino Municipal Code,
if the applicant can provide a study supporting the deviation. Further, the City will continue
to efficiently process all development applications.
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
Implementation Program 16: Residential and Mixed Use Opportunities In or
Near Employment Centers
The City will encourage mixed use development and the use of shared park-
ing facilities in or near employment centers. In addition to the development
opportunities available through the "Heart of the City" Specific Plan, the City
will evaluate the possibility of allowing residential development above ex- •
isting parking areas. In specific, these areas would be near or adjacent to em-
ployment centers and could provide additional opportunities for housing.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Housing
Time Frame: 2002-2003 Evaluate parking opportunity sites
2002-2003 Evaluate incentives that may be offered to
encourage residential development in or near employ
ment centers.
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
Policy 3-7: When the City begins to collect tax increment revenues from the
Redevelopment Project Area, a minimum of 20% of tax incrementfunds generated
will be used for housing activities that create affordable housing for lower and
moderate income households.
E Implementation Program 17: Redevelopment Housing Set -Aside Funds
The City has established a Redevelopment Project Area but has not yet col-
lected tax increment funds. When those funds are collected, a minimum of
20% of tax increment funds will be directed to housing activities. The Rede-
velopment Agency will develop policies and objectives for the use of those
funds. All policies and objectives shall be developed to reflect the goals and
objectives of this Housing Element.
Time Frame: 2002-2003 Develop Policies and Objectives for Use of
Housing Set -Aside Funds
• Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
C CONSERVE AND ENHANCE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.
0
Policy 3-8: Assist very low and low-income homeowners and rental property
owners to maintain and repair their housing units.
Implementation Program 18: Housing Rehabilitation Program
•
This program provides financial assistance to eligible very low and low-in-
come homeowners to rehabilitate their housing units. The County of Santa
Clara, Housing and Community Development (HCD), administers the pro-
gram on behalf of the City of Cupertino. When the City becomes an Entitle-
ment community in 2002-2003, housing rehabilitation activities will continue
to be funded.
Funding Source: CDBG Funds
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino and County of Santa Clara
(HCD)
Quantified Objective: 5 Housing Units Rehabilitated Annually
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
3-11
REHABILITATION
PROGRAMS
INCLUDE ACCESS
AND
WEATHERIZATION
IMPROVEMENTS
3-12
Housing •
ImplementationProgram,19: Home Access Program
The Home Access Program provides assistance with minor home repairs and
accessibility improvements for lower-income, disabled households. Eco-
nomic and Social Opportunities (ESO) administers the program under a con-
tract with the County of Santa Clara.
Funding Source: Santa Clara County Urban County CDBG Funds
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: ESO and County of Santa Clara (HCD)
Quantified Objective: 3-5 Households Assisted Annually
0 Implementation Program 20: Weatherization Program
This program assists very low income homeowners with weatherization im-
provements to their homes. The program is administered in Cupertino and
other areas of the County by Economic and Social Opportunities (ESO)
Funding Source: State of California Energy Conservation Program
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: ESO •
Quantified Objective: 3-5 Households Assisted Annually
0 Implementation Program 21: Apartment Acquisition and Rehabilitation
The County of Santa Clara administers HOME and CDBG funds on behalf
of the members of the Urban County and HOME Consortium. The City of
Cupertino participates in both the Urban County and Consortium activities.
Funds are available on a competitive basis to developers to acquire and re-
habilitate rental units for very low and low-income households. When the
City becomes an entitlement community in 2002-2003, the City will continue
to include the availability of HOME and CDBG fund for apartment acquisi-
tion and/or rehabilitation.
Funding Source: HOME and CDBG Funds
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino
0 Implementation Program 22: Preservation of"At Risk" Units
The only affordable housing development at risk of converting to market rate
is the Sunnyview development. The expiration date of their federal subsidy •
is May 31, 2004. However, the development is considered at low risk for con-
verting because it is owned by a non-profit organization which has indicated
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
Housing
that it will renew the assistance again in 2004. However, the City will moni-
tor the development and will initiate contact in late 2003 with the owner and
HUD to ensure that the units remain affordable
Time Frame: 2003 Initiate contact with owner and HUD to deter
mine status of subsidy renewal
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
Quantified Objective: 100 Units Preserved as Affordable Housing
® ImplementationProgram23: Condominium Conversions
The City's existing Condominium Conversion Ordinance prevents the con-
version of rental units in multi -family housing developments from convert-
ing to condominiums. Condominium conversions are not allowed if the
rental vacancy rate in Cupertino is less than 5% at the time of the applica-
tion for conversion and has averaged 5% over the past six months. The City
will continue to implement this Ordinance in order to preserve the rental
housing stock.
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
• Quantified Objective: No Conversions
•
M Implementation Program 24: Rental Housing Preservation Program
The City's existing multi -family rental units provide housing opportunities for households
of varied income levels. The City will develop and adopt a program that includes the follow-
ing guidelines:
When a proposed development or redevelopment of a site would cause a loss of multi -family
rental housing, the City will grant approval only if at least two of the following three circum-
stances exist:
• The project will produce at least a 100% increase in the number of units
currently on the site and will comply with the City's BMR Program, and/or
• The number of rental units to be provided on the site is at least equal to
the number of existing rental units, and/or
• No less than 20% of the units will comply with the City's BMR Program.
Further, the preservation program will include a requirement for a tenant re-
location plan with provisions for relocation of tenants on site as much as
possible.
Time Frame: 2002-2003 Design and Program
2002-2006 Implement Program
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
3-13
3-14
Housing
Implementation Program 25: Conservation and Maintenance of Affordable
Housing
Develop a program to encourage the maintenance and rehabilitation of resi-
dential structures to preserve the older, more affordable housing stock.
Time Frame: 2003-2004 Design Program
2004-2006 Implement Program
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
Implementation Program 26. Neighborhood and Community Clean-upCam-
paigns
Continue to encourage and sponsor neighborhood and community clean up
campaigns for both public and private properties.
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
Policy 3-10: Encourage energy conservation in all existing and new residential
development.
0 Implementation Program 27. Energy Conservation Opportunities
The City will continue to enforce Title 24 requirements for energy conserva-
tion and will evaluate utilizing some of the other suggestions as identified
in Chapter 9 of this document.
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
0 Implementation Program 28: Fee Waivers orReductionsfor Energy Conservation
The City will evaluate the potential to waive or reduce fees for energy conservation im-
provements to residential units (existing or new).
Time Frame: 2002-2003
Responsible Party: City of Cupertino, Planning Department
��A D SUPPORT
HOUSEHOORGANIZATIONS THAT PROVIDE SERVICES TO SPECIAL NEED
Policy 3-11: The City will continue to support organizations thatprovide services
to special need households in the City; such as homeless, elderly, disabled and
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0
•
•
• Housing
single parent.
® Implementation Program 29: Cupertino Community Services (Homeless Ser-
vices)
Cupertino Community Services (CCS) manages transitional housing and ad-
ministers the "Continuum of Care" services for homeless, including the ro-
tating shelter program. In order to facilitate any future emergency shelter
needs, the City will revise the Zoning Ordinance to allow permanent emer-
gency shelter facilities in "BQ" quasi -public zones and will promote and
encourage the location of permanent shelters in BQ zones.
Funding Source: County of Santa Clara Urban County funds and federal
funds
Time Frame: 2001-2002 Revise Zoning Ordinance to allow perma-
nent emergency shelters in BQ zones
2001-2006 Continue to support services of CCS to as-
sist homeless households
Responsible Party: Cupertino Community Services
Quantified Objective: Transitional Housing for 12-24 Households Annually
• ® Implementation Program 30: Project MATCH (Senior Shared Housing)
Project MATCH places seniors in housing arrangements with other persons
interested in shared housing. Seniors may either be the homeowner who has
extra bedroom space to share with another or the person who rents a bedroom
from another household. Project MATCH is funded with County of Santa
Clara Urban County funds.
Funding Source: County of Santa Clara Urban County Funds
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: Project MATCH
Quantified Objective: 5-10 Cupertino Households Placed Annually
O Implementation Program 31: Catholic Charities Social Services (Single -parents)
Catholic Social Services provides helps to place single parents in shared
housing situations. The program is funded with Santa Clara County Urban
County funds.
Funding Source: County of Santa Clara Urban County Funds
• Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: Catholic Social Services
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
3-15
3-16
j ,7.
ON00
�
Housing
Quantified Objective: 5-10 Cupertino Households Placed Annually
E ENSURE THAT ALL PERSONS HAVE EQUAL ACCESS TO HOUSING
OPPORTUNITIES.
Policy 3-12: Supportprograms and organizations thatseek to eliminate housing
discrimination.
. Implementation Program 32: Santa Clara County Fair Housing Consortium
The Santa Clara County Fair Housing Consortium includes the Asian Law
Alliance, Mid -Peninsula Citizens for Fair Housing, Project Sentinel and the
Mental Health Advocates Program. These organizations provide resources
for Cupertino residents with tenant/landlord, rental mediation, housing dis-
crimination and fair housing concerns. Administrative funding for these or-
ganizations is partially contributed by County of Santa Clara Urban County
funds.
Funding Source: County of Santa Clara Urban County Funds
Time Frame: 2001-2006
Responsible Party: Santa Clara County Fair Housing Consortium
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0
•
•
11
Housing
The map on the next page illustrates
the location and number of units
estimated by Planning Area to
accomodate the goals of Programs
1 and 2 on pages four and five of
this document.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
3-17
3-18
Housing
40
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
r1
L_J
•
is
Housing
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
3-19
r
UcJA.f ' n
till
rt lin
n -
f ,y
le•n•Lnm
Lute
dfuJcrnre
dfudrru
•'
(Gn
Is:�.r s" '
4p
1. Unit, h, Planing District
�� >frq ,'
1,378 Units
2. 1.nd Llsc Dt.ltgr[allnrls
1111] QUATE $ISL$ -`
c `
ry POR RPGIOI�Ah'
326 Units
183 Units
439 Units
3 f]1l5 [ing Invc ntorp
z
25 Units
4. Second Unit Ordinance
7. [lou sing Mltig.11iou (BJ71t)
159 Units
159 Units
106 Units
i
Pnrgroun
s' �u`r• Pi'SnL SYs 5:::
s 4
`,: }A1 PORUAIiISI : G
4*1 .�I oUS1NGrF'y.r`�
40 Units
40 Units
R. Af hrdablc Noosing Fund
<•
5-10
'.. i,
9. M,,,t rage Credit
'T�tic'i�' .•.'i.^
holds
Cenificvtcs
25 Units Rehabilitated
IK. housing Rc h:drilil:uiun
�.4
fi
REijARIYYTATION.
15-25 Houschnlds Assisted
19. llo ne Access Nagrtm
ire
I5-25 Houschnlds Assisted20.
Wcathcrization Program
f
' !PIiE{EItVATION;OF'
l l" �EXIS'1°1NG
100 Units
22. Presun•c "At Risk" Units
-,
60-120
'l[). Cupertino Com nsnuitY
_,
Hnm<hnlds
Scr�iccs
RFU
25-50
tSPrclAlrN
HOUSING--: y,
Households
30. Project IvtATCfI
•.
a•: r .. « T 'a
25-50
3'I. Csuholic Social Sc
4e,1s
Houschnlds
rtices
-
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
3-19
©UIRI MSM
0
O
0
C�
•
•
Section 4
Transportation
Introduction
People in Cupertino use different means of travel—from driving on the fi
taking a bus or a car on a street to walking along a hiking trail. This element's put
integrate the travelways and the transit service into a single system that ble
Cupertino lifestyles.
APROMOTE A BALANCED CIRCULATION SYSTEM THAT IS INTEGRATEI
WITH THE REGIONAL SYSTEM, OFFERING FLEXIBILITY FOR THE FUTU.
BY ALLOWING FOR A VARIETY OF FORMS OF TRANSPORTATION ANC
KEEPING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL EFFECTS ON THE
COMMUNITY TO A MINIMUM.
The Regional Perspective
Cupertino does not plan its circulation system in a vacuum; it participates
in regional and sub -regional planning and supports the Santa Clara County
Congestion Management Agency, Measure A Task Force (Local Transportation
Authority), and the Santa Clara County Transportation Plan (T2010). The City
requires bus turn outs to be built at key intersections and makes sure that new
development encourages bus patrons to walk home from the bus stop. A bus
transfer station will be built in Vallco Park when new development in the neigh-
borhood warrants it.
Regional transportation planning efforts involve land use. The jobs -housing imbalance
in northern Santa Clara County makes the transportation picture worse. Increasing the
housing opportunity next to areas with employment growth is a policy
advocated by the Association of Bay Area Governments, the Bay Area 19911111111111111h,
Council, other public interest groups and the Santa Clara
County Board of Supervisors.
Cupertino responded to this challenge in 1975- (\
1979 by significantly increasing allowed density\.�
ranges. The effort was augmented by changes to
land use and housing policy in 1993 which reallocated
potential commercial development to less traffic intensive
office development zones and increased the potential num-
ber of housing units. The 1992 policy changes increased the
potential housing by approximately 1,000 units. Despite
Housing
Cupertino
General
Plan
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Usel
4-1
4-2
Transportation
•
density increases that theoretically would have increased the future housing supply,
Cupertino may not be able to balance new jobs with new housing. It would have to rezone
the majority of industrial parcels located in built-up industrial areas to high-density resi-
dential to achieve this balance. This is not practical because most of that land is planned for
the expansion of existing firms and most of the remaining parcels are too small for housing.
Cupertino encourages mixed-use development to increase housing supply.
0 Policy 4-1: City Participation in Regional Transportation
Participate actively in developing regional approaches to meeting the trans-
portation needs of residents of the Santa Clara Valley.
Strategies
1. Congestion Management Agency. Continue to actively participate in the
Congestion Management Plan and other regional efforts to control traffic
congestion and its attendant air pollution impacts by:
a. requiring a separate traffic analysis using Congestion Management
Agency (CMA) methodology for projects that generate a large amount
of peak hour traffic.
b. preparing a deficiency plan as defined by CMA if the regional transpor-
tation system is seriously congested. •
2. Expansion of Bus Fleet. Support the expansion of the County Transit Dis-
trict bus fleet and support prioritizing commuter express services along
expressways and City arterial streets.
3. Extension of rapid transit. Support the extension of rapid transit along
North De Anza Boulevard/ Highway 85 Corridor and Stevens Creek Bou-
levard Corridor by the following means:
a. All right-of-way improvement projects shall be reviewed for potential op-
portunities and constraints to rapid transit extension in these corridors.
b. Focus higher development intensities along the corridors and orient the
design of such developments to serve future transit patrons and pedes-
trians.
c. Seek the cooperative support of residents, property owners and busi-
nesses in planning for a rapid transit extension.
The Local Perspective
Cupertino's land use and circulation plans control the intensity of development, based
on the capacity of the street network to carry traffic, incorporating measures that protect •
residential areas from through traffic.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
CJ
0
•
Transportation
15000 II 18000 26000 1250001-il 21000 HWESTEAORO
8
10000
Figure 4-A. Average Daily Traffic Counts.
6000
6000 6060
RAIN20W
OR
PROSPECT $
RO
\ 19000
FaIX
20000 $� 26000
The term "traffic carrying capacity" is subjective. Its definition is based on the de-
sired maximum road width and number of travel lanes and the 'level of service." Except
for intersections, the City limits the number of travel lanes in each direction to four. This
limit is based on future widening possibilities and a judgment that wide streets are unat-
tractive and divide Cupertino. Figure 4-B shows the adopted roadway system.
"Level of service" refers to a system that measures the degree of traffic congestion. It
ranges from Level A—free flow, to Level F—failure. Table 4-A explains these levels. Level A
is ideal, but it is not feasible to maintain in an intersection if surrounding intersections are
more congested. Drivers looking for the fastest way to their destination will go to the less
congested intersection and equalize the congestion for the whole system. Like most cities
located in the urbanized areas of Santa Clara County, Cupertino adopted Level of Service
(LOS) D for the purpose of planning its street system to accomodate growth. The general
plan links existing and future land use activities with the existing and future street systems
so that a minimum LOS D is maintained. The intersections of Stevens Creek and De Anza
boulevards, and De Anza Boulevard and Bollinger Road are exempted from the LOS D stan-
dard in order to facilitate the "Heart of the City" concept described in the Land Use/Com-
munity Character Element.
THE CUPEHTINO GENERAL PLAN
12000
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
4-3
I
\
- 65
„
9D6
IL
Stevens creek\ r-�-------
Reseruoir
\ 1
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
II
\
'
_--__—
8
10000
Figure 4-A. Average Daily Traffic Counts.
6000
6000 6060
RAIN20W
OR
PROSPECT $
RO
\ 19000
FaIX
20000 $� 26000
The term "traffic carrying capacity" is subjective. Its definition is based on the de-
sired maximum road width and number of travel lanes and the 'level of service." Except
for intersections, the City limits the number of travel lanes in each direction to four. This
limit is based on future widening possibilities and a judgment that wide streets are unat-
tractive and divide Cupertino. Figure 4-B shows the adopted roadway system.
"Level of service" refers to a system that measures the degree of traffic congestion. It
ranges from Level A—free flow, to Level F—failure. Table 4-A explains these levels. Level A
is ideal, but it is not feasible to maintain in an intersection if surrounding intersections are
more congested. Drivers looking for the fastest way to their destination will go to the less
congested intersection and equalize the congestion for the whole system. Like most cities
located in the urbanized areas of Santa Clara County, Cupertino adopted Level of Service
(LOS) D for the purpose of planning its street system to accomodate growth. The general
plan links existing and future land use activities with the existing and future street systems
so that a minimum LOS D is maintained. The intersections of Stevens Creek and De Anza
boulevards, and De Anza Boulevard and Bollinger Road are exempted from the LOS D stan-
dard in order to facilitate the "Heart of the City" concept described in the Land Use/Com-
munity Character Element.
THE CUPEHTINO GENERAL PLAN
12000
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
4-3
4-4 I Transportation
Freeways and Expressways
Arterials
Major Collectors
Minor Collectors
Figure 4-B. Primary Circulation Plan.
Table 4-A. Traffic Service Levels.
Level of Service Stopped Delay Description
per Vehicle (Seconds)
A 5.0
Free flow, no congestion (very little delay)
B 5.1 to 15.0
Stable flow, some congestion (slight delay)
C 15.1 to 25.0
Stable flow, moderate congestion
(acceptable delay)
D 25.1 to 40.0
Approaching unstable flow, high congeston
(tolerable delay)
E 40.1 to 60.0
Unstable flow, near breakdown
(unacceptable delay)
F 60.0
Forced flow, breakdown (very long delay)
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
Streets not classified in a higher system, primarily provid- (Direct access
ing direct access to abutting land and access to the higher to adjoining
systems. The offer the lowest level of mobility and usu- property)
ally carry no bus routes. Service to through traffic is de-
liberately discouraged. Local streets may function to
"collect" traffic from the immediate neighborhood and
provide access to the other street categories.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Transportation
4-5
•
Table 4-B.
Street Hierarchy.
Street
Street Function
Typical Number of
Category
Lanes and Access
Characteristics
Freeways
Inter-State4nter-City
4 lanes or greater
and
Expressways Highways carrying inter -city, inter -county and inter-
(No access to
state traffic. Freeways and expressways do not provide
adjoining
direct access to abutting lands.
property)
Arterial
Inter -City
4 lanes or greater
Streets and highways serving major metropolitan ac-
(Limited access
tivity centers, the highest traffic volume corridors. The
to adjoining
longest trip demand, and a high proportion of total
property)
urban area travel on a minimum of mileage. Service
to adjoining land should come second to providing
access to major freeways and expressways. This sys-
tem carries the major portion of trips entering and leav-
ing an urban area, and normally will carry important
intra -urban as well as inter -city bus routes.
Major
Collector
Inter-City/Inter-Neighborhood
2 - 4 lanes
Streets and highways interconnecting with and aug-
(Direct and
menting the arterial system and providing service to
indirect access
trips of moderate length at a somewhat lower level of
to adjoining
travel mobility. The system places more emphasis on
property)
land access and distributes travel to geographic areas
smaller than those identified with the higher system.
Minor
Inter-CityAnter-Neighborhood
2 - 4lanes
Collector
Streets penetrating neighborhoods, collecting traffic
(Direct access
from local streets in the neighborhoods and channel-
to adjoining
ing it into the arterial system. A minor amount of
property)
through traffic may be carried on collector streets, but
the system primarily provides land access service and
carries local traffic movements within residential
neighborhoods, commercial, and industrial areas. It
may also serve local bus routes.
Local
Intra -Neighborhood
2 lanes
Streets not classified in a higher system, primarily provid- (Direct access
ing direct access to abutting land and access to the higher to adjoining
systems. The offer the lowest level of mobility and usu- property)
ally carry no bus routes. Service to through traffic is de-
liberately discouraged. Local streets may function to
"collect" traffic from the immediate neighborhood and
provide access to the other street categories.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
4-6
Transportation •
0 Policy 4-2: Traffic Capacity and Land Use Limitations
Maintain a reasonable minimum LOS D for major intersections during the
p.m. peak traffic hour (highest single hour) by imposing reasonable limits
on land use to ensure that principal thoroughfares are not unduly impacted
by locally generated traffic during the peak traffic hour.
In order to accommodate development which furthers a unique community
gathering place on Stevens Creek Boulevard, the intersection of Stevens
Creek and De Anza boulevards and De Anza Boulevard and Bollinger Road
may maintain a LOS E+ (No more than 45 seconds weighted delay).
For land use and transportation planning purposes, the traffic peak hour
should not be allowed to expand into the peak period. Staggering of work
hours beyond current levels is not acceptable as a transportation demand
management (TDM) technique. The TDM technique must benefit both the
peak hour traffic and the average daily traffic volume.
Strategies
1. Right -of -Way Limitation. In order to minimize the barrier effect of major
streets and the negative aesthetics, limit mid -block right-of-way capacity
to a maximum of eight lanes for De Anza Boulevard and six lanes for
Stevens Creek Boulevard. •
2. Development/Floor Area Ratio Limitation. In order to maintain a desired
level of transportation system capacity, the city's remaining commercial
development potential shall be pooled and reallocated according to the
City's development priorities tables. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) limitations
apply to all remaining office and industrial properties, unless a property
owner received bonus FAR credit authorized by the 1983 General Plan and/
or a higher development allocation, above the FAR limitation, approved by
the City. The properties previously regulated by the traffic intensity per-
formance standard (TIPS) will be regulated by a floor area ratio specified
in the Land Use Element.
Businesses that generate traffic levels significantly higher than those typi-
cally found in a similar zoning district will be subject to the "Extraordinary
Use Policy" contained in the Development Intensity Manual.
3. Citywide Transportation Improvement Plan. Carry out a citywide trans-
portation improvement plan to accommodate peak hour traffic flows on
arterial streets and major collector streets at a minimum of Service Level
D. Service Level E+ (45 seconds weighted delay) is acceptable only for the
intersection of De Anza and Stevens Creek boulevards and De Anza Bou-
levard and Bollinger Road to implement the Heart of the City Concept. If
feasible, the plan should maintain existing levels of service higher than Level
D. The percent or number of through trips on arterial and major collector
streets is not regulated.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
• Transportation
4. Underpass at De Anza and Stevens Creek Boulevards. If needed to imple-
ment significant, new growth, the City should consider an underpass at De
Anza and Stevens Creek boulevards to improve traffic flow
5. Traffic Assessment after Highway 85 Completion. After the completion
of Highway 85, the City should conduct a traffic analysis of the street sys-
tem to determine opportunities to improve the Level of Service.
6. Annual LOS Analysis. Conduct an annual Level of Service anlaysis, to be
completed at the time of the annual General Plan Review.
Traffic Modeling
Cupertino uses a traffic model that inputs existing and planned land uses and densi-
ties and assigns future work, shopping and recreation trips to the street network. The model
includes future traffic generated by projected growth in surrounding communities and De
Anza College, along with significant future road improvements, including pending improve-
ments in the Highway 85 corridor and Measure A (1984) transportation projects. Most of
the county's T2010 improvements are not included in the model. The model calculates traf-
fic volumes and Level of Service for various intersections, enabling the City to determine
how much new development can occur without exceeding the City LOS standards and road
width criterion.
SThe land use plan allocates available development potential and establishes land use
intensity controls in the form of development priorities and height limits for each area of
Cupertino.
Each time a new development application is reviewed, the Level of Service and maxi-
mum lane width criteria are considered so that the traffic carrying capacity of the road re-
mains in line with new development.
Traffic Controls on Additional Mitigated Development
The growth limit defined by the traffic model limits retail, commercial, office and in-
dustrial growth to approximately 3,300,000 square feet above development that was built
and occupied during the 1990 base year. The land use element of the plan describes the
permitted land uses in detail. To attain its economic development goals, the General Plan
permits additional growth to occur above the General Plan base level to a maximum cap of
2,000,000 square feet if such additional development can conform to the housing and trans-
portation goals. Prospective office and industrial developers/employers may apply for such
additional square footage if the expected traffic generation can be reduced to a level equiva-
lent to the traffic generated by such property if it developed at its base entitlement estab-
lished by FAR constraints. The following policy establishes a three -tiered traffic mitigation
program for such additional development.
0 Policy 4-3: Tiered Traffic Mitigation for Additional Mitigated Development
Developers/ employers may increase building area above levels allowed by
applicable Floor Area Ratios (FARs) when it can be demonstrated that peak
p.m. trips can be reduced beyond base levels experienced by the specific
applicants, prior to implementation of Transportation Demand Management
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
4-7
4-8
REFER TO "TIER 2"
PLAN
Transportation
•
(TDM) programs. The maximum additional development cap is 2,000,000
square feet. The three -tiered traffic mitigation program is described in Table
4-C. The City's Development Intensity Manual will be amended or an or-
dinance developed which will describe detailed procedures to implement
the Tiered Traffic Mitigation Program.
Table 4C. Tiered Traffic Mitigation Program.
TIER 1: FIXED DISCOUNT OF VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION
Tier 1 discounts are applicable to new development.
1. A 5% p.m. peak hour trip discount will be applied if a standard Trans-
portation Demand Management program is included in the project. The
applicant must have a TDM Coordinator.
For example, elements of a TDM program may include:
- Transit passes
- Guaranteed Ride Home
Bicycle lockers
- Preferred parking for carpoolers
A 5% discount will be applied to a company located near a transit (rail •
or major bus) line.
3. A 10% discount will be applied when a company implements number 1
and is near a transit line.
This represents the maximum discount available under Tier 1
TIER 2. VARIABLE DISCOUNT OF TRIP GENERATION
Tier 2 discounts are applicable to existing and new development. The Tier 2
approach provides a mechanism to enable employers/business property devel-
opers to take advantage of housing and more aggressive TDM measures to in-
crease employment density/building space without increasing traffic.
1. Housing: The tier 2 approach recognizes the synergism between in-
creased housing opportunity and new forms of TDM. Traffic reduction
discounts may be taken when:
a. Provision of on or off site housing combined with other TDM
strategies with a demonstrated reduction in p.m. peak hour trips.
b. Assure compliance of housing creation and TDM performance through
a development agreement which provides sanctions for lack of
performance.
2. Examples of aggressive TDM programs are:
a. Telecommuting and satellite telecommuting
b. Shuttle systems
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Transportation
c. Compressed work week
d. Village design (on site services)
e. Satellite park and ride lot
f. Peak hour express bus system
Adoption of aggressive TDM program will require a proven track record and
the establishment of performance standards with a monitoring system.
Sanctions will be developed to ensure compliance.
TIER 3: IMPROVE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM CAPACITY
(applicable after implementation of Tier 1 and 2 techniques)
Implement Transportation System Management (TSM) techniques such as
the De Anza/Stevens Creek Boulevard underpass. Approvable development
based on traffic analysis of projected increase in peak hour traffic capacity
of street system.
■ Policy 4-4: Coordination of Street Improvements
Develop the street construction plan ensuring critical street improvements
are finished before or at the same time as major developments. The plan
• should be based on the principle of equity, ensuring that land developers
help pay for street improvements.
Strategy
Traffic Evaluations With New Development. Require a traffic evaluation
when the final development plans for any major development are filed.
The five-year Capital Improvements Program outlines improvements for the entire
network. The timing of improvements will be adjusted depending on land development
projects.
Description of the Circulation Plan
Figure 4-13 describes Cupertino's Circulation Plan for City streets except for residen-
tial streets, which are not shown. It locates the freeways, expressways, arterials and major
and minor collectors. Table 4-13 defines the function of each street type and its typical lane
design.
The street hierarchy is designed to concentrate traffic on freeways and arterials that
serve commercial and industrial areas and to shift traffic away from residential areas to the
network of freeways and arterials. The plan is put into effect in stages by the five-year Capital
Improvements Program and by improvements built along with new development.
Cupertino uses site planning criteria to control development, thus obtaining a more
•efficient street system. The area plans controlling development next to major arterials have
design standards that strictly limit the number of access points to the property. Curb breaks
are typically shared by adjoining properties and developers are required to record recipro-
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
4-9
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 14.04
4-10
Transportation
cal circulation easements. These easements allow adjoining properties to share roads and
gain access to secondary streets that intersect with major arterials.
The North De Anza Boulevard plan requires property owners to participate in the
construction of Bandley Avenue that parallels De Anza Blvd. A system of private drive-
way connections is required to link adjoining parking lots. As a result, De Anza Blvd. has
few curb breaks and few side restrictions to slow traffic. The policy's secondary benefit is
that the lack of curb breaks has resulted in an attractive streetscape.
Interconnecting Driveways to Reduce Curb Breaks.
0 Policy 4-5: Driveway Interconnection
Discourage direct access from adjoining properties to major arterial streets.
Require access by interconnecting private driveway networks linking side
streets or other major entrance points unless— this is unsafe or impractical
because of the established development pattern.
Cupertino uses a computerized traffic
', signal interconnect system to increase the traf-
e fic-carrying capacity of arterial streets. The
e i system controls the flow at intersections to fa-
* -, vor commute traffic. Green lights are longer
on major arterials to encourage shoppers, com-
.r,
A j muters and employees to use those streets.
N 0i
These policies encourage travelers to use
F the arterial system. Cupertino discourages
drivers from other cities from using local
streets and, where appropriate, local collector
streets, by means of stop signs, speed bumps,
raised medians, diverters and intensified en-
forcement of speed limits
M Policy 4-6: Protection From Effects of Transportation System
Work to protect the community from noise, fumes and hazards caused by
the City's transportation system.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
•
Site A
Site B
Tw o -Frontage Site
I
Access
II I
From d---1
Secondary
rn
Street
Only 2,= 111 11111 1�
v
c
0
l •
)
Major Street
--
Interconnecting Driveways to Reduce Curb Breaks.
0 Policy 4-5: Driveway Interconnection
Discourage direct access from adjoining properties to major arterial streets.
Require access by interconnecting private driveway networks linking side
streets or other major entrance points unless— this is unsafe or impractical
because of the established development pattern.
Cupertino uses a computerized traffic
', signal interconnect system to increase the traf-
e fic-carrying capacity of arterial streets. The
e i system controls the flow at intersections to fa-
* -, vor commute traffic. Green lights are longer
on major arterials to encourage shoppers, com-
.r,
A j muters and employees to use those streets.
N 0i
These policies encourage travelers to use
F the arterial system. Cupertino discourages
drivers from other cities from using local
streets and, where appropriate, local collector
streets, by means of stop signs, speed bumps,
raised medians, diverters and intensified en-
forcement of speed limits
M Policy 4-6: Protection From Effects of Transportation System
Work to protect the community from noise, fumes and hazards caused by
the City's transportation system.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
•
11
r�
L_J
•
Transportation
0 Policy 4-7: Neighborhood Traffic Management
Develop traffic management plans for neighborhoods affected by unaccept-
able levels of through traffic. Design these plans based on the concept that
commute or through traffic should be redirected from local residential
streets and minor collectors to the freeway, expressway and arterial and
major collector streets.
0 Policy 4-8: Abusive Driving
Continue to study and carry out techniques that discourage abusive driv-
ing on local neighborhood streets, including intensified enforcement of
speed laws, enforcement of State muffler laws and review of traffic man-
agement strategies.
Accommodating Alternatives to the Automobile
Developing travel routes and methods that are
alternatives to the automobile will increase the effi-
ciency of the system. However, until alternatives are
widely accepted locally, Cupertino cannot rely on them
to reduce traffic levels noticeably. For people who
wish to use them, the City will encourage alternatives
to the automobile. Bike lanes must be safe and conve-
niently located. Buses must be frequent and allowed
to use preferential lanes where possible.
0 Policy 4-9: Reliance on Usage of Private Cars
Promote a general decrease in reliance on
private cars by accommodating and encour-
aging attractive alternatives.
Strategies
_ ( i
1. Alternative Transportation. Encourage use of alternative transportation,
such as bicycles and motor bikes, as well as techniques that increase the
number of people in each vehicles, such as buses and van and car pooling.
2. Street Space for Alternative Transportation. Provide space on appropri-
ate streets for bus turn outs, safe and accessible bike lanes and pedestrian
paths.
3. On -Site Bike Facilities. Require on-site bicycle facilities, including park-
ing facilities, showers and clothing storage lockers, in industrial and com-
mercial developments. ,
4. Coordination of Bicycle Planning. Coordinate bicycle route planning with
surrounding cities and the County in order to provide for the commuting
needs of workers, shoppers and students and the travel needs of park users.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
4-11
4-12
SEE POLICY 542
Transportation
5. Designing for Alternative Transportation. Require grade -separated thor-
oughfare construction to provide adequate design and width to accommo-
date bicycle lanes and pedestrian crossings.
6. Alternative Transportation Information. Use the Cupertino Scene and
other media to provide educational material on non -motoring travel.
7. Citizen Participation. Continue to work with the City Bicycle/ Pedestrian
Advisory Committee, community groups and residents to eliminate haz-
ards and barriers to bicycle and pedestrian traffic.
8. Shuttle Service. Consider the possibility of creating a shuttle service to link
a proposed bus transfer station in Vallco Park with Town Center and North
De Anza Blvd. Reassess the feasibility of requiring car or van pooling.
Alternative transportation can enhance recreational opportunities. Figure 4-C shows
a plan for bikeways. It coordinates directly with bikeways planning by the County and the
MidPeninsula Regional Open Space District.
M Policy 4-10: Regional Trail Development
Continue to plan and provide for a comprehensive system of trails and
pathways consistent with regional systems., including the Bay Trail, Stevens
Creek Corridor and Ridge Trail. The general alignment of the Bay Trail, as •
shown in the Association of Bay Area Governments' Bay Trail planning
document, is incorporated in the General Plan by reference.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
HOMESTEAC
F -I VIU
1
Transportation
E
s
_r
w
0
� ■ 3
6y W> F
Hall W w
z
4-13
n.a
ti
' RAINBOWk
.......... i
DRIVE t
\' PROSPECT
uu.... .uu..un.0
.. I Existing Bike Lanes and Routes
I 1
Proposed Bike Lanes and Routes
^•...^^.• Non -Cupertino Bikeways
Figure 4-C. Bike Lanes.
0
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0
•
Ll
•
Section 5
Environmental Resp
Introduction
Land was once considered solely as a commodit}
for the largest private profit with little regard for publi
unchecked growth caused by this attitude made urba
polluted the air and water and made it necessary for ci
vices for inefficiently planned communities. This attit
aware that the quality of life depends on the communit
The General Plan is a tool for making day-to-day
public policies dealing with stewardship of the land.
Open Space Planning
Open space planning includes buying and devel-
oping land for parks, protecting watersheds and reservoi
allowing for farming in or next to urban areas and crea
opportunity for privately owned recreational sites.
Conservation Planning
Conservation means responsible human coexistence with plants and animals,
responsible mineral extraction and preservation of ground water recharge areas.
Conservation and Management of Resources
Conservation is a creative opportunity to use wisely the resources needed now
and to be sure these resources are available for future generations. This element
inventories Cupertino's key resources and outlines policies for their use and pres-
ervation.
Agricultural Lands
A AVOID THE PREMATURE CONVERSION OF AGRICULTURAL LANDS TO
URBAN USES WITHIN THE CITY'S URBAN SERVICE AREA.
The California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA)requires a comprehensive
review of any development that might
harm the environment. The General
Plan includes much of the analysis and
mitigation policies required under
CEQA. This makes project -by -project
environmental impact reports unneces-
sary in many cases. CEQA suggests us-
ing general plan conservation elements
as reference documents in judging the
effect of a proposed development on
the community and in creating devel-
opments that fit the environmental
needs of their surroundines.
Cupertino, like the rest of Santa Clara County, has one of the best growing climates in
the state, but farming here cannot compete with other California cities because labor and
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
MIN
5-1
5-2
Environmental Resources
r
�.
IW
— — -- I t
Figure5-A. Agricultural Uses
CIM515I Cler
or2 W1
Soll
Cl..i
or25oll'.Y g
Clau 31.
Soll I� '
W "'. Lands Under
_...j Williamson Act Contract
0 Present Agricultural Use
1111111111 Generalized Extent of
Class 1 and 2 Soils
--- Urban Service Area Boundary
— - - — Boundary Agreement Line
water costs are higher and production efficiency is lower. Even flower growers, who have
been successful until recently, have suffered declines because of Latin American competi-
tion. In 1990, the amount of farmland in Cupertino's urban service area was negligible.
The City has signed Williamson Act contracts with three property owners in Cupertino
(Figure 5-A). The act, also known as the California Land Conservation Act, protects farm-
land and grazing land from taxation as developable property. Two of the properties are
still pressured for more intensive development and probably will not remain as farms/graz-
ing land much longer. The Williamson Act has had little effect in preserving prime grow-
ing lands over the longer term in Cupertino.
MPolicy 5-1: Williamson Act Properties
Designate properties under the Williamson Act contracts in the General Plan
for their anticipated developed use to plan for future public service and
utility demands and to ensure that development will be consistent with
community character.
0 Policy 5-2: Agricultural Recognition
Recognize and support agricultural land uses, which provide food and fi-
ber, enhance air quality and visually and functionally define rural/open
areas from urban land uses during public land use and urban development
review processes.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
r�
U
•
•
• Environmental Resources
Cupertino's historical farm and orchard will continue to serve schools and youth ser-
vice organizations as a field trip site. Cupertino will set aside community vegetable gar-
dens in parks that have a rural flavor and will offer gardening classes through the Recreation
Department.
0 Policy 5-3: Farming and Grazing
Maintain farming and grazing on the hillsides to preserve open space and
monitor to prevent erosion.
Air Quality
B STRIVE TO MAINTAIN ACCEPTABLE AIR QUALITY LEVELS FOR THE
CITIZENS OF CUPERTINO.
C UTILIZE LOCAL PLANNING EFFORTS TO IMPROVE AIR QUALITY
REGION WIDE.
Clean air is a natural resource of vital importance. Pollutants in the air can cause health
problems, especially for children, the elderly and people with heart or lung problems.
Healthy adults may experience symptoms during periods of intense exercise. Pollutants can
also cause damage to vegetation, animals and property.
• The Federal and State Clean Air Acts are the primary regulators of air quality, but day-
to-day responsibilities fall under the regional Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD). State and Federal Clean Air Standards are exceeded in Santa Clara County
many times a year.
Air pollution potential is based upon the tendency for high pollutant concentrations
to develop at a given location. This potential is dependent upon the amount of pollutants
en-tted into the air and the local atmosphere's ability to transport and dilute the pollutant.
The county's topography, prevailing wind pattern and frequent air inversions combine to
catch and hold the pollutants that the urban area releases daily into the air. Air pollution is
composed of a vast assortment of gases and particles which can be grouped in three catego-
ries: ozone, carbon monoxide and particulate matter. A large proportion of air pollution in
Santa Clara County is automobile related.
The existing development pattern, countywide, contributes to the further deteriora-
tion of air quality. For example, the majority of affordable housing for low to moderate
employees is on the outskirts of the county or in adjoining cities. This requires employees
to commute long distances daily to and from work which in turn increases air pollution
countywide. Also, much of the citywide residential areas are separated from commercial
uses, which in turn requires residents to drive vehicles to complete errands. This tends to
increase air pollution within the community. Land use planning is beginning to change with
these considerations in mind.
As Santa Clara County continues to be the population and employment growth cen-
ter of the region, residents, employers and municipalities must take responsibility for the
• impacts of air pollution on the quality of life.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
5-3
5-4 Environmental Resources •
PRINCIPAL POLLUTANTS OF THE AIR BASIN
Particulate Matter Particles enter the air when the wind erodes the earth, when minerals are
quarried, when soil is graded for construction, and when automobiles operate. Airborne
particles can be inhaled by people. Larger particles are rapidly expelled by the natural de-
fenses of the human body, but very small particles can remain deep in the lungs for weeks
or years. Some airborne particles are toxic in themselves or become toxic when they com-
bine with other air products.
Fine particles in the air are major culprits in the low atmospheric visibility typical of
the valley. The particulates have major health effects and have been linked to high rates of
lung cancer in polluted urban areas. Between 1983-1990 the Federal Air Quality Standards
were exceeded three days and the State Air Quality Standard were exceeded 177 days out
of the eight years in the Bay Area. An example of a major contributor to Cupertino particu-
late pollution the Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corporation and Kaiser Cement and
Gypsum Corporation. This plant alone emitted, in 1990, 250 tons per year of particles into
the air.
Carbon Monoxide About 90 percent of carbon monoxide pollution comes from motor ve-
hicles. Carbon monoxide, a product of incomplete combustion, displaces oxygen in human
blood, diminishing people's ability to perform mentally and physically. Higher concentra-
tions follow highway patterns and are related to traffic speed and congestion.
Because the gas is mostly from cars and trucks, it tends to concentrate near major roads, •
particularly in the congested morning and evening hours. Regionwide, between 1987-1989,
the number of days carbon monoxide exceeded both State and Federal maximums was sig-
nificant. During 1990, the number of days decreased. Because the Bay Area cannot attain
the Federal or State Standards, it has been designated as a "non -attainment area" and a plan
of control is required.
Ozone Unlike other pollutants, ozone is not emitted into the atmosphere. Rather, it is cre-
ated from ozone precursors which are nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons that emanate from
combustion, factories and automobiles and from the evaporation of solvents and fuels. State
and Federal ozone limits have been exceeded fewer times in the last decade, with 53 State
and 21 Federal air quality warnings in 1983, compared to 14 State and 2 Federal warnings
in 1990.
Regional, State and Federal Planning Air Quality Standards are set forth by both the State
and Federal government. The BAAQMD has the responsibility to monitor and enforce State
Standards in the Bay Area. Planning for compliance with the Federal Air Quality Standards
has been assumed in part by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) which, with
the BAAQMD, prepared the Air Quality Management Plan for the San Francisco Bay Re-
gion. Among the actions recommended by this plan are many policies and programs which
local governments can undertake to help achieve the essential improvements in air quality.
The California Clean Air Act of 1988 requires a 1991 plan to meet State Ambient Air
Quality Standards for ozone and carbon monoxide by the earliest practical date. The Act
requires regions to seek a 5% per year reduction in pollutant emissions by implementing all
feasible emission reduction measures. The Clean Air Plan, prepared by the BAAQMD,
ABAG and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), was adopted in October •
1991. State emission standards are more restrictive than Federal standards and therefore,
this plan is expected to also satisfy federal requirements.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Environmental Resources
Air pollutant emission reductions will come from new motor vehicle emissions stan-
dards, enhanced inspection/ maintenance, tighter controls on new and existing stationary
pollution sources and transportation control measures.
Responsibilities of the City While air quality is often regarded as a regional problem, it is
fundamental that local land use and growth decisions attempt to combat air pollution. The
land use, transportation, energy and environmental policies that comprise this plan will all
act in combination to meet the State Air Quality reduction plans.
Air Quality Policies The Plan's Circulation Element encourages alternative modes of trans-
portation to reduce traffic on major streets, making commuter trips more efficient. It also
encourages protection of residential neighborhoods from through commute traffic.
Increasing the efficiency of traffic flow will decrease congestion and air pollution. Using
traffic management devices such as diverters, circuitous road systems and stop signs to dis-
courage commute traffic in residential neighborhoods will hurt air quality by making trips
longer. The Stevens Creek Boulevard Plan Line/General Plan Study demonstrated that
improving the boulevard would decrease congestion and pollutants. It also showed that a
diverter system on Byrne Avenue and Orange Avenue would make trips longer, increasing
neighborhood air pollution.
Cupertino discourages drive -up windows. On a small scale, this does not improve air
quality much. But, depending on the design of the window, customers waiting in line with
• their engines idling could be exposed to high levels of carbon monoxide and other pollu-
tion, endangering people who have cardiovascular or lung disease. Handicapped people
and parents who do not want to take children into a bank or restaurant will be inconve-
nienced, but the City's policy of removing barriers to the handicapped should help.
M Policy 54: Air Pollution Effects
Continue to assess air pollution effects of future land use and circulation
planning. Review projects for toxic air contaminants at time of approval.
■ Policy 5-5: Dust Control
Continue to require the use of water or oil to control dust during construc-
tion activities.
■ Policy 5-6: Clean Air Education
Initiate a citywide public education program regarding the implications of
the Clean Air Act and provide information on ways to control emissions.
0 Policy 5-7: Regional Cooperation
Actively pursue cooperation among regional agencies to improve air quality
0 Policy 5-8: Land Use Decisions
• Ensure that local land use decisions support the goal of clean air.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
SEE POLICY 4-9
5-5
5-6 Environmental Resources
Policy 5-9: Home Occupations
Continue to allow home occupations in all residentially zoned properties.
■
Policy 5-10: Street Trees
SEE MUNICIPAL Increase street trees on public property and tree planting on private prop -
CODE CHAPTER 14.12 erty.
■ Policy 5-11: Fuel -Efficient Vehicles
Look into buying more fuel-efficient vehicles for City use.
0 Policy 5-12: logging and Bicycling Warnings
Use the Cupertino Scene and other publications to tell residents about the
danger of inhaling pollutants while jogging and bicycling near busy streets.
Expand the par course and jogging trails to meet demand.
Wildlife and Vegetation
��Tl D PRESERVE AND PROTECT SPECIAL AREAS OF NATURAL VEGETATION
ll.e AND WILDLIFE HABITATION AS INTEGRAL PARTS OF THE •
ENVIRONMENT.
Cupertino's wildlife and natural vegetation resources are con-
r, centrated in the relatively undeveloped western foothills and moun-
tains and along Stevens Creek, not on the valley floor (Figure 5-13).
Urbanization of the valley floor has rendered this environment ill-
'� c suited to the needs of wildlife and native plants. Most of the native
u " vegetation was removed by historic agricultural activities and the
introduction of non-native grasses and crops. Native vegetation was
further reduced by the more recent construction of homes, businesses,
-r� industries and infrastructure that supports this suburban community.
u The loss of vegetation also meant a concomitant loss of wildlife habi-
tat which provided food, cover and shelter for numerous wildlife
species.
STREAMSIDES
Riparian vegetation grows along stream courses where there is
fertile soil and ample water. It often appears as a distinct band of
vegetation when contrasted against other uses. Such vegetation can
y be found along Stevens Creek, Permanente Creek, Regnart Creek,
Heney Creek and portions of Calabazas Creek. Common plants in-
clude willow, California bay, California buckeye, Coast live oak, coy-
ote brush, poison oak and California blackberry. Riparian habitats are considered among
the most valuable habitats for wildlife because of the presence of water, lush vegetation and
high insect populations. Less disturbed riparian areas support a wide variety of wildlife, •
including amphibian, reptile, bird and mammal species
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
I•
0
o 'k 0jk 0-0.
tComferous
o oForests ,o
Environmental Resources
Riparian
Flowing
Grass
Deciduous- land % 3,
Chaparral f
' . .a
p / Ripanane+. • , yGrassland
Mixed^•r': %Grassland= ^,permanents'` 1
,,Evergreen Forest,, y_
,F.. Foothill
ro, Chaparral' a':: a'•'.'
oo an
k
ti.Grassland'
Figure 5-B. Vegetation Resources
GRASSLANDS
Grassland habitats occur on the lower slopes of the western foothills and at scattered
locations at higher elevations in the Montebello Ridge system. Much of these areas were
formerly used for pasture and are largely composed of non-native grasses. Plant species oc-
curring in this habitat include wild oat, clover, rye grass and vetch. During the spring sea-
son, displays of wildflowers are expected which may include California poppy, plantago
and owl's clover.
Reptile and mammal species adapted to dry conditions are common in this habitat.
They include the western fence lizard, western rattlesnake and common king snake. Mam-
mals include a variety of burrowing rodents, such as meadow mice and California ground
squirrel.
BRUSHLANDS
Brushlands are a scrubby, dense vegetation type that often integrates with woodland
• habitat. This vegetation is often found on dry, rocky, steep slopes. Dominant plant species
include: coyote brush, poison oak, California sage and ceanothus. Common animal species
include: scrub jay, California quail and deer mouse. Mule deer, brush rabbit, bobcat and
coyote utilize brushlands as part of a larger home range.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
5-7
5-8
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHANTER 14.15
SEE POLICY 247
Environmental Resources
FOOTHILL WOODLANDS AND FORESTS
Characteristic of the woodland vegetation are scattered oak trees with an undergrowth
in some areas of plants and low shrubs. Higher elevations in the Montebello Foothills in-
clude mixed hardwood trees and evergreens, including redwoods. Woodlands benefit wild-
life as a food source, and as shelter, nesting or cover; they help control erosion from foothill
drainage basins; they reduce wind speeds, increasing the oxygen in the atmosphere and
neutralizing certain air pollutants.
Woodlands provide visual relief from the urbanized valley floor. The Montebello Ridge
system's extensive tree cover gives seasonal color variation, variety of shape and definition
of hillside contours. Insect or seed eating birds and mammals are common in the wood-
lands and are preyed upon by raptors and owls that also inhabit these areas. The larger
mammals, deer, coyote, etc., utilize these areas as well.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
Human activity, particularly urban development and resource extraction, is the most
destructive influence on plants and animals in Cupertino. Urbanization of mountain lands
and construction of new housing next to streambeds will likely destroy vegetation. Grad-
ing for roads and building sites and leveling for septic tank drain fields also destroys veg-
etation and creates potential for soil erosion. Fire also threatens vegetation and the animals
that depend on it for food and shelter.
Fire suppression is a mixed blessing to the natural environment. It maintains the sce-
nic beauty of the wildlands, protects life and property, and, at least on the surface, enhances
wildlife habitat. But, wildfires also are a natural phenomenon. Some local mountain plant
species rely on periodic, low -intensity fires to germinate seeds and cut down competing
plants. Wildlife forced out by fire may be able to survive if there is a suitable environment
nearby. But if development and other human changes of the environment make a new home
for wildlife impossible, certain animals may be forced out of the urban fringe or out of
Cupertino's planning area altogether.
These policies will protect animal and plant life in Cupertino's planning area.
0 Policy 5-13: Public Project Landscaping
Encourage public and quasi -public agencies to landscape their city area
projects near native vegetation with appropriate native plants.
■ Policy 5-14: Development Near Sensitive Areas
Encourage the clustering of new development away from sensitive areas
such as riparian corridors, wildlife habitat and corridors, public open space
preserves and ridgelines.
Strategy
Consider specific protection tools for riparian corridor protection, such as
a riparian corridor ordinance or development and preservation guidelines.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
r -I
LJ
Environmental Resources
■ Policy 5-15: Landscaping Near Natural Vegetation
Emphasize drought tolerant native plants and ground covers when land-
scaping properties near natural vegetation, particularly for control of ero-
sion from disturbance to natural terrain.
0 Policy 5-16: Natural Area Protection
Minimize lawn area and maximize the number of native trees.
Strategy
Amend the RHS ordinance to emphasize drought tolerant native plants and
native trees and to minimize lawn area.
. Policy 5-17: Hillside Property Fencing
Confine fencing on hillside property to the area around a building, rather
than around an entire site, to allow for migration of wild animals.
■ Policy 5-18: Recreation in Natural Areas
Limit recreation in natural areas to activities compatible with preserving
natural vegetation, such as hiking, horseback riding and camping.
■ Policy 5-19: Public Access
Provide public access to wildlife observation and fishing sites consistent
with preserving important wildlife habitat.
■ Policy 5-20: Recreation and Wildlife Trails
Provide open space linkages within and between properties for both recre-
ational and wildlife activities, most specifically for the benefit of wildlife
which is threatened, endangered or designated as species of special concern.
Strategy
Amend the RHS ordinance to require identification of creeks and water
courses on site plans and require that they be protected from adjacent de-
velopment. The ordinance could state that trail easements for trail linkages
may be required if analysis determines that they are needed.
Mineral Resources
The State of California, recognizing the value of preserving the State's mineral depos-
its, enacted the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA). The objective of
SMARA is to assist local governments in conserving mineral deposits for future use. The
• State identifies mineral resource areas and requires that jurisdictions recognize them and
emphasize conservation and development of these areas. These mineral resource areas are
shown in Figure 5-C.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
5-9
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 14.15
SEE POLICY 2-54
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER
19.40.060
SEE POLICY 5-42
REFER TO MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 19.40
Environmental Resources
Hillside -
Unincorporate,
::Area Outside the,
;, = Urban Service Arei
is Appropriate;:,
i-uture:
Extraction,,
Unsuitable ;
\\ for K\
Extraction
\,\ \ \fie
\•
Source: State or California Resources Agency.
Department of conservation.
ROAD
.i.N.\ •• �PR�.SPElT
RWO
\2\MRZ-2 Areas where adequate information
L indicates that significant mineral deposits are
present, or where it is judged that a high
likelihood for their presence exists.
\'\MRZ-3 Areas containing mineral deposits
the significance of which cannot be evaluated
from available data.
� � Mineral Resource Areas
........ Urban / Low Density Hillside Boundary
------- Incorporated Area
— — — Urban Service Area Boundary
---- Boundary Agreement Line
Figure 5-C. Mineral Resource Areas in Cupertino.
There are mineral resource areas in the City's boundary agreement areas and in the
City limits. Within Cupertino's boundary agreement areas there are two quarries,
Permanente and Stevens Creek, which have been designated by the State as having mineral
deposits of regional or state significance. Since the quarries are in the unincorporated area,
Santa Clara County has jurisdiction. The County's mineral resource policies are directed
toward preserving existing resource areas and, where feasible, designating new areas and
expanding existing sites.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
•
Environmental Resources
Within Cupertino's City limits are classified mineral resource areas for which the State
also requires policies supporting preservation and extraction. Most of the areas are already
developed into residential and other uses. One area, the "Gravel Pit" is considered depleted.
These areas, therefore, would not benefit from conservation. The areas that would benefit
from conservation are outside the City limits.
Cupertino's proposed policies recognize the existence and potential of the identified
mineral resource areas. However, proposed policies reflect an underlying assumption that
quarries should be limited to their existing operations in terms of noise and traffic. For many
years, Cupertino residents have expressed concern about quarry pollution, noise and traf-
fic. Cupertino officials have stated at public hearings that operation controls and limits
should be set. New areas could be accessed as long as current noise and traffic levels are
not exceeded and environmental concerns are met.
. Policy 5-21: Mineral Resource Areas
New mineral extraction areas may be considered within Cupertino's sphere
of influence, but the cumulative impact of existing and proposed activity
should not exceed present operations in terms of noise and traffic. Work
with Santa Clara County to assure that mining operations outside the City
limits are consistent with the City's General Plan, that restoration plans are
adequate, and that mining activity is not extended into undisturbed lands
without adequate documentation of economic purpose and environmental
impacts and mitigations.
Strategies
1. Traffic and Noise Studies. Perform traffic and noise studies if applications
for increased mineral extraction activities are proposed.
2. Joint Study Process. Establish a joint study process in the sphere of influ-
ence and boundary agreement areas with Santa Clara County to reach
agreement on future land uses.
E Policy 5-22: Mineral Extraction Controls
Control scenic restoration and noise pollution as well as air and water pol-
lution in mineral extraction quarrying, processing and transportation.
■ Policy 5-23: Incompatible Land Uses
Conserve mineral resource areas outside the City by not allowing incom-
patible land uses in and around identified mineral resource areas. Uses con-
sidered incompatible are high density residential, low density residential
with high unit value, public facilities and industrial and commercial uses
with intensive impacts.
0 Policy 5-24: Recreation at Old Quarries
• Look into the desirability of designating abandoned quarries for passive rec-
reation to rehabilitate the land.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
5-11
SEE POLICY 2-60
5-12
Environmental Resources
•
Water Resources
�_n�1TL
C PROTECT AND CONSERVE WATER RESOURCES AS THEY ARE VITAL TO
`
r��"J
THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC HEALTH OF CUPERTINO.
if
11a
STRIVE TO MINIMIZE THE QUANTITY AND IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF
99A
STORM WATER RUNOFF CONSISTENT WITH THE PROTECTION OF
GROUNDWATER QUALITY AND GROUNDWATER RECHARGE AREAS.
PRESERVATION OF WATERSHEDS
Cupertino has 12 square miles of very productive watershed—hillside land with abun-
dant vegetation and heavy rainfall. This watershed is important to the City and to the county.
Grading plans for developments must be prepared to prevent erosion, protecting water
quality in the City's drainage basin. Erosion control eliminates siltation, which makes the
water cloudy and reduces wildlife populations and streambed groundwater recharge ability.
GROUNDWATER RECHARGE FACILITIES
The groundwater basin is the largest supply of water in Santa Clara County. It has an
estimated storage capacity of 1,770,000 acre feet, compared to reservoir capacity of only
160,000 acre feet. The Santa Clara Valley Water District prevents too much water from be-
ing drawn out by wells by placing recharge sites, sometimes called percolation ponds,
throughout the valley where the geological composition of the soil is suitable. Two of these
are located in Cupertino.
Policy 5-25: Ground Water Recharge Sites
Continue to support the Santa Clara Valley Water District to find and de-
velop groundwater recharge sites within Cupertino's planning area and
provide for public recreation at the site where possible.
Policy 5- 26: Other Water Sources
Encourage the research of other water sources, including water reclamation.
■ Policy 5-27. Industrial Water Recycling
Encourage industrial projects, especially at the building permit approval
stage, to have long-term conservation measures including recycling equip-
ment for manufacturing and pooling water supplies in the plant. Work with
the Cupertino Sanitary District to carry out this policy.
Policy 5-28: Natural Creek Beds
SEE POLICY 5-14
Retain creek beds, riparian corridors, water courses and associated vegeta-
tion in their natural state to protect wildlife habitat and recreation poten-
tial and assist groundwater percolation.
•
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Environmental Resources
OTHER WATER RESOURCES
Cupertino has three major water suppliers: California Water Service, Cupertino Wa-
ter Utility and San Jose Water Company. A private water service cooperative, the Reglin
Mutual Water Company, serves part of Regnart Canyon.
Water comes from two main sources: wells fed by groundwater, and imported water
from the Rinconada Treatment Plant. Cupertino gets about 1.6 million gallons a day from
the underground sources and about 4.5 million gallons a day from the Rinconada plant.
Stevens Creek Reservoir yields about 2,500 acre feet per year to the seasonal run-off from
groundwater recharge. The Santa Clara Valley Water District projects the total demand for
Cupertino will be about 6.85 million gallons a day by 1995, which could be reduced through
conservation.
URBAN WATER CONSERVATION
The Santa Clara Valley experienced a drought from 1988-1990 and additional years of
drought are expected. The four water companies within the boundaries of the City enforced
water restrictions in response to the Santa Clara Valley Water District's to reduce overall
water use by 25% during the high use months. This policy will be periodically reduced or
increased based upon water reserves, water usage and rainfall amounts. Ground -water
pumping was also restricted because over pumping lowered the water table and ground
settlement occurred throughout the Valley. The Santa Clara Valley Water District does not
• have sufficient allocations from the California Water Project nor the Federal Water Project,
so water conservation is of great economic, social and environmental importance.
Citywide, the majority of the water connections and usage is residential. Therefore,
the burden of water conservation falls largely on residential users. Even though the num-
ber of industrial connections may be less than residential, consumption is high per connec-
tion and conservation measures are still warranted.
The Santa Clara Valley Water District indicates it has the ability to meet the long term
water needs of Cupertino water retailers. The District Water Supply Master Plan has planned
for growth, based upon the maximum growth potential of all municipalities in the District,
which does not exceed ABAG's projections.
■ Policy 5- 29: Interagency Coordination
Actively pursue interagency coordination for regional water supply prob-
lem solving.
The California Water Service Company will increase water pressures 10 to
15 pounds per square inch throughout the Cupertino Service area during
the 1992 fiscal year. California Water Service will meet the Public Utility
Commission minimum water pressure service area wide.
■ Policy 5- 30: Reglin Water Annexation
Recognize that additional capacity requirements placed on Reglin Mutual
Water Company would require that one of the adjoining utility companies
annex and service users in the next decade (through year 2001).
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
5-13
5-14
Environmental Resources
Recognize that if annexed by Cupertino Municipal Water Company, an in-
crease in capital improvement projects and required financing would be
required to enhance the water supply system.
■ Policy 5- 31: Local Conservation Policies Similar to Regionwide Policies
Continue to keep citywide efforts of water conservation similar to those
being conducted on a regional scale. Many of these conservation efforts are
outlined in the Santa Clara Valley Water District Drought Plan and
Countywide Water Use Reduction program.
■ Policy 5- 32: Public Information Effort
Continue providing the public information regarding the status of the
drought and water conservation techniques. Consider sending regular
notices to households and businesses on water prohibitions, water alloca-
tions and conservation tips. Continue to air conservation videotapes on the
City's government channel. Continue to provide water conservation kits
to the community upon request.
■ Policy 5-33: Prohibit Excessive Water Use
Prohibit excessive water uses throughout the City, such as irrigation of ex-
isting landscaping during the daylight, and require large water users to
perform water audits. These and other policies shall be enforced until such
•
time as an official declaration has been made by Santa Clara Valley Water
District that the drought conditions no longer exist.
Policy 5- 34: Water Conservation Program
To preserve the well-
known beauty of
Cupertino's landscap-
Undertake programs for long-term water conservation at City buildings fin-
ing without excessive
demand on limited
eluding installation of low flow toilets and installation of automatic shut off
water supplies, the
valves in sinks of park buildings.
City requires extensive
use of drought-resis-
NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION
tant and native plants
for proposed non-resi-
dential projects as part
Nonpoint source (NPS) pollution is caused by the accumulated debris and chemicals
of the approval pro-
on streets and pavements which are carried by water runoff into the storm drain system and
cess. Cupertino enjoys
eventually into South San Francisco Bay. Unlike pollutants that come from a point source,
public and private
cooperation in this
e such as a sewer i NPS pollutants are washed from streets, parking lots, neighborhoods,
pipe, P p g g
effort.
construction sites and other exposed surfaces throughout the City.
While NPS pollutants come from a variety of sources, many of them are familiar to
SEE MUNICIPAL
residents because they originate from the home and automobile. NPS pollutants include
CODE CHAPTER 9.15
detergents, paint products, pet wastes, garden pesticides, fertilizers, eroded soils, motor oil
and car exhaust. Since the storm drains are separated from the sanitary sewers, pollutants
carried by water runoff into the storm drain are not treated and flow directly into the creeks
and streams that feed San Francisco Bay.
Previously, it was widely believed that wastewater treatment plants, industries and
other "point sources" were the main contributors of contaminants to the Bay. Today,
nonpoint sources are recognized as significant contributors to Bay pollution. The concen-
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0
Environmental Resources
trations of NPS pollutants can have deleterious effects on aquatic wildlife which include the
impairment of growth, reproduction and overall health of sediment -dwelling organisms,
fish and other wildlife. Some toxic substances accumulated by aquatic organisms enter the
food chain when consumed by larger fish, birds or humans.
GOVERNMENT ACTION
At the instigation of South Bay cities, the Regional Water Quality Control Board and
federal mandates have required the protection of San Francisco Bay through the control of
nonpoint source pollution. Fifteen Santa Clara County jurisdictions, including Cupertino,
that discharge into San Francisco Bay have joined together to develop and implement a Storm
Water Management Plan. This association of agencies, known as the Santa Clara Valley
Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program, is continuing to identify feasible solutions to
control nonpoint source pollution.
M Policy 5-35: Nonpoint Source Pollution
Continue to support and participate in the Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint
Source Pollution Control Program in order to cooperatively reduce nonpoint
source pollution with other cities that discharge storm waters into San Fran-
cisco Bay.
■ Policy 5-36: Storm Water Runoff
. Encourage the reduction of impervious surface areas and investigate oppor-
tunities to retain or detain storm runoff on new development.
E Policy 5-37: Development on Septic Systems
Do not permit urban development to occur in areas not served by a sani-
tary sewer system, except the previously approved Regnart Canyon Devel-
opment.
Energy Conservation
Escalating energy costs and decreasing availability of fuel sources reinforce the need
for energy efficiency. Energy conservation is an individual responsibility to some extent
and personal efforts may work better and cost less than a complex system of government
regulations. This section discusses the energy use problem and gives local conservation
policy options.
REGIONAL PERSPECTIVE
In 1972, 19.5 percent of the nation's energy was used for residential and commercial
applications; transportation used 24 percent, industry 31 percent, and electrical utilities 24.5
percent. About half of the energy used by households is wasted. Home heating is the larg-
est cause of waste; it uses 65 percent of the residential energy budget and makes up 80 per-
cent of the wasted energy. Water heating takes about 13 percent of the budget, lighting about
10 percent, and cooking and air conditioning five percent each.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
5-15
5-16
Environmental Resources
In California, 96 percent of homes are heated by gas, the rest by electricity. Very little
coal, oil or wood is used for home heating. In 1972, the Bay Area energy was used this way:
homes, 17.1 percent; commercial, 6.5 percent; refineries, 18.4 percent; utilities, 15.4 percent;
industrial, 10.6 percent; transportation 30.5 percent and miscellaneous, 1.6 percent.
During 1972, 2.8 million cars and light-duty trucks consumed 6,000,000 gallons of gaso-
line while driving about 76,000,000 miles, taking up about one quarter of the daily energy
budget.
In the Santa Clara Valley, the average daily household use is about 15 kilowatts of elec-
tricity and about 3.3 therms of natural gas.
In Cupertino, a considerable amount of energy could be saved by making home heat-
ing and water heating more efficient or finding alternatives to current processes; making
lighting, cooling and cooking more efficient and reducing unnecessary use of automobiles.
The Cupertino Planning Department found that people who live in the flatlands use
only about 15 percent of the total energy demand for transportation because they are near
major roads, while people who live on hillsides use twice that amount.
. Policy 5-38: Public Information
s
Continue to act as a liaison between PG&E and the community in provid-
ing energy efficiency information. •
RESIDENTIAL ENERGY USE MITIGATION MEASURES
1. Types of Construction Single-family detached houses lose more heat per square foot of
floor area than individual dwellings in multiple -family buildings. Less exterior wall area
compared to floor area also reduces energy loss. So, a rectangular or L-shaped, one-story
house loses the same amount of heat as a two-story square house when both have insulated
walls and ceilings. Floor plans with an H -shape or T-shape lose even more heat compared
to the square layout.
2. Insulation/Heat Loss Protection Floor, wall and ceiling insulation reduces interior heat
loss. A well -insulated house in the Bay Area has little need for air conditioning on most
warm days. Insulation designated R-19 in ceilings and walls and R-11 in floors cuts heating
and air conditioning costs considerably. These designations are higher than those required
under California law.
If the building has perimeter heating ducts under the slab, it will lose even less heat if
there is edge insulation.
Insulated thermal windows, storm doors, and sealed fireplace flues further reduce
energy loss from inside the building. Light-colored exterior paint makes the indoors cooler
as well.
In multiple -family buildings, a heat pump system can provide home heat, water heat-
ing and air conditioning using less than half the energy needed to do the same thing with
conventional heaters and coolers. Solar heat collection panels can augment the usual pool •
heating system.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
SEnvironmental Resources
3. Orientation of Buildings Buildings built on hills will need an eave overhang of 24 to 32
inches to shade exposed walls and windows from direct summer sunshine. In the winter,
the sun's lower path through the sky allows some rays to penetrate under the eaves to sup-
ply some heat.
It is best to use more windows in walls that face southeast, south and southwest and
to shade them with trees, shrubs, awnings or eaves to reduce summer heat gain. Planting
evergreen trees near north -facing walls reduces wind. Leafy trees shade the south walls in
the summer and allow solar heat gain when they shed their leaves in winter. Shrubs, trel-
lises, and hedges should provide natural wind breaks for building entrances. Air condi-
tioner condensers must be shaded and have plenty of natural ventilation to increase
compressor efficiency and reduce energy use.
TRANSPORTATION ENERGY CONSERVATION PRACTICES
People rely on their cars in the Santa Clara Valley, and these cars are a principal source
of pollution. They inefficiently consume vast amounts of gasoline, the materials needed to
build them and the roads they run on.
Cupertino provides incentives to use alternative transportation. Major industrial de-
velopment approvals have required experimental employee van pooling. A major bus sys-
tem transfer facility is planned for Vallco Shopping Center to encourage commute trips.
Recognizing that people will probably prefer to use their cars for transportation for
many years to come, the City Council approved construction of an electronic traffic signal
interconnect system for the major commute boulevards. This system will ease traffic and
reduce the number of stops through flexible and sensitive signal control over a longer por-
tion of the commute path. If this system functions correctly, air quality, gasoline economy
and vehicle operation cost will improve.
Open Space Resources
GPRESERVE AND ACQUIRE OPEN SPACE LANDS FOR THE PRESERVATION
OF NATURAL RESOURCES, THE MANAGED PRODUCTION OF
RESOURCES, FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION AND FOR PUBLIC HEALTH
AND SAFETY.
PUBLIC OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT
Several public agencies share the task of acquiring, maintaining, accessing and devel-
oping open space lands for the enjoyment of residents of Cupertino and its neighboring cit-
ies. Some of these public open space lands provide high or low -intensity recreation; some
emphasize scenic beauty; others preserve vegetation or wildlife habitats; still others help
control urban sprawl.
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
The District, created in 1972 by the County electorate, has as its major goal preserving
• undisturbed, unique and sensitive wildland habitat by carefully controlling access. District
lands in Cupertino are designated for low -intensity use to give long-term protection from
encroaching urbanization. These lands were acquired according to four principal criteria:
scenic preservation, preservation of unique sites, the guidance of urban form, and low in -
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
5 -17
5-18
Environmental Resources
tensity recreational opportunities. Guidance of urban form requires cooperation and coor-
dination with Cupertino's planning efforts. Consequently, the Cupertino City Council and
the District Board agreed to a review procedure in 1976 of District purchases in Cupertino's
planning area. The informal agreement provides for City review of potential purchases
within the planning area and no review of acquisitions outside the planning area.
SANTA CLARA COUNTY
Most of the hillsides in Cupertino's planning area are unincorporated and undevel-
oped, so Santa Clara County's hillside policies and ordinances dictate their final land use.
The County's General Plan calls for the hillside area to be preserved in an open condition
with uses that support and enhance the rural character, which protect and promote wise
use of natural resources, and which avoid or reduce the risks imposed by natural hazards
found in these areas. Allowed uses include very low density residential development, min-
eral extraction, agriculture, grazing and wildlife refuges, among others. The number of
houses allowed to be built is controlled by a slope density formula which ranges from 20-160
acre minimum parcel sizes increasing with the steepness of the slope. The theoretical maxi-
mum number of houses ranges from 115 to 190.
Cupertino expects that the Board of Supervisors will amend the Montebello Plan to
reflect the more restrictive limitations and the City Plan will be amended accordingly.
SANTA CLARA COUNTY PARKS PROGRAM
11
This program operates on a voter approved measure in which a fixed portion of the •
property taxes are set aside from the General Funds for parks to acquire and develop a re-
gional park system. It emphasizes completing Upper Stevens Creek Park and its connec-
tion to Stevens Creek. Because the upper portions of Stevens Canyon are environmentally
sensitive, the County Parks and Recreation Department has made a commitment to connect
these two parks. Currently, the County is preparing a master plan for lower Stevens Creek
Park.
E Policy 5-39: Stevens Creek Park
The Santa Clara County Parks program should pursue the goal of connect-
ing upper and lower Stevens Creek Parks. The County parks budget should
pursue acquisition to the extent possible, and emphasize passive park de-
velopment in keeping with the pristine nature of the hillsides.
SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
The District can continue to help Cupertino carry out its open space policies. It helped
Cupertino prepare its natural flood plain policy for the reach of Stevens Creek between
Stevens Creek Boulevard and the reservoir and directly helped to buy open space lands
within McClellan Ranch Park. It also created a Flood Protection Program for that reach of
Stevens Creek next to the Creston and Oakdell Ranch neighborhoods. The District upgraded
Stevens Creek Reservoir in 1986 and it is being refilled to full capacity as weather permits.
Policy 540: Stevens Creek Reservoir
Work to keep the watershed and storage basin properties of Stevens Creek •
Reservoir in public ownership if the Santa Clara Valley Water District de-
cides to abandon it.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
Environmental Resources
Open Space Policies and Programs
• Cupertino's main role in open space planning is in developing neighborhood parks.
The City has policies that encourage the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and
the County Park System to complete phases of their programs and to buy certain properties
it feels need to be owned by the public but still kept undisturbed. The City recognizes that
fiscal constraints on regional, as well as local, park financing will affect park acquisition pro-
grams.
Figure 5-D identifies these properties. Cupertino intends to create a continuous open
space green belt next to its planning area.
M Policy 541: Continuous Open Space
Actively pursue inter -agency cooperation in buying properties near the
western planning area boundary to complete a continuous open space green
belt along the lower foothills, with a special focus on purchase of the Dio-
cese property.
STEVENS CREEK
The Stevens Creek Flood Plain is Cupertino's most prominent urban open space re-
source. The land is designated for recreation and farming, with adjoining properties set aside
for low-density residential use.
Since the late 1950s, many jurisdictions have advocated a formal urban trail following
Stevens Creek, extending from the San Francisco Bay to the Pacific Ocean. Cupertino's 1964
•and 1972 plans proposed an ambitious plan to buy lands for this purpose. The City's acqui-
sition of Linda Vista Park, McClellan Ranch Park, Simms Property and Blackberry Farm
supported this plan.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
5-19
M.1
Environmental Resources
Rancho San
County Park
,.: .. '... )CJI VN< A,,
L
_ 4
Shnrns C ak' ,
c >
LrJ ,J
} Proposed )\'Steveris Creek v"<>�� Stevens
vrn ,;Creek;;
Trail Corridor \
n �,
>�I s
aatogalGap•.
Ipen Space -.
reserves
11IVC>�
L�Lr>�'Lrj ^nn)�LN>77
LrV J -lr� V.L ry IJc�, Ver , >
Figure 5-D. Existing and Proposed
Public Open Space.
DA.
� Cdleg[
G \ J ML CIEWN \,
Llnda,Vista
City Park
j � \
i
I � i
Fremont Older
v�Open Space
�'^Preserve
The barrier caused by Interstate 280 along with the encroachment of residential devel-
opment, breaks the continuity of the ocean -to -bay trail system. So, there will most prob-
ably be urban links connecting the trail from Homestead Road to Blackberry Farm by way
of Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road.
The Stevens Creek Trail Plan retains the open space character of the Stevens Creek Flood
Plain between the reservoir and Stevens Creek Boulevard and may offer historical signifi-
cance relating to the Juan Bautista De Anza Trail designation.
•
�J
One land purchase is proposed to help preserve the open space of the flood plain. The
Stocklmeir property is uniquely suited to be a joint open space and historic preservation site.
A decision on buying the property will be triggered either by the owner's request to develop •
the property or to dedicate it for open space or by a direct request of the community. If the
community found that it would be too expensive to buy the property or cost too much to
maintain it over a long period, the property would remain in private hands. Since most of
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Existing County Parks
Existing Mid Peninsula Regional
Open Space Preserve
Proposed City Open Space
-----
�
Proposed Expansion of
------
Regional Open Space Lands
Public Access To
Open Space Preserves
Proposed Open Space Linkage
---
Urban Service Area Boundary
---
Boundary Agreement Line
The barrier caused by Interstate 280 along with the encroachment of residential devel-
opment, breaks the continuity of the ocean -to -bay trail system. So, there will most prob-
ably be urban links connecting the trail from Homestead Road to Blackberry Farm by way
of Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road.
The Stevens Creek Trail Plan retains the open space character of the Stevens Creek Flood
Plain between the reservoir and Stevens Creek Boulevard and may offer historical signifi-
cance relating to the Juan Bautista De Anza Trail designation.
•
�J
One land purchase is proposed to help preserve the open space of the flood plain. The
Stocklmeir property is uniquely suited to be a joint open space and historic preservation site.
A decision on buying the property will be triggered either by the owner's request to develop •
the property or to dedicate it for open space or by a direct request of the community. If the
community found that it would be too expensive to buy the property or cost too much to
maintain it over a long period, the property would remain in private hands. Since most of
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Environmental Resources
the property is in the natural flood plain, its residential development potential is limited to
a small area around the existing homesite that is outside the natural flood plain. The open
space acquisition and public trail easement through the 150 -acre Kaiser property south of
Linda Vista Park will come about when the property is proposed for development and City
review begins.
■ Policy 542: Open Space and Trail Linkages
Work to provide the open space lands and trail
linkages described in Figures 5-D,E,F.
Strategy
Develop a City trail plan which links major em- I
ployment centers, the Heart of the City and ma-
jor open space areas.
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE RESOURCES
There are several private open space and recreational IF"—
activity businesses in Cupertino's planning area, including
golf courses, riding stables and clubs offering tennis and swimming. They are valuable to
the community because they provide services that are not traditionally provided by the
• public sector on City or regional parklands. Land use controls and incentives should be
incorporated into public policy so these operations can continue. Utility system power line
corridors in the City's foothills are another category of privately controlled open space. Deer
and other animals use these as migration paths.
0 Policy 5-43: Private Open Space and Recreational Facilities
Encourage the continued existence and profitability of private open space
and recreation facilities through incentive and development controls.
0 Policy 5-44: Public Use of Private Open Space
Seek cooperation from private land owners for public use of private open
space.
NEIGHBORHOOD OPEN SPACE PROGRAM
Cupertino's neighborhood parks system serves the active and passive recreation needs
of its residents. Table 5-A lists the park and recreation acreage by neighborhood.
The City of Cupertino recognizes that a well-managed open space and park system
enhances the quality of life for its citizens. The existence of open space provides a visual
break from development, and park facilities provide people with the opportunity and en-
couragement to pursue recreational activities improving both their physical and mental well
being.
•Changing economic conditions have created a need for new approaches to the acqui-
sition of open space. Escalating land costs and reductions in local funding mean the City
needs to identify alternatives to the traditional purchase of park land, such as long-term joint -
use agreements and development dedications.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
5-21
SEE POLICIES 4-10
AND 5-20
SEE MUNICIPAL -
CODE, SECrION 19.72
5-22
Environmental Resources
I Li I
Steven Cre` BI d
La
�� Da a
McClellan Road
McClellan
Raricli%
11
Ij
,i
11inda Vista
City Park
>
O
L
County I Open Space
Palk Acquisitions
Existing Public
FRO Open Space
4,!:3p E= Proposed Open
Space Linkage
Figure 5-E. Public Open Space in the Stevens Creek Flood Plain.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0
0
•
Environmental Resources
0
Rancho
San Antonio
Park
Figure 5-F.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
5-23
5-24
Environmental Resources
Table 5-A. Park and Recreation Acreage by Neighborhood.
•
Neighorhood Park
Acreage
School
Acreage
A-1
0
0
A-2
McClellan Ranch
Blackberry Farm`
18.7
33
0
B
Linda Vista
11
Monta Vista HS
Kennedy Jr. HS
Lincoln Elem.
Regnart Elem
10
16.6
3.29
3.81
C
0
0
E-1
Varian
6.3
Stevens Creek Elem.
3.1
E-2
Monta Vista
6.2
0
F-1
0
Homestead HS
10
F-2
Memorial
27.8
Garden Gate Elem.
3.13
G
Somerset Square
1.7
0
H-1
0
Faria Elem.
4.19
H-2
Jollyman
12
0
•
I-1
Wilson
10.4
Eaton Elem.
5.98
1-2
Fremont Older
11.8
J-1
0
Cupertino HS
10
J-2
0
Hyde Jr. HS
Sedgewick Elem.
7.75
4
K
0
0
L-1
0
0
L-2
Portal
3.8
Collins Elem.`
Portal Elem.'
2.92
1.71
M
0
0
N
0
0
O
0
0
P-1
Three Oaks
3.1
0
P-2
Hoover
5
0
"Not included in park ratio
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
J
11
r
•
Environmental Resources
In any case, the City of Cupertino shall continue its com-
mitment to a responsive and attractive open space and park sys-
tem by adhering to the following policies.
E Policy 5-45: Park Acreage
Provide park land equal to a minimum of three acres
for each 1,000 residents.
E Policy 5-46: Park Walking Distance
Ensure that each household is within a half mile walk
of the park and that the route is reasonably free of
physical barriers, including streets with heavy traffic.
. Policy 5-47. Park Minimum Acreage
Plan parks to be at least 3.5 acres for flexibility of use. The acquisition and
development of parks less than 3.5 acres may be considered according to
the following priorities:
High Priority - Designated neighborhoods which have no park or recreation
areas.
Moderate Priority - Designated neighborhoods which have school grounds
and no park land.
Low Priority - Designated neighborhoods which have park or recreation
areas less than three acres per 1,000 residents.
Accessibility of residents to parks should be considered in determining pri-
orities.
■ Policy 5-48: Park Design
Design parks informally to make use flexible and long-term maintenance
costs low.
■ Policy 5-49: Park Street Access
Ensure that parks are bounded by public streets. When possible, re-evalu-
ate parks that meet minimum size requirements to see if it is feasible to in-
stall a perimeter road.
■ Policy 5-50: Neighborhood N
New residential development in Neighborhood N should provide a public
neighborhood park based upon the City's park dedication ordinance. Sub-
sequently, the boundaries of neighborhoods N and El should be redrawn
to reflect the additional park site.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
5-25
5-26
Environmental Resources •
Policy 5-51: Neighborhoods J-1, J-2, K
Make the final determination regarding a neighborhood park site after the
completion of Cupertino Union School District's Sedgwick School master
plan.
DEFINITION OF NEED
Some sub -neighborhoods are isolated by physical barriers, including land forms, rail-
road tracks or streets with heavy traffic.
Accessibility is a major consideration in neighborhood parks. Figure 5-H shows the
half -mile service area radius for neighborhood parks. The shaded service areas show physi-
cal barriers, such as freeways, railroad tracks or stream beds. The diagram does not show
streets with heavy traffic. These busy streets may discourage some people, especially young
children, from visiting parks. For example, many parents would not allow their pre-school
children to cross De Anza Boulevard or Stevens Creek Boulevard alone to go to a park.
M
•111 iii
E-1 'a�' F-2 L-2
e A-1 '
srEVENs GREEN
Figure 5-G. Neighborhood Map.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•�
.
••' A-2 o AR�
-�
J -1e
E-2
cPu
O .... •fi
11 11• ..�1
H
ale
NICOLE WN
ROAD
<
;N
I-� '-2 ¢ J-2
a •;
H-2
E BOUINGERi
• :
B . 0
m
♦1
,i
• •11 •
�• ••9uuu :
�1
f
"d a;
P-1
= 1
RAINBOW
`/ :
RIV
P-2
koms Cmk
c vo r
\ WYW.WY.W
\j
• PROSPECT
�
RD
`�
1993
ran
........m.m
I
Neighborhood Boundary Line
—
Urban Service Area Boundary
/
I
Boundary Agreement Line
Figure 5-G. Neighborhood Map.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
L�
Environmental Resources
IMPLEMENTATION
Cupertino will not have the money to buy enough park land to meet the minimum
standard of three acres for each 1,000 residents in all neighborhoods. Table 5-B shows an
acquisition strategy that stretches limited money by using school sites, expanding existing
parks and taking advantage of park dedication requirements for major new developments.
Table 5-B. Proposed Park Land Acquisition Program.
Park and Recreation Land Needed - Acres/1000 People.
5-27
Area
1990
1990 Existing
GP
Existing GP (Mod)
Proposed GP
Notes
Existing
Buildout
Supply
Demand
Ratio
Supply
Demand
Ratio
Demand
Ratio
(acres)
(acres)
(ac/1000)
(acres)
(acres)
(ac/1000)
(acres)
(ac/1000)
Al/E1
9.4
11.22
2.51
9.4
11.31
2.49
11.31
2.49
F1/F2
40.93
21.27
5.77
40.93
22.38
5.49
24.21
5.07
G
1.70
1.95
2.62
1.7
1.97
2.6
1.97
2.6
1
N
0
3.21
0
0
4.17
0
4.17
0
Sub Total
52.03
37.65
4.15
52.03
39.83
3.92
41.66
3.75
A2/B/C
63.4
17.85
10.66
63.4
19.53
9.74
19.53
9.74
E2
6.2
10.38
1.79
11.1
11.01
3.02
11.01
3.02
2
1-11/1-12
16.19
11.55
4.21
16.19
11.91
4.08
14.46
3.36
0
0
4.23
0
0
4.41
0
4.41
0
3
P1
3.10
3.43
2.72
3.10
3.69
2.52
4.2
2.21
P2
5
5.16
2.91
5
5.16
2.91
5.61
2.67
Sub Total
93.89
52.6
5.36
98.79
55.71
5.32
59.22
5.00
11/12
28.18
17.52
4.83
28.18
18.15
4.66
19.8
4.27
J1/J2/K
21.75
15.63
4.17
21.75
15.69
4.16
15.69
4.16
1-1/1-2
3.8
13.02
.88
3.8
15.78
.72
16.59
.69
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.9
0
Sub Total
53.73
46.17
3.49
53.73
49.62
3.25
55.98
2.88
Totals
199.65
136.42
4.4
204.55
145.16
4.23
156.86
3.91
Notes:
1. Land not available for acquisition in neighborhood G.
2. 4.9 acres (Stocklmeir property) of natural open space will be acquired adjacent to Stevens
Creek per existing open space plan.
3. Park land in neighborhood 0 will not be acquired because of close proximity to other parks.
Supply Assumptions:
Schools with joint agreement areas and other long range availability of recreation areas are included
in the ratios. They are: Stevens Creek, Garden Gate, Lincoln, Faria, Regnart, Eaton, Kennedy,
Hyde, Sedgwick, Homestead High School, Monta Vista High School and Cupertino High School,
•Blackberry Farm is not included because it is a limited purpose facility.
Demand Assumptions:
Based on 2.60 persons per household
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
5-28
Environmental Resources •
0 Policy 5-52: Park and Open Space Acquisition Program
The City's park acquisition is defined by Table 5-13. The Acquisition Pro-
gram is based upon three broad acquisition objectives:
1. Complete the Parks Acquisition Program.
2. Maintain an adequate inventory of sports fields.
3. Retain creek site and other natural open space areas identified in
the Open Space section of the General Plan.
The plan is a policy document that will be used yearly to help in preparing
the updated Capital Improvements Program. The plan is subject to revi-
sion depending upon the availability of funds and subsequent actions of the
Cupertino Union School District regarding the disposition of surplus school
sites.
0 Policy 5-53: New Residential Development in Non-residential Areas
New residential development in non-residential areas shall provide park
and recreational space and facilities. The need for dedication of public park
land and the provision of private recreational space and facilities shall be
determined when a master plan is submitted for the development, based •
on the following criteria:
1. Where feasible, public park space as opposed to private should be
provided. Active park areas are encouraged which will serve the commu-
nity need. Passive areas are acceptable, when appropriate to an urban set-
ting. Features could include paths, benches, water features, picnic tables,
public art, trees and gardens. They should be oriented toward the street or
an activity area where it is easily accessible to the public. Passive areas
deemed inaccessible or unlikely to be used by the public should not be cred-
ited toward park dedication. Providing public trail connections may be
given partial credit toward park dedication.
2. New residential developments should be encouraged to blend their
recreational facilities into the community at large.
3. Park fees should be collected based on a formula which considers the
extent to which the public and/or private park space and facilities meet the
park need.
■ Policy 5-54: Recreational Facilities
The City of Cupertino recognizes the public benefit derived from a recre-
ational gymnasium and swimming pool and should such a facility be de-
veloped, the City shall pursue all possible partnerships, including school
districts, non-profit organizations and the corporate community, as a means
of funding and operating the facilities. •
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0 Environmental Resources
r-1
LJ
•
II
I
I�
II
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
Figure 5-H. 1990 Park Access Status.
...........I Neighborhood Boundary Line
Existing Park Site
Proposed Acquisition or Expansion
112 Mile Access Range From Park Sites
— — —
Urban Service Area Boundary
---
Boundary Agreement Line
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
5-29
0
W
•
Section 6
Public Health and Safety
Introduction
The purpose of this element is to ensure that Cupertino remains a reasonably safe place
to live and work. This section points out potential natural threats to life and property, in-
cluding earthquakes, floods, wildfires and landslides. There also are threats related to hu-
man carelessness, including urban fires and failures of water storage tanks, long-term
exposure to excessive noise, and crime encouraged by misjudgments in land planning and
building design.
There is no such thing as a risk-free environment; there is only an acceptable level of
risk. The question to be answered is "how safe is safe enough?" This is a subjective ques-
tion. Ideally, one would get rid of as much risk as possible, but local government must try
to set realistic standards within today's economic and social limits.
• Seismic and Geologic Hazard
The City is seismically very active. The mountains and lower foothills of Cupertino
are crossed by the San Andreas Fault, which moves from side to side, and its two splinter
faults, the Sargent-Berrocal and Monta Vista fault systems, which move up and down. Fig-
ure 6-A shows the two categories of fault displacement. The San and the Sargent-Berrocal
fault systems are in the mountains of Cupertino's planning area. The Monta Vista Fault
follows the line between the valley floor and the hillsides where urban development has
taken place. This fault is potentially active, but although it has not ruptured within the past
11,000 years, the potential always exists and must be considered when reviewing urban
development.
Ground shaking is the greatest hazard in an earthquake. Earthquake intensity is mea-
sured by two scales. First, the Richter Magnitude, which measures the total energy of an
earthquake as determined by a seismograph, an instrument that records the
vibrations of the earth. Second, the Modified Mercali Intensity Scale, a
system that measures the earthquake's intensity based on assess-
ing damage and personal reaction to the earthquake.
H K
Table 6-A shows the general comparisons between the La tl use/
twoscales.=a,Cominunity ,;,
A "maximum probable" earthquake on the San �Cupertino
Andreas and Monta Vista faults could cause consider- General
able damage depending on distance and whether the land Plan
• is bedrock or soils deposited by flowing water. Trensport;tIon
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN 1 6-1
6-2
Public Health and Safety
A. San Andreas Fault
• Horizontal Offset of the Ground Surface
• Horizontally Shifted Block
tel\
a�-2�
Fault Type: Right Lateral (Strike -Slip) Fault
Displacement: Horizontal
B. Sargent - Berrocal Fault
• Vertically Elevated Block
.,
x f a
s
Fault Type: Thrust (Dip -Slip) Fault
Displacement: Vertical
Figure 6-A. Diagrams Exhibiting Faults Within the Cupertino Planning Area Characterized By
Horizontal (A) and Vertical (B) Displacements.
EARTHQUAKE PROBABILITY
The time necessary for maximum probable earthquakes to occur again on a given fault
are guesses based on present and past activity, the amount of displacement of rock forma-
tions of different geologic ages along the fault tract, and the amount of strain accumulation
now measured across it. Estimates on potentially active faults such as the Sargent-Berrocal
and Monta Vista are even less accurate than estimates for active faults such as the San Andreas.
•
0
Tables 6-A and 6-B estimate the maximum earthquake magnitude and recurrence in-
tervals of maximum probable earthquakes for fault systems that affect Cupertino. There is
not enough information to estimate probable recurrence of a maximum earthquake on the
Sargent-Berrocal and Monta Vista Faults. The recurrence interval on the San Andreas fault •
is 50 to 200 years; the last maximum earthquake was in 1906. Each year that passes without
a maximum earthquake means that an earthquake is statistically more likely to happen
within any year.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0 Public Health and Safety
e
Table 6-A. General Comparison Between Earthquake Magnitude and the Earthquake Effects Due
to Ground Shaking.
Earthquake Richter
Category Mag.
ISL 1=16
Modified Mercali Intensity Scale*
(After Houser, 1970)
6-3
Damage To
Structure
I Detected only by sensitive instruments
2.00 11 Felt by few persons at rest, esp. on upper floors;
delicate suspended objects may swing
III Felt noticeably indoors, but not always recognized as No
3.00 an earthquake; standing cars rock slightly, vibration Damage
like passing trucks
4.00
IV Felt indoors by many, outdoors by a few; at night,
some awaken; dishes, windows, doors disturbed;
cars rock noticeably
V Felt by most people; some breakage of dishes, Architectural
windows and plaster; disturbance to tall objects Damage
VI Felt by all; many are frightened and run outdoors;
falling plaster and chimneys; damage small
5.00
5.3 VII Everybody runs outdoors. Damage to buildings varies
depending on quality of construction; noticed by
drivers of cars
Moderate 6.00 VIII Panel walls thrown out of frames; walls,
monuments and chimneys fall; sand and mud ejected;
drivers of cars disturbed.
Structural
6.9 IX Building shifted off foundations, cracked, thrown Damage
out of plumb; ground cracked, underground pipes
broken; serious damage to reservoirs/embankments
Major 7.00 X Most masonry and frame structures destroyed;
ground cracked; rails bent slightly; landslides
7.7 XI Few structures remain standing; bridges destroyed;
fissures in ground; pipes broken; landslides; rails
bent Total
Destruction
Great 8.00 XII Damage total; waves seen on ground surface; lines of
sight and level distorted; objects thrown into the air;
large rock masses displaced
* Subjective measure of ground shaking; not engineering measure of ground acceleration
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-4
Public Health and Safety
•
Table 6-B. Active and Potentially Active Faults and Their Earthquake Characteristics.
Causative Distance From Maximum Maximum Est. Recurrence
Faults De Anza/SCB Historic Quake Probable Quake Interval of Max. Prob.
Intersection Magnitude Magnitude Earthquake
San Andreas 5.5 Miles 8.3 (Richter) 8.3 (Richter) 50-100 Years
(Last event 1906)
San
Andreas Hayward 10 Miles 7.0+ (Richter) 7.0+ (Richter) 10-100 Years
System (Last event 1868)
Calaveras 14 Miles 6.0+ (Richter) 7.0+ (Richter) 10-100 Years
Sargent- Berrocal 3.5 Miles 3.7-5.0 (Richter) 6.5-7.0 (Richter) Insufficient Data
Berrocal
System Monta Vista 2 Miles 2.0-3.0 (Richter) 6.5-7.0 (Richter) Insufficient Data
d VIII-IX.";tea
VII - VIII �.^o
I -
;••'.VIII =:IX .
VII
•��VIII - - _ _. X _
X - XII - Modified Mercalli
Intensity
i
San Andreas Fault -
Magnitude 8.3
Figure 6-B. Apparent Intensity Map of the Cupertino Planning Areas, San Francisco Earth-
quake of 1906. (Modified after Algermissen, 1972; and Borchert, et al., 1975)
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
0
09
ro \
•
IX
VII - VIII"\
X -XII
Public Health and Safety
Monte Vista Fault -
Magnitude 7.0
6-5
Figure 6-C. Hypothetical Intensity Map
for a Maximum Probable Earthquake on the
Monta Vista Fault.
Cupertino is divided into 13 geologic/seismic hazard zones. Figures 6-C and 6-D shows
the zones and describes the specific hazards that could happen within each zone. The haz-
ard map and table will be used to determine which future development projects must un-
dergo geologic review and the degree of detail of each review.
GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
Landslides are the greatest geologic hazards to the foothills and low mountains in the
planning area. Landslides can move earth up or down. The sliding of a slope is the normal
geologic process that widens valleys and flattens slopes. The rate ranges from rapid rock
falls to very slow soil and bedrock creep. Landslides are caused by inter -related natural
factors, such as weak soil and rock over hillsides made steeper by rapid stream erosion,
adverse geologic structure, ground water levels and high rainfall rates. Landslides can be
caused by improper grading, excessive irrigation, removal of natural vegetation and alter-
ing surface and sub -surface drainage.
Figure 6-E shows landslide deposits within Cupertino. Geologic mapping in the hill-
sides shows that landslide deposits cover as much as 20 to 30 percent of the hillsides in the
planning area. Landslides range from small, shallow deposits made up of soil and weak
bedrock materials to large, deep landslides involving a large amount of bedrock.
It's nearly impossible to know the long-term stability of a landslide deposit. Old de-
posits are the most difficult to judge. Experience shows that old landslides are far more likely
to move again than areas that have not had landslides before. Areas in these old landslides
that are next to steep, new stream channels are more likely to have new landsliding than
areas further from the new channels. This would be especially true with severe shaking
during a major earthquake on any of the three faults in Cupertino. The historic account of
the 1906 earthquake shows many landslides throughout the Santa Cruz Mountains. Some of
these were catastrophic, causing loss of life, personal injury and severe damage to buildings.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
SEE THE CTTY OF
CUPERTINO
GEOLOGIC AND
SEISMIC HAZARDS
MAP FOR A PARCEL
SPECIFIC GEOLOGIC
MAP.
6-6
Public Health and Safety •
• \ ;.� ., �' ::'- }.�__, J- ' /_.._ ,,� �.� IVF -S t r
FmIS
PMIPEC! �
.S
VF Valley Floor Terrain Hazard Zone
F Foothill Terrain Hazard Zone
M Mountain Terrain Hazard Zone
lateralaultt
W-3 � / � � �'^'�� Theist Fault
concealed Thrust Fault
\i
Schemaac Cross Section
' -
F-2 F-3 VF$ VFd VF -5 VF4
,,•� t /' C it I 111
VF -2 VF -3
Urban Service Area Boundary
Boundary Agreement Line
Figure 6-D. Seismic and Geological Hazards.
Landslides are expected along the higher portions of Stevens Creek embankments on
the valley floor, confined to local sites along the stream channel extending from the front of
the hillsides across the valley floor. The hazard can be reduced significantly by restricting
building at the base and top of the embankments.
ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF RISK
Land use and building design standards must relate to the degree of geologic and seis-
mic hazards in the zone in which a proposed project would be built so that an acceptable
level of risk can be assigned. Table 6-D shows an acceptable level of risk for seven land use
categories. The four levels of acceptable risk range from extremely low to ordinary. Ex-
tremely low risk is assigned to vital structures, such as a large dam or a public utility facil-
ity. An ordinary risk category is assigned to buildings such as single-family houses,
warehouses and farm buildings. The table also shows the possible additional cost of mea-
sures to reduce risk and identifies the level of protection for life and property.
Land use in the extremely low risk category must achieve maximum safety. For ex-
ample, Stevens Creek Reservoir must be designed to remain totally functional during the
worst possible earthquake. Those improvements must be made at any cost; there is no set is
percentage of cost associated with structural safety improvements. Ordinary risk activities
will cost about 1 to 2 percent more for the desired level of safety.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
Public Health and Safety
6-7
Qal - Valley Floor Alluvium
0 QTsc - Santa Clara Formation
Tm,Tr - Tertiary Sedimentary Rocks
Kir - Franciscan Assemblage
- Landslides
- Thrust Fault
Stnke-Slip Fault
Figure 6-F shows vital facilities that must remain intact during the worst probable earth-
quake on any fault system in Cupertino. Most of these facilities are owned by private com-
panies or public agencies beyond direct City control. The map's purpose is to bring the
owners' attention to the need to evaluate the facilities in terms of their potential to disrupt
service or cause hazard to Cupertino residents. Cupertino City Hall is a communications
center for natural disasters, including earthquakes, and will be important in coordinating
emergency services. The City must be sure that critical parts of the water system can with-
stand a maximum earthquake so that there will be sufficient water to drink and fight fires.
Table 6-E shows a policy position on the amount of technical evaluation needed to be
sure that hazards in new developments are reduced to an acceptable level of risk based on
land use. Critical facilities in Cupertino's planning area should be evaluated and modified
structurally to withstand a maximum earthquake.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-8 Public Health and Safety •
Table 6-C. Explanations: Geologic and Seismic Hazards Map of the Cupertino Planning Area.
Geologic Terrain General Geologic/Seismic Hazard Specific Hazard
Unit Hazards Within Terrain Unit Zone Map To Be Considered
Symbol In Haz. Zone
VALLEY FLOOR: Nearly flat,
urbanized valley floor; steep
walls of Stevens Creek
Canyon; low rolling foothills
area near St. Joseph
Seminary and Monts
Vista substation
GROUND SHAKING - Moderate to locally severe
- Ground Shaking
VIII to IX intensity for max. probable event (8.3M)
- Ground Failure
on San Andreas Fault. X to XII intensity within
VF - 1/2/3 - Flood Inundation
1000 fl. and VII to VIII intensities at distance > 1000 ft.
(Calabazas Creek)
from max. probable event on Monte Vista Fault.
Santa Cruz Mountains
GROUND FAILURE - Moderate to high landslide
potential along steep Stevens Creek canyon VF - 4 - Ground Shaking
walls; Moderate -high potential lateral spreading - Ground Failure
and ground lurching, Stevens Creek Canyon (landsliding, lurching,
walls, liquefaction potential low -moderate lateral spreading)
MOUNTAINS - Moderate
GROUND RUPTURE - Moderate potential
M - 1 - Ground Shaking
- Ground Shaking
X to XII intensity for max. probable event (8.3M) on
along and Win 300 ft. east of Monte Vista Fault trace
Montebello Ridge and
- Ground Failure
(landsliding)
Santa Cruz Mountains
VF - 5
(liquefaction)
GROUND FAILURE - Moderate to high landslide
M-2 - Ground Shaking
- Flood Inundation
potential under seismic/non-seismic conditions for
FLOOD INUNDATION - Moderate -high potential
slopes > 15%; ground lurching, fracturing within
(lurching, fracturing)
along Stevens Creek under seismic or non -seismic
2000 ft. west of Berocal and San Andreas Fault
conditions, and along Calabazas Creek under
VF - 6
- Ground Shaking
San Andreas Fault trace; Moderate potential 600 ft.
non -seismic conditions
- Ground Rupture
- Ground Rupture
(Monte Vista Fault)
FOOTHILLS - Gentle to
GROUND SHAKING - Moderate to locally severe VIII
F - 1
- Ground Shaking
steep, partially urbanized
to IX intensity for max. probable event (8.3M) on San
- Ground Failure
hillside area located west
Andreas Fault. X to XII intensity within 2000 ft. west
(landsliding)
of Valley Floor, generally
of Monte Vista Fault for max. probable event (7.OM)
east of Montebello Ridge
F-2
- Ground Shaking
GROUND FAILURE - Moderate to high landslide
- Ground Failure
potential under seismic/non-seismic conditions for
- Ground Rupture
slopes > 15%; ground lurching, fracturing within
2000 ft. west of Monte Vista Fault trace during
F-3
- Ground Shaking
maximum probable earthquake.
- Ground Failure
- Ground Rupture
GROUND RUPTURE - Moderate potential along and
Win 300 ft. east and 600 ft. west of Monte Vista Fault
and Berrocal Fault
F-4
- Ground Shaking
(Same as
- Ground Failure
FLOOD INUNDATION - Moderate -high potential
VF - 5)
- Flood Inundation
along Stevens Creek under seismic or non -seismic
conditions
MOUNTAINS - Moderate
GROUND SHAKING - Moderate to locally severe
M - 1 - Ground Shaking
to steep hillside areas of
X to XII intensity for max. probable event (8.3M) on
- Ground Failure
Montebello Ridge and
San Andreas Fault. X to XII intensity within 2000 ft.
(landsliding)
Santa Cruz Mountains
from Berrocal Fault for max. probable event (7.OM)
GROUND FAILURE - Moderate to high landslide
M-2 - Ground Shaking
potential under seismic/non-seismic conditions for
- Ground Failure
slopes > 15%; ground lurching, fracturing within
(lurching, fracturing)
2000 ft. west of Berocal and San Andreas Fault
GROUND RUPTURE - High potential w/in 600 ft. of
M-3 - Ground Shaking
San Andreas Fault trace; Moderate potential 600 ft.
- Ground Failure
west of Berrocal Fault trace
- Ground Rupture
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
r1
L_J
• Public Health and Safety
Table 6-D. Acceptable Exposure to Risk Related to Various Land Uses.
Land uses and structural types are arranged below according to the level of exposure to acceptable risk
appropriate to each group; the lowest level of exposure to acceptable risk should be allowed for Group 1 and
the highest level of exposure to acceptable risk for Group 7.
Acceptable Land Use Extra Project Cost To
Exposure Group Reduce Risk To
To Risk Acceptable Level
EXTREMELY Group 1 VULNERABLE STRUCTURES (nuclear As required for maximum
LOW reactors, large dams, plants manufact- attainable safety
uring/ storing hazardous materials)
Group 2 VITAL PUBLIC UTILITIES, (electrical Design as needed to remain
transmission interties/substantions, functional after max. prob.
regional water pipelines, treatment earthquake on local faults
plants, gas mains)
Group 3 COMMUNICATION/TRANSPORTATION 5% to 25% of project cost
(airports, telephones, bridges, freeways,
evac. routes)
SMALL WATER RETENTION Design as needed to remain
STRUCTURES functional after max. prob.
earthquake on local faults
EMERGENCY CENTERS (hospitals,
fire/police stations, post -earthquake aide
stations, schools, City Hall, De Anza
College)
Group INVOLUNTARY OCCUPANCY
FACILITIES (schools, prisons,
convalescent and nursing homes)
HIGH OCCUPANCY BUILDINGS
(theaters, hotels, large office/
apartment bldgs.)
MODERATELY Group 5 PUBLIC UTILITIES, (electrical feeder 5% to 25% of project cost
LOW routes, water supply turnout lines,
2% of project cost; to 10
sewage lines)
project cost in extreme cases
LEVEL
Design to minimize injury, loss of
FACILITIES IMPORTANT TO LOCAL
life during maximum probable
ECONOMY
earthquake on local faults; need
single-fam. resid., motels, small
not design to remain functional
ORDINARY Group 6 MINOR TRANSPORTATION (arterials
2% of project cost; to 10
RISK and parkways)
project cost in extreme cases
LEVEL
LOW -MODERATE OCCUPANCY
BUILDINGS (small apartment bldgs.,
single-fam. resid., motels, small
commercial/office bldgs.)
Group 7 VERY LOW OCCUPANCY BUILDINGS
Design to resist minor earthquakes
(warehouses, farm structures)
w/o damage; resist mod. earth-
quakes w/o strut. damage, with
OPEN SPACE & RECREATION AREAS
some non-struct. damage; resist
(farm land, landfills, wildlife areas)
major earthquake (max. prob. on
local faults) w/o collapse, allowing
some strut. & non -strut. damage
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-9
6-10
Public Health and Safety 0
I h\
Fire Station
OFreeway
�
+
Medical Supplies
�
L
City Hall
Water Mains
ROAD
.- ♦�)�' HOMESTEAD
♦ 11
\, � ���
Urban Service Area Boundary
---
Boundary Agreement Line
L---==---=-=---=-----`
0 '. '1.
-j... 0
i •�
....
r
gz
I
• ■
MC ROAD
�..i
= a
©
a
0
II
m
BS r
,_•..
�}
I
u✓
...
iJL
I 1
\ ' , steuens:Creek
I Reseiwir-
'-----
—'
I'
I
School
I
` L - 1 Water Tank or Reservoir
•1•
Fire Station
OFreeway
Overpass or Bridge
+
Medical Supplies
I
L
City Hall
Water Mains
••••••
S. C. V. W. D. West Pipeline
— —
Urban Service Area Boundary
---
Boundary Agreement Line
L---==---=-=---=-----`
•1•
Fire Station
OFreeway
Overpass or Bridge
+
Medical Supplies
••-••
Sanitary Sewer Trunk Line
City Hall
Water Mains
••••••
S. C. V. W. D. West Pipeline
— —
Urban Service Area Boundary
---
Boundary Agreement Line
Figure 6-F. Critical Facilities.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Municipal Buildings
0
City Corporation Yard
0
Senior Center
0
Community Center
0
City Hall
Facilities
Q Cal. Water Tanks
© HUD Tank
© San Jose Waterworks Tanks
• Public Health and Safety 6-11
Table 6-E. Technical Investigations Required to Design Structures Based Upon Acceptable Level
of Risk for Various Land Use Activities.
Hazard Zone Map Symbol
VF12356 F1234
M123 VF4
Land Use Activity Evaluations Required Evaluations Required
(Table 6-D)
Uniform Bldg. Code (UBC) Uniform Bldg. Code (UBC)
Groups 1 to 4 Soils Soils
Seismic Hazard Seismic Hazard
Geology
Uniform Bldg. Code (UBC) Uniform Bldg. Code (UBC)
Groups 5 to 7 Soils Soils
Geology
Description Of Technical Evaluations
UBC 1976 Edition, Uniform Building Code
•
Soils Soils and foundation investigation to determine ability of local soil
conditions to support structures
Geology Determine subsurface structure to analyze potential faults, ground
water conditions and slope stability
Seismic Hazard Detailed soils/structural evaluation to certify adequacy of normal UBC
earthquake regulations or to recommend more stringent measures
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-12
SEE POLICY 2-56 AND
POLICY 249
SEE GEOTECHNICAL
MAP
SEE EMERGENCY
PREPAREDNESS PLAN
Public Health and Safety
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
This section outlines actions the City should take to reduce the risk of injury or prop-
erty loss caused by natural disasters. Regulating new development offers the greatest re-
wards in risk reduction because while it is difficult to improve existing development, it is
much easier to locate and design new buildings to achieve this goal.
N Policy 6-1: SeismiclGeologic Review Process
Adopt and use a formal seismic/geologic review process to evaluate new
development proposals all over the City.
Strategies
1. Acceptable Level of Risk. Use the table on acceptable level of risk to iden-
tify reasonable levels of risk for land uses. The table gives general struc-
tural risk -reducing design criteria for each land group.
2. Geotechnical and Structural Analysis. Use Table 6-E of the Seismic Safety
Background Report to find the necessary geotechnical and structural analy-
sis based on the proposed location of a development in a specific hazard
zone.
3. Earthquake -Resistant Design Techniques. Give a high priority to using
new earthquake -resistant design techniques in the design and structural
engineering of buildings.
4. Residential Construction Standards Upgrade. Upgrade construction stan-
dards for non -engineered residences to reduce earthquake damage, limit-
ing them to minor construction techniques and components that do not
significantly raise costs. Examples are additional bracing for garage open-
ings of two-story and split-level homes and increased first story bracing in
multiple -family residences over parking garages.
5. Geotechnical Review Procedure. Adopt a geotechnical review procedure
that incorporates these concerns into the development review process.
It is not practical to improve buildings to incorporate revised earthquake safety stan-
dards. Luckily, most buildings in Cupertino are new and were constructed under a build-
ing code that includes components and designs that resist ground shaking.
Still, structures identified as "critical facilities' should be re-evaluated, especially those
in the high -hazard zones. Many seismic safety evaluations have been completed.
Cupertino's schools comply with legal standards. The state Department of Transportation
is looking at freeway overcrossings to see how resistant they are to ground shaking.
Evaluating non-critical public or private buildings is too expensive but City govern-
ment should educate residents, employers, and business owners to protect their property
and reduce risk of injury.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
11
•
• Public Health and Safety
■ Policy 6-2: Public Education on Seismic Safety
0
Continue the public education program to help residents reduce earthquake
hazards.
Strategies
Covenant on Seismic Risk. Continue the City program that requires de-
velopers to record a covenant to tell future residents in high-risk areas about
the risk and inform them that more information is in City Hall records. This
is in addition to the state requirement that information on the geological
report is recorded on the face of the subdivision map.
2. Earthquake Safety Booklet. Continue to distribute a general informational
booklet of instructions to minimize earthquake risks for owners of homes
and businesses. This booklet may be published in the Cupertino Scene.
Examples of safety tips may include tying down gas appliances, installing
an appropriate tool next to gas turn-off valves, finding a safe location for
family members to gather during an earthquake, recommending earthquake
drills and advising residents to maintain first-aid supplies, food, and drink-
ing water.
3. Promote Emergency Preparedness. Publish and promote emergency pre-
paredness activities and drills.
4. Community Alert System. Create and maintain a computerized calling
program to alert and evacuate neighborhoods in disasters.
5. Develop Neighborhood Response Groups. Train neighborhood groups
to respond to disasters as they request assistance. Assist in neighborhood
drills.
6. Dependent Populations. Encourage operators/owners of buildings with
dependent populations such as day care centers, schools, residential day
care and convalescent homes to prepare their buildings and clients through
an emergency plan, training and drills.
7. Foreign Language Emergency Information. Actively translate emergency
preparedness materials and distribute to appropriate foreign language
populations.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-13
6-14
Public Health and Safety •
Fire Hazard
Fire Services
The City of Cupertino's fire fighting and emergency medical services are provided by
the Central Fire Protection District. Three fire stations are located in the City of Cupertino.
(Figure 6-G)
The District also provides similar services for The Town of Los Gatos, Campbell, Monte
Sereno and a portion of the City of Saratoga. Besides fire protection, the District provides
fire prevention activities, educational programs, including those on earthquake prepared-
ness training, cardio pulmonary resuscitation and first aid certification classes.
The current and projected operating budget allows the District to perform these func-
tions satisfactorily. The City and District goal is to maintain a high level of service which is
measured by response times. It is the policy of the District to respond to all emergency calls
in under five minutes. The fire stations are strategically distributed throughout the city in
order to reduce response times.
Fire Hazards on the Urbanized Valley Floor
People who live and work in Cupertino are not subject to a high risk of fire. The City •
has a well-managed fire protection service; buildings are relatively new and there is a strong
code enforcement program and adequate water service. Nevertheless, there is room to re-
duce fire hazards in some geographical areas. Fire risk in cities depends on building con-
struction techniques, materials and heights, response time of fire equipment and firefighters
and water availability.
In urban areas, the most serious concern is fires in high-rise buildings, multiple fam-
ily dwellings and commercial and industrial structures containing highly combustible or
toxic materials.
RELATIONSHIP OF BUILDING DESIGN AND MATERIALS TO FIRE RISK
Cupertino minimizes fire hazards by regulating building construction and site plan-
ning through the Uniform Fire Code and the Uniform Building Code. All land within City
limits is designated Fire Zone 3 under the Uniform Fire Code. This is the least restrictive of
the fire zones and is used by suburbs in which most of the buildings are constructed to
modern standards and separated so that fire is not likely to spread from one to another.
Cupertino's large commercial and industrial buildings are designed to separate large areas
to prevent the spread of fire. The City also requires automatic sprinkler and fire detection
systems to further reduce risks.
The City and the Fire District periodically inspect commercial and industrial buildings,
but single-family homes do not require inspection. Smoke alarms are required in all new
homes constructed in the City.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0
•
E
V
Stevens Creek — —
Reservoir \ �'
1
Figure 6-G. Fire Service Area Boundaries.
ACCESSIBILITY
I
OLLINGepRo
Santa Clara County Central Fire Station
3/4 Mile Service Area
1-12 Miles Service Area
2 Miles Service Area
City of San Jose Fire Station
314 Mile Service Area Boundary
1-12 Miles Service Area Boundary
Urban Service Area Boundary
Boundary Agreement Line
A radius of a mile and a half is generally the ideal service area for a fire station, but a
large number of commercial and industrial buildings may require a radius of three-quar-
ters of a mile while a rural environment of single-family and two-family houses may per-
mit a radius of three to four miles or more. Figure 6-G shows the distances from four Central
Fire District Stations and the Rainbow -Blaney Avenue station in San Jose. As shown, the
majority of the community is within the one mile and a half radius. These distances predict
potential response time, which may change due to traffic congestion and other problems.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-16
SEE POLICY 2-53 AND
POL[cr 2-56
Public Health and Safety is
The ideal service area lines are used to show the relative degree of accessibility to various
areas in Cupertino.
One of the major goals of fire service is to reduce response time, but the City's policy
of discouraging commute traffic from driving through neighborhoods may delay response
time because it is difficult for fire equipment to use direct routes. Private security systems
for planned residential communities may also delay response time and must be looked at
carefully.
The City of Cupertino has a good safety record in terms of fire protection and a mini-
mum of fire losses. This record is reflected in the City's excellent fire insurance rating of
Class 3 (1 being perfect). This low level of risk is the combined result of the high propor-
tion of new construction which meets current Uniform Building Code standards, and an
efficient fire protection service.
Increased calls for fire service and traffic congestion can erode the Fire Department's
critical response times. To compensate, the District will adjust and/or expand staff and
equipment in high areas of service demand and continue its program of placing emergency
traffic preemption controls on key traffic signals.
People who live in the foothills and mountains of Cupertino's planning area are most
at risk from fire. The City is not directly involved in fire fighting in the mountains but fire
safety in the Montebello Ridge and Stevens Canyon area does affect Cupertino directly.
Major fires would harm the Stevens Creek watershed, by increasing flooding potential, by -
silting up stream beds and by reducing recreational opportunities.
Fire Hazards in the Foothills and Mountains
The vegetative cover, the degree of slope and critical fire weather are the three natural
factors the California Division of Forestry uses to classify the severity of potential fire in the
foothills. Development in the foothills is typically scattered and of low density, making fire
protection difficult. The amount of hazard to life and property is affected not only by the
fire itself but by road access for evacuation, the number of available fire fighters, the avail-
ability of water to fight the fire and the effectiveness of building codes and inspection of
developments in fire hazard areas.
There are about 16 square miles of land in the mountains of the Cupertino planning
area. Living in the rural hillsides has become very popular. Any increase in density increases
fire exposure risks. In 1992, all properties above the 10% slope line were categorized as
Hazardous Fire Areas, that is, land which is covered with grass, brush or forest, and which
is also difficult to access. Structures within this area are required to have fire retardant roof-
ing (Class A) and to continuously clear any brush away from their structures. Such struc-
tures may also be required to have sprinklers. If a fire were to start in this area, it would be
abnormally difficult to suppress. Under County zoning regulations, the number of houses
in such hazardous areas would peak at between 112 and 190.
Most of the mountainous land is owned either by the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District or the Santa Clara County Parks System. When the parks are fully active, many
people could be exposed to fire risk. •
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Public Health and Safety
BUILDING CODES
The Uniform Fire Code is used to designate certain areas as hazardous fire areas. The
code regulates building materials and the closeness of combustible plants to a structure. The
County Fire Marshal and Central Fire Protection District regulate activities in fire hazard
areas, including closing an area to the public. The County Fire Marshal currently responds
to complaints in the hazardous fire area. An inspection program is being designed for both
weed abatement and brush clearance. The goal date for implementation is December 1993.
ROAD ACCESS
Access is a key component of fire safety. Fire fighting equipment must be able to reach
the fire; likewise, assurance must be given to residents and visitors that they can escape from
fire. Fire equipment needs roads which are passable, have less than 15% grade, a turning
radius minimum of 42 feet or greater and places to turn around.
Public road access is severely limited. All emergency access roads run through pri-
vate property and these property owners are asked to act independently or to form groups
to maintain fire access roads. Santa Clara County lists the Montebello Road/Stevens Can-
yon area as the fourth highest risk in the county.
A gravel surface road links Montebello Road and the Palo Alto Sphere of Influence to
the bottom of Stevens Canyon. A fire trail extends from Skyline Boulevard on Charcoal Road
- to Stevens Canyon. Segments of that road are not paved and are extremely steep, so stan-
dard passenger cars cannot be used.
Road accessibility in the lower foothills is easier. The City requires an all-weather
surface, private emergency access connection between public streets within Lindy Canyon
and Regnart Canyon. However, private roads are less likely to meet the access standards.
There are usually no long-term guarantees of maintainance. Typically, private roads have
lower construction standards than public roads.
Dead end roads, especially long dead end roads which give access to many portions
of Regnart Road and Stevens Canyon areas, are risky. For this reason, alternate access routes
are provided via private emergency access routes.
WATER SUPPLY ON MONTEBELLO RIDGE AND IN STEVENS CANYON
There are no water systems in the Montebello Road and Stevens Canyon area with the
exception of Stevens Creek itself. The county requires each homesite to be served by a 10,000
gallon tank. It is theoretically possible to have water storage systems that are jointly owned
and operated and possible to reduce the required amount of water if there is an adequate
water main distribution for all homes sharing the joint facility.
WATER SUPPLY FOR FOOTHILL REGIONS WITHIN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA
All development in the Urban Service Area must be served by a water system that
complies with City standards for household and firefighting use. In the short term, a few
developed areas, such as lots in the upper reach of Regnart Canyon and a few areas in In-
spiration Heights, have an inadequate water system. In the long term, these areas will re-
ceive a better supply of water for fighting fires as the City's water system or adjoining water
provider expands along with new development and capital improvements projects.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-17
6-18
SEE POLICY 2-58
Public Health and Safety •
WATER SUPPLY FOR FOOTHILL REGIONS
The Reglin Mutual Water System services approximately 120 families in the Fire Haz-
ard area. There is no guarantee that these homeowners will maintain the water supply and
equipment. The Board of Directors has indicated that one of the existing water tanks is in
need of replacement. Annexation from one of the adjoining water companies may be nec-
essary.
Having enough water is important in fighting fires. Three of the four water retailers
serving the City of Cupertino, (Figure 6-H) also serve foothill areas. These servers include
the Cupertino Municipal Water, Reglin Mutual Water System and San Jose Water Company.
The San Jose Water company has adequate water lines and distribution systems to meet the
fire flow needs. However, although they meet today's needs, neither private water system
is required to maintain adequate fire flows under its agreements with the City and fire agen-
cies.
The City bought its domestic water system in 1960, when it consisted of old distribu-
tion lines and pumping facilities. The utility now has modernized lines mostly through new
development, but there are areas in the City that must be upgraded to meet fire -flow re-
quirements.
The Fire District has extensive fire and hazardous materials mutual aid plans with
adjacent cities, the County of Santa Clara and various state agencies. Mutual aid agreements
with surrounding jurisdictions augment the City's fire response capabilities. is
The City of Cupertino has taken a number of steps to combat fire hazards including
adoption of the State 1991 Fire Code, and has declared most of the Santa Cruz Mountain
range as hazardous fire areas. An early review process with the Fire District and the City is
conducted to incorporate fire prevention methods. Secondly, the City reviews building plans
and requires use of fire-resistant materials. The City coordinates with and encourages the
County of Santa Clara to uphold the weed abatement program.
0 Policy 6-3: County Fire Hazard Reduction
Encourage the county to put into effect the fire reduction policies in the
County Public Safety Element.
E Policy 64: Fuel Management to Reduce Fire Hazard
Encourage the Midpeninsula Open Space District and the County Parks
Department to continue efforts in fuel management to reduce fire hazard.
0 Policy 6-5: Green Fire Breaks
Encourage the Midpeninsula Open Space District to consider "green" fire
break uses for open space lands. This could include commercial timber
harvesting.
■ Policy 6-6: Residential Fire Sprinklers
Continue to require fire sprinklers in new residential construction located •
in hillside areas and on flag lots.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Public Health and Safety
CJ
11
Cupertino Municipal Water System
I
I � I
I
I � �
it
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Stevens Creek :\
Res rtroir
n o 1
r■■� i
1
1
.I
Figure 6-H. Water Service.
HOMEsi D
1
FEW--
MEN
EW--f■
■ o Q
s
� o
■■N
C[Avn
cdl�
California Water
■
ry •■�■■ ■■
/loll 6 Q
.� _
Reglin Mutual Water System
6
San Jose Water Works
■ IN ■ ■ ■ ■ Water Company Service Areas
®Area Subject to Lease Agreement
San Jose Water Works
— — — Urban Service Area Boundary
--- Boundary Agreement Line
. Policy 6-7: Hillside Access Routes
Require new hillside development to have frequent grade breaks in access
routes to ensure a timely response of fire personnel.
Policy 6-8: Hillside Road Upgrades
Require new hillside development to upgrade existing access roads to meet
Fire Code and City standards.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
SEE RESIDENT
HILLSIDE ORDI'
NANCE
6-19
1
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 14.04
6-20
PREHEARING REVIEW
Public Health and Safety •
. Policy 6-9: Early Project Review
Involve the Central Fire Protection District in the early design stage of all
projects requiring public review to assure fire department input and plan
modifications as needed.
E Policy 6-10: Growth Cooperation
Encourage cooperation between water utility companies and the Central
Fire District in order to keep water systems in pace with growth and
firefighting service needs.
E Policy 6-11: Fire Fighting Upgrade Needs
Encourage utilities to consider Central Fire District's firefighting needs when
upgrading water systems.
■ Policy 6-12: Roadway Design
Attempt to involve the Central Fire District in the design of public roadways
for review and comment. Attempt to ensure that roadways have frequent
median breaks for timely access to properties.
■ Policy 6-13: Fire Prevention .
Continue to promote fire prevention through city -initiated, public educa-
tion programs either through the government television channel and/or the
Cupertino Scene.
Policy 6-14: Multi -Story Building Fire Risks
Recognize that multi -story buildings of any land use type increases risks of
fire. Ensure that adequate fire protection is built into the design and require
on-site fire suppression materials and equipment to ensure safety of the
community.
E Policy 6-15: Residential Fire Sprinkler Ordinance
Consider adopting a residential fire sprinkler ordinance. This will reduce
both fire flows and the need for firefighting personnel and equipment.
E Policy 6-16: Commercial and Industrial Fire Protection Guidelines
Coordinate with the Fire District to develop new guidelines for fire protec-
tion for commercial and industrial land uses.
■ Policy 6-17. Private Residential Entry Gates
Discourage the use of private residential entry gates which act as a barrier
to emergency service personnel.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Public Health and Safety
■ Policy 6-18: Dead -End Street Access
Allow public use of private roadways during an emergency for hillside
subdivisions that have dead-end public streets longer than 1,000 feet or find
a secondary means of access.
■ Policy 6-19: Smoke Detectors
Continue to require smoke detectors in new residential construction and
continue to support fire protection agencies' education of homeowners on
installation of smoke detectors. Use the Cupertino Scene to publicize fire
hazards and correction methods.
Flood Hazard
Floods can result from large rainstorms, failure of water -storage facilities and from a
water basin created by a landslide.
Flood Hazard from Rainstorms
•Floods caused by large rainstorms are the most common and the least risky. The vast
watersheds in the Santa Cruz Mountain Range feed into four major streambeds that cross
the City: Permanente Creek, Stevens Creek, Regnart Creek, and Calabazas Creek. Figure
6-I shows streambed locations and the extent of a 100 -year flood, the flood than has a 1 per-
cent chance of happening during any given year.
The 100 -year flood is the standard design flood accepted by the City, the Santa Clara
Valley Water District and federal agencies. There is more information on this subject in the
section on acceptable level of risk.
The remainder of Cupertino is protected from flooding by the concrete sub -surface
storm drain system. It was designed for the largest storm that could happen once in three
years and was redesigned in 1977 for a 10 -year flood. All new development will have the
larger system. In the meantime, the key parts of the older system will be updated through
the long-term capital improvements program.
The City has not studied in detail the carrying capacity of the system for larger floods,
but in general a moderate storm, a 10 -year to 40 -year flood, will be contained within the curbs
and gutters of the streets and will flow into major storm channels and creek beds designed
to handle a 100 -year flood. Heavier storms may cause some flooding of yards, but it would
be extremely unlikely for water to enter buildings. A few areas in Cupertino, including Old
Monta Vista, and older areas next to the foothills, are not protected by storm water systems.
It is difficult, if not impossible, to predict the location and extent of flooding in smaller iso-
lated areas. In any case, the risk to life is virtually non-existent.
•Heavy rainstorms in the foothills and mountains of the planning area generally do not
cause flooding problems. A report sponsored by the Divisions of Mines and Geology showed
that all streambeds can carry a 200 -year flood.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-21
6-72 Public Health and Safety
�,% II r--_
- --
� 1 1 HOMESTEAD ROAD o 1
1
dv M Z 100 Year Flood 1
J
V• � � �e � es F
Contained In 1
, g Channel
8
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
N College
rZ
MCCLELLAN
tyHapROAD Gear w Q 1
L ` J Z
a m E BOLLINOEARD
0
/« epw
Yate
I ICad' RAiNBow Va -::
DRIVE
IOU YearFlood
Contained In
.: PROSPECT._
' RADC hannel
�.
ii- ,k
Reservoir.
='q Flood Limit Line for a "100 -Year" Event
---- Natural or Man -Made Water Course
--- Urban Service Area Boundary
Boundary Agreement Line
Note: Detailed Maps of 100 -Year Flood Event
Are Available at City Hall
Figure 6-1. Extent of Flooding as a Result of a "100 -Year" Flood.
Landslides and mudslides are the main problems caused by heavy rainstorms. These
happen when heavy sheet flows of water expose cut -and -fill slopes. Unless the slopes are
protected by erosion control methods, there will be landslides and mudslides, which silt up
streambeds.
Flood Hazard from Failure of Water -Storage Facilities
CI
L—A
Figure 6-J shows the location and size of water -storage facilities in the planning area. •
It describes the flooding if Stevens Creek Reservoir should fail instantaneously. The flooded
area is based on the maximum storage capacity of 3,700 acre feet. This reservior dam was
strengthened in 1986, allowing the dam to operate at its capacity.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Public Health and Safety
;
,\ -
Proposed Tank o
N 61.3 Acre Feet \\\\\\ '~Mann Drive Tank 0+30 Min. m O
��.20 Mil Gal m " ? S w
-AC
TMiLGaI.
Vos AVe 8 (, \ STEVENS CREEK BLVD
10 Acre Feet Az :,� �p^e r Q
111111 ' r ❑ city W LL
MCCLELLAN a
2 Mil. Gal.• y ROAD _ / w /w a
Acre.Fek ,! g <
4 Mil. Gal.,0+f0 Mn.
O
I �im
,...gap -
O - I z.' -'20 Mil. Gal. RAINBDw
ReglinMutual ��,;�Reservoir DRIVE
-; System 161.3 Acre Feet
20 MIL GaL� PROSPECT
ROAD
`
Stevens
Creek,' G '—
Reservoir .'`,, i
3700 Acre Feet'`; ,I
�_. 1 Bit. 200 Mil Gal
- Flood Limit Line
I
�` -- Natural or Man -Made Water Course
,s
Urban Service Area Boundary
I �
.\ --- Boundary Agreement Line
Note: Flood Inundation Area for Failure
A of Stevens Creek Reservoir Is Based Upon
IMaximum 3700 Acre Feet Storage Capacity.
I �
Figure 6-J. Extent of Flooding as a Result of Failure of Man -Made Water Storage Facilities.
The storage tanks shown on Figure 6-J are considered a minimal risk, but there is a
possibility of injury and property loss for homes located near these tanks if they were to fail.
Owners of such tanks are not required under law to prepare flooding maps and none have
been prepared by water utilities. The San Jose Water Company has installed flexible cou-
plings and check valves in the 20 -million -gallon Regnart Road Reservoir to minimize valve
and water line failure during an earthquake. The City's two water tanks, each holding 2
million gallons, do not have a check valve or flexible couplings. The 8 -to -10 acre-foot Voss
Avenue Pond was determined to be safe by an engineering consultant.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-23
6-2a
SEE POLICIES 2-61
THROUGH 2-63
Public Health and Safety •
Flood Hazard From Landslides
A landslide could occur within a steep ravine in the foothill fringe in the more moun-
tainous terrain outside the Urban Service Area boundary. If there is a landslide in a ravine
serving a relatively large watershed, water could collect behind the landslide debris and
eventually collapse the debris wall, resulting in a wall of water cascading down the ravine,
injuring people or damaging property. The watersheds in this area are relatively small, so
the risk of floods caused by landslides is minimal. There is a massive ancient landslide west
of Stevens Creek Reservoir but it would not be a flood hazard or result in an unstable pond.
Acceptable Level of Risk
There is low risk from flooding in Cupertino and its planning area. There is an ex-
tremely low risk from flooding if Stevens Creek Reservoir were to fail. Sometimes rain -
swollen flood channels cause drowning when people fall into them or venture out onto them
in boats.
It is possible to design flood protection for a 500 to 1,000 -year flood, but it would be
extremely expensive in relation to the property's land -use activity. For example, it would
not be cost effective to construct a flood works to protect grazing or agricultural land next
to a stream. It is more prudent to protect a housing development and essential to protect a
critical facility such as a hospital.
Policies is
The Santa Clara Valley Water District and the City are actively involved in programs
to minimize the risk of flooding. The City developed a flood plain land use policy for the
non -urbanized reach of Stevens Creek south of Stevens Creek Boulevard. This ensures that
the area flooded in a 100 -year flood would be preserved and protects the natural stream -
side environment.
The City and the water district developed an unusual flood management program for
the reach of Stevens Creek between Interstate 280 and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The strat-
egy is to keep the natural environment of Stevens Creek even though structural improve-
ments would be necessary to protect properties from a 100 -year flood. The majority of people
living in the Phar Lap Drive and Creston neighborhoods agreed to accept a higher level of
flooding risk with the understanding that risks would be partially lowered by using the
Federal Flood Insurance Program and installing a flood warning system. The strategy also
includes building a new conduit on Interstate 280 to reduce the barrier effect of the freeway
itself, which was built across the natural flood plain.
M Policy 6-20: No New Construction in Flood Plains
Adopt stringent land use and building code requirements to prevent new
construction in already urbanized flood hazard areas recognized by the
Federal Flood Insurance Administrator. For example, the finished floors of
new construction must be higher than the water level projected for the 100- •
year flood. A description of flood zone regulations and a map of potential
flood hazard areas will be published in the Cupertino Scene.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
9
Public Health and Safety
E Policy 6-21: Prohibit Dwellings in Natural Flood Plain
Continue the policy of prohibiting all forms of habitable development in
natural flood plains. This includes prohibiting fill materials and obstruc-
tions that may increase flood potential downstream or modify natural
streamsides.
Removing sediment from drains is one of the major expenses of the City and the wa-
ter district. The sediment is caused by natural erosion as well as erosion induced by devel-
opment, mostly in the hillsides. The City's Hillside Development Ordinance requires private
hillside construction to install erosion control measures on all cut -and -fill slopes including
roadways, driveways, and house pads. Sediment increases flood risks and clogs the natu-
ral percolation function of streambeds, which replenish the groundwater table.
0 Policy 6-22: Restrict Hillside Grading
Continue to restrict the extent and timing of hillside grading operations to
April through October. Require performance bonds during the remaining
time to guarantee the repair of any erosion damage. All graded slopes must
be planted as soon as practical after grading is complete.
Most water -storage facilities shown in Figure 6-G are designed to withstand ground
shaking. If the magnitude of ground shaking was not previously assessed or if the water
facilities were designed before new standards were developed, the City should re-evaluate
the design, if the facility is publicly owned. If privately owned, the City should or strongly
suggest that the owners evaluate the structural integrity based on the maximum possible earth-
quake on the San Andreas fault, including an evaluation of the possible area of flooding.
■ Policy 6-23: Evaluate City Water -Storage Facilities
Program necessary funds to evaluate the structural integrity of municipal
water -storage facilities, including distribution line connections and any
necessary repairs. Possible flood speeds and flooded areas should be in-
cluded. The study consultant will confer with the City's geological consult-
ant to determine the geology and the maximum expected ground shaking
intensities of the tank site.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-25
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 16.52
6-26
SEE MUNICIPAL
CODE, TITLE 10
Public Health and Safety
Noise Pollution
Freedom from excessive noise is a major factor in maintaining a high degree of qual-
ity of life. The noise environment is an accu mutation of many different sources ranging
from common machinery to the major source, street and freeway traffic. Table 6-F lists some
common noise sources and their sound levels.
The degree to which noise is irritating depends on a variety of factors, some indepen-
dent of the noise source itself. Time of day, background sound level, the listener's activity
and surrounding land use can all influence the degree to which a particular sound is per-
ceived as annoying. Value judgments also enter into tolerance for urban sound levels.
Emergency sirens and loud lawnmowers are tolerated by most people because they repre-
sent necessary actions, public safety and neighborhood upkeep. However, loud noises from
cars with defective or modified mufflers are usually greeted as annoyances.
Overall noise levels seem to be increasing despite efforts to identify and regulate noise
sources. Truly effective solutions to the noise problem will probably require lifestyle changes
and tradeoffs between freedom from government intervention in personal lives and the
convenience and economy of using noisy devices. It's not possible to control all city noise
sources but some regulation is needed to offset negative results of excessive noise.
Effect of Noise on People
Noise can affect the physical, social, psychological and economic well-being of com- •
munity residents. The effects can be more intense for sensitive receptors such as residences,
schools and parks adjacent to major noise sources. Excessive noise can result in temporary
or chronic hearing loss and physiological damage to the inner ear. Noise can disturb pri-
vacy, worsen mood, disturb relaxation and interrupt sleep. It can interfere with speech and
confuse other auditory signals. Diminished worker efficiency and economic loss can result
if noise disrupts the performance of complicated work tasks. All of these stresses are rea-
sons for trying to control the effects of urban noise. The next section outlines and discusses
various measures the City can take to counteract some increasing noise irritations.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
60 Air Cond. Unit ® 100ft. (60) Conversation (60) 60dB(A) 1/2 as loud
50 QUIET Large Transformer® 100' (50) 50dB(A) 1/4 as loud
Bird Calls (44)
40
JUST AUDIBLE (dBA Scale Interrupted)
10
• Threshold
0 of Hearing
(') Not all distances of measurement are identified. Varying distances will make a difference in noise levels.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Public Health and Safety
6-27
Table 6-F. Sound Levels and Loudness of Illustrative Noises in Indoor and Outdoor Environments.
dB(A)
Overall Level
Community
Home or Industry
Loudness
(Sound Pressure
(Outdoor) (1)
(Indoor)
(Human judgment of
Level = .0002
diff. sound levels)
Microbar)
130
Military Jet Aircraft
Takeoff w/Afterburner
From Carrier ® 50 ft. (130)
120
UNCOMFORTABLY
Oxygen Torch (121)
120dB(A) 32 times as loud
LOUD
Turbofan Aircraft Takeoff
200 ft. (118)
Riveting Machine (110)
110
Rock -n -roll Band (108)
110dB(A) 16 times as loud
Jet Flyover ® 1000 ft. (103)
Boeing 707 @ 6000 ft.
before landing (108)
100
VERY
Helicopter ® 100 ft. (100)
100dB(A) 8 times as loud
LOUD
Power Mower (96)
Newspaper Press (97)
Boeing 737 ® 6000 ft.
landing (97)
•before
90
Motorcycle @ 25ft. (90)
90dB(A) 4 times as loud
Car Wash @ 20 ft. (89)
Food Blender (88)
Prop Plane flyover @ 1 k' (88)
Milling Machine (85)
Diesel Truck 40mph @ 50'(84)
80
Diesel Train 45mph @ 50'(83)
Garbage Disposal (80)
80dB(A) 2 times as loud
High Urban Ambient (80)
Living Room Music (76)
MODERATELY
Pass. Car 65mph @ 2511. (77)
LOUD
Freeway @ 50ft. frm. Pavement
70
Edge (70-82)
TV -Audio, Vac. Clnr.(70)
70dB(A)
Cash Reg. @ 10'(65-70)
Elec. Typwrtr. @ 10' (64)
Dishwasher @ 10'(60)
60 Air Cond. Unit ® 100ft. (60) Conversation (60) 60dB(A) 1/2 as loud
50 QUIET Large Transformer® 100' (50) 50dB(A) 1/4 as loud
Bird Calls (44)
40
JUST AUDIBLE (dBA Scale Interrupted)
10
• Threshold
0 of Hearing
(') Not all distances of measurement are identified. Varying distances will make a difference in noise levels.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-28
I
I �
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Public Health and Safety
r r-�
References:
Continuous Contour Lines On Selected Arterials
Obtained From: City of San Jose General Plan, Noise Element
i
_ I City of Los Altos General Plan, Noise Element
Stevens Creek Blvd. Plan Line Study
— — Urban Service Area Boundary
-- Boundary Agreement Line
Figure 6-K. Noise Contour Map.
Policy Framework
This section gives a policy framework for guiding future land use and urban design
decisions and contains a system of control and abatement measures to protect residents from
exposure to excessive or unacceptable noise levels. Policy objectives will be identified and
analyzed according to land -use compatibility, noise sources related to and not related to
transportation, and will include discussion of the severe effects of quarry truck traffic.
Acceptable noises do not disturb commonly recognized activities, such as conversa-
tion and rest. Various studies have established maximum interior noise levels that will en -
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
L
E
0
Public Health and Safety
•
sure undisturbed conversation and relaxation. Exterior noise environments are more diffi-
cult to analyze and control. The ability to speak at close range in a normal voice seems to be
a reasonable standard with which to judge outside noises. This section outlines techniques
to help protect interior and exterior environments from disruption by city noise for com-
fortable daily living.
Land Use Compatibility
A STRIVE TO ENSURE A COMPATIBLE NOISE ENVIRONMENT FOR ALL
EXISTING AND FUTURE LAND USES.
Many undesirable noise effects can be reduced or avoided if noise conditions are con-
sidered when assigning uses to specific land parcels. Noise cannot and should not be the
primary factor considered in land use analysis, but the City should strive to match land uses
to compatible noise levels.
Compatibility may be achieved by locating land use types outside of designated noise
impact areas or by requiring modifications including setbacks, noise walls, building insula-
tion or landscaping.
The Cupertino Municipal Code, Section 10, outlines the maximum noise levels on re-
ceivmg properties based upon land use types.
■ Policy 6-24: Land Use Decision Evaluation
Use Figures 6-K, 6-1, , 6-M and the City Municipal Code to evaluate land
use decisions.
Strategy
Noise Review of New Development. Review the proximity of new or sig-
nificantly remodeled housing to the traffic noise corridor by using the noise
contour map and review the results of previous noise standards to see if the
standards can be complied with through conventional construction prac-
tices. If there is not enough information, the staff may ask the developer to
provide an acoustical analysis along with the application. The applicant may
appeal staff recommendations to the Planning Commission.
Transportation Noise
B WORK TO REDUCE THE NOISE IMPACT OF MAJOR STREETS AND
FREEWAYS UPON CUPERTINO.
Traffic noise is the greatest contributor to noise pollution in Cupertino and one of the
most difficult to control through local effort. Cupertino is crossed by two major freeways
® and three major arterial streets.
Cupertino is fortunate that significant portions of Highways 85 and 280 are recessed
because this helps lessen noise in the surrounding neighborhoods. Freeway noise, at a con -
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6 -29
( All 1.
�`
SEE NOISE
ORDINANCE
6-30 Public Health and Safety
•
' �UII� II IIIIAjNf °"'hlllgl p III III I stant but subdued level, is less of a direct threat to neighbors.
( Commuters use local north -south streets heavily and greatly
` increase local traffic congestion, air pollution and noise.
The impacts of heavy traffic on local roads may be re-
' ` duced when traffic is diverted to Highway 85 (1994-1995).
The addition of traffic on Highway 85 will increase noise
levels for residences adjoining the right of way. When the
roadway opens, the residences will experience a significant
increase over existing noise levels because the residents are
not currently experiencing roadway noise from this location.
1 Noise impact analyses prepared for the proposed highway
indicate that typical noise levels may increase 4 to 10 decibels.
These increases include the mitigation measures of a de-
pressed roadway and noise barriers. The maximum noise
levels are predicted not to exceed the State maximum of 64
decibels. About 2,460 of Cupertino's 17,000 homes are ex-
posed to excessive noise levels greater than 60 decibels.
Table 6-G. Noise Exposure Index (Len, 60 dB and above).
Existing Future Total
Units Population Units Population' Units Population
R-1 1550 4154 340 911 1890 5065
R-2 R-3 560 1500 10 26 570 1526
TOTAL 2110 5654 350 937 2460 6591
' Future impacted areas result from Highway 85 extension to Saratoga
Sunnyvale Road and from Bollinger Road extension to Stelling Road
NOTE: Population multiplier= 2.68 persons/household based upon
the Association of Bay Area Governments Projections '90.
When we compare the Municipal Code allowed maximum noise levels to the existing
(Figure 6-K), the majority of locations are currently experiencing noise levels above the
maximum.
New development in these areas will be required to build and incorporate design strat-
egies outlined in the policies of this document to meet the maximum allowed internal and
external noise levels.
Policy 6-25: Freeway Design and Neighborhood Noise
Ensure that roads along the West Valley Transportation Corridor are de-
signed and improved in a way that minimizes neighborhood noise.
Policy 6-26: Support Stricter State Noise Laws
Continue to support enactment of stricter state laws on noise emissions from
new motor vehicles and enforce existing street laws on noise emissions.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Public Health and Safety
•
Land Use Catagory
Community Noise Exposure
(La, or CNEL, dB)
55 60 65 70 75 80
Residential - Low Density
(Single Family, Duplex,
Mobile Homes)
Residential - Multi Family
Transient Lodging
(Motels, Hotels)
4,,
Schools, Libraries, Churches,
Hospitals, Nursing Homes
Auditoriums, Concert Halls,
Amphitheaters
Sports Arena, Outdoor
Spectator Sports
Playgrounds, Neighborhood
Parks
Golf Courses, Riding Stables,
Water Recreation, Cemeteries
Office Buildings, Commercial
and Professional Centers
Industrial, Manufacturing,
Utilities, Agriculture
D Normally Acceptable
Conditionally Acceptable
® Normally Unacceptable
Clearly Unacceptable
Figure 6-L. Land Use Compatability for Community Noise Environments.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-31
6-32
Public Health and Safety
I III IIIIIII� ����' � ����yli II ill
KAISER 4
PERMANENTE
Numbers Represent
Truck Levels LT In dBa
Figure 6-M. Equal Noise Level Contours.
LOCAL STREETS/NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION
Neighborhood streets are especially sensitive to noise abuse. When considering neigh-
borhood noise policies, a balance must be achieved between the resident's need to drive and
the.need to keep emergency vehicle response time to a minimum.
M Policy 6-27. Neighborhood Need Priority
Continue to review the needs of residents for convenience and safety and
make them a priority over the convenient movement of commute or through
traffic where practical.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
r�
•
•
Public Health and Safety
Policy 6-28: Solutions to Street Abuse
Continue to evaluate solutions to discourage through traffic in neighbor-
hoods through modified street design. Examples include meandering
streets, diverters, landscape islands, street closures and wide parking strips.
Strategy
Local Improvement Districts. Use of modified street design may require
funding through the creation of local improvement districts.
Train and Aircraft Noise
Trains and aircraft do not contribute much to noise in Cupertino. Aircraft flying into
Moffett Field Naval Air Station are restricted to the northeastern comer of Cupertino, af-
fecting some residents of the Rancho Rinconada neighborhood. Cupertino's one railroad
line passes through the Monta Vista neighborhood and connects with the Kaiser Permanente
Plant in the Western foothills. There is one train daily (2 trips - one in, one out) which oc-
curs usually in the early evening hours. Noise levels associated with the trains are approxi-
mately 85-90 decibels at a distance of 50 ft. from the track for a period of two minutes. There
are no noise protection devices along the rail corridor, and if increases in rail activity oc-
curs, sound walls or other mitigation may be required, as well as placing a deed restriction
on the adjoining property notifying future property owners that the noise standard will be
da exceeded.
E
Truck Traffic
The most crucial example of traffic noise intrusion on the quality of neighborhood life
is the effect of heavy duty truck trips to and from the Kaiser Permanente Plant and Voss
Road Quarry located in the western foothills near Stevens Creek Boulevard and Foothill
Boulevard. There are about 1,500 trips each working day, which generate up to 90 decibel
noise levels next to the road. When trucks speed up, slow down or use their high-powered
brakes on the unusually steep road, the truck noise problem is worsened.
■ Policy 6-29: Noise Improvement by Restricting Trucks
Continue to work toward improving the noise environment along Foothill
Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard by restricting quarry truck traffic
especially during late evening and early morning hours. It is preferable that
the restrictions be voluntary. Encourage alternative to truck transport, spe-
cifically rail, when feasible.
A study prepared by professional acoustical engineering consultants suggested a se-
ries of measures to diminish noise for homes along the truck traffic corridor. Reducing truck
travel and carrying out these measures could give some relief to the residents most severely
affected.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-33
SEE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT FILE
No. 81,005.5
6-34 Public Health and Safety •
0 Policy 6-30: Reduction of Noise from Kaiser Permanente Trucks
Work to carry out noise mitigation measures listed in the Edward L. Pack
and Associates report (County of Santa Clara) to diminish noise from Kai-
ser Permanente truck traffic for homes near Foothill and Stevens Creek
Boulevards.
Strategy
Noise Notification in Deeds. Require, as a condition of development ap-
proval, that deeds of property in the area affected by the noise contain no-
tices informing buyers of the noise problem.
Non -Transportation Noise Sources
CPROTECT RESIDENTIAL AREAS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE FROM INTRUSIVE
NOISE GENERATED BY SOURCES OTHER THAN TRAFFIC.
Noises not generated by traffic are typically stationary and/or sporadic. They have a
relatively minor affect compared to traffic noise, but noises such as permanent equipment
(refrigeration or air conditioning units or other related pumps), barking dogs and rattling
of garbage cans when people are trying to sleep can be annoying and disruptive. Complete
regulation of these noises is unlikely, but the City can work to protect neighborhoods from
excessive noise and require compliance with the noise standard during the evening and early
morning, when ambient noise levels tend to be lower.
Short term noise sources are also disruptive. Temporary activities such as construc-
tion can often last for several months and generate a substantial number of complaints. Some
are unavoidable, but superior muffling devices for construction equipment can reduce noise
from jackhammers, portable compressors and generators. The days and hours of construc-
tion operations are controlled by City Ordinance. Policies are provided to limit noise lev-
els. In several cases building construction is stopped during evenings and weekends.
Adjoining Dissimilar Land Uses
People who live near commercial loading docks often complain of late night and early
morning disturbances. Similarly, those who live near industrial areas are often annoyed by
sounds from chemical storage plants, and the general manufacturing process. It's easy to
anticipate these problems but it's hard to resolve them in the development review process
because economic interests and property rights must be balanced.
Policy 2-19 of the Land Use/Community Character Element of this plan gives a strat-
egy for design controls to ensure a more peaceful co -existence between neighboring differ-
ent land uses. These should be studied carefully at the beginning of a commercial or
industrial project that will adjoin homes.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
• Public Health and Safety
■ Policy 6-31: Commercial Delivery Areas
• Be sure new commercial or industrial developments plan their delivery
areas so they are away from existing or planned homes.
■ Policy 6-32: Limit Delivery Hours
Continue active enforcement of Section 10.45 of the Municipal Code limit-
ing commercial and industrial delivery hours adjoining residential uses.
0 Policy 6-33: Noise Control Techniques
Continue to require analysis and implementation of techniques to control
the effects of noise from industrial equipment and processes for projects near
homes.
■ Policy 6-34: Restrict Hours of Construction Work
Continue to restrict non -emergency building construction work near homes
during evening, early morning, and weekends.
0 Policy 6-35: Comprehensive Noise Ordinance Development
Develop a comprehensive noise ordinance that gives time restrictions on
commercial and industrial deliveries, and establishes procedures for regu-
lating noisy animals.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-35
6-36
01W. Inco � -
Public Health and Safety •
Noise Attenuation
D ENCOURAGE TECHNIQUES TO DIMINISH NOISE WHEREVER THEY CAN
PRODUCE PRACTICAL AND DESIRABLE RESULTS.
Reducing noise intrusion into residences can be accomplished in the same way homes
are insulated against cold. Leaks around doors, windows, vents or through open fireplace
dampers, as well as single -glazed windows and lack of seals or weatherstripping, increase
noise intrusion and can be remedied. Sound is pervasive in cities and it's difficult to con-
trol exterior noises.
Different noise control techniques can be used with varying degrees of success. Each
site should be evaluated to find the best combination of noise control devices. Here is a
summary of common techniques and their uses.
Barriers
Solid noise walls can reduce noise from 5 to 15 decibels or more. Their effectiveness
depends on the relative grade of the roadway, the distance of the listener from the center
line of the nearest road, placement and height of the noise wall in relation to the receptor
line, the size and location of the area to be protected and the frequency of the noise source.
The barrier is more successful with higher -pitched noise and is usually more effective when •
located close to the source or to the listener, assuming that both are below the top of the
barrier.
Noise barriers can be ugly and can wall in or separate neighborhoods. Landscaping
is a less expensive and effective way to make the walls more attractive and will also reduce
sound reflection from the walls. Evergreen and vines should be planted along the roadway
side. Reflection can increase noise levels on the opposite side by as much as l to 3 decibels.
. Policy 6-36: Noise Wall Requirements
Exercise discretion in requiring noise walls to be sure that all other measures
of noise control have been explored and that the noise wall blends with the
neighborhood.
Strategy
Special Assessment Districts for Noise Control. Help form special assess-
ment districts to install noise barriers where single-family homes back up
to major streets. Landscape all walls on the street side.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
ePublic Health and Safety
E
•
Landscaping and Setbacks
Landscaping and setbacks for small properties do not work well in reducing noise.
Plants and trees are not dense enough to prevent air flow. Setbacks must be substantial to
make a difference in noise. Noise goes down about 3 decibels for heavy traffic and about 6
decibels for light traffic every time the setback from the center line of the roadway is doubled.
This figure, from the Santa Clara County Noise Element, shows the effects landscaping and
setbacks have on noise.
P:
-20
20 30 40 50 60 80 100 200 300 400
Distance From Center Line Of Lane In Feet
Figure 6-N. Setback and Noise Reduction.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-37
IEEE
20 30 40 50 60 80 100 200 300 400
Distance From Center Line Of Lane In Feet
Figure 6-N. Setback and Noise Reduction.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-37
6-38
SEE UNIFORM
BUILDING CODE
Public Health and Safety •
Building and Site Design
Building and site design techniques can control noise effectively in new developments
or when existing buildings are modified. Sensitive areas can be set back or buffered by
buildings, parking or recreation areas. Homes can use rooms such as kitchens, bathrooms
and garages to buffer the more sensitive bedrooms and living rooms. Buildings should face
solid walls onto the noise source and be sure that no vents or other air leaks face the noise
source.
INSULATING BUILDINGS FROM NOISE
Conventional building practices will achieve noise reductions from adjoining roadways
of between 10 and 20 decibels.
This table, from the Santa Clara County Noise Element, shows noise reduction from
typical building types.
Table 6-H. Approximate Noise Reduction Achieved by Exterior of Common Structures
Bldg. Type
Window Condition Reduction of Noise
Max. Exterior
from Outside
Noise level Matched
60dBa
Source
to Achieve 45dBA
P.L.
Interior Design Stnd.
• Roof and Walls Lack Insulation
Floor Vents
• Poor Quality Window/Door Assemblies
All
Open
10 decibels
55 dBA .
Light Frame
Ordinary sash, closed
20 decibels
65 dBA
Masonry
Single pane, closed
25 decibels
70 dBA
Masonry
Standard clot. pane, closed
30 decibels
80 dBA
Figure 6-0. Typical Structure Exposure to Noise.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
7l5dBa
60 Feet
80dBa
60dBa
10 Ft. 10 Ft. / / 20 Ft.
P.L.
Air/Sound Leaks:
• Roof and Walls Lack Insulation
Floor Vents
• Poor Quality Window/Door Assemblies
Windows/Doors Lack Weather
Stripping
Figure 6-0. Typical Structure Exposure to Noise.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
u
1
0
Public Health and Safety
Crime
The City's commitment to public safety encompasses two broad areas of responsibil-
ity. First is the direct provision of public safety services and the planning necessary for pre-
vention of crime. Second is planning for a safe environment in which the public is not
exposed to unnecessary risks to life and property.
Cupertino has a very low crime rate which can be partially attributed to project de-
sign techniques and active community involvement. However, changes in future develop-
ment patterns may affect public safety. An increase in retail activities may increase thefts
and related criminal activity. An increase in growth may increase vehicle traffic, which in-
creases the risk of automobile accidents. Both relate to a need for additional public safety
services.
The City recognizes the sociological and psychological effects of the physical environ-
ment on human behavior and conducts pre -hearing review meetings for all new projects.
This occurs early in the planning process and involves the Santa Clara County Sheriff's
Department commenting on safety issues.
Park Design
People who live next to neighborhood parks have had problems with nuisance and
criminal behavior, especially in park areas that are not easily visible from the street.
Future parks will be surrounded by streets where feasible, allowing neighbors and the
police to see the park from all sides. This gives people more control over their neighbor-
hoods. Future parks will also take into consideration design techniques to minimize poten-
tial vandalism and crime.
Original Configuration Revised Configuration
Three Oaks Park Three Oaks Park
Figure 6-P. "Defensible Space" Park Design.
Cupertino's General Plan stresses protection of visual privacy. This could conflict with
the idea of defensible space if privacy design techniques isolate households enough so that
people feel they are losing private and semi -private spaces in residential developments.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-39
SEE OPEN SPACE
POLICIES PAGE $-17
THROUGH 5-21
6-40
Public Health and Safety •
Design can be used to create social cohesion, important not only for a planned residential
community, but in single-family detached homes. For example, someone who lives in a
single-family home needs assurance that the neighborhood will support his or her effort to
question a stranger parked at the curb or to report a strange car that keeps cruising up and
down a street. If the resident thinks that other neighbors don't want to get involved or don't
care about strangers in the neighborhood, that person would watch out only for his or her
own property. Cupertino has actively supported a Neighborhood Awareness Program that
offers advice on crime prevention and encourages neighborhood cohesiveness.
EPolicy 6-37: Neighborhood Awareness Programs
Continue to support the Neighborhood Awareness Program and other=
intended to help neighborhoods prevent crime through social interaction.
Non -Residential Design for Defensible Space
Using design techniques to prevent crime in non-residential districts is more preva-
lent than in residential areas. The key is to design buildings to ease police patrol and help
community surveillance. Decisions on crime prevention involve tradeoffs between aesthetics
and the ease of access for patrol vehicles, as well as tradeoffs between privacy and acousti-
cal protection between commercial properties and adjacent homes.
Commercial office and industrial properties designed with interior garden courts, with •
private fenced patios and isolated entrances, have more burglaries and robberies than those
that are highly visible. Masonry barriers, earth mounds and landscaping beds are typically
used to isolate parking lot noise in commercial operations. The County Sheriff's Office, which
provides police service in Cupertino, believes that these solutions do not increase burglary
in adjoining homes.
N Policy 6-38: Public Perimeter Roads for Parks
Encircle neighborhood roads with a public road to provide visual accessi-
bility whenever possible.
0 Policy 6-39: Crime Prevention in Building Design
Consider the relationship between building design and crime prevention
in reviewing all developments. Develop criteria with help from the Sheriff's
Office to determine the degree to which crime prevention standards should
override esthetic concerns.
N Policy 6-40: Fiscal Impacts
Recognize fiscal impacts to the County Sheriff and City of Cupertino when
approving various land use mixes.
■ Policy 6-41: Pre -hearing Review
Continue to request County Sheriff review and comment on development •
applications for security measures.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Public Health and Safety
Disaster Planning
Under state law, cities must prepare an emergency plan to respond to natural, man-
made or other disasters that threaten the health or property of their residents. The City's
Emergency Plan mainly establishes an organizational framework to enable the City to pre-
pare for its emergency response activities and to coordinate with county and state agencies.
Effective communications is one of the primary objectives of the Emergency Plan.
The Cupertino Emergency Plan
The City's Emergency Plan is based upon the State's Multi -hazard Functional Emer-
gency Plan and uses the Incident Command System as the management structure. Within
this organization, the City Manager becomes the Director of Emergency Services when a local
emergency is declared. Department directors or their pre -designated alternates are trained
in the roles of Operations, Human Services, Finance or Resources in the Emergency Opera-
tion Center (EOC). There are three parts to the Emergency Plan. The first part is the legal
requirements, the second is the descriptions of the functional responsibilities and checklists
of the members of the EOC, and the third is sample forms, resource lists and references. The
plan is reviewed annually through disaster drills.
Cupertino constructed an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) on the lower floor of
• City Hall. An emergency diesel generator and telephone equipment were installed along
with a cooperatively operated amateur radio communication system to supplement pub-
licly sponsored emergency channels. The EOC to EOC radio at City Hall is duplicated at
the Service Center.
All city employees are designated as Disaster Service Workers. As such, they receive
training in home preparedness skills and emergency response responsibilities. Additional
classes are offered in first aid and CPR, search and rescue and damage assessment. April is
Earthquake Preparedness Month, and all employees are reminded of preparedness steps to
take at home and at work. Staff assigned to the EOC participate in at least one training ex-
ercise per year.
. Policy 6- 42: Emergency Service Training Program
Continue to train employees annually in disaster preparedness, first-aid and
CPR.
■ Policy 6-43: Ham Radio Operators
Continue to support the training and cooperation between the city and ham
operators to prepare for emergency communications needs.
Strategy
Activate the Public Information Office. Activate the Public Information
Office either in the Emergency Operations Center or in City Hall as quickly
• as possible after an emergency.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-41
6-42
Public Health and Safety
Immediately following a major emergency, police, fire and medical services
will be spread very thin. Residents are developing self-reliance in first aid
and the storage of food, water and other essentials. The October 17, 1989
Loma Prieta Earthquake motivated many residents to host emergency pre-
paredness presentations in their homes. This service continues to be offered
to neighborhoods, businesses and schools. A Memorandum of Understand-
ing between Cupertino Community Services and the City of Cupertino de-
scribes the use of pre -registered and volunteers at the Quinlan Community
Center. These volunteers are also being trained and integrated into the
emergency preparedness program.
A large earthquake could isolate Cupertino from major full-service hospitals (Figure
6-Q). City personnel and local physicians will be ill-equipped to meet the emergency needs
of residents if a major earthquake strikes.
0 Policy 6-44: Community Preparedness
Continue to provide training to the community on self -preparedness for
emergencies.
. Policy 6-45: Informed Citizenry
E
Use the Cupertino Scene and other communication methods to inform resi-
dents that they have a responsibility to be prepared for emergency disas- •
ters and give information on how to achieve this self-reliance.
■ Policy 6- 46: Business Storage Containers for Emergency Supplies
Prepare an ordinance for businesses that defines policies for establishing an
emergency supply container on a business property.
�, Cantrar Ex
rn Z `"t'
00 Hwy m
rejSrara � � �, to
2 o F+,o in w <0
ryy a � \cam°
w
T / Stevens ,Creek' Blvd
-� i
3 1�—
N �n
Q
Q ^
3
City of
Cupertino r
Hospitals
Potential F+o
^� Barriers
Figure 6-Q. Areas Potentially Isolatable in a Seismic Emergency.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
• Public Health and Safety
Cupertino planned the construction of an EOC in the City Hall basement in 1980.
Emergency diesel generator and telephone equipment is installed. The EOC is located on
the lower floor, rooms C and D, of City Hall. The communications room including Ama-
teur Radio Equipment and the EOC to EOC radio is adjacent to the EOC. The Service Cen-
ter has an alternate EOC with duplicate communications equipment.
0 Policy 6-47: Emergency Operation Center
Continue to annually train all city employees on the operations of the EOC.
Hazardous Materials
Hazardous materials pose a danger to public health and safety. They encompass a
broad range of substances, including toxic metals, chemicals and gases, flammable and/or
explosive materials and corrosive agents. Yet these materials are recognized as an integral
part of society, used to produce manufactured goods which contribute to our economic well-
being and quality of life. Hazardous materials are used in manufacturing processes in Santa
Clara County and a variety of household chemicals, such as, pesticides, motor oil, cleaners
and paint.
is The transportation, distribution, storage and disposal of hazardous materials is of great
concern to Cupertino. The City has adopted a Hazardous Materials Ordinance which regu-
lates the storage of these materials in solid and liquid form. The City's Toxic Gas Ordinance
regulates the storage of these materials which are in gaseous form.
0
E PROTECT CITY RESIDENTS AND EMPLOYEES FROM THE INHERENT
RISKS IN THE TRANSPORTATION, USE, STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, WHILE RECOGNIZING THAT THE USE OF
THESE MATERIALS IS INTEGRAL TO MANY ASPECTS OF SOCIETY.
■ Policy 6-48: Hazardous Materials Storage
Continue to require the proper storage and disposal of hazardous materi-
als to prevent leakage, potential explosions, fire or the release of harmful
fumes.
N Policy 6-49: Proximity of Residents to Hazardous Materials
When new residential development or childcare facilities are proposed in
existing industrial and manufacturing areas, an assessment of the future
residents' risk of exposure to hazardous materials should be completed.
Residential development should not be allowed if such hazardous condi-
tions cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level of risk.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-43
6-44
Public Health and Safety
Hazardous Waste
Traditionally, the managing of hazardous waste has relied heavily upon land disposal
of untreated hazardous wastes. This approach has sometimes led to the contamination of
both soil and groundwater and will be prohibited by mid-1990. Beginning in 1990, hazard-
ous waste was required to be treated before disposed on land. To accomplish this, new treat-
ment methods and facilities had to be developed and approved to pre -treat hazardous waste
before final disposal.
Under authority of the 1986 "Tanner" Bill (AB2948), Cupertino, along with the cities
of Campbell, Gilroy, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Moun-
tain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, Santa Clara, Saratoga and Sunnyvale has joined with the
County to jointly develop a comprehensive and coordinated approach to hazardous waste
planning. The County's Hazardous Waste Management Plan (COHWMP) has been endorsed
by the Cupertino City Council, and funding has been provided to implement technical as-
sistance programs in the County's plan, based on the City's proportionate contribution to
the total waste stream.
Under the provisions of the State law, the City exercised its option to create a locally
administered Hazardous Waste Management Plan (LHWMP). The local plan complements
and enhances the County plan, but provides stricter siting criteria for new hazardous waste
management facilities, as well as a separate review and permitting process.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
0
• Public Health and Safety
Identification of Waste Stream
The LHWMP must identify the components and qualities of hazardous substances
generated within the community. Table 6-I fulfills this requirement and is based on Depart-
ment of Health Services shipping manifests for 1989, the last year for which reliable data is
available.
Table 6-1. Cupertino Waste Stream.
(By waste category and treatment method for 1989.)
Waste Category Tons Treatment Method
•
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-45
123
Unspecified Alkaline Solution
28
Aqueous Treatment / Metal Neutralization
131
Aqueous with Reactive Anions
55.86
Aqueous Treatment / Metal Neutralization
132
Aqueous with Metals
11.58
Aqueous Treatment/Metal Neutralization
134
Aqueous w/organic Residues <10%
8.13
Other Recycling
135
Unspecified Aqueous Solution
18.56
Aqueous Treatment / Metal Neutralization
151
Asbestos Containing Waste
107.00
Stabilization
181
Other Inorganic Solid Waste
44.58
Other Recycling
211
Halogenated Solvents
41.89
Solvent Recovery
212
Oxygenated Solvents
1.93
Solvent Recovery
214
Unspecified Solvent Mixtures
40.07
Solvent Recovery
221
Waste Oil and Mixed Oil
53.84
Oil Recovery
•
222
223
Oil/Water Separation Sludge
Unspecified Solvent Containing Waste
5.01
15.42
Oil Recovery
Oil Recovery
241
Tank Bottom Waste
10.00
Incineration
261
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
1.46
Incineration
331
Off -Spec., Aged or Surplus Organics
.84
Other Recycling
343
Unspecified Organic Liquid Mixtures
.79
Other Recycling
352
Other Organic Solids
2.13
Oil Recovery
461
Paint Sludge
.47
Incineration
512
Empty Containers > 30 Gal.
102.26
Other Recycling
513
Empty Containers <30 Gal.
1.88
Other Recycling
521
Drilling Mud
1.20
Stabilization
541
Photochemcials
.28
Other Recycling
551
Laboratory Waste Chemicals
.68
Other Recycling
611
Contaminated Soils
273.18
Incineration
731
Liquids with PCB's > 50 Mg/
5.2
Incineration
741
Liquids with Halogenated Organics
1.02
Solvent Recovery
791
Liquids with pH<2
489.67
Aqueous Treatment / Metal Neutralization
Total
1,295.21
•
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-45
6-46
Public Health and Safety
EPolicy 6-50: Endorse County Hazardous Waste Management Plan
The City shall continue its endorsement of the County Hazardous Waste
Management Plan, subject to the following principles:
- Locally adopted criteria for siting of hazardous waste management treat-
ment, disposal or transportation facilities shall take precedence over
such criteria in the County plan when City -adopted criteria are more
stringent.
- The City will avoid duplication of effort to implement hazardous waste
management programs. Priority will be given to cooperative funding
support of implementation programs through the County Hazardous
Waste Management Plan.
E Policy 6-51: Alternative Products and Recycling
Encourage residential, commercial and industrial contributors to the haz-
ardous waste stream to use non -hazardous alternative products and pro-
cesses and recycle materials in order to retard growth of the waste stream
and thus reduce demand for treatment capacity.
•
Policy 6-52: Household Hazardous Wastes
Continue to work with the County, other cities and interested groups to •
develop a program for the proper management and disposal of household
hazardous wastes that is effective and convenient for residents.
The City is required to identify generalized locations where hazardous waste manage-
ment facilities could be placed. Figure 6-R describes these generalized industrial locations,
but does not necessarily ensure that any particular treatment/ disposal facility could be
placed in the locations consistent with siting criteria in the County or City HWMP.
Facilities which could typically be placed on sites of the scale available in Cupertino
would generally emphasize reclamation or recycling of waste products. However, other TSD
(Transfer, Storage or Disposal) facilities could include equipment for stabilization of liquid
or gaseous contaminants prior to ultimate disposal outside the city, facilities for reduction
or oxidation of compound materials, or equipment for transfer of materials from temporary
to permanent storage containers.
There are no sites in Cupertino suitable to the development of a residuals repository
facility, due to the large-scale site requirements and region -serving nature of such facilities.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Public Health and Safety 6-47
0
•
Figure 6-R. Generalized Location of Potential Hazardous Waste Management Sites.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-48
SEE CnY COUNCIL
RESOLUrION
No. 8759
Public Health and Safety
PUBLIC UTILITIES
Solid Waste
Every year, Cupertino residents, busi-
nesses and industries dispose of 36,000 tons
of solid waste material. Commercial and
industrial businesses account for 34% of the
total waste disposed, while residential uses
dispose of 31%, 34°% debris boxes (construc-
tion material) with 1.0% being self haul waste.
The composition of the solid waste for commercial is primarily paper, while indus-
trial waste composition is primarily inert waste and organic (textile, wood, etc.) and the ma-
jority of residential composition is yard waste and paper products. Many of the current
products being disposed could be recycled.
In recent years, regional concerns have been expressed regarding existing landfill ca-
pacity and the lack of potential landfill sites to meet future needs. This concern is com-
pounded by a growing recognition of environmental impacts associated with landfill usage.
Santa Clara County will exhaust its landfill capacity by the year 2013. All publicly owned
landfills are expected to reach capacity in the late 1990s.
To assure adequate landfill capacity to meet future needs, the City of Cupertino has en-
tered into a Joint Powers Agreement with five other northwest cities in Santa Clara County to
provide solutions to common solid waste management concerns. In 1989, Cupertino finalized
a contract for landfill at Newby Island, located in North San Jose. The term of the agreement is
30 years (2019) or depletion of the tonnage allocated (2,050,000 tons) whichever comes first.
State Assembly Bill (AB939) requires local governments to divert 25 percent of all solid
waste from landfill disposal through reduction, recycling and composting by January 1, 1995.
The City of Cupertino has met this 25% diversion requirement. The Assembly Bill further
requires that by January 1, 2000, the City must divert 50% of the waste stream. This will be
more of a challenge for the City but a Source Reduction and Recycling Plan has been com-
pleted which outlines how this reduction will be achieved.
The additional source reduction components will include an expansion of recycling
efforts to all land uses, streamlining the residential composting program, and public edu-
cation and information programs. Each of these categories have short-, medium- and long-
term goals and implementation programs.
0 Policy 6-53: Commercialllndustrial Recycling
Continue to expand commercial and industrial recycling programs to meet
AB939 waste stream reduction goals.
■ Policy 6- 54: Residential Recycling
Continue to streamline the residential curbside recycling program in the next
decade. All city-wide residential zoning districts should be included in the
curbside recycling program.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
0
•
Public Health and Safety
0 Policy 6- 55: On-site Garbage Area Dedication
Modify existing on-site waste facility requirements to all multi -family resi-
dential, commercial and industrial land uses to have 50% of their garbage
area dedicated to recycling and 50% dedicated to solid waste.
0 Policy 6- 56: Public Education
Continue public education regarding the reduction of solid waste disposal
and recycling.
0 Policy 6- 57: City Staff Recycling
Continue to encourage City staff to recycle at all City facilities.
Waste Water
Waste water collection and treatment in Cupertino is provided by the Cupertino Sani-
tary District and the City of Sunnyvale. The Cupertino Sanitary District serves the majority
of Cupertino. The City of Sunnyvale serves a small portion of the Cupertino Urban Service
area within the San Jose Rancho Rinconada area, which is located adjoining Lawrence Ex-
pressway on the east side of the City.
The Cupertino Sanitary District collects and transports waste water to the San Jose/
Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant located in North San Jose. The District purchases
water treatment capacity from the plant, and has purchased 8.6 million gallons per day of
capacity from the San Jose/Santa Clara Treatment Plant. This purchased capacity is suffi-
cient to meet the projected wastewater treatment needs of Cupertino.
The City of Sunnyvale provides waste water treatment service for two blocks of
Cupertino commercial properties along South Stevens Creek Boulevard. This service area
also includes unincorporated single family residential properties within the Cupertino Ur-
ban Service area. The City of Sunnyvale Wastewater Treatment Plant has a daily treatment
capacity of 29 million gallons per day (mgd) of which approximately 15 mgd are being uti-
lized. The City of Sunnyvale can continue to provide treatment capacity for future growth
in its Cupertino service area, however, the trunk service mains and other portions of the
sewer main system would probably have to be upgraded by the developers, if large indus-
trial users are allowed in the Cupertino service area. It is unlikely though that the Stevens
Creek Conceptual Plan will be amended to allow industrial users in this area because of the
need to maintain compatibility with adjoining single family residential uses.
E Policy 6-58: Impacts -Sunnyvale Treatment
Consider the impacts on the Sunnyvale sanitary sewer system if significant
industrial uses are proposed in the South Stevens Creek Boulevard area.
N Policy 6-59: Vallee Parkway
Recognize that new high discharge users in the Vallco area and the Stevens
• Creek Boulevard and Blaney Avenue area will require private developer
paid upgrading of tributary lines.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
6-49
NO
0
0
•
rI
Section 7
Implementation
Introduction
This section outlines the steps to be taken to carry out General Plan policies and pro-
grams during a set period of time. It monitors the City's progress toward meeting the Plan's
goals and measures the Plan's effectiveness through periodic reviews.
It is not easy to relate long-term policies and programs to concrete implementation steps,
but other policies and programs that are very specific can be completed relatively quickly.
Implementation Techniques
The General Plan is carried out through four techniques: control timing of growth,
development regulations, capital improvements and intergovernmental coordination.
Controlling the timing of growth includes consideration of the infrastructure capac-
ity, geographic limitations and annexation. Cupertino makes sure that the City's infrastruc-
ture, in other words, its utilities and road system, can absorb the impacts of growth,
regulating growth's timing and extent.
Cupertino cooperates with the Santa Clara County Local Agency Formation Commis-
sion (LAFCO) to define the growth limits of the City. LAFCO establishes an Urban Service
Area boundary that identifies a supply of land to accommodate five years of growth, based
on the growth rate of the previous five years and a Sphere of Influence line showing the
25 -year growth limit. Both limits are illustrated on Figure 7-A.
Cupertino's Urban Service Area is developed with the exception of a few areas along
the western fringe of the foothills, the Vallco Park planning area and the San Jose Diocese
property near Interstate 280. Cupertino does not intend to expand into the 25 -year limit
Sphere of Influence growth line at this time.
Most of the county islands within the Urban Service Area have been annexed into
Cupertino. Routine annexation will continue with properties that require new or expanded
connections to Cupertino Water Service or properties that develop under county jurisdiction
with a formal agreement to annex at a specified time. Annexations of large areas will be re-
viewed as they come up to find the degree of benefit to both the annexed area and to Cupertino.
E Policy 7-1: Annexations of Small Islands
• Actively pursue annexation of small islands, especially those in need of
Cupertino Water Service and other municipal services to facilitate new de-
velopment.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN 1 7-1
7-2 Implementation •
Figure 7-A. Urban Service and Sphere of Influence.
WR Unincorporated Areas within
Urban Service Area
— — Urban Service Area Boundary
(5 Yr. Growth)
..... Sphere of Influence Line
(25 Yr. Growth)
---- Boundary Agreement Line
Some of Cupertino's development regulations are proactive, defining the actions of the
City and other agencies to meet planning goals. A good example is in the Environmental
Resources Element. Policies identify lands to be acquired by the City and other agencies
for public open space and recreation. Others are reactive, regulating the use of land by pri-
vate parties. They are in the Land Use/Community Character Element and on the land use
diagram, which identifies approved land use types and intensity.
The need for significant capital improvements and their location are shown in the
General Plan. The City is responsible for adopting a Capital Improvements Program to set
the amount and source of money to build streets, acquire parks and build physical improve-
ments to carry out the Plan.
The Plan guides agencies that directly serve the City, such as the fire district, sanitary
district, school system and the regional open space management district. The Plan also con-
tains policies that react to regional planning efforts, such as the T-2010 Transportation Plan.
This implementation chart links the plan's policies to a system that identifies the ac-
tions and timing needed to carry them out. The Plan will be reviewed yearly and the poli-
cies will be tested to be sure that they are still relevant and feasible, economically and
politically, thus ensuring that the Plan remains current.
0
The General Plan must be both practical and visionary. The Plan must not be limited to a
short-term viewpoint because it contains fundamental goals that may not be possible to achieve •
in a prescribed period. The steps to carry out such goals must be tested yearly to be sure that
they are still valid and attainable. The community should appoint a Goals Committee to exam-
ine and restructure the Plan every five years to reflect changing community values.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
• Implementation 7-3
r 1
L-A
Policy 7-2: Plan Review Schedule
Schedule the General Plan for review annually by the Planning Commis-
sion and every five years by an ad hoc citizen's review committee.
The implementation diagram shows follow-up actions to be taken within a specific time
period based on a system of priorities. The Program Code refers to the Capital Improve-
ments Program, Legislative Review Program, or to the Community Development/Public
Works Departments' annual work programs, which contain more detailed description of
each activity.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
7-4
Implementation
KEY
Land Use/Community
=
High Low
Priority *= PriorityIII♦ =Ongoing
Character Element
=
Prionry ?n = Unprogrammed �= Targe
FOLLOW-UP
ACTION
TIMING
POLICY
DESCRIPTION
ter -
Develop.
NUMBER (Program Summary)
CIP
Code
Code
Guitle-
Ate
Ord.
lines
Coord
Review
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
2-1
Provide adequate land area for a variety of uses,
including recreation and open space. Encourage
;IIII
I II
mixed use development.
2-2 Coordinate private development to create
Community Focal Point on or near Stevens Creek
Blvd, through development of a specific plan.
2-3 Revise Development Intensity Manual to address
development allocation.
2-4 Regulate land use intensity for Monte Vista area
industrial and office uses. Require an allocation
:I I IIS
IIII
for commercial land uses.
IIII
2-5 Protect residential areas from intrusive impacts of
I II
commercial and industrial uses in Monte Vista area.
�I
I I II
2-6 Implement shared driveways and interconnect
• "
III
parking lots on commercial sties in Morita Vista area.
�I
2-7 Require replacement of housing removed under
eminent domain in Monte Vista.
:IIII
I I II�
•
2-8 Eliminate architectural barriers to pedestrian
mobility in Monta Vista area.
:IIII
I I II�
I I II�
2-9 Maintain a semi -rural appearance with residential
street improvements in Monte Vista.
:IIII
2-10 Preserve existing neighborhood landscaping and
emphasize on-site parking during redevelopment
'IIII
III
in Monte Vista.
2-11 Allow mixed use development in Granada Ave.,
Stevens Creek Blvd. and Orange Ave. area and
rely on public parking for commercial pan of
�I I II
I I II
project on Pasadena and Imperial Avenues.
2-12 Require traditional storefront appearances for
commercial and office structures in Monta Vista.
'IIII
III
✓
2-13 Provide full range of housing density and tenure
type.
✓
2-14 Consider housing in non-residential develop-
ments.
2-15 Ensure scale and density of new and remodel
housing consistent with predominant single
�I I II
III
family pattern.
I I II
2-16 Ensure compatibility of lot sizes with neighbor-
hood lot pattern for zoning requests.
:IIII
•
2-17 Encourage
variety in housing type and density in
urban core.
✓:
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Land Use/Community Characterl
Element (con't)
POLICY DESCRIPTION
NUMBER (Program Summary)
2-18 Include private indoor/outdoor spaces for each
unit in residential developments.
2-19 Protect neighborhoods from adverse effects of
more intense development.
2-20 Use design techniques to reduce privacy intrusion
from neighbors.
2-21 Use design techniques to enhance security/
neighborhood awareness.
2-22 Allow development in excess of allocations it
traffic, housing and other goals are met.
2-23 Monitor development rate/fiscal effects to avoid
market saturation.
2-24 City may enter into agreement with developer of
hotel conference facilities to develop such facility.
2-25 Intensify urban development in Vallco Park, N.
De Anza BI. and Town Center and Stevens Creek
2-26 Emphasize attractive on-site environments during
Implementation 7-5
KEY
HighLow IIII++ -Ongoing
- Prioriry - Priority 7 -
= Medium - Prog Timing
Priority - Unprogrammed �= Target
FOLLOW-UP ACTION
TIMING
CIP
Code
Ord.
Guide-
lines
Inter -
Agency
Develop.
Review
1993
1994 1995 1996
1997
2-28 Review proposed development at Community
IIII»�III�
III
III
IIII»��II�
IIII
ment.
:IIII
2-30 Plan street improvements as an integral part of
IIII»�III�
the project to ensure safe movement of people
IIII*�III�
I II
and vehicles.
III
2-26 Emphasize attractive on-site environments during
the development review process.
2-27 Encourage residential and public open space nextL
=LrL
to major streets.
I II
2-28 Review proposed development at Community
entries to include Gateway treatment.
I II
2-29 Minimize number of curb cuts in each develop-
ment.
2-30 Plan street improvements as an integral part of
the project to ensure safe movement of people
:IIII
I II
and vehicles.
III
2-31 Include defined spaces for pedestrians in parking
lots.
:IIII
III
2-32 Provide 50 ft. setback for properties fronting De
Anza Blvd.
�I I II
I II
2-33 Use design techniques to off- set effects of major
I Ilyl
roadways.
�I
2-34 Define neighborhood entries through architecture,
landscaping.
2-35 Protect neighborhoods from through traffic =� .
spillover, rJtil :IIII I II
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
7-6
Implementation
KEY
•
Land Use/Community
Character
High
X=
A= priority IIII» = Ongoing
Element (con't)
= MediumTiming
= Unprogrammed V=
Priority Target
FOLLOW-UP ACTON
TIMING
POLICY
DESCRIPTION
Inter-
NUMBER (Program Summary)
CIP
Code
Guide-
enc
Develop.
Ord.
lines
Agency
Review
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
2-36
Apply slope density formula to foothill residential
areas.
;IIII
2-37 Apply the 5-20 slope density designation to
provide special hillside protection west of the
.IIII
IIII
existing urban/suburban development pattern.
2-38 Require consolidation of lots less than 5 areas
under certain conditions in the 5-20 slope density
:IIII
I I II
area.
2-39 Rezone portion of Inspiration Heights area from
R1-10 to RHS .
v
2-40 Adopt an exception process in the foothill
_—
modified and 1/2 acre modified slope density
designations to allow consideration of develop-
ment on sub-standard lots.
2-41 Apply hillside protection policies to diocese
✓
property.
IIII
IIII
•
2-42 Do not expand the urban service area.
2-43 Cluster major subdivisions in the hillsides,
reserving 90% of the land in open space.
:IIII
IIII
2-44 Establish a private open space zoning district.
2-45 Encourage clustering in minor subdivisions,
reserving 90% of the land in open space.
�I I II
I I II
2-46 Establish stricter building standards for the
=Lti
hillside area.
�J�l
2-47 Amend RHS ordinance 10 disallow any structures
on ridgelines if visible from valley floor vantage
points.
I I II
2-48 Locate hillside structures to minimize impacts on
adjacent properties and open space.
:IIII
2-49 Amend RHS ordinance to avoid or limit develop-
ment in geological hazard areas.
✓
2-50 Amend RHS ordinance to reduce visible mass of
_
structures.
�J�l
2-51 Amend RHS ordinance to require low intensity
and shielded lighting.
✓
/
2-52 Amend RHS ordinance to limit height and visual
impacts.
v
•
2-53 Amend the RHS ordinance to prohibit structures
on slopes greater than 30%.
v
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
Implementation
7-7
KEY
Land Use/Community Character
= a ority
= Priody IIII♦ =Ongoing
Element (con't)
Medium
Timing
_
= Unprogrammed �=
Priority
Target
FOLLOW-UP ACTION
TIMING
POLICY
DESCRIPTION
Inter-
NUMBER (Program Summary)
CIP
Code
Guide-
Develop.
Ord.
lines
Coteord
Review
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
2-54
Require rural improvement standards in hillside
subdivisions.
:IIII
IIII
2-55 Include view of foothills/natural features in public
facilities design.
:IIII
IIII
IIII
2-56 Investigate/mitigate environmental dangers of
hillside development.
:IIII
IIII
2-57 Minimize disturbance of natural contours, plants,
trees during hillside development
;IIII
III
III
2-58 Incorporate Santa Clara County Hillside Policies.
:IIII:
2-59 County development should consider Cupertino's
General Plan,
I I II
I
2-60 Explore a joint powers agreement made up of
Cupertino, Los Altos Hills, Palo Alto, Saratoga
_—
and Santa Clara Co. for the purpose of hillisde
protection in the unincorporated area.
2-61 Allow existing commercial/recreation uses in
floodplain to remain or convert to agriculture.
;IIII
III
III
2-62 Designate non -recreational sites in floodplain as
residential per criteria.
:IIII
III
2-63 Allow public, quasi -public uses in floodplain after
review.
:IIII
III
2-64 Balance access to, protection from sun exposure
for all homes.
:IIII
2-65 Work with school districts to continue to provide
high level of school services.
III
III
2-66 Design roads to meet school busing needs.
�I I II
2-67 Create pedestrian access between now
I II
subdivisions and schools.
I II
2-68 Continue to provide building permit data to school
districts.
:I I IIy:
III
2-69 Allow non-traditional uses at De Anza College.
:IIII
2-70 Require cooperation between the County and City
in expanding library services and facilities if
jr♦
necessary.
2-71 Integrate and coordinate the library system into
•
General Plan goals.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
7-8
Recognize that actual dwelling unit density may
Implementation
be different from the land use map.
•
2-81
Allow public and quasi -public activities within any
KEY
land use designation and allow residential land
Land Use/Community Character
=
High
= Low
IIII♦ =Ongoing
within closed school sites used for quasi -public,
y
institutional activities or for housing.
2-83
Element (con't)
MediumTiming
surroundings shown.
=
r = Unprogrammed I,/=
uses.
Priority
Target
FOLLOW-UP ACTION
TIMING
POLICY
DESCRIPTION
Inter -
NUMBER
(Program Summary)
CIP
Abe
Guide-
Agency
Review
Coord.
1993 1994
1995 1996 1997
2-72
Encourage library to use new technology to
improve service and encourage adjustments of
•
:
✓
library collections to meet needs.
III'
2-73 Actively seek methods to expand library facilities.
•
2-74 Encourage private rehabilitation and retention of
landmark buildings.
:III'
2-75 Require investigation to determine if archaeologi-
cal resources will be affected by a project.
2-76 Take appropriate actions if native American
I
burials are discovered during construction.
2-77 Protect and maintain Heritage Trees.
2-78 Consider requiring installation of public art in
•
(rl�
large project approvals.
I,til
2-79 Base boundaries between land
use classifications
upon established land use activities, public
streets and physical barriers.
2-80
Recognize that actual dwelling unit density may
I
be different from the land use map.
2-81
Allow public and quasi -public activities within any
land use designation and allow residential land
uses in quasi -public areas.
2-82
Designate all public school sites for public use
within closed school sites used for quasi -public,
institutional activities or for housing.
2-83
Allow new dnveup facilities if compatibility w/
surroundings shown.
2-84
Discourage late -hour activities except in Vallco,
Town Center or areas isolated from residential
uses.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
eImplementation
Housing Element
POLICY DESCRIPTION
NUMBER (Program Summary)
RESPONSIBLE
AGENCY
1
Prepare specific plans for existing non-residential areas where an
additional 1,500 housing units will be allowed.
Planning Dept.
2
Encourage higher density affordable housing with density
bonuses.
Planning Dept.
3
Consider specific locations for mandatory residential or mixed use.
Planning Dept.
4
Consider surplus school and urban church sites for higher density
and mixed use residential.
Planning Dept
5
Study additional specific areas for residential use.
Planning Dept.
6
Allow a density bonus if a Transfer of Development Credits
program is adopted.
Planning Dept.
7
Discount parking standards for mixed use developments.
Planning Dept.
8
Set minimum landscaping, open space and setback standards
for higher density and mixed use projects.
Planning Dept.
l Il
7-9
KEY
Ongoing
_ Timing
Target
Staff time ✓
Staff time
Staff time
Staff time
9 Set high design standards for higher density and mixed use Planning Dept. Staff time
projects.
10 Continue second unit ordinance. Planning Dept. Staff time
11 Cooperate with county, state, federal and private agencies in
developing affordable housing; use HUD funds to finance
infrastructure; encourage use of mortgage revenue bonds
and CDBG funds.
12 Construct 160-210 very low and low income units.
13 Continue participation in Section 8 (Ex.) to assist 63 very low
and low income housing.
14 Develop rental and affordable ownership housing opportunities
through the following combination of programs:
Continue priority processing of developments that have
low/moderate income units;
Identify suitable sites and determine availability of surplus
school sites;
Excuse all/part of development fees for projects which include
low -mod. income units;
Develop additional methods for providing funding and units such
as revenue bond financing;
• Use City funds to assist non-profit organizations to develop
rental units for low and very low income households.
Planning Dept. Section 202;
Section 8, CDBG
Housing Authority CDBG,
of Santa Clara Project Spronsor, I Ill'
Staff time
Planning Dept. Staff time,
City Funds
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
TIMING
FUNDING
SOURCE
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
Staff time,
property owners
✓
Staff time
Staff time
Staff time
l Il
Staff time ✓
Staff time
Staff time
Staff time
9 Set high design standards for higher density and mixed use Planning Dept. Staff time
projects.
10 Continue second unit ordinance. Planning Dept. Staff time
11 Cooperate with county, state, federal and private agencies in
developing affordable housing; use HUD funds to finance
infrastructure; encourage use of mortgage revenue bonds
and CDBG funds.
12 Construct 160-210 very low and low income units.
13 Continue participation in Section 8 (Ex.) to assist 63 very low
and low income housing.
14 Develop rental and affordable ownership housing opportunities
through the following combination of programs:
Continue priority processing of developments that have
low/moderate income units;
Identify suitable sites and determine availability of surplus
school sites;
Excuse all/part of development fees for projects which include
low -mod. income units;
Develop additional methods for providing funding and units such
as revenue bond financing;
• Use City funds to assist non-profit organizations to develop
rental units for low and very low income households.
Planning Dept. Section 202;
Section 8, CDBG
Housing Authority CDBG,
of Santa Clara Project Spronsor, I Ill'
Staff time
Planning Dept. Staff time,
City Funds
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
7-10
Implementation •
KEY
Housing Element (con't) IIII» = Ongoing
_ Timing
Target
POLICY DESCRIPTION
RESPONSIBLE
FUNDING
TIMING
NUMBER (Program Summary)
AGENCY
SOURCE
25 Require developers of affordable housing to provide a reserve
Planning Dept.
Staff time,
I II
for maintenance.
Project sponsor
1993
1994
1995
1996 1997
15
Determine necessity for Article 34 referendum.
Staff report to
City funds
w I II
Planning Dept.
Staff time
I �I
City Manager
:by
16 Participate in Mortgage Credit Certificate Program to provide
Planning Dept.
Staff time,
/
ownership housing to 40 moderate income ownership units.
MCC fund
II'
:1995:
17 Continue to support matching services for low income elderly
Planning Dept.
Staff time,
households. -
CDBG
II'
18 Encourage the conversion of existing market rate units to
Planning Dept.
Staff time
affordable rental units.
19 Encourage long-term leases from churches, school districts and
Planning Dept.
Staff time
corporations for construction of affordable rental units.
20 Give first priority for affordable units to people who live, work or
Planning Dept.
Staff time
have family in Cupertino.
21 Utilize the City's Affordable Rent Schedule in setting affordable
Planning Dept.
Staff time
rents and update it annually,
22 Adopt an ordinance to require housing mitigation procedures
Planning Dept.
Staff time
for new officelndustrial and residential development.
23 Investigate various financing strategies including:
Planning Dept.
Staff time
Local and county bond financing;
Bank financing of mixed use projects;
Pension funds as sources;
Transfer tax for sales of property
Redevelopment agency reactivation;
Employer -assisted housing programs;
Non-profit housing developers' participation.
24 Create a Housing Endowment Program for affordable housing
Planning Dept.
Staff time,
CDBG
25 Require developers of affordable housing to provide a reserve
Planning Dept.
Staff time,
I II
for maintenance.
Project sponsor
26 Develop an educational program for the public about affordable
Planning Dept.
Staff time
/
housing.
v
27 Ensure that developers meet with neighborhood groups prior to
Planning Dept.
Staff time
I �I
and during development of affordable housing projects.
28 Form a housing advocacy group to educate residents about
Planning Dept.
Staff time
/
affordable housing needs and benefits.
: v
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
•
lu
Implementation
Housing Element (con't)
POLICY DESCRIPTION RESPONSIBLE FUNDING
NUMBER (Program Summary) AGENCY SOURCE
29 Support existing rotating homeless shelter program sponsored Planning Dept. Staff time
by churches.
30 Conserve low income and handicapped units and units in Planning Dept. Staff time
congregate care residences.
31 Continue code enforcement and maintenance of public areas.
32 Provide low interest loans to rehabilitate 20-30 low income
owner units.
33 Continue condominium Conversion Ordinance to preserve
existing supply of affordable rental units.
Planning Dept. City Funds
Public Works
Planning Dept. Staff time,
CDBG
Planning Dept. Staff time
KEY
Ongoing
_ Timing
Target
TIMING
1993 1 1994 1 1995 1 1996 1997
34 Provide information on loan programs through the rehabilitation
Planning Dept.
Staff time
III
program.
CDBG
35 Review existing City Ordinance and energy programs from
Planning Dept.
Staff time
I II
other jurisdictions.
• 36 Offer pre -sale code inspections.
Planning Dept.
Staff time
I II�
37 Investigate and pursue federal, state and county funded programs
Planning Dept.
Staff time
I II
for expansion of rehabilitation activities.
CDBG
38 Refer individuals experiencing discrimination to fair housing
Planning Dept.
Staff time
III
organization.
39 Refer landlord/tenant complaints to City -established mediation
Planning Dept.
Staff time,
agency.
Service agency
III
40 Continue to support fair housing services through the County's
Planning Dept.
Staff time,
CDBG program.
County
s
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
7-12
Implementation
=Medium �1 = Unprogrammed V= Timing
Priority Target
POLICY DESCRIPTION
FOLLOW-UP ACTON TIMING NUMBER (Program Summary) CIP Code Guide- Inter_ Develop.
Ord. lines Agency AenReview 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
4-1 Participate in developing regional transportation =R
solutions.
Strategy Support expansion of County Transit fleet and
support prioritizing express services along
expressways and arterial streets.
Strategy Support expansion of rapid transit.
4-2 Maintain reasonable PM peak hour level of
service through land use limitations.
Strategy Limit Stevens Creek Blvd. and De Anza Blvd. to
8 lanes; retain 16 trip/ac. core area limit which
may be exceeded by a development allocation.
Strategy Impose FAR on commercial, office and industrial
uses which may be exceeded by a development
allocation.
Strategy Carry out citywide transportation improvement
plan to accommodate LOS D on major street
system except LOS E at Stevens Creek and
De Anza Blvds. and De Anza Blvd. and Bollinger
Road for the Heart of the City.
Strategy Consider an underpass at De Anza and Stevens
Creek if needed.
Strategy Conduct a traffic analysis after completion of
Highway 85 to determine opportunities to improve
LOS.
4-3 Allow development above allocations up to
2,000,000 sq. h. if PM peak trips are not
exceeded.
4-4 Plan construction of critical street improvements
to coincide with major development.
Strategy Require traffic study with plans for major
developments.
4-5 Interconnect private driveways in lieu of direct
access to major streets.
4-6 Protect community from harmful impacts of
transportation system.
4-7 Develop traffic management plans for neighbor-
hoods affected by excess levels of through traffic.
4-8 Study/implement techniques to discourage
abusive driving.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
111
•
•
KEY
Transportation Element
-
h
rity
Priority
-
A
Low
Priority
III♦ =Ongoing
=Medium �1 = Unprogrammed V= Timing
Priority Target
POLICY DESCRIPTION
FOLLOW-UP ACTON TIMING NUMBER (Program Summary) CIP Code Guide- Inter_ Develop.
Ord. lines Agency AenReview 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
4-1 Participate in developing regional transportation =R
solutions.
Strategy Support expansion of County Transit fleet and
support prioritizing express services along
expressways and arterial streets.
Strategy Support expansion of rapid transit.
4-2 Maintain reasonable PM peak hour level of
service through land use limitations.
Strategy Limit Stevens Creek Blvd. and De Anza Blvd. to
8 lanes; retain 16 trip/ac. core area limit which
may be exceeded by a development allocation.
Strategy Impose FAR on commercial, office and industrial
uses which may be exceeded by a development
allocation.
Strategy Carry out citywide transportation improvement
plan to accommodate LOS D on major street
system except LOS E at Stevens Creek and
De Anza Blvds. and De Anza Blvd. and Bollinger
Road for the Heart of the City.
Strategy Consider an underpass at De Anza and Stevens
Creek if needed.
Strategy Conduct a traffic analysis after completion of
Highway 85 to determine opportunities to improve
LOS.
4-3 Allow development above allocations up to
2,000,000 sq. h. if PM peak trips are not
exceeded.
4-4 Plan construction of critical street improvements
to coincide with major development.
Strategy Require traffic study with plans for major
developments.
4-5 Interconnect private driveways in lieu of direct
access to major streets.
4-6 Protect community from harmful impacts of
transportation system.
4-7 Develop traffic management plans for neighbor-
hoods affected by excess levels of through traffic.
4-8 Study/implement techniques to discourage
abusive driving.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
111
•
•
io
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
KEY Implementation I
7-13
Transportation Element (con't)
_
Low
"90 Priority k- Priority
= Ongoing
,�1 =
n
Medium rn = unprogrammed v=
Priority
Timing
Target
POLICY
NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
(Program Summary)
FOLLOW-UP ACTION
TIMING
CIP
Ce
Gude-
Inter -
Agency
Coord.
Review
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
4-9
Discourage private auto use in favor of other
=lrL
travel modes.
Strategy
Encourage bicycling, motorbike use and car/van
IIII
pooling.
:III'
Strategy
Provide street space for bike lanes, ped. paths,
II'�
,
bus turnouts.
Strategy Require on site bicycle facilities including parking
facilities, showers, and clothing storage lockers at
industrial, comm. developments.
Strategy
Coordinate bicycle route planning with surround-
•
ing cities and County.
Strategy
Incorporate bicycle lanes and pedestrian
II�
crossings in freeway overpass construction.
Strategy
Use City media to provide information on non -
•
Strategy
motoring travel.
Continue to work with CUBPAC and the public to
improve bicycle and pedestrian safety.
4-10
Continue to plan for and provide a comprehen-
sive trail and pathway system.
io
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
7-14 I Implementation
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
4)
KEY
TIMING
POLICY DESCRIPTION
Environmental Resources
Xt
Pngorhy
Low
AC Priorty Illly = Ongoing
Element
=
Medium
�= Unprogrammed 1= Timing
Code
Guide-
Priority
Target
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
4)
FOLLOW-UP ACTION
TIMING
POLICY DESCRIPTION
InneAger
NUMBER (Program Summery)
CIP
Code
Guide-
Develop.
Ord.
lines
Cord
Review
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
5-1 Designate Williamson Act properties for their
anticipated developed use.
:I I II
III
5-2 Recognize and support agricultural land uses in
development review.
:I I II
III
III
5-3 Maintain farming/grazing in hillside areas -
I II
monitor erosion.
:I
5-4 Assess air quality impacts of major develop-
I II
ments.
�I
III
5-5 Use water or oil to control dust during constric-
tion activity.
III
/
5-6 Initiate a public education program about the
'M
Clean Air Act and ways to control emissions.
L`
� v
I I II
5-7 Pursue cooperation among region wide organiza.
tions to improve air quality.
rJtil
I I II
5-8 Ensure that local land use decisions support the
goal of clean air.
IIID
5-9 Continue to allow home occupations in residential
•
areas.`
5-10 Increase tree planting on public and private
property.
� ✓
5-11 Consider purchase of more fuel efficient city
vehicles.
'lw`
: ✓
5-12 Warn joggers, cyclists against inhaling pollutants-`
•
expand par jogging trails per demand.
I I II
I I II
5-13 Landscape city projects which are near native
vegetation with appropriate native plants.
5-14 Cluster new development away from sensitive
natural areas.
rJ�l rJ�l
I II�:
5-15 Use native plants near natural vegetation and for
I II
erosion control.
:I
III
✓
5-16 Minimize lawn area and maximize native trees by
amending RHS ordinance.
rJ�l
5-17 Limit fencing of hillside lots to area near building,
not entire site.
5-18 Limit recreation activity as compatible with
preserving natural areas.
III
5-19 Provide public access to wildlife and fishing sites.
IIII*
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
•
4)
•
•
0
5-21
Implementation
7-15
KEYHigh
Santa Clara County to ensure compatibility with
Environmental Resources
+ Ongoing
City's General Plan.
Priority Priority
Element (con't)
=
Medium/=
�' Unprogrammed V
Timing
I II
Priority
Target
extraction activities.
FOLLOW-UP ACTION
TIMING
5-23
POLICY DESCRIPTION
III
mineral resource areas.
Inter_
NUMBER (Program Summary)
CIP
Code
Guide-
'
Develop.
quarries.
5-25
Ord.
lines
Coord
Review
1993
1994
1995 1996
1997
5-20 Provide open space linkages within and between
when possible.
properties for recreational and wildlife activities.
5-26
III
5-21
Limit existing mineral resource areas in sphere of
influence to present operations and work with
•
I II
Santa Clara County to ensure compatibility with
City's General Plan.
5-22
Control pollution, scenic restoration in mineral
I II
III
extraction activities.
�I
5-23
Encourage compatibility of land uses around
III
mineral resource areas.
5-24
Consider passive recreation uses at abandoned
•
quarries.
5-25
Support SCVWD development of ground water
recharge sites in city; provide public rec. uses
when possible.
5-26
Encourage research of other water resources
such as water reclamation.
5-27
Encourage inclusion of conservation measures in
industrial projects with Sanitary District cooperation.
:I I IIy
I II
5-28
Retain natural state of water courses and
associated vegetation to protect habitat and
I II
III
recreation potential and enhance ground water
:I
recharge.
5-29
Pursue regional solutions to water supply
—
III
problems.
5-30
Recognize that additional growth in Reglin Mutual
Water Co. district may require annexation to
I II
adjoining water district, resulting in facility and
service demands to that district.
5-31
Keep city-wide conservation efforts similar to
I I II
regional efforts.
5-32
Provide public information on water conservation
I I II
techniques.
5-33
Prohibit excessive water uses during drought
=R
I II�
conditions.
rJ�l
5-34
Institute water conservation programs at City
/0
buildings.
5-35
Continue to participate in the Non -point Source
IIII`
Pollution Control program.
5-36
Encourage reduction of impervious surface areas
and retaining stone runoff.
I I II
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
7-16
Implementation
KEY
h Low
Environmental Resources = Priority A- Priority III♦ =Ongoing
Element (con't) = Medium Timing
Priority =Unprogrammed �= Target
5-41 Actively pursue interagency acquisition of green
•
111,
FOLLOW-UP ACTION
[[_�`•
TIMING
POLICY
DESCRIPTION
5-E,F,G.
CIP
Code
Guitle-
_
Anenr
Develop.
NUMBER (Program Summary)
111
5-44 Seek cooperation from private land owners for
public use of private open space.
— •
5-48
Design parks for flexibility and low maintenance.
5-49
Ord.
lines
Coob
Review
1993
1994
1995 1996
1997
5-37
Do not permit development if not served by
requirements in Neighborhood N and adjust
Sanitary sewers except for Regnart Canyon.
5-51
Determine park needs in Neighborhoods J-1, J-2
1II�
5-38 Continue to act as a liaison between PG&E and
community in providing energy efficiency
and K after completion of Sedgwick School
information.
master plan.
5-52
I11�
5-39 Continue County policies to pursue connection of
funding/timing priorities.
upper/lower Stevens Crook Park.
5-53
Provide park and recreational space and facilities
5-40 Keep Stevens Creek Reservoir and watershed in
5-54
public ownership.
gymnasium and swimming pool should they be
5-41 Actively pursue interagency acquisition of green
•
111,
belt space on lower foothills.
[[_�`•
III
5-42 Provide open space/trail linkages in Figure
)In
5-E,F,G.
Ilk
5-43 Encourage continued existence of private open
5-47
space facilities.
: P :
111
5-44 Seek cooperation from private land owners for
public use of private open space.
— •
5-45
Provide park land of a minimum of 3 acres/1000
population.
5-46
Provide park space ® 1/2 mi. safe walking
distance from all households.
5-47
Plan park areas at 3.5 acre minimum area for
flexible use except if certain criteria are met.
5-48
Design parks for flexibility and low maintenance.
5-49
Ensure parks are bounded by public streets;
create perimeter roads.
5-50
Provide a public neighborhood park for new
— •
residential development based on park ratio
requirements in Neighborhood N and adjust
boundaries of Neighborhoods N and E-1.
5-51
Determine park needs in Neighborhoods J-1, J-2
and K after completion of Sedgwick School
master plan.
5-52
Pursue park acquisition program per Table 5-B
funding/timing priorities.
'JAL
A
5-53
Provide park and recreational space and facilities
for new residential development in non -res. areas.
5-54
Pursue partnerships to fund a recreational
gymnasium and swimming pool should they be
developed.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
V/
•i
C
I 1
L A
•
Implementation
7-17
Public Health and Safety
KEY
Element
POLICY
DESCRIPTION
NUMBER
(Program Summary)
6-1
Adopt formal geologic process for new
�!7
Priority=
development.
Pnorrry
6-2
Continue public education program to reduce
=
Medium
earthquake hazard.
Unprogrammed V=
6-3
Encourage County implementation of fire hazard
Priority
policies in County GP.
6-4
Encourage outside agencies to pursue fuel
management practices.
6-5
Encourage MPOSD to allow use of green fire
Guide-
inter-
breaks.
6-6
Continue to require fire sprinklers in hillside and
flag lot residences.
6-7
Require frequent grade breaks in hillside
Ord.
lines
development access routes.
Review
6-8
Require upgrade of existing access routes in new
1995
1996
hillside development.
,re•,
6-9
Involve Central Fire District in early design stage
of projects.
6-10
Encourage cooperation between water utilities
and Central Fire District.
6-11
Encourage utilities to consider fire fighting needs
when upgrading water systems.
-
6-12
Involve Central Fire District in design of public
roadways.
6-13
Promote fire prevention through public education.
6-14
Ensure adequate fire protection for multi -story
buildings.
6-15
Consider requiring fire sprinklers in all resi-
dences.
6-16
Consider new guidelines for fire protection in
commercial and industrial uses.
6-17
Discourage entry gates in private residential
development.
6-18
Allow public access to private streets in
emergency for dead end streets.
6-19
Require smoke detectors in new res. structures.
IR
III
III
III
III
II
III
III
III
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Implementation
7-17
KEY
=
High
Low III1 -Ongoing
7 -
�!7
Priority=
Pnorrry
=
Medium
rn =
Unprogrammed V=
Timing
Priority
Target
FOLLOW-UP ACTION
TIMING
CIP
Code
Guide-
inter-
Develop.
Ord.
lines
CoordY
Review
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
,re•,
IR
III
III
III
III
II
III
III
III
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
7-18
Implementation
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Cl
�. Jl
KEY
FOLLOW-UP
Public Health and Safety
A=
High
Priority
A,= Low ��1* = Ongoing
Priority T
Element (con't)
POLICY
= Medium
Unrammed V /= Timing
= prog
Priority
Target
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Cl
�. Jl
FOLLOW-UP
ACTION
TIMING
POLICY
DESCRIPTION
Inter_
NUMBER
(Program Summary)
CIP
Code
Guide-
Agency
Develop.
Om.
lines
Coord.
Review
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
6-20
Discourage new construction in urban flood
hazard areas.
'"J�lI
I IIy
6-21 Continue prohibiting habitable developments in
natural flood plains.
6-22 Restrict hillside grading from April to October;
replant affected slopes.
�I I II
III
6-23 Evaluate structural integrity of city water system
components.
6-24 Use GP data to evaluate land use compatibility
with noise environment.
'I I II I*
I I II
6-25 Design of roads along West Valley Transportation
corridor should minimize noise intrusion.
�J�l
6-26 Support stricter noise reduction legislation at
state level.
6-27 Prioritize resident convenience and safety over
=R
through commute traffic.
6-28 Evaluate solutions to halt abuse of local streets,
•
,(r►�
including assessment district funded improvements.41
6-29 Work toward voluntary truck traffic reduction from
• —
quarries.
6-30 Work to carry out noise mitigation measures to
diminish Kaiser truck traffic near Foothill and
Stevens Creek Blvds.
6-31 Plan new commerciallndustrial delivery areas
away from residential uses.
:I I II
III
III
III
6-32 Limit delivery hours per Municipal Code.
:I I II
6-33 Require noise analysis/mitigation for industrial
uses near homes.
�IIII
I I II
6-34 Restrict hours of construction work near homes.
:I I II
6-35 Develop comprehensive noise ordinance to set
maximum disturbance levels from many sources.
� y
III
III
6-36 Exercise discretion in requiring noise walls.
6-37 Support Neighborhood Awareness Program to
{IIII�
{III
prevent crime.
III
6-38 Encircle public parks with perimeter roads when
I II
possible.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Cl
�. Jl
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
Implementation
KEY
7-19
Public Health and Safety
=
High iy
A= Prig ly
IIII♦ =Ongoing
Element (con't)
=
Medium
�71 =Unprogrammed
/= Timing
✓
Priority
Target
FOLLOW-UP
ACTION
TIMING
POLICY
DESCRIPTION
Inter -
Develop.
NUMBER (Program Summary)
CIP
Code
Guide-
Agency
Ord.
lines
Eby
Review
1993
1994
1995
1996 1997
6-39
Consider crime reduction techniques in project
planning and design.
6-40 Recognize fiscal impacts to security forces when
approving land use mixes.
'M
L`
III
6-41 Continue to involve County Sheriff in review of
development applications.
6-42 Continue to train employees annually in disaster
preparedness.
I II
6-43 Continue to interact with ham operators to
prepare for emergency communication needs.
III
I I II
6-44-47 Encourage disaster preparedness community -wide.
6-48 Continue to require proper storage and disposal
of hazardous materials.
I II
6-49 Assess the risk of exposure to hazardous
materials when new residential development or
•
_—
childcare facilities are proposed in existing
industrial and manufacturing areas.
: ✓ _,
6-50 Endorse County Hazardous Waste Mgmt. Plan.
6-51 Encourage contributors to the hazardous waste
stream to use non -hazardous alternative products
I((`�
and processes and to recycle materials.
III
6-52 Continue to work with the County and other
groups for proper management and disposal of
household hazardous wastes.
6-53 Continue to expand recycling program to meet
state goals.L
6-54 Include all zoning districts in curbside recycling
program.
i
6-55 Modify on-site waste facility requirements in
multi -family residential, commercial and industrial
—�
land uses to accommodate recycling.
/
6-56 Continue public education regarding solid waste
reduction and recycling.
v
III
6-57 Continue recycling at City facilities.
6-58 Consider impacts on sanitary system if significant
industrial uses are proposed in Stevens Creek area.
6-59 Recognize that high discharge users in Vallco area
and Stevens Creek Blvd. Blaney area will require
developer paid upgrading of tributary lines.
THE CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
THIS COPY OF EIR BELONGS
ON PLANNING STAFF CLERICAL DESK
op DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
■
1993
y GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
�N
CITY OF CUPERTINO
SCH # 91033064
March 11, 1993
1�„�,E• CITY OF CUPERTINO
s,,,/tr
Public Notice of Availability
Document Type: Draft Environmental Impact Report
' Date: March 12, 1993
Project Title: 199-1 General Plan Amendment, Cj(yof rupert•no File No 'A -GPA -9n
Project Location - Specific: The project encompasses the Cupertino Planning Area which ranges from the
Montebello Ridge to Lawrence Expressway and from Homestead Rd to Prospect Rd
Project Location - City: Cupertino Project Location - County: Santa Clara
Description of Project: Ac.ompr henslye amendment of the existing General Plan of the City of Cupertino which will
hange existing and future development. land uses, and theintensity of development including public infrastructure
services and utilities.
Lead Agency: (iry of Cupertino
Lead Agency
Contact Person: Liddy Wordell city Planner AreaCoderrelephone/Extension (408)252-4505
Address where document may be obtained:
Agency Name: City of Cupertino - Community Development Department
Street Address: 10300 Torre Avenue
City/State/Zip: Cupertino California 95014
Public Review Period: Begins March 12, 1993
Tentative Public Hearing (s):
tat Meeting
:.• .111• •uu •1
Time: 6•45 p m
• • 1 1 1 • 11 • • F
invited to comment on the
Ends April 26.1993
2nd Meeting
111• •uu •1
Date:�M y 10. 1993
1 I� ftf. • is
Locatlon: City Council Chamhers
Iat1T41m
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
1993
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
SCH # 91033064
March 11, 1993
PREPARED FOR:
THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
By THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
IN CONJUNCTION WITH
PLANNING RESOURCE ASSOCIATES
707 Bradford St., Suite D
Redwood City, CA
(415) 366-2533
260 State St., Suite 105
Los Altos, CA 94022
(415)941-4975
Table of Contents
Chapter I
Introduction
Chapter II
Project Description
Chapter III
Summary—Project, Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Chapter IV
Environmental Setting
Chapter V
Environmental Analysis
Section 1 Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 2 Housing
Section 3 Transportation and Circulation
Section 4 Public Utilites/Services
Section 5 Air Quality
Section 6 Noise
Section 7 Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 8 Drainage and Flooding
Section 9 Open Space and Parks
Section 10 Vegetation and Wildlife
Section 11 Historical, Archaeological and Cultural Resources
Section 12 Hazardous Materials
Section 13 Economic Development
Chapter VI
Impact Summary and Other CEQA Issues
Chapter VII
List of Preparers
Chapter VIII
Sources and References
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A
Chapter I
INTRODUCTION TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
BACKGROUND
The adoption of a General Plan or General Plan Amendment constitutes a "project' under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State EIR Guidelines, and therefore is
subject to environmental review. If any aspect of the proposed General Plan Amendment,
either individually or cumulatively, may significantly affect the environment, an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared. This EIR is prepared in accordance
with State requirements, and analyzes the environmental effects that could result from
implementation of the proposed General Plan Amendment.
A General Plan is a policy document and as such need not be evaluated at the same level of
detail as a specific development project. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines clearly acknowledge this difference. It indicates that the degree of specificity
required in an EIR should correspond to the degree of specificity involved in the underlying
activity. An EIR on a General Plan should focus on the secondary effects that may be
expected to follow from the adoption of the General Plan, but need not be as detailed as an
EIR on the specific construction projects that might follow (CEQA Guidelines, Section
15146). Future developments proposed pursuant to the General Plan will be subject to
separate environmental review under CEQA.
An Environmental Impact Report is an informational document which, when fully prepared
in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, will inform public decision -makers and the general
public of the environmental effects of projects they propose to carry out or approve. The EIR
process is intended to enable public agencies to evaluate a project to determine whether it may
have a "significant' effect on the environment, to examine and institute methods of reducing
adverse impacts and to consider alternatives to the project as proposed. While CEQA
requires that major consideration be given to the potential physical impacts on the
environment, and preventing environmental damage, it is recognized that public agencies
have obligations to balance other public objectives, including economic and social factors, in
determining whether and how a project should be approved.
In accordance with Section 15151 of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR should be prepared with
a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision makers with information which enables
them to make a decision, which intelligently considers environmental consequences. An
evaluation of the environmental effects of the proposed project need not be exhaustive, but
the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in light of what is reasonably feasible.
Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should
summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not
for perfection, but for adequacy, completeness, and a good -faith effort at full disclosure.
A General Plan, and an EIR on a General Plan, are legally distinct documents. Yet they must
address many of the same concerns. Many of the requirements of an EIR are incorporated in
the process of preparing a General Plan Amendment. As a result, many of the proposed
General Plan policies and programs represent mitigation measures to potential adverse
environmental impacts, and therefore are considered to have beneficial impacts.
General Plan EIR Introduction
Page 2
B. PURPOSE OF THIS EIR
This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) addresses the potential environmental effects of the
proposed amendments to the City of Cupertino's General Plan, including the key proposals
and policies of the General Plan Amendment and related zoning changes. These items
constitute the proposed project. This EIR contains all sections required by the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and State CEQA Guidelines.
This EIR is the informational document that enables the general public and the decision -
makers to evaluate the potential significant environmental effects of the amendments to the
City of Cupertino's General Plan. It identifies and evaluates the significant environmental
impacts that may result from the implementation of the proposed project, analyzes reasonable
alternatives to the proposed project, and discusses feasible mitigation measures to avoid or
ameliorate those significant impacts. Consequently, the EIR will be used by the City in
evaluating the merits of approving the revisions to the General Plan and zoning changes.
This EIR, prepared in conjunction with the General Plan, contains all the requirements of
CEQA as specified in Article 9. Contents of Environmental Impact Reports, and described in
the following Sections. A review of the proposed amendments to the General Plan was made
to determine which policies and programs would have environmental impacts. Only these
policies and programs are being evaluated in this EIR. All other policies and programs were
determined to have either beneficial impacts, or no significant impact on the environment.
C. SCOPE OF THIS EIR
This evaluation of environmental impacts is presented within each Section. A matrix format
is included as a summary which lists potential environmental impacts of implementing
General Plan policies and the related programs which serve to mitigate future environmental
effects. There are three levels of impacts and mitigations for the proposed General Plan
Amendment policies and programs. Primary impacts resulting from implementation of the
proposed General Plan Amendment are mitigated mostly by other policies and programs in
the General Plan. The secondary impacts are those which require mitigation through plan
implementation, such as Zoning changes, Specific Plans, or Capital Improvement Programs.
Finally, the tertiary impact level is focused on more specific developments, and may be
mitigated through future site specific project review.
The CEQA Guidelines allow the preparation of an EIR which addresses only significant
project effects. The City of Cupertino identified a number of areas in which the approval of
amendments to the General Plan could have significant effects on the environment, including
land use, housing, transportation, utilities and public services, local economics, air quality,
open space and parks, and natural environment.
Where appropriate, the EIR incorporates by reference documents that are readily available to
the general public, in accordance with Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Draft
General Plan Amendment, which is being circulated with the Draft EIR for public review and
comment, is hereby incorporated by reference.
C
General Plan EIR Introduction
Page 3
ORGANIZATION OF THIS EIR
Following this Section I - Introduction, Section II of the EIR contains a description of the
proposed project and a brief description of other alternatives. Section III contains a summary
of the key proposals and policies, and their impacts. Section IV provides a brief overview to
the City's environmental setting, and Section V contains the detailed environmental analysis
and addresses potential environmental effects. A "Level of Significance" is identified for
each area analyzed. For each environmental area analyzed in Section V, this EIR presents a
description of the existing conditions or the environmental setting, then a discussion of
potential impacts resulting from the proposed project, and recommendations for mitigating
identified significant adverse effects. Section VI includes other topical discussions required
by CEQA, such as unavoidable adverse impacts, and growth -inducing impacts. Section VII
discusses, in more detail, alternatives to the proposed project considered during development
of the amendments to the General Plan. Sections VIII, IX, and X contains the List of
Preparers, Agencies Contacted, and other References and Sources.
E. EIR PROCESS
Before the proposed project can be adopted, the City must demonstrate that it has fully
considered the EIR conclusions regarding potential environmental impacts of the General
Plan Amendment. To do this, the City will release this EIR as a draft document for review
by the public and public agencies. A public hearing before the Planning Commission will be
scheduled to receive further public comments and, as necessary, modifications will be made
to the Draft EIR (DEIR). The responses to comments, along with the DEIR as amended, will
constitute the Final EIR (FEIR). The Planning Commission then has the obligation of
determining whether the EIR adequately conforms with CEQA. Upon making this finding,
the EIR can be recommended to be certified, and only then can the proposed project, the
General Plan Amendment, be acted upon, and recommended to the City Council for action.
Upon determination by the City Council that this EIR adequately complies with CEQA, it can
be certified and action can then be taken on the proposed General Plan Amendment.
I
11
1
II
11I
11
11
V
1
I
1
1
1
1
A
1p
1
CHAPTER II
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1
1
1
i
1
U1
I 10
I I
II
II
II
1P
I
Chapter II
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. PROJECT LOCATION
The City of Cupertino is located on the San Francisco Peninsula within Santa Clara County.
Immediately to the north of Cupertino lies the City of Sunnyvale and a small portion of of the
City of Los Altos. To the east, are the cities of Santa Clara and San Jose. To the south, lie
additional portions of the City of San Jose, and the City of Saratoga. Forming the westerly
and a portion of the southerly borders of Cupertino is the Montebello Ridge of the Santa Cruz
Mountain Range. A large portion of this area lies within the unincorporated area of Santa
Clara County.
Cupertino lies in the heart of what is referred to as the "Silicon Valley," that subregion that
contains many high technology based companies. The area generally stretches on the north
from Menlo Park in San Mateo County to the south, including much of Santa Clara County,
and the east to include Fremont and Newark in Alameda County.
B. PROJECT AREA
The total area of the incorporated City of Cupertino is approximately 10.4 square miles. In
addition, there are approximately 0.96 square miles of unincorporated areas within the City's
Urban Service Boundary or official "Sphere of Influence," as established by the Local
Agency Formation Commission. These unincorporated areas and pockets of land, which are
presently under the jurisdiction of Santa Clara County, are those areas which may be
considered for future annexation by the City of Cupertino. The major unincorporated areas,
that the City has interest in, are the foothills to the west and south of Cupertino, as previously
described. These areas, which extend beyond the Urban Service Area Boundary, are
included in the much larger, approximately 16.2 square mile, Planning Area. While much
smaller in size, but also very significant, is an already developed unincorporated residential
neighborhood adjoining the southeast area of Cupertino, and many smaller unincorporated
pockets of land scattered within the incorporated City and throughout the Planning Area.
Since the State of California encourages, permits, and in some cases, mandates consideration
of issues beyond a City's boundaries, the Planning Area therefore extends beyond the City
limits and even the Urban Service Area Boundary to include the largest area possible as the
Project Area. The City of Cupertino's Planning Area/Project Area, as well as the Urban
Service Area Boundary, are shown in Figure 1-A and elsewhere on various diagrams in this
document.
General Plan EIR Project Description
Page 2
C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Proposed Project evaluated in this Environmental Impact Report is the proposed General
Plan Amendment for the City of Cupertino. The "Proposed Project" therefore consists of
amendments to the following General Plan elements:
• Land Use/Community Character,
• Housing,
• Circulation,
• Environmental Resources, and
• Public Health and Safety.
In addition, an Implementation Section is included. The seven State of California mandated
General Plan elements are integrated into the above elements and then into a single General
Plan document in a format similar to previous General Plan documents, so as to address the
City of Cupertino's unique and specific concerns.
The General Plan Amendment and its various elements and sections include goals, policies,
land use diagrams, mitigation measures, and implementation programs. In addition, as part
of the preparation and discussion of the amendments to the General Plan, was the
consideration of alternatives to the proposed project.
The "Proposed Project," the General Plan Amendment, emphasizes three major categories of
chahge which are: 1) land use designations, 2) building intensities, and 3) development
reallocations. The Proposed Project can then be quantified as allowing the following
potential development within the major land use categories during the overall time period of
the General Plan, that is, up to approximately the year 2000 when Cupertino will be at or
approaching full build out.
• Office/Industrial 11,292,000 sq. ft.
• Commercial (non -hotel) 4,431,000 sq. ft.
• Hotel 697,000 sq. ft./1,027 rooms
• Residential (including urban service area) 20,044 dwelling units
See other alternatives below for a general comparison of the proposed project and the
other project alternatives.
This Environmental Impact Report is the document that evaluates the above Project, as well
as a "No -Project" Alternative, and the Alternative referred to as the "Existing General Plan
(Modified)." The evaluation includes the impacts of each Alternative within the framework
of the subject matter and headings as follows:
• Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character,
• Housing,
• Transportation and Circulation,
• Public Utilities/Services,
• Air Quality,
• Noise,
• Geology, Soils and Seismicity,
• Drainage and Flooding,
• Open Space and Parks,
• Vegetation and Wildlife,
• Historical, Archaeological and Cultural Resources,
• Hazardous Materials, and
• Economic Development.
1
D
11
II
r
I
II
II
II
II
1
le
I
General Plan EIR Project Description
Page 3
OTHER PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
"No Proiect" Alternative is the existing situation or "as built" conditions, as of 1990. This is
the most recent time when census data, land use and other basic information is available, and
when the updating of the General Plan began. This existing, or base line alternative saw the
major land use categories consisting of the following developments.
• Office/Industrial 7,457,000 sq. ft.
• Commercial (non -hotel) 3,359,000 sq. ft.
• Hotel 139,000 sq. ft./277 rooms
• Residential (including urban service area) 17,460 dwelling units
The "Existing General Plan (Modified)" Alternative is based upon the existing General Plan
as initially adopted in 1964, revised in 1973 and 1983, and reformatted in 1990. This
alternative basically consists of the existing General Plan build out in the urban area, and
modified by the preferred reduced build out in the hillsides. This alternative would allow the
following development within the major land use categories as follows:
• Office/Industrial 9,030,000 sq. ft.
• Commercial (non -hotel) 4,721,000 sq. ft.
• Hotel 525,000 sq. ft./827 rooms
• Residential (including urban service area) 18,560 dwelling units
E. PROJECT GOALS
The Proposed Project, the General Plan as revised, is the major policy document that
describes the City of Cupertino's goals and policies for the future with regard to land use
development and environmental protection. The main goals of the General Plan Amendment
are to:
1) Strengthen hillside preservation by reducing overall residential densities and developing
standards to improve aesthetics, preserve natural resources and avoid hazardous areas.
2) Provide for the fiscal health of the City by allowing the major companies to expand in the
City without adverse traffic and housing impacts.
3) Provide additional housing opportunities, particularly affordable housing.
4) Address imbalances in the development potential levels for commercial, office and
industrial land uses, while maintaining traffic level of service (LOS) "D" for all
intersections except Stevens Creek and De Anza Boulevards where Level of Service "E"
is acceptable to implement the "Heart of the City" concept.
5) Develop a "Heart of the City" which would have the combination of land uses and built
environment to service as a memorable gathering place for residents.
6) Provide additional measures to protect existing neighborhoods from land use and
development'incompatibilities.
General Plan EIR Project Description
Page 4
F. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed project, the General Plan as revised, contains a vision of the future of
Cupertino where the growth is carefully managed to maintain and enhance the quality of life,
to protect the natural heritage, and to ensure long-term economic vitality. Its major
characteristics include the following aspects:
PROVIDING FOR A LIVABLE COMMUNITY, which contain
- the creation of a City Core to serve as the physical, social, and cultural center of the City;
and
a partnership with neighboring cities to find solutions to regional housing needs.
PRESERVING AND ENHANCING THE NATURAL HERITAGE which includes
- controlling urban sprawl and enhance efforts to build more compact and transit-
compatibile residential and commercial developments in the City Core and along new
public transit corridors;
- protecting ecological integrity of critical wildlife habitat and watershed lands; and
- providing for recreational opportunities for Cupertino and area residents.
CHIEVING ECONOMIC DIVERSITY AND SUSTAINABILITY, which includes
- fostering the development of new markets and a diversity of economic growth;
- allowing higher density land uses in business areas in close proximity to public
transportation, with appropriate mitigation measures;
- encouraging and working with corporate participation in the promotion of housing and
public transportation, especially to address the jobs/housing balance resulting from
business expansion, and to implement policies to attract and retain business in
Cupertino; and
- defining a balance of growth that benefits the overall community.
CHAPTER III
SUMMARY
PROJECT, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
MEASURES
1
Chapter III
SUMMARY - PROJECT, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is the update to the City of Cupertino's existing General Plan. The
update consists of changes to the Plan's text and Land Use Map.
In general, the text changes focus on three areas of change, 1) land use designations, 2)
development intensity , and 3) reallocation of future development (See Chapter II C for a
detailed description of these changes).
Revisions to the General Plan Land Use Map reflect the above three categories of change (see
Chapter V Land Use Compatibility, Section, Figure I -F)
B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The central thrust of the Proposed Plan Amendment is embodied in the Project Goals found
in Chapter H. Essentially, the principal objectives of the Proposed General Plan Amendment
are to:
• Protect and preserve the significant hillside areas located in the western portion of the
City
• Create a central focus and enhance community identity by creating a central "Heart of
the City."
• Expand housing opportunities for all residents.
• Enhance the fiscal position of the City through the provision of environmentally sound
opportunities.
C. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The EIR contains an evaluation of two alternatives to the Proposed General Plan Amendment:
1) the No Project Alternative; the existing "as built" condition as of 1990, and 2) the Existing
General Plan (Modified); including the current allowable land uses and building intensities as
modified by the recent adoption of policies reducing building densities in the hillside areas
(see Chapter 11, D).
I1P
rl
IJ
General Plan EIR Summary
Page 2
D. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY AND RELATED ISSUES
The following issues and areas of controversy were raised and discussed during the various
Planning Commission and City Council meetings and public hearings on the proposed
General Plan revisions:
1. Hillside Development - The nature and intensity of development and the extent of
protection afforded hillside land resources.
2. Commercial Office and Research and Development Uses - Desirability, magnitude and
location of expansion.
3. Housin -Consideration of the need for a jobs/housing balance.
Mitigation of housing demand created by employment growth.
4. Traffic Congestion - Existing and future.
5. BuildingHeight - Consideration of impacts resulting from multi -storied structures.
6. City Identi - Location of concentration of future development and identifying type and
magnitude of supporting improvements.
7. Mineral Resources - Level of allowed extraction operations.
E. IMPACTS, MITIGATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING
A summary of the environmental impacts and mitigation measures identified in the body of
this report is found in the following matrix. The matrix is organized by topical sections of
the report. Detailed discussions are found within each of the applicable sections.
Also, Section 21081.6 of the State Public Resources Code requires the City to adopt a
reporting or monitoring program to assure that prescribed mitigation measures are reasonably
implemented. The following matrix also includes an identification of the City agency
responsible for implementing or monitoring the successful completion of the mitigations
together with a prescription for the timing of the implementation. The mitigation monitoring
program was combined with the summary identification of the project impacts and mitigation
measures for the ease of reference and clarity.
\
\
\
\
(
\
/
C6
k
be
$
A
«
A
Z
2 a
)E�f\��
Ta)� !\
t.§ ® £ 2— 73©`
0V I!§ kKkI\u\
§0 >
z9
,
U
�
�
I
I
11
11
11
11
|1
|1
|1
|1
|1
|1
�
�
|I
k
k
/
\
k
P
\
�
$
k
/
/
K
I
\
[
N
e
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
V
a
€gym=ue9 •a .ao .o,,,apa� a�m._c
s:�p8g Y.StiW a •a Vy?�>EUbaE31i
in
n
fnfna o� a� ¢ � U E�iS�'5���9 �
boo
O r
to u 10
>5Qu3"Es "HIS
C,
►1
I
@
�
@
I
I
I
I
I
11
|1
|1
|1
|1
|1
I'f
|I
/
/
\
\
f
/
/
!E
Z
#
)
�/
$■ ' 2 #,&
§_$£\ © °\ �§
;�»
k\}/■4;� /k2\ }a}\\�\\\mac §k\�
g&a /ca gat_ �0+\
§g«77�� i=!� 22 eE2=£2 i'b�
a�
� ■�2»\ !] §, !e■�.£
ao=�a=§ ±;2«■0
)/§/2me .000'k}k/
V
II
11
1
11
11
11
11
It
II
N
go
I'l, bb 4ss e 8z yaeaz Psi
Fi
m
m
b
ba
CL
91
.5
.5
.5
.S
11
1
11
11
11
11
It
II
N
go
I'l, bb 4ss e 8z yaeaz Psi
Fi
\
Z
/
/
/
�k
#$
Z
I
�.# �§& ■
k®E,
|kk £a
\fk) ���) �$
kt�R � )(�(@2 7 �■!£f$|/\
oaU
/
k ■ t#k at■�2a��
2202/k/\\{bo
\
/
I
I
1p
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
�
�
\
k
k
k
k
\
\
�
\A/
$I a
IO ;\
■'■2` ■}/Eke§
$§2fSul
Z
Z
/
/
I
/
/
f
)
/
/ t
k
N
/_
$
#;
/
\
) )
)
)
)
)
f 0
■k- / ))a�}R )7E
§§2
IK)/ v7) /Bt/}/ ])J
S ci §�. °7]
\§�)kdE $I)
e • a=
`EVbr bo -0
})§tf) ƒ-K
!9.
W
\
/
/
)
I
■
2
w
§
§
Z
�
\\a
k
k
k 0
3 3
J
ƒ
Z /
� ) 3
}�] §ko8\
2 obi
�2)\ OU (LI
/k mg
,
/
]\222(\\
2®%§29]t
� § % �■� \2 2 ®{9`.
�=-■2�� -°•�\ e «E;\e
/���} 5\�7 �d ■A2e§�%E k� $_{
00 \\§/}\\�
§%■i£ J3at i§ �f§zaaE& »3? *#�■2t£[
Z
2
Z
#
/
/
/
\
/
(
\CL
/ \
/
I
A
a
/
$
#
/
]\222(\\
2®%§29]t
� § % �■� \2 2 ®{9`.
�=-■2�� -°•�\ e «E;\e
/���} 5\�7 �d ■A2e§�%E k� $_{
00 \\§/}\\�
§%■i£ J3at i§ �f§zaaE& »3? *#�■2t£[
a
ci
m
a
°�
V �a o
Eu � .� o > S p m �S 5
0
Lu �o
y> 3dm 'y
eq
Co_hE.?o$5p3=�
UCGS w oa A � 5v�i tri EO
m
.5
0
n
o
v
A
a
a
ci
m
a
°�
V �a o
Eu � .� o > S p m �S 5
0
Lu �o
y> 3dm 'y
eq
Co_hE.?o$5p3=�
UCGS w oa A � 5v�i tri EO
/
{}}2\ \\$f§\ 2■{ CE. 9 [}
§377ƒ 1.3■ )2
�+�2_ /!2\
a(%�• ;e_ 5� =$_i
a§mai }aE &«� &■E# Al
';±-5
2/a 852$£2( §§`aE�#�12 §««;
\/k/k
E }52&�|7 2k&k£ 5S8 Em )\}\}
k
kk
}
a
3
3
3
3
3
/
/
t
#
i
/
{}}2\ \\$f§\ 2■{ CE. 9 [}
§377ƒ 1.3■ )2
�+�2_ /!2\
a(%�• ;e_ 5� =$_i
a§mai }aE &«� &■E# Al
';±-5
2/a 852$£2( §§`aE�#�12 §««;
\/k/k
E }52&�|7 2k&k£ 5S8 Em )\}\}
m
m
m
m
0
0
0
0
m
m
m
be
5
S
.5
S
P
Q
to
A
I
Z o a
S� � ..
o.0 3 CH ou'u E � y� ZS
O .> O qy�2y9 ]'1
e'E� � C G
G�
_ C q
Us
'�
00 aEWPiE:
» «
�A \a))
.■� § (�
AVE
7kMa (■a2I::ƒ
E%kk} 27277§(r
■k\2
■
be
k
k
0
3
3
3
\
\
7
`
A
/
)
�
�
» «
�A \a))
.■� § (�
AVE
7kMa (■a2I::ƒ
E%kk} 27277§(r
■k\2
■
00
ba
bc
k
k
k
be\
3
3
3
3
\
I
/
`
Z
2
#
k
�
)
)
�
�
2
k
\
I
�I
$
)ja }
ko_2 a�a
pl
t
�
0 $
I(
](
t
\\�o
`
ki
§�{]
ƒ}
C.0
$
)ja }
ko_2 a�a
pl
I!
m m
oc 00
j 9S ❑
&0
F
g5O9Ut
0.4
t=�
v
c^, a d E
•aa
OO
�p CC5 st �e 9t � E .� o
Y y K G y Z V po. epi
EJO J bo L L
m
�y
r
q 3
m u
aq
11
f
is
I
1
'9py >
N6 O t O _> z O ttl >�C E '
Q 9 p
con mm
0 0 3 rJ F
TE E o Qg'�p c� 0�foL '�u o �a.a4 �= u 5"Uc
uop�tE>`'Sa�aVyna' �� ��p$0.°9°�°�v��g c�e'o
� � ui N m'O •�•
rz
�h.� s gez° r.'Y230's.�
w
8
b
eo
a
XJ
J
J
CL
J
O.�
6
Q!�j
;9
$ 3
8H
� o
3
C JD
�a
C
C '
a�
—
M
rks
cc
'9py >
N6 O t O _> z O ttl >�C E '
Q 9 p
con mm
0 0 3 rJ F
TE E o Qg'�p c� 0�foL '�u o �a.a4 �= u 5"Uc
uop�tE>`'Sa�aVyna' �� ��p$0.°9°�°�v��g c�e'o
� � ui N m'O •�•
rz
�h.� s gez° r.'Y230's.�
w
I
$
�
if
|@
if
|@
11
@
1p
11
/
Z
/
f
/
)
)ƒ
2
k
@£_w» k)#�>.sk \\\)\
§gf)2.
ƒ2i\■] �a|■© 7H -US §
/ 2kuZ.2§
b§® \ a f .2 !�E.,
}f$K�§]£ a)27£ |$lk� ■
k
k
V
$
�
@
@
1@
if
|$
|@
|$
11
1p
If
cu C3
/
2
$
0
/
f
/j
�%
%
f$
k)
2)
)
))
k
3
§)
I®)] _ A§e1\\q¥
I
a� M.
teka
, q=.t`Z'Nr7 Ca
�(-a 7k;.e t
)§\k�
_
�> � §^E )b { �j ƒa§ %£ tk)a a
k
bo
3
tic
3
bc
3
\�
k
\/
.%± �.
*
\�� \�2\w/\
■.2_ I2g.§\� «})■�t��
I\
■!■
too
k%�ƒ¥b
ujB V) ƒ&i72AR J ka]a�f
s
r
1
m
.5 .5
T
�3NN 3 3
rr
�a
D
' 'a � C •T � W �� K r O C� V
bC
lid
O y € U T ty
mu__ G y Tu
S
a 5 u 952 W K Z mvYi 'n Ea E 3 5 o
�ddz u TW ":a_&nz 5 c •5
>�m 5 °u`Som g.a o
3S °.� � 9K E cx �
v'S c = ` o :'m a `j
C p 'C
c ° TSU
E u
'c 5 8.9
%a
u
0 3 �3�•5 3�=3 0
;YTT.O uu� L
u do o u2
c co Z 8. z2
11
Fi
u
boCE
Ll
II
u
Ii
I1
u
11
11
if
11
II
I1
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
.5
m
m
.5
m
J
J
J
J
J
80
0
m
m
m
bo
m3
A.a
C g� p
r 0 y a e FilEAg 5a
M.0
,�� r •@"03'�
Is,
���
b� �� � � u '0 3' u Sad ��b ° E�•� � ` ° � �•�b
-E cz
9
� ug
w
u
A
a
2216
itJIM-« L») a -8B o f »s -a /¥
]f§e 22a 2]c ia0 |«£k23a
a
)3 /§{ © �' -12 ■3 7 2)
$aJ m !a §B$t §ke 72)
!/2�/ $I|) \£$I $/IE ) k a£2 )$?
Ell
Z
Z
I
2
Z
f
/
k
/
k
/
/
$
/
/
/
/
Z
Z
Z
/
Z
)
)
)
2216
itJIM-« L») a -8B o f »s -a /¥
]f§e 22a 2]c ia0 |«£k23a
a
)3 /§{ © �' -12 ■3 7 2)
$aJ m !a §B$t §ke 72)
!/2�/ $I|) \£$I $/IE ) k a£2 )$?
Ell
-
) 7
C:6
iLI
41 11
\3%ƒ � ■ &
»§ 2E»`mak ..
®2~ ©��= \ e© ` £
k��k�®� ��k{
bo
\f\§]«_� �
/
I
\
/
\
\
f
/
/
k
/
/
-
s
Z
/
$
)
)
-
) 7
C:6
iLI
41 11
\3%ƒ � ■ &
»§ 2E»`mak ..
®2~ ©��= \ e© ` £
k��k�®� ��k{
bo
\f\§]«_� �
I
Ip
11
11
11
|@
|1
|@
|@
|$
|@
|@
|1
|@
I'?
11
k k
�
�
2
7
\\
f) -E-
u CX
k k
� Ja
\
\
\
\}
�
�
2
7
\\
f) -E-
u CX
k k
� Ja
\
\}
$
�
u
11
11
11
|@
|1
|1
|$
|@
|@
|1
|1
le
1p
11
I@
@
.Ip
I
I
1]
@
I
11
1]
|1
�
|@
|1
|1
$
Ip
11
k
�
P,
k
R
�
[
E
2
2 .E§
��—
�%
}
aige 72aat #2& 2 k�2a/
§$)
2��'■§
2■'�©�
%37)2
2 t2`�■s.
2!2,27/
/
\
/
/
/
�
[
E
2
2 .E§
��—
�%
}
aige 72aat #2& 2 k�2a/
§$)
2��'■§
2■'�©�
%37)2
2 t2`�■s.
2!2,27/
9
i
k/E \
\
\
\
\
\
§§(3
< 0
��
\
\
/
\
i»
Iaa§«|
Z
)
)
)
)
)
9
i
k/E \
\;£
)>
]§�°t
§§(3
< 0
��
2 \
7■� �§
}�$§>
i»
Iaa§«|
)
�al2 7777r�2/ 2# �
7r�� ■��e22.2\®
{k$i �2!■� � § e£
�2\�($]2§}] i\§■
!�
\}k£ /))k]i/\ }$\\
/
I
@
�
�
�
\
0
\
f
|1
|@
IN
|@
|1
|1
|1
�
�
11
)
\
R
E
f
/\\
H
j\§\
jg
$ %&©
/)E�§
■ ee)
za=�a
�§»p—
§§&Er\7§2f§k� \ ~e}Ae
k®If2��■aI■E ®! 222§}
;E.�.■��;0�772® 27(
ƒ$j3#§§iƒuaA■E( )§i§)
9
m
.5.5
m
m
.5
be
.5
00
bo
a
Aa
p Y9 N v%A N's 9'tJ D V
.5 m F of �N � � • N 'J Q C S Ep � m
sA
Sr z w at
p
Cg a 19 6 A � BU W U= U 6��
0
/
k
f
/
k
/
/
■
A
Z
Z
2
7
Z
�
Z
§ /
I
/
/
$
2
f
»
&
#
}
)
)
�
.\U
*)�&E
�a!ƒ7
■iK) (-,
a2 a�2kf
k
k
,
k
\
ba
0
f
f
\
/
\
\/
IN
\N
Z
%
{s
))
§k]§}
� . = 1>0
>f9OE kaki!/
cc■f2|3%�
Opal 2§$/}
\§I)kI&M3
) Or mak]
§\ )f
2{{ w
§.a f2 )f,�m•§e
d)$ «�
■§�{ ki/ �k)•i§ii
§a ■a . a $•,»
/k§k 7(\ �)2.sPU
F�
mhil
m = k
be
}
3
m
3
3
/
/7
. e
&2 fa/ =§jate
2�G2� A)sk\/
]&>•7 k2ƒ2)�
§77$& a©||■|
aaa §� /§A■%«4
,
§ t ■ ! ® § 78
=7. �•/. 2 & )
t-2_ 2 '�§ a% %
]§I )))g!i I»2�}|A ]A
/ (e}e 3a{
2� /k
\§l/ i§
)S§4 3ae�(]t 3§a/o§22� aea�.2
«
/
k
/
f
f
ƒ
&
»
3
,
§ t ■ ! ® § 78
=7. �•/. 2 & )
t-2_ 2 '�§ a% %
]§I )))g!i I»2�}|A ]A
/ (e}e 3a{
2� /k
\§l/ i§
)S§4 3ae�(]t 3§a/o§22� aea�.2
Z
2
0
/
/
/
\
\
§
\)
/
/
/
/
Z
)
�
�
)/
\
� -2■\
Ra)\22� e -sem k |_)
Et=al® �]\I 4a
.0 k§§2)ƒ£
*\i\ E• §a ka)*= .■%■�
���� ��72� §)um7\/
k\\�f 2f\77B& |kk��} ƒk§§$�[
kiae$Ka
�u
a
m
d
I
�@
IP
@
A
if
�
�
|1
|1
11
|@
�
�
|i
tc 2
A
/
/
/
/
\
k
\
B
�]
�
|@
is
| I
k
k
k
3
0
3
3
3
3
\
\
\
k
\
)�
§/§/
7•
7�
)�
«
[
�)\\I■] { /)\ 2�( { .£,k{
2\Q.ƒ/ so
0 |!■'§ 1A
ak/R 2b�g22
]©2-• #,E.¥ (\�-
m®\ Ik�§■�7 ,§ ƒ ®IBJ 2$I 7
g}
j \/ k2a3$§£ 6saU /\\ƒ/ )(�}/
,
u
i
1
li
It
11
It
I
I
I
LL
•O
�,O
m
m
OO
m
J
J
Jyy
a
J
H
ILI
5
5
5
5
C C 00
6T
�.R � A 9 C 1z,
�
Al La "IT
y g� }Q�
W
m
A
a
m m m m
5 .5 .5 .5
0 0 0 0
m m m m
ba be
C c c C
C6 ca
.y
N
d
be
p, o
.00
m vi a'�L 5•� �9� m� r
� '�' E W 5.50� �� •5��..�'$s>.s
�gsub4�gy�°�SuCb oo sm9a'm
c r a E> a Q5a i5p >. C ,•5 p
�:
mW 6�
m9
C> ; u ' 3
C O>,
V Crj'g L
�oy���
E E s u
3too
m
d
Ii
a
1
1
T
00U
a
1
1
T
,
Z
(
/
\�A)�
■f
s= Eik 5
/
/0 °
■_
\
O3
)
)�
,
`�^��
k)i§{
c
\�A)�
■f
s= Eik 5
,
�I
i$
�
I
u
Ir
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
G
EO
OE
vgk025a 415
hy
3•�g Qe' 3g 8�>9a oa> > �'
W $� 6SUL.< S mS� Cg Qs c b l5� Ell)
W
a,
a
o
a m
a5
� E
-9
R
U
A
d
5
.5
.5
bo
w
a
o
c.a�
n
c2i
mms
5.$ =
m
5
ISO Or
5.
ca,v_
c
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
G
EO
OE
vgk025a 415
hy
3•�g Qe' 3g 8�>9a oa> > �'
W $� 6SUL.< S mS� Cg Qs c b l5� Ell)
W
a,
a
o
a m
a5
� E
-9
R
U
A
d
§
U91
d§ k
�
�f
ƒ \
]t
I) %
]7
\
�f
ƒ \
]t
I) %
]7
Es
t � � �I
\a\\/ a22Q !§��� X22 k;e_
) 2 k k` ■ \k.6i �2��
$«!2B \»R) \°)�
,
m
m
a
c
c
c
m
m
a
0 79�_
QU qc�� 9` 3x
s
m�
ISE
u r'i -Ai E 2ivh 1� 3 8 2�
�
�
@
I
1]
11
1@
|1
|@
|1
|1
|@
|@
|1
I'is
11
m
- ■ 2 § � l a
±i/jt 2 Joe -
!.i
-
- - 3
k§�\ )k— fk( ata �`%\•»
7:\® ■ ■R 21._s.9 §r &�2/
2I)\ §\� $/ _2)-222»ikk}�R
a |at
8e 77 ifJ}921k
»E
E§�$% f 2/77)7\
IE 32]\ 52 1.2E -a
V
A
�§
f2
/2
:2s
#a
I
k§�\ )k— fk( ata �`%\•»
7:\® ■ ■R 21._s.9 §r &�2/
2I)\ §\� $/ _2)-222»ikk}�R
a |at
8e 77 ifJ}921k
»E
E§�$% f 2/77)7\
IE 32]\ 52 1.2E -a
V
C
�
C
CbO
yy
FFC
O
C a y� N C .p G Gi 7 �y •a W ttl �J 5� Q O
y
aO o
G y C
21's.
u C V1 C y 3� C I
gy v�
} $5 E � � gyp.• •Y �, � .
c�.: � �� � i � c � t7 � 3� � 6�4•E� a � � 2 3 83c°S
i3 ,r
� 3
3 m�
u
Z>�
m
d
u
u
yy
yyCL
C a y� N C .p G Gi 7 �y •a W ttl �J 5� Q O
y
aO o
G y C
21's.
u C V1 C y 3� C I
gy v�
} $5 E � � gyp.• •Y �, � .
c�.: � �� � i � c � t7 � 3� � 6�4•E� a � � 2 3 83c°S
i3 ,r
� 3
3 m�
u
Z>�
m
d
,
Q
/
Z
/
k
�
,
q§ j
�
/
Z
k
k
E
te■ 1\ 33 © �]a
kaf§ ■ 7�(Ho M.9
]%� ƒ\}/
222�it2k7 a2if
:6 $kk§
2 2|]a■_ 2 �ef9K «222
ak
§9
)2
B$
2 k\�
}k$
IIlp
II
II
11
11
11
11
11
11
II
S I iia pt 9.5 o�c
05 �y ��°�pQV `Gd :100 u'`$ �q
y q •M ° ° 'O '1. y
o Va 3'K r y iQi` S N m•y E o
S 8 tis'g.
5
m
n
a
a
a
a
a
S I iia pt 9.5 o�c
05 �y ��°�pQV `Gd :100 u'`$ �q
y q •M ° ° 'O '1. y
o Va 3'K r y iQi` S N m•y E o
S 8 tis'g.
5
m
n
a
E f _ | � ` k
\ �K \
a$��a��{ E ■22x7 §\2 a= ] `
)�2&`§�|«i) 2|tk\
I� k - ■)a§a �$ -2� ! �R
-Rig$a2§4k(3$ z /a■e
/
Z
■
/
t
}
E f _ | � ` k
\ �K \
a$��a��{ E ■22x7 §\2 a= ] `
)�2&`§�|«i) 2|tk\
I� k - ■)a§a �$ -2� ! �R
-Rig$a2§4k(3$ z /a■e
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
3c 6
0.50 SsA-5
o.- gle 3 E
.96
rna.SC7 �� fo `d r c� x c CG 3 g 3�
N
m
a
c
a
�
e
a
3c 6
0.50 SsA-5
o.- gle 3 E
.96
rna.SC7 �� fo `d r c� x c CG 3 g 3�
N
m
a
■12 )]\ �7 ak ©� E®2 � ��
+2\2§&£ 4§$£/
§22k�] a�■s9— ■.
7}2§7®! k��a§ ® §§ § AI §)
Ir >-g
2 12)kRig )§k]t\ )IN
RR
/
/
/
/
0./�
/
19
/
/
/
% Z
I
Z
■12 )]\ �7 ak ©� E®2 � ��
+2\2§&£ 4§$£/
§22k�] a�■s9— ■.
7}2§7®! k��a§ ® §§ § AI §)
Ir >-g
2 12)kRig )§k]t\ )IN
RR
I
,I
1p
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
11
11
|1
�
�
|I
)
)
k
\
\
)
e k]2 ]�]\■Q � § f2*®[ «�)]\
■§�3\� �]-�f\ 2)\ij k§�3= \)
§ƒf$/
I�f,— ){ � /all j\ f$§Ea
) Ea ■a £ Q ■ ��
2�©
%k)
�2kk
°���■
§
/
/
/
)
)
k
\
\
)
e k]2 ]�]\■Q � § f2*®[ «�)]\
■§�3\� �]-�f\ 2)\ij k§�3= \)
§ƒf$/
I�f,— ){ � /all j\ f$§Ea
) Ea ■a £ Q ■ ��
2�©
%k)
�2kk
°���■
§
�
�
11
11
11
11
11
|1
11
|1
11
|1
|1
|1
I'&
11
\
k
/
}
�
k
B
\
k
f
,
r
II
II
II
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
II
r a
Le
opo
inrn�'ua
OP
.50��5
U
caRiuv o "� E9E 3a$v� svS�'C� c�a
>'n°$ 9TJ �3s'o yo_�
9 vis'
sR E
c
c.
'5
3m
be
3m
wm
a0.
a
a0.
r a
Le
opo
inrn�'ua
OP
.50��5
U
caRiuv o "� E9E 3a$v� svS�'C� c�a
>'n°$ 9TJ �3s'o yo_�
9 vis'
sR E
/
. )
|
§b�
k
&
%E �}
&]B= �E-_■■\�=&|/af��
\2kJU -M
2� 2222222$$-£
=2 } :�ml91H
.s k ]]
§4)§�\
2 �E22
§22f _
�`. ���
k)Eakl;
I
.I
1p
@
I
I
11
11
|1
1]
|1
|1
|@
�
�
11
k
k
k
2
k
k
,
f f2
t
k
§
■ /�_
k� :21 Jo)�a�� �
§ats a -t5
■_2 // ■ �© gym\
\0 72222$ ■]2§a� ( }2k I§
/�)$)//§/2 \Ik7\k
g §7
a 2I3
:2 GO
k
be
3
3
k
k)
\
\/
]
]a
f f2
t
k
§
■ /�_
k� :21 Jo)�a�� �
§ats a -t5
■_2 // ■ �© gym\
\0 72222$ ■]2§a� ( }2k I§
/�)$)//§/2 \Ik7\k
g §7
a 2I3
:2 GO
11
11
II
[1
11
11
11
11
II
11
11
11
II
i
I
T
d
m
CL
�
s
&
m
�
3
�
a
a
i
I
T
d
m
CL
k
3
k
3
«
\
k\
`
2a
j
32
]§
bc
\
K
E
W
�
�
I
II
1
1
1
1p
11
r C y C 5
cq
IRS A or
��_ � 0•��•5 €���'S�a� �� '� 3� 3 >� �' � 5TH �
•�+� �;5 e,- E pQ � E u 3 3
�23 �S�F fig SCJraI'.�23i3.� Egg&
T
m
a
II
Ir
II
II
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
a
d u u•-�•> v u666u uU�
A
I
1p
I
11
|1
|1
|1
|1
|1
|1
|1
|1
|1
|1
I'ia
11
As
%%9229 §ga)k
$E{�l§&)kf
`E �a§■$&2=e�R
c�~\ 2
�$\k\Ia§2792\§I
§
i
\
CHAPTER IV
ENVIRONMENTAL
SETTING
r�
II
II
II
II
II
I`
II
II
II
1
r
Chapter IV
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A. REGIONAL AND SUBREGIONAL
The City of Cupertino is located in the southern portion of the San Francisco Peninsula.
The City is part of the continuous "urban fabric" which covers the area between the City of
San Rafael in Marin County to the north, to the urban area south of the City of San Jose in
Santa Clara County, to the south.
The City and County of San Francisco is located approximately 50 miles to the north of the
City of Cupertino while the southern edge of San Francisco Bay lies approximately 7.5
miles to the north. The geographical area in which the City is located is known as Santa
Clara Valley, a once rich agricultural -alluvial plain which has undergone a process of
intense urbanization in the years following World War 11. Santa Clara County is the most
populous County in northern California containing a population of approximately 1.46
million.
The City is surrounded on at least two sides by concentrated urban development with the
cities of Sunnyvale and Los Altos to the north; the cities of Santa Clara and San Jose to the
east and the cities of San Jose and Saratoga partially to the south. To the remainder of the
south are the Fremont Older and Picchetti Ranch Regional Open Space preserves and the
western foothills area of the City of Saratoga. To the west of the city are the foothills of the
Santa Cruz Mountains containing the Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve and
unincorporated privately owned areas.
B . LOCAL SETTING
The Cupertino planning area consists of approximately 16.2 square miles. The area of the
incorporated City is approximately 10.4 square miles. Most of the City is located on a
relatively level portion of Santa Clara Valley. The topography rises gently to the west and
more steeply at the Stevens Creek corridor, forming a plateau near Foothill Boulevard.
This plateau ends at the foot of the steeply inclined Montebello ridges, which extend along
the west and south edges of the City. These ridges create a dramatic backdrop for the more
urban environment located on the valley floor.
Stevens and Calabazas Creeks flow through the City and ultimately into the southern tip of
San Francisco Bay.
The City is divided into several geographical planning areas. The principal areas and their
functions are:
M
Town Center Southeast quadrant intersection
Historical and
of De Anza and Stevens Creek
geographical
Boulevard
focal point; offices
and shops
Vallco Park Wolfe Rd., Stevens Creek
Mixed use,
Blvd., Homestead Road and
commercial and
east city limit
employment center
General Plan EIR Environmental Setting
Page 2
North De Anza
Stevens Creek Blvd.
Monte Vista
Merriman and
Santa Lucia Rds.
Western Hillside
Area
C . ECONOMIC SETTING
Between Stevens Creek Blvd.
Office and R & D
and 1280
activity
East of De Ana Blvd. and west
Mix of retail and
of Stem Ave.
office uses
Stevens Creek Blvd. from
Commercial and
RR.R.O.W. to Byme Ave.
residential uses
Santa Lucia and Alcalde
Residential uses
Rds. and Foothill Blvd.
West of Stevens Creek
Residential Open
Space and resource
management uses
Cupertino is located in the heart of "Silicon Valley", an area stretching from the City of
Palo Alto to the City of San Jose. This area is known as the major center for research,
development and manufacturing of "high-tech" computers and electronics. The City's
economic base is dominated by this high tech industry. The City serves as a corporate
headquarters and research and development center, although little or no manufacturing is
found here.
Representatives of the significant companies headquartered here indicate that they enjoy a
competitive advantage by locating in Cupertino. This is because highly skilled employees
prefer living and working in the City because of its moderate size, and a balanced mixed of
'high-tech" firms, retail centers, quality schools, open space, and pleasant residential areas.
D. CONSISTENCY WITH LOCAL AND REGIONAL PLANS
The Proposed General Plan Amendment is, in general, consistent with all applicable
Federal, State, Regional and Local plans and policies with the exception of the
inconsistencies indicated below.
The proposed revisions were compared to the following plans and policies:
Clean Air Act
Safe Drinking Water Act
Water Pollution Control Act and Clean Water Act
Endangered Species Act
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Toxic Air Contaminants (AB2588)
National Recreation and Parks Association Standards
General Plan EIR Environmental Setting
Page 3
'
2. 5= .
Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act
Fish and Game Code (Section 1603)
Endangered Species Act
Government Code, Section 65032 (Open Space Plan)
'
Integrated Waste Management Act
Hazardous Waste Control Act
Recycling Legislation
'
Tanner Bill (AB 2948)
3. Reeional
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Environmental Management Plan
(water quality and supply, solid waste and air quality)
ABAG Regional Plan, 1980
ABAGBAAQMD/MTC 1982 Bay Area Air Quality Plan and Clean Air Plan.
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Plan
4. Santa Clara County
Solid Waste Management Plan
'
Transportation 2010
Congestion Management Plan
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
2020 Task Force, Open Space Preservation Program
Hazardous Waste Management Plan
E. INCONSISTENCIES
' The proposed plan revisions may be deemed to be inconsistent with two areas of the Santa
Clara County General Plan.
' 1. Mineral Extraction
While the County Plan provides for the expansion of sand and gravel resource
extraction, the proposed Plan Amendment will only permit such expansion
provided all resulting impacts may be completely mitigated to existing levels.
e2. Employment Growth
The County Plan channels the major growth in employment to the communities
south of San Jose on the premise that sufficient area for employee housing is
available in those locations. The City's Plan (and those of other northern county
communities) programs additional job expansion within the City and provides for
concomitant traffic and housing mitigation.
The County's General Plan policy (SU6) is that housing supply should be
commensurate with planned increases in employment. The City's policies would
result in slower increases in housing than the demand generated by employment
growth. The City's plan revisions, however, contain policies which would result
in increasing housing densities in proximity to employment centers and
' transportation facilities as suggested in the County General Plan. This potential
inconsistency would not result in a significant impact.
1P
General Plan EIR Environmental Setting
Page 4
Trans2mation
The County's plan requires improvements in traffic congestion, air quality, noise
and other environmental conditions. The City's plan essentially focuses on
reducing or mitigating traffic congestion. This would not be considered a
significant project impact.
For a detailed discussion of the consistency of the Proposed General Plan Amendment with
those of other jurisdictions, see each individual EIR Section (i.e. Land Use, Housing,
Transportation, Air Quality, etc.)
II
1
1 CHAPTER V
I
1
� ENVIRONMENTAL
y ANALYSIS
1
1
I
11
1
1
1
r
1
II
1
I
1 SECTION 1
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY
AND
VISUAL CHARACTER
I
I
I
I
LJ
Table of Contents
Page
I. Environmental Setting..................................................................1-1
A. Existing Development and Conditions...........................................1-1
1. Regional........................................................................1-1
2. Local............................................................................1-1
B. Consistency with Other Plans...................................................1-16
1. City General Plan .............................................................1 -16
2. Other Cities and County.....................................................1-16
3. Regional.......................................................................1-16
II. Impacts..................................................................................1-17
A.
Significance Criteria ................................................ ..............
1-17
B.
Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated...................................1-17
1. Aesthetics......................................................................1-17
2. Substantial Concentration of Population...................................1-18
3. Traffic..........................................................................1-18
4. Land Use Compatibility......................................................I-18
5. Public Services and Utilities.................................................1-18
C.
Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated...............................1-19
D.
Effects Found Not To Be Significant...........................................1-19
E.
Alternatives Analysis...........................................................1-20
1. No Project Alternative ....................... ............... ..................
1-20
2. Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative.............................1-20
F.
Local Short -Term Uses vs. Long -Term Productivity .........................1-20
G.
Growth Inducing Effects.........................................................1-21
H.
Economic and Social Effects.....................................................1-22
I.
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Should The Plan Be
Implemented................................................ :......................
1-23
III. Mitigation Measures...................................................................1-23
A. Aesthetics.......................................................................1-23
1. Proposed.......................................................................1-23
2. Existing.......................................................................1-24
B. Substantial Concentration of Population.......................................1-24
1. Proposed.......................................................................1-24
C. Land Use Compatibility..........................................................1-25
1. Proposed Mitigations .........................................................1-25
2. Existing.......................................................................1-28
Sources........................... .................... ................................... 1-29
Tables
Page
1-A Agricultural Uses in Cupertino....................................................... 1-5
1-B Development Reallocation by Land Use ............................................ 1-9
1-C Commercial Development Priorities ................................................. 1-9
1-D Office/Industrial Development Priorities............................................1-10
1-E Residential Development Priorities .................................................. 1-20
1-F Buildout Comparison of General Plan Alternatives................................1-21
1-G New Development Comparison of General Plan Alternatives....................1-21
1-H Income of Households 1991.........................................................1-23
Figures
1-A Regional Map......................................................................... 1-2
1-B Cupertino Planning Area 1992, Existing Land Uses ............................. 1-3
1-C Agricultural Lands.................................................................... 1-6
1-D Housing Reallocation Map...........................................................1-11
1-E
Maximum Building
Heights
Map ...................................................
1-12
1-F
General Plan Land
Use Map
Amendments ........................................
1-15
' SECTION 1
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY AND VISUAL CHARACTER
I. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A. EXISTING
1• Rezional
The City of Cupertino is located in the southwestern portion of Santa Clara Valley.
Since European settlement of this area, the valley has served as an important
agricultural area, first as pastureland and a leading wheat growing area under
Spanish and Mexican rule and later as an important center for the production of
wines, fruit and vegetables during the European emigration to California in the latter
19th Century.
The agricultural landscape was transformed to an urban -industrial pattern in the
post -World War II period with first the growth of the defense and aeronautical
industries and later in the 1960's and 1970's with the emergence of the electronics
and semiconductor industries. The later industries emanated from Stanford
University whose entrepreneurial graduates planted their roots and developed the
technologies that define the Silicon Valley boom As industrial activities increased,
land became scarce and industrial development moved southward from Palo Alto to
Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and other northern Santa Clara County Cities. These
cities, recognizing the benefits of a strong industrial base, rezoned agricultural land
to industrial use and offer other incentives to attract companies to their industrial
parks. The emerging land use pattern was one of industry being concentrated in the
northern cities of the County, that is, the job belt. The housing for most of the
workers was being developed in the southern part of the County, becoming the
County's housing belt.
2. 1.6&d
Cupertino is one of the above described northern cities surrounded by the cities of
Sunnyvale and Los Altos to the north, the cities of Santa Clara and San Jose to the
east, and San Jose and Saratoga to the south (Figure I -A). The lower foothills of
the Santa Cruz Mountain Range defines Cupertino's western boundary.
eGeneralized existing land uses in Cupertino are shown in the Figure 1-B
Cupertino's land uses may be grouped into four major land use categories:
residential, commercial, officelndustrial and public/quasi-public.
Residential: Single-family residential land uses predominate this category
t consisting of one and two-story detached dwellings throughout the City, but mainly
located south of Stevens Creek Boulevard and westerly of Stelling Road. The
density range varies from one dwelling per ten acres to ten dwellings per gross
acre. The most common density is one dwelling on a 7,500 square foot lot.
Higher density residential development (duplexes, townhouses and condominium
flats) are scattered along the City's major thoroughfares, such as, along Stelling
Road, Homestead Road, Miller Avenue, Stevens Creek Boulevard, and Foothill
Expressway where the density is 10-35 dwellings per gross acre. Most of these
dwellings are also low profile one and two-story structures except the taller
residential developments at City Center which are 5 and 7 stories tall and at the
southeast comer of Homestead Road and De Anza Boulevard where the maximum
building height is 4 stories.
F
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 2
RI•Im nd
{�
_
e�
MARIN l ♦ ,�.�Q
= o
•
4 r`u x o. '♦ CONTRA COSTA
Y
? •ly GA 1t) bks _
r� ItysN.Fiff .:
r..
r r3� 1 d
an
_ a. Oars% ri ALAMEDA
Q '�S
i\ �
•d"' F n
t;
C
Y•ki�!
I SAN M TEO F•1
� Oa•n y,;
Y
n
Cupertino" •
X'i f i k"' •'�
k 3
r ¢ C Sant
�
'' •
L N N! ) �� Iil
ga
R - LO
r f.'sT six
SNo•
SANTA
CLARA
SANTA CRUZ
REGIONAL MAP
Figure
1-A
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 3
-------------
CUPERTINO PLANNING AREA 1992,
EXISTING LAND USES
Source: City of Cupertino, December, 1992
a
E
CL
0
i>
2
E
E
U
0
t
U
d
V
i,'
Figure
1-B
o
N
O
V
b
b
J
V
T
v
T
M
Z
.
j
Q
a
`�
'D
8
..
a°
v
E
r W
'y
z
c
p .
0
C'
C
J
� W
v
a
a
$
$
n.
-------------
CUPERTINO PLANNING AREA 1992,
EXISTING LAND USES
Source: City of Cupertino, December, 1992
a
E
CL
0
i>
2
E
E
U
0
t
U
d
V
i,'
Figure
1-B
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 4
Commercial: Commercial land use is defined as retail sales, businesses,
professional offices and service establishments with direct customer contact. Thus,
this category includes a diverse range of activities ranging from a neighborhood
convenience store to regionally oriented specialty stores, or a real estate sales office
to a medical office building. Most of the City's commercial development is along
the major thoroughfares: Stevens Creek Boulevard, Homestead Road, Wolfe Road
and De Anza Boulevard/Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. Major commercial centers
include the Crossroads, Homestead Square, the Oaks, Cupertino Village and Vallco
Fashion Park, Cupertino's regional shopping mall. Most of the commercial
buildings also reflect Cupertino's low profile character of one and two-story
buildings with surface parking. The most intensely developed commercial site is
Vallco Fashion Park which includes two stories of retail uses and multiple level
parking structures. Typically commercial projects devote 25% of the site to
building, 15% to landscaping and pedestrian areas and 60% to parking and
circulation.
Office/Industrial: This category reflects the integration of office and industrial uses
in Cupertino. Little manufacturing and assembly occurs in Cupertino because the
high cost of living in the Santa Clara Valley makes it difficult to manufacture
products competitively. Industrial activity is concentrated in research and
development, prototype manufacturing and administrative and marketing support.
The activities can occur in office environments, so the outward appearance of an
office building and a research and development building are similar. To some
extent office and research and development uses may occur in commercial area.
Computer and related high technology firms lease some space in numerous
multi -tenant commercial office buildings in Cupertino. The office/industrial use is
concentrated in the following areas of the City: 1) Vallco Park bounded by
Homestead Road, Wolfe Road, Stevens Creek Blvd. and the eastern City limits; 2)
North De Anza Blvd. area between Highway 280 and Stevens Creek Blvd., and 3)
the northwest quadrant of future Highway 85 and McClellan Road. This land use
category shows the greatest range in building intensity and height (1 to 8 stories) in
Cupertino. Parking may be on the surface or above or below ground in structures.
Public/Ouasi-Public: This land use category applies to land used by a government
agency for a public purpose and privately owned land used for institutional
educational, religious or private utility purposes. Such land uses are scattered
throughout the City and include schools, colleges, churches, parks, city hall, the
library, electrical substations, and cemeteries.
Agricultural Lands: Most of Cupertino has been built upon prime agricultural soils.
Only remnants of the once thriving agricultural economy exist in Cupertino today,
consisting mainly of small scattered orchards on the valley floor and in the hillsides.
There are two moderate-size, active agricultural areas in Cupertino: the Forge
property, north of Homestead Road and westerly of De Anza Blvd., which has a
small orchard and flower growing operation; and a portion of the Seminary
property, off Cristo Rey Drive, which is used as pasture land. Neither site is
identified by the State as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance.
Both sites are under Williamson Act Contract which preserves the agricultural uses
by taxing the property at its lower agricultural value if the property owner agrees to
maintain the property in open spaces uses. (See Table 1-A and Figure 1-C)
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 5
The Williamson Act Contract on the Forge property was not renewed by the
property owner in 1990, and the contract on the Seminary property was not
renewed by the property owner in 1992. Both properties have residential or Quasi-
PublicAnstitutional General Plan designations.
Table 1-A
AGRICULTURAL USES IN CUPERTINO
Under Williamson
Ag Location Soil Tvce JJ= Act Contract
Forge 9.72 Homestead Road Non -prime Orchard Yes
Flowers
in
F]
II
I
The proximity of different land uses does not necessarily mean that land uses are
incompatible, meaning that the activities or structures come into conflict or result in
adverse effects on each other. Land use compatibility is related to the density of
development, the nature of the on-site activities and the potential for these activities
to interface or interfere with uses on adjoining sites. The City's planning and
zoning controls have evolved over time to limit potential land use incompatibilities
through the provision of regulations on setbacks, lot coverage, building height,
fencing, parking, circulation and limits on land use activities.
Land use controls currently utilized by the City to limit potential building intensity
incompatibilities are Floor Area Ratios (FARs) and Traffic Intensity Performance
standards (TIPS). FARs is a development control which limits buildable floor
space to a fixed fraction of the lot area. TIPS controls development intensity by
prohibiting development from exceeding a specific vehicular trip rate.
Seminary 150.6 Cristo Rey Drive Non -prime Pasture Yes
Garrod 0.85 Foothills Non -prime Unknown Yes
Perusina 1.96 Festival Drive Prime Orchard No
Stocklmeir 5.14 Stevens Creek Prime Orchard No
Source: Cupertino Community Development Dept.
Existing Land Use Compatibility: The City's land use patterns have developed
largely in a manner that separates dissimilar land uses. This pattern was planned
under the theory that dissimilar land uses were incompatible with each other and
thus should be separated from each other. Thus, the city developed with separate
residential areas, commercial areas and industrial areas. This historical
'
development pattern has fostered the concentration of commercial land uses along
the City's major thoroughfares and the industrial uses in the vicinity of freeway
corridors. There are, however, areas in the City with dissimilar land uses which
are in close proximity, such as portions of Monta Vista where industrial uses can be
found adjacent to residential uses.
in
F]
II
I
The proximity of different land uses does not necessarily mean that land uses are
incompatible, meaning that the activities or structures come into conflict or result in
adverse effects on each other. Land use compatibility is related to the density of
development, the nature of the on-site activities and the potential for these activities
to interface or interfere with uses on adjoining sites. The City's planning and
zoning controls have evolved over time to limit potential land use incompatibilities
through the provision of regulations on setbacks, lot coverage, building height,
fencing, parking, circulation and limits on land use activities.
Land use controls currently utilized by the City to limit potential building intensity
incompatibilities are Floor Area Ratios (FARs) and Traffic Intensity Performance
standards (TIPS). FARs is a development control which limits buildable floor
space to a fixed fraction of the lot area. TIPS controls development intensity by
prohibiting development from exceeding a specific vehicular trip rate.
uenerdt rtan nuc LAno use c;ompauotuty attu v taus, . twtat ter
Section 1- 6
\ ' °. .,7 Boo ...,...
'�♦ \ I /�. \1 `!Vii%�...
a
n c...r1. yl 1Y.ZA
\ QW"� ! C
�. .(!.: `:. i; :...:..�::�..,...��, I', /.. •• i71!`I,f-......... .\...,`...... ....._' Bay ( ',
`
\� t^i \
1 c o t`atjiutu\
L
;"' -�-^ aIM[d t! C r• •w!-'�- �►-— ..
w yww , \J
N The City of Cupertino
r a` \�. ,
1.1W
" 'I — Urban Service Area Boundary
/\ W
J. I u\•- ,r,---- Boundary Agreement Line
!. t W '.�;; : '% ,•\.,•
IF75M Greenhouse
Lands Under Williamson Act Contract
`, � Y -.T ;��� _ - , •�= \�� r \ -'•� r\;«:cHy Present Agricultural Use
\\.,��.:•-• ,._ ,..,,1..\• ,,, . '' ?;.; ,; yunuw Generalized Extent olClass 1
and 2 Soils
AGRICULTURAL LANDS Figure
Source: City or Cupertino, December, 1992 1-C
The 1973 TIPS policy is generally applied to the North De Anza Boulevard and
East Stevens Creek Boulevard areas where development activity is limited to those
that do not exceed 16 peak -hour, one-way trips per acre. The FAR policy, adopted
in 1983, is applicable to all remaining commercial, office and industrial zoned
properties not subject to TIPS. The adopted FARs are: .25 for commercial, .33 for
office and .37 for industrial. Land use intensity in the Town Center Planning area
is regulated by a specific traffic generation accounting system different from the
standard FARs and TIPS. This system of development controls helped to ensure
the City would remain a low -profile built community. Certain areas of the City,
however, were planned for increased density and building height: Vallco Park,
North De Anza Boulevard and Town Center. This building intensity was
accomplished by granting developers "bonus" square footage in these areas and
allowing the transfer of FAR and TIPS credits from less developed properties to
these intensification sites. The Proposed Plan Amendments rescind the TIPS policy
which has been found in practice to be overly complicated and cumbersome to
implement. The Plan Amendments propose replacing the TIPS policy with FAR
regulations and a development allocation system discussed later in the text.
it
is
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 7
With the advent of adequate development controls and more flexible attitudes
toward mixed land uses, what was once an imperative to separate dissimilar land
uses has become more flexible. Encouraging the mixing of residential and
non-residential land uses is increasingly being viewed as a means to accomplish city
goals such as the creation of new housing opportunities, reducing traffic congestion
by placing housing in proximity to jobs and creating a "heart" of the City, a central
area where citizens could live, work and shop.
In the last decade, the City has sought to encourage mixed use development in
selected areas. The effort included: a General Plan policy to allow the
consideration of residential development in non-residential areas and exempting
such residential development from the floor area ratio restrictions established for the
non-residential development and mixed use General Plan land use designations.
Currently, mixed land uses are or have been developed in two areas: Monta Vista
and City Center. Monta Vista has historically had a mixture of land uses near
Stevens Creek Boulevard. General Plan policies reinforce this mixed pattern. City
Center, at the southeast quadrant of Stevens Creek Boulevard and De Anza
Boulevard, has been developed as a mixed use area, combining office, residential
and open space uses.
Project Description: The principal goals contained in the Proposed General Plan
Amendment are as follows:
a. Strengthen hillside preservation by reducing overall residential densities and
development standards to improve aesthetics, preserve natural resources and
watershed areas, and avoid hazardous areas.
b. Provide for the fiscal health of the City by allowing the major companies to
expand in the City without adverse traffic and housing impacts.
c. Provide additional housing opportunities, particularly affordable housing.
d. Address imbalances in the development potential levels for commercial,
office and industrial land uses, while maintaining a traffic level of service
(LOS) "D" for all intersections except Stevens Creek and De Anza
1 Boulevards where level of service "E" is acceptable to implement the "Heart
of the City" concept.
I
r
I
e. Develop a "Heart of the City" which would contain a combination of land
uses and suitable built environment to serve as a memorable gathering place
for residents.
f. Provide additional measures to protect existing neighborhoods from land
use and development incompatibilities.
To achieve the above goals, the Proposed Plan amendments seek to change:
a. The overall development allocation system
b. The building intensity of different areas
c. Land use designations
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 8
Development Allocation System:
The City's transportation consultant simulated future traffic conditions using a
computer model and land use inputs reflective of development allowed under the
existing General Plan forecasted to occur in the surrounding region. The computer
simulation indicated that future citywide development allowable under the current
General Plan largely would meet the City's transportation goal of LOS D (with the
exception of two intersections) when certain thoroughfare improvements were
completed, for example, Highway 85 and the widening of N. De Anza Boulevard
across Highway 280. IAS, or level of service, is a method of rating the flow of
traffic through intersections (see Transportation and Circulation section).
Using the existing General Plan as a benchmark, a new system of allocating
development potential was devised to meet the City's major goals. The TIPS policy
will be replaced and the FAR policy will be modified to incorporate a more
discretionary development allocation system. Uncommitted development potential
under the existing General Plan is reallocated among the major land uses: retail,
offtcelmdustrial, hotel and housing, to meet the City's major goals. To facilitate
the reallocation system, conversion (trip) factors were established based on the
peak hour traffic generating characteristics of the individual land uses. Using the
trip factors, the existing General Plan (Modified) was determined to have a "trip
ceiling" of 4,340 peak hour trips. Table 1-B indicates the preferred reallocation of
uncommitted development potential for each major land use. The reallocation,
pursuant to the proposed plan, has a trip count of 5,300 which indicates the City's
preference for a development level above the existing General Plan.
The development reallocation table (Table 1-B) reflects the City's goals and
priorities. Generally, retail development potential was reallocated to office/ in-
dustrial, hotel and housing uses to attain the City's goals of fiscal well-being and
increased housing opportunities.
Building Intensity Changes:
The development reallocation is assigned to different areas of the City according to
the following development priority tables (Tables I -C,1 -D, and 1-E) to reflect the
City's goals and priorities. The retail allocation is primarily assigned to the "Heart
of the City" to achieve city identity goals and to a future power retailer for its fiscal
benefits to the City. The housing allocation emphasizes the placement of new
housing in urban infill locations along major thoroughfares (Table 1-E). These
locations are depicted in Figure 1-D. Since these areas have been historically non-
residential in character, existing residential neighborhoods will be protected from
potential density incompatibilities. Thus, the residential priorities table favors more
urban housing locations where services are available, versus the more remote
hillside areas which will remain rural in character.
r
IA
I4
ib
11
IA
r
(sq. ft.)
Office/Ind.
(sq. ft.)
Hotel
(rooms)
Housing
(units)
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 9
DEVELOPMENT REALLOCATION BY LAND USE
Existing Proposed Peak Trips/1000
G.P.(Mod) G.P. Proposed Hour sq. ft.
1990 Committed Uncommitted Reallocated G.P. Trip Room or
7,457,000 541,000 1,033,000 1,294,000 9,292,000** 1.70 2,200
277 250 300 500 1,027 0.40 200
17,460 584 516 2,000 20,044 0.80 I&ffl
5,300
*Committed growth refers to growth potential, resulting from the construction of
developments with approved use permits and development subject to vesting maps or
development agreements. The committed space will be transferred to uncommitted if a use
permit expires or the use is determined to be inconsistent with the General Plan.
** Figure does not include 2,000,000 square feet of additional traffic mitigated
development resulting from the application of the proposed development allocation system
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES
• Along or near Stevens Creek Boulevard to support the Heart
of the City policy. 250,000 sq. ft.
• Remodeling and development of major retail centers on 5+ acre sites
outside of the Heart of the City and on major arterial streets. 40,000 sq. ft.
• Mixed use development with residences outside of the Heart of the
City. 35,000 sq. ft.
• Development or revitalization of other commercial parcels. 50,000 sq. ft.
• Power Retailer (i.e. high volume discount retailer) 125,000 sq. ft.
• Full service hotel(s), appropriate location evaluated at time of proposal. 500 rooms
For commercial properties, transfers of trips defined by the TIPS policy approved prior to
General Plan adoption remain valid and are exempted from reallocation.
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 10
Table 1-D
OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES
• Development potential based on preexisting FAR restraints and
TIPS standards remains with existing office and industrial parcels. 1,033,000 sq. ft.
• Town Center & Crossroads Comers 111,000 sq. ft.
• Non -designated Pool to be allocated based on the following priorities: 150,000 sq. ft.
Company with 1,500+ employees
Company with City corporate headquarters
Property owners possessing bonus square footage authorized by the 1983 General Plan
retain such square footage.
Table 1-E
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES (See Figure 1-D)
• Residential density potential based on existing general plan residential
516
land use designations remains with existing residential parcels.
• North De Anza Boulevard Area *
150
• Vallco Park
500
• Stevens Creek Boulevard between Torre Avenue and Saich Way, including the
300
Town Center Planning Area
• Remainder of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Route 85 and eastern City Limits
200
• Bubb Road between Stevens Creek Boulevard and McClellan Road *
150
• Undesignated Pool
184
r
* When residential redevelopment of officeJmdustti it uses occurs in the North De Anza
Boulevard and Bubb Road areas such residential development shall generate no more
peak hour traffic than the office/industrial uses it replaces.
To provide for the reasonable growth needs of the major companies in the City, an
additional mitigated development policy is proposed to allow major companies to
expand their building area beyond the reallocation limits. Such development is
capped at 2,000,000 square feet and must mitigate 1) traffic impacts through a
combination of transportation demand management techniques and street
improvements, and 2) housing impacts by providing nearby housing preferably for
company employees. The two million square foot cap was determined by the City
to be the maximum level of additional development whose generated traffic could be
feasibly mitigated through aggressive TDM measures on proposed and existing
development.
i
r
i
i
I
iw
it
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- I1
Simm Cruk ` --- -
Re it ` 1 �_-r•
I
t
r
� I
r
CUPERTINO
Plannina District
0 West Stevens Creek
C East Stevens Creek
North De Anza
Crossroads
lffmm� Vallco Park
Bubb Road
Undesinnated
Total
HOUSING REALLOCATION MAP
Source: Citv of Cuuertino. December, 1990
mousing
Units
200
150
300
500
150
184
1.484
Figure
1-D
Although the traffic and housing impacts generated by this additional 2 million
square feet of development would be fully mitigated, this level of development may
create other potentially significant impacts on the City's visual character, level of
public services and utilities, air quality, noise, storm drainage,
historic/archaeological/cultural resources, and vegetation and wildlife resources.
Also, such growth will induce additional housing demand which will generate
needs for additional parks and public services. Furthermore, office/industrial
growth will generate additional hazardous wastes which may increase the exposure
of nearby residents and future residents. These potential impacts are discussed in
their respective sections of this report.
This plan also proposes maximum building heights which are coordinated with
areas proposed for intensification. Taller buildings would be allowed in Town
Center, Vallco Park and North De Anza Boulevard which are already intensely
urban. Medium height buildings would be allowed along Stevens Creek Boulevard
to implement the "Heart of the City" concept. (See Figure 1-E.)
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 12
a
P
� C
twill a i
1 r;- z '
z
Lu
S
3nv M311n 0
+F a w
F — vv AarH,a 0 `m
-
m,t '
BE
e •iiy.j�; i!! •!1! T! o � � �
99
3 /
� - � avoueane 1
1
------
\ ��•� J L
C
---- -- ------------------------
MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHTS MAP Figure
1-E
Source: City of Cupertino, December, 1992
General Plan EIR - Land Use Comparability and Visual Character
Section 1- 13
Hillside residential densities are proposed for induction west of the urban/suburban
edge where density will decrease from a 1/2 acre minimum to a 5 acre minimum.
The proposed reduction will help achieve City goals of preserving natural
resources, avoiding development of hazardous areas and improving the aesthetics
of the hillside backdrop. New, higher density housing is directed to historically
non-residential areas along Stevens Creek Boulevard, Bubb Road, Bandley Drive
and Vallco Park where jobs are located, transportation access is convenient and
impacts to existing residences are expected to be minimal.
In summary, these changes within the hillside area will provide the following
beneficial impacts:
a. Preserve additional biotic habitat.
b. Reduce the quantity of sedimentation, erosion, and harmful surface drainage
into streams, creeks and onto roads.
c. Reduction of negative impacts on stream corridors and drainages while
ultimately drain into San Francisco Bay. This has the secondary, but
nonetheless important, benefit of improving the water quality of the Bay.
d. Reduction of traffic impacts on local roads. The reduction of each dwelling
until in the hillside areas will result in the reduction of traffic impacts by
approximately 11 trip ends per day.
e. Reduction of visual impacts. Density reduction, along with sensitive site
planning requirements will lessen visual impacts of the hillside areas, especially
from the valley floor and from I-280, a State scenic highway, and thereby help
to retain the natural open -space qualities of the hillside areas. Also, reduced
density will inevitably result in reduced grading and site development.
f. Reduction of impacts on public services. Reduced densities in the hillside areas
will also mean reduction of fire hazards, emergency response time and impacts
on water supply.
Land Use Designation Changes:
The following land use map amendments are proposed and shown on Figure 1-F:.
a. Lands west of the urban/suburban development pattern in the western foothills,
including the Kaiser property, Seminary property, Regnart Canyon area and
Inspiration Heights area are proposed to change from very Low Residential -
Semi -Rural 5 -acre, Foothill Modified 1/2 acre, and Foothill Modified slope
density formulae to Very Low Residential Foothill 5-20 acre slope density
formula. Other similarly situated property such as the Gate of Heaven
Cemetary and Maryknoll Seminary, should they redevelop, would also be
subject to the Foothill 5-30 acre slope density formula.
b. The Voss Pond, Alcade Knolls, and a portion of the property in Regnart
Canyon in the western foothills are proposed to change from Very Low -Semi
Rural 5 acre and Foothill Modified 1/2 acre slope density formulae to Private
Open Space to reflect existing allowed uses.
General Plan EIR - Land Use Compatability and Visual Character
Section 1- 14
c. Blackberry Farm, located along Stevens Creek, on the south side of Stevens
Creek Boulevard, is proposed to change from Private Recreation to Parks to
reflect its public ownership and use.
d. Peninsula Avenue property is proposed to change from public right-of-way to
Residential (4.4 - 7.7 D.U./Gr. Ac.) to reflect its private ownership and
surrounding land uses.
e. The Town Center area properties at Stevens Creek and De Anna Boulevards are
proposed to change from Commercial/Residential to Commerpial/Offrce/Resi-
dential to reflect existing land uses.
f. The Commercial, Commercial/Office, Industrial and Office/Industdal/Commer-
cial, Neighborhood Commercial, Commercial and "Store Front" Industrial Mix,
and Light Industrial land use designations are all amended to explicitly allow
residential land uses.
g. The former Fremont Older school site along Calabazas Creek and Miller Avenue
is proposed to change from Public Facilities to Parks to reflect its City
ownership and intended uses.
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 15
C;
V
U
$ v & e 800
a c u
_ L F
a.s E u g Z oa
,Am`'O .a o� n � -4
V?
p a� -` O~ C z 9 Q 2 C
�99�ia� VBG
cLU�mc
_a'3vc oo„v 37z 'u'y.a
ECEavo
E 2
Yma N m O U`UL
't a'3
ac> ra�a�r'eao -2
o .L+ •• 'r
E U E va EG:UK K zc
G.�
N�v>�NU 2U.� U�
r
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENTS I Figure
1-F
Source:
1992
General Plan E1R Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 16
L-Ifflomm f -I ImmmuIIS. Kell I: IMI zau Inv
I �l��yr• ,�
The proposals to change the overall development allocition system, building
intensities and land use designations are consistent with the overall goals of the
General Plan. Development potential of residential, commercial and
office/industrials uses will be reallocated to provide additional housing
opportunities and strengthen the City's economic base, while maintaining a
reasonable balance of jobs and housing. Development densities will be reduced
from 1R -acre minimum lots to 5 -acre minimum lots in the hillsides to further
protect natural resources. Development levels will be adjusted to keep the traffic
system within the desired capacity level. Nonresidential development above this
level must mitigate traffic impacts and address housing demand. Development will
be allocated on a priority basis to help shape the City's physical identity, while
neighborhoods will be protected from the negative impacts of the increased
intensity.
The Proposed General Plan Amendments consistent with the general plans of the
surrounding cities of Sunnyvale, Santa Clara and San Jose, in that each community
strives to provide a mixture of land uses and a development pattern that satisfies the
economic, social, recreational and aesthetic needs of its residents. Two of the
communities, Sunnyvale and Santa Clara, have high jobs -to -housing ratios which
create net in -commuting patterns in their cities and high demand for housing. Like
Cupertino, they are seeking opportunities to develop additional higher density
housing to address the problem. All of the communities strive to balance
development activity and transportation capacity to lessen traffic congestion, but
each community utilizes different means. San Jose and Santa Clara generally do
not impose a development intensity limitation such as a floor area ratio. Rather,
San Jose examines intersection LOS and requires street improvement mitigation,
while Santa Clara views higher density as a means to facilitate public transit. Santa
Clara imposes traffic mitigation fees through assessment districts. Sunnyvale
utilizes a FAR limitation on industrial development, but has no similar restriction
for commercial uses.
The Proposed Plan is consistent with the County general plan in that growth is
focused into existing urban areas and not within the undeveloped hillsides.
However, the Plan is inconsistent with County policy to direct job producing
growth to the bedroom communities of San Jose, Gilroy and Morgan Hill and away
from the "job -rich" communities in northern Santa Clara County.
See Housing section of this report.
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 17
See Housing section of this report.
IMPACTS
A. SIGNIFICANCE :rr : :
According to the California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G, a project will
normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will:
• Conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community where
it is located;
• Have a substantial, demonstrable negative aesthetic effect;
• Induce substantial growth or concentration of population;
• Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing
traffic load and capacity of the street system;
• Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community;
• Conflict with established recreational, educational, religious or scientific uses
of the area;
• Convert prime agricultural land to non-agricultural use or impair the
productivity of prime agricultural land.
uta :.r aa_ y i, y. :.: � rr : r_ •
Implementation of the Proposed Plan amendments would allow hillside residential
development, albeit at a significantly reduced level compared to the residential
potential of the existing plan. Hillside development under either plan may have a
potentially significant aesthetic impact on the scenic, natural hillside environment.
Grading associated with street and home construction may remove large amounts of
native and naturalized vegetation that blanket the hillsides. Hillside residential
development will introduce additional man-made structures and building materials
that may create visual contradictions with the largely pristine, natural, hillside
environment that provides significant visual relief from the urbanized valley floor.
Visual contradictions may be heightened if structures are located in highly visible
locations, such as ridge lines; or if large, visible walls are constructed on steep
slopes; or if selected building materials contrast sharply with the color and texture
of the hillsides. Such residential development may induce secondary development
effects which would intensity the visual impacts. Secondary development includes:
the widening of existing roads to accommodate emergency vehicles; the
undergrounding of utilities; the construction of flood control structures,
sedimentation basins etc. to manage increased runoff and erosion; the trimming and
clearance of vegetation for fire protection purposes; and the construction of hillside
water storage facilities to provide adequate water supply.
Mitigation: Adopt design standards. Refer to Land Use
Mitigation Measure III Al (a -k) and IIIA2 (a)
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 18
Implementation of the Plan would allow substantial concentrations of new residents
in existing industrial areas that may not be easily accessible to residential services,
such as parks and schools. Other impacts resulting from the substantial
concentration of population are discussed below.
Mitigation: Adopt population based park dedication requirements
and cooperate with school districts and county library
to monitor growth. Refer to Land Use Mitigation
Measure III Bl (a -c)
Implementation of the proposed General Plan Land Use Plan would allow increased
land use intensity within the City and change the distribution of land uses.
Development consistent with the proposed Plan will change traffic levels and traffic
patterns. Proposed Plan changes would increase employment growth in certain
office/industrial areas and concentrate new housing development in existing
non-residential areas along major thoroughfares and near employment centers. The
changes in intensity and land use have traffic implications that are considered
potentially significant and are discussed in the Transportation and Circulation
Section.
Mitigation: Limit development commensurate with traffic carrying
capacity standard (Level of Service). Refer to Mitiga-
tion in Transportation and Circulation section.
. . s
Development consistent with the Proposed General Plan Amendment may create
potentially significant land use compatibility impacts, such as:
1. Allowing a high intensity development adjacent or in close proximity to a low
intensity use creating a significant visual contradiction and privacy impacts.
2. Allow the development of residential uses in non-residential areas in such a
manner that new residents may be exposed to noise, odor, hazardous materials
and traffic safety impacts, while non-residential uses may find untenable
restrictions placed on their activities in order to buffer residential uses.
Mitigation: Adopt Land Use Compatibility and Design Policies.
Refer to Land Use Mitigation III Cl (a -p) and IIIC2 (a -e)
Development consistent with the proposed General Plan may result in development
in areas not adequately served by public services or utilities. This is considered a
potentially significant impact. The adequacy of public services and utilities under
General Plan buildout is discussed under the Public Utilities section.
Mitigation: Coordinate land development growth controls with
service providers. Refer to Mitigation in Public Utilities
Section.
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 19
LGAI-i Lei uta lem.r as y meAve, I •1. Karim u. 55 a -1:5 „ rr : r •
Development consistent with the Proposed General Plan Amendment will significantly
change the visual character of the community from its current low -profile, suburban
bedroom community to a more dense, more urban city with a physical identity
distinctive from surrounding communities. However, the potential change in visual
character will be less pronounced than the development pattern allowed in the Existing
General Plan because overall maximum building height limits will have been reduced in
the Proposed Plan.
u as •1 • 1►I• ► • • : ►Ila : ►r
All agricultural uses on the valley floor in Cupertino are planned for urbanization
except for agricultural uses in the Stevens Creek flood plain south of Stevens Creek
Boulevard. The Seminary property is planned for open space and/or residential
uses.
Existing agricultural uses in Cupertino on the valley floor occur on small scattered
parcels surrounded by urban development. Most of these agricultural operations
occur on Class I and Class II (prime) soils which are considered by the U.S. Soil
Conservation Service to have little to few limitations for agricultural crops. The
Seminary property soil is rated Class IV which is considered to have very severe
limitations which restrict the choice of crops and requires very careful management.
The property is used as pasture land
Agriculture continues to decline in Santa Clara County due to numerous factors
such as: the encroachment of urban uses; the conversion of farmlands to more
profitable land uses; the decline of agricultural infrastructure -canneries, distribution
facilities, warehouses and mills; escalating energy and water costs; a severe housing
shortage for itinerant farm workers; and competition from lower cost agricultural
areas. There are approximately 14 acres of active and semi -active agricultural lands
on the valley floor outside of the Stevens Creek floodway. Two sites are protected
by Williamson Act Contracts which the owners have recently not renewed.
Given the small amount of agricultural land in a largely urbanized area, the loss of
agricultural land to urbanization is considered insignificant, in that, there is a minor
decrease in capacity to produce food locally and to the extent the food was
consumed locally, a marginal increase in need to import such produce with
concomitant, insignificant increases in energy consumption and air pollution.
Urbanization of the agricultural lands will reduce agricultural production jobs and
diminish support for other agricultural economic sectors. Development of the prime
agricultural lands will cause the loss of scenic and open space resources associated
with these lands. However, the impact is considered insignificant given the
relatively small size of the agricultural sites and the proximity of urban
development.
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 20
In additional to the Proposed General Plan Amendment the following two plan
alternatives were considered:
\ I 0I 1 X111. I
The No Project Alternative represents the existing built environment of the City.
The visual character of the community would remain the same and there would be
no substantial changes in traffic or the arrangement of the population. There are no
aesthetic impacts on the hillsides and no additional land use incompatibilities aside
from existing situations. There would also be no new housing, economic growth
or "Heart of the City" concept with this alternative. The existing General Plan,
however, would remain in effect.
This alternative represents the existing General Plan for the urbanized area and the
Proposed Plan's alternative for hillside areas. Numerically this alternative
compares to the Proposed General Plan Amendment as follows:
BUILDOUT COMPARISON OF GENERAL PLAN ALTERNATIVES
Existing General
Office/Industrial (sq. ft.) 9,031,000 11,292,000
Commercial -non -hotel (sq. ft.) 4,721,000 4,431,000
Hotel (rooms) 827 1,027
Residential -urban service area (units) 18,560 20,044
Source: Cupertino Community Development Dept.
This alternative provides for fewer housing units, hotel rooms and office/mdustrial
square footage than the Proposed Plan. Residential densities in the hillside areas
would remain the same under either alternative. Potentially taller buildings would
be allowed under this alternative than the Plan, creating greater visual contradictions
in the development pattern. However, the overall density of development would be
less than the Proposed Plan.
e.. ; CC k4 60614u .e\ r :u 1 •:C• yYurr
Implementation of the Proposed General Plan will result in the permanent urbanization
of currently vacant, agricultural and open space lands within the Urban Service Area
which will limit the range of possible long-term uses of these lands. Agricultural uses
will continue to decline in this area as they are not considered viable uses, particularly
on the valley floor. The decline of agriculture will preclude it from contributing to the
long-term productivity and sustainability of the area economy.
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 21
The implementation of a development strategy to focus development on infill locations
will encourage the urbanization of open space within the Urban Service Ana, while the
hillside protection policies will strengthen the preservation of hillside open space
resources, thus preserving future options for these lands.
• .r0. 1150 t. ao 01
The General Plan defines and guides the future development and growth of the City.
The planned growth is significant in comparison to the built environment and the
existing plan as shown in Table I -G:
NEW DEVELOPMENT COMPARISON
OF GENERAL PLAN ALTERNATIVES
Land Use
1990 Built
New Development
Existing G.P.(Mod)
New Development
Under Proposed Plan
Commercial (sq.ft.)
3,359,000
1,362,000
1,072,000
Offrce/Ind.(sq.ft.)
7,457,000
1,574,000
3,835,000
Hotel (rooms)
277
550
750
Residential (units)
17,460
1,100
2,584
Source: Cupertino Community Development Dept.
The General Plan, as a policy document that accommodates and guides new population and
economic growth, is by definition, a project that induces growth. Growth forecasts and
public input were used to determine the level of new growth that could be accommodated
consistent with the economic, environmental, social and public service goals of the City.
The City's growth strategy would allow continued infill development within the Urban
Service Area, while reducing growth potential in the hillsides by reducing residential
densities and controlling urban expansion.
Planned economic growth within Cupertino's urban boundaries will create pressures to
expand the boundaries. The City's hillside protection policies are meant to discourage this
outward growth pressure, so the secondary growth inducement, manifested mainly as
housing demand, will likely occur outside of the City in the surrounding region.
Based on the City's Housing Nexus Study, new non-residential growth under the
Proposed Plan is expected to generate the following housing demand:
Land Use Demand (Units)
Commercial (+ hotel) 2,396
Office/Industrial +7.421
New Housing 9,817
Demand
Less New Dwellings
(built after 1990) in Cupertino -2.584
Estimated Net Housing
Growth Inducement Outside 7,233
of Cupertino
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 22
This housing growth inducement from Cupertino's planned growth is part of a larger
cumulative impact which will be generated by expected growth partems in surrounding
cities in Santa Clara Valley. When job growth continues to out pace housing growth,
the unmet housing need will continue to induce housing demand elsewhere in the
region.
Whether this housing demand is translated into additional dwellings depends on two
factors:
The major companies in Cupertino which are planning expansions have indicated
that many of these "new" jobs are actually existing jobs in the region which will be
consolidated in Cupertino. Since these existing employees are currently housed, no
new housing demand should be induced. Since the actual growth of "new" jobs
cannot be distinguished from the movement of "existing" jobs to Cupertino, it is not
possible to accurately characterize outside housing demand.
The surrounding cities and counties which will experience this increased housing
demand each has the authority and ability to direct and regulate its growth to achieve
the orderly development of their respective communities. Thus, the housing
growth inducing aspects of Cupertino's Plan will translate into new residential
development in the subregion only if other affected communities permit it to
happen.
If residential development occurs in other communities as a result of Cupertino's job
growth, then a number of secondary environmental impacts may be expected. These
include:
• Secondary job growth in service industries such as retail, finance and other areas to
service the growing population.
Increased demand for public services, including schools, police, fire protection,
utilities, water and other services typically provided by cities, counties and special
districts.
Increased potential for traffic congestion, air and water degradation, depletion of
natural resources and exposure to hazards.
I. Aa •u :►la • _:_ _D�_�l
The balance of land uses and intensities is estimated to be of a net fiscal benefit to the
City in terms of annual costs and revenues. The calculation of city costs and revenues
is outlined in the Economics section. Based on the Nexus Study, 100,000 square -foot
commercial, office and industrial projects would be expected to have the income
distribution for new employee households as indicated in the following table. The type
of developments proposed in the Plan would tend to attract relatively more higher
income households ($50,000+) than lower income households. There will be a loss of
agricultural jobs and fewer job opportunities for agricultural workers.
I
I�
I
I11
I_7
it
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 23
INCOME OF HOUSEHOLDS
1991
Household Income Ranee
Number
Commercial
Development
of Households
Industrial
Development
Office
Development
$0-14,999
19
2
2
$15,000-19,999
9
1
1
$20,000-24,999
10
1
1
$25,000-49,999
40
30
32
$50,000+
0
151
10
TOTALS
147
191
196
Note: Development based on a 100,000 sq. ft. prototype
Source: Cupertino Housing Nexus Study
i I. SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES SHOULD THE
�( PLAN BE IMPLEMENTED
■ • Approximately 515 acres of open space will be lost as vacant, agricultural and
hillside land is transformed by urban development.
• Topographic features will be permanently altered by grading and filling.
Waterways may be re-routed and altered by flood control projects.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation measures for traffic, noise, hazardous materials and public service and utility
impacts, resulting from implementation of the proposed policies and land use designations,
are discussed under those respective sections of this report.
•• 1. E=sed
a. Apply all hillside protection policies to the Seminary Property, and specifically
protect the prominent Knoll on the northeast side of the property and the steep,
wooded southwest comer of the property. (Policy 2-41)
' b. Major subdivisions (5 or more lots) involving subdivided lots of 5 or more
acres shall be cluster development, reserving 90% of the land in private open
space to protect the hillsides from adverse environmental impacts. (Policy 2-
43)
c. Encourage clustering of development for minor subdivisions (4 or fewer lots)
' of property over 5 acres in size. Encourage reserving and dedicating 90% of
the land in private open space to protect the hillsides from adverse
environmental impacts. (Policy 2-45)
E
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 24
d. Establish stricter hillside development standards for the hillside area which,
among other things, would provide that views of the ridge lines remain
unobstructed and would require that designs, colors and materials for homes
and other structures blend with the natural hillside environment. (Policy 2-46)
e. No structures shall be located on ridge lines if visible from new and established
valley floor vantage points unless it is determined that significantly greater
environmental impacts would occur if structures are located elsewhere. (Policy
2-47)
Locate proposed structures to minimize the impacts on adjacent hillside
properties and public open space. (Policy 2-48) .
g. Effective visible mass shall be reduced through such means as stepping
structures down from the hillside, following the natural contours, and limiting
the height and mass of the wall plane facing the valley floor. (Policy 2-50)
It. Outdoor lighting should be low intensity and shielded to minimize illumination
off-site. (Policy 2-51)
i. Provide development standards which limit height and visual impact of
structures. (Policy 2-52)
j. No structures or improvements shall occur on slopes greater than 30% unless
an exception is granted. (Policy 2-53)
k. Be sure that natural land forms and significant plants and trees are disturbed as
little as possible during development. All cut and fill shall be rounded to natural
contours and planted with natural landscaping. (Policy 2-57)
a. Require rural improvement standards in the residential hillside zoning ordinance
and the hillside subdivision regulations to preserve the rural character of the
hillside. (Policy 2-54)
1: :►Mls �� y_►rl:.: M�► � ��• is ��3►1
a. New residential development in non-residential areas shall provide park and
recreational space and facilities. (Policy 5-53)
b. Recognize the financial impacts of increased development on the school
districts' ability to provide staff and facilities. Work with the districts to assure
that the continued high level of school services can be provided for new
development. (Policy 2-65)
c. Continue to provide school districts with building permit data which will enable
the District to record the type of construction, location and their square footage
to plan for future schooling needs. (Policy 2-68)
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 25
C. I .AND USE COMPATIBILITY
1 Progpsed
a. Create a positive and memorable image of Cupertino by developing a Heart of
the City on or near Stevens Creek Boulevard and visually and functionally
linking the major activity nodes on Stevens Creek Boulevard from Highway 85
to the eastern City limits. (Land Use/Community Character Element, Goal B)
b. Create a civic environment where the arts freely express our innovative spirit,
celebrate our rich cultural diversity and inspire individual and community
participation. (Land Use/Community Character Element, Goal G).
c. Stimulate opportunities for the arts through cooperative relations between local
business and the City. (Policy 2-78)
d. 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 residential
districts will not suffer from privacy intrusion or be overwhelmed by the scale
of a building or group of buildings. (Policy 2-25, Strategy 1)
e. Limit the height of new buildings in various planning areas as specified below:
is
it
1
[J
1
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 26
MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT BY AREA
Town Center
Max. Bldg. Height
(Top of Parapet)
Typical Landmark
Area west of Torre Ave. and north of Rodrigues
60' 75'
Area east of Torre Avenue
30' N/A
Southeast comer of Stevens Creek and De Anza
Remain as is, no
Highway 280 to Vallco Parkway
obstructed view of towers
Crossroads Corners (NW, NE, SW Comers)
60' N/A
Stevens Creek Blvd. (Stelling Rd. to East City limits)
30'-45'
Remainder of Vallco area
depending on distance to
75'
residential
Vallco Park
Area facing freeway, west of Tantau Ave.
120'
N/A
East side of Wolfe Road from north of
60'
N/A
Highway 280 to Vallco Parkway
North Stevens Creek Blvd. frontage
45'
N/A
Remainder of Vallco area
60'
75'
North De Anza Blvd.
Area west of Bandley Drive and its northerly
45'
N/A
extension
East property frontage
60'
75'
of North De Anza Blvd. between Mariani
Avenue and Highway 280
Remainder of North De Anza Blvd.
60'
N/A
* Portions of Planning Areas abutting residential areas are subject to a 45 foot
maximum height limit in addition to other measures to mitigate visual intrusion.
In the Town Center, the maximum existing building height is defined by the
City Center twin office towers. In the Vallco Park area the maximum
committed building heights is defined by the Vallco Fashion Mall expansion
(file no. 9-U-90) which is subject to a development agreement. The Tandem
Jackpot project (file no. 13-U-88) approved at the northwest corner of Stevens
Creek Blvd. and Tantau Ave. is specifically exempted from the above new
height limitations and would define the maximum existing building height in the
Vallco Park area if built.
To qualify for landmark building height consideration, proposed projects
should be of very high quality architecture, building materials and finishes and
conform to at least three of the following criteria:
1) Location on a major street frontage.
2) Inclusion of cultural facilities, such as, art galleries, museums, and
performing arts centers.
3) Inclusion of ground level, outdoor public gathering places that includes
pedestrian amenities and public art
4) Inclusion of uses that promote social gathering and interaction, such as,
restaurants or entertainment activities.
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 27
Rooftop mechanical appurtenances and utility structures may exceed stipulated
height limitations if they are enclosed, centrally located on the roof, and not
visible form the adjacent streets.
The zoning code shall be reviewed and revised as necessary to implement these
General Plan height policies. (Policy 2-25 Strategy No. 2)
f. To better integrate the Vallco Park Fashion Mall with the surrounding
community and emphasize its role as a community focal point, encourage any
new retail development at Valico Park south of Highway 280 to provide
outdoor shopping experiences in continuity with the present indoor shopping.
New office development should also provide outdoor and pedestrian -oriented
designs. To achieve this focus, development review should consider the
following design considerations:
I
1) Active retail uses should oriented to the street or outdoor pedestrian
corridor with appropriate connections to the interior mall shopping
activity.
2) Parking should be designed and sited to avoid creating pedestrian
barriers and shopping islands.
3) Buildings should be sited to develop a strong street presence.
4) Projects should include pedestrian amenities: landscaping, furniture,
canopies, special paving materials and other features to enhance
pedestrian activity. (Policy 2-25, Strategy No. 3)
g.
Coordinate the efforts of property owners on or near Stevens Creek Boulevard
to plan and create a community focal point that expresses the character of
Cupertino through a diversity of uses, serving City residents and scaled for
pedestrians. (Policy 2-2)
h.
Emphasize attractive on-site environments during the development review
process, by giving careful attention to building scale and mass, landscaping,
placement screening of equipment and loading areas, and related design
'
considerations. (Policy 2-14, Strategies 1,2,4, and 5)
L
Require properties fronting on N. De Anza Boulevard to provide a landscaped
front setback of 50 feet from the face of the curb excluding parking lots.
(Policy 2-32)
j.
The Crossroads intersection should be developed with a distinct signature to
�.
mark its noted City prominence. Such improvements may include the
prominent siting of landmark buildings at the intersection corners, street
monuments or other public art works, landscaping and special pavement.
(Policy 2-2)
k.
Protect residential neighborhoods from noise, traffic, light and visually
intrusive effects from more intense development with adequate buffering
setbacks, landscaping, walls, activity limitations, site design and other
appropriate measures. (Policy 2-19)
1.
Ensure that the scale and density of new residential development and
remodeling is reasonably compatible with the City's predominant single-family
residential pattern, except in areas designated for higher density housing.
(Policy 2-15)
I
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 28
in. When new residential development or child care facilities are proposed in
existing industrial and manufacturing areas, an assessment of the future
resident's risk of exposure to hazardous materials should be completed.
Residential development should not be allowed if such hazardous conditions
cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level of risk. (Policy 6-49)
n. Avoid the premature conversion of agricultural lands to urban uses within the
City's Urban Service Area. (Environmental Resources Element, Goal A)
o. Recognize and support agricultural land uses, which provide food and fiber,
enhance air quality and visually and functionally define rural/open areas from
urban land uses in public land use and urban development review processes.
(Policy 5-2)
p. Maintain farming and grazing on the hillsides to preserve open space and
monitor to prevent erosion. (Policy 5-3)
a. Work to ensure that blight and noise from commercial and industrial uses do not
intrude upon residential neighborhoods. (Policy 2-5)
b. Development intensity may be reduced below the minimum in the land use
diagram if neighborhood compatibility standards cannot be met. (Policy 2-15,
Strategy No. 1)
c. Keep visual intrusion into established neighborhoods to a minimum and reduce
the apparent size of the building by using different land levels. (Policy 2-15,
Strategy No. 2)
Keep the sights and sounds of the neighbors from intruding on residents.
Techniques can include greater building setbacks, wing walls, window
shutters, and non -transparent glass. (Policy 2-20)
e. Use design techniques in new development and rehabilitation to increase
security and personal safety and to increase neighborhood awareness. (Policy
2-21)
General Plan EIR Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character
Section 1- 29
Sources
1. City of Cupertino, General Plan, February 1990.
2. California History Center De Anza College, Cupertino Chronicle: Local History
Studies-Volume 19, 1975.
3. Planning Resource Associates, A Study to Examine the Relationship of Land Use and the
Creation of Additional Housing Needs, January 1992.
4. State of California, Department of Conservation, Farmland Mappine Program Maps, 1991.
5. State of California, Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 as amended through 1991.
6. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Soils of Santa Clara County, June 1968
SECTION 2
HOUSING
I.
II.
E. Alternatives Analysis.............................................................2-15
F. Local Short Term Uses vs. Long Term Productivity .........................2-15
G. Growth Inducing Effects.........................................................2-15
H. Economic and Social Effects.....................................................2-16
Table of Contents
Page
Environmental Setting..................................................................2-1
A.
Existing Development and Conditions...........................................2-1
1.
Number and Type of Units...................................................2-1
2.
Housing Need
.......... 2-1
3.
........................................................
Housing Costs.................................................................2-3
4.
Jobs/Housing Balance........................................................2-3
5.
Household Incomes...........................................................2-3
6.
Affordability....................................................................2-3
7.
Housing Policy................................................................2-3
8.
location of Housing..........................................................
2-3
B.
Regional Setting...................................................................2-10
C.
Consistency With Other Plans...................................................2-10
1.
Consistency with General Plan Elements..................................2-10
2.
Adjacent Jurisdictions........................................................2-10
3.
Sub -regional Jurisdictions...................................................2-11
4.
Regional Jurisdictions........................................................2-11
Impacts..................................................................................2-12
A.
Significant Effects.................................................................2-12
B.
Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated...................................2-12
1.
Jobs Housing Balance.......................................................2-12
2.
Affordable Housing..........................................................2-13
3.
Established Residential Neighborhoods...................................2-13
4.
Traffic..........................................................................2-13
5.
Parklands......................................................................2-13
6.
Agricultural and Natural Environment.....................................2-14
7.
Seismic and Geological Hazards .................................
........... 2-14
8.
Historical, Cultural and Archaeological Resources
.......................2-14
9.
Public Services and Facilities...............................................2-14
C.
Significant Effects Which Can Not Be Mitigated..............................2-14
D.
Effects Found Not To Be Significant...........................................2-15
1.
Air Pollution...................................................................2-15
2.
Noise...........................................................................2-15
E. Alternatives Analysis.............................................................2-15
F. Local Short Term Uses vs. Long Term Productivity .........................2-15
G. Growth Inducing Effects.........................................................2-15
H. Economic and Social Effects.....................................................2-16
Table of Contents continued
III. Mitigation Measures...................................................................2-16
A.
Jobs/Housing Balance............................................................2-16
1. Proposed.......................................................................2-16
2. Existing.......................................................................2-16
B.
Affordable Housing..............................................................2-16
1. Proposed.......................................................................2-16
2. Existing.......................................................................2-16
C.
Established Residential Neighborhoods........................................2-19
1. Proposed.......................................................................2-19
2. Existing.......................................................................2-19
D.
Traffic..............................................................................2-19
E.
Parklands...........................................................................2-19
F.
Agriculture and Natural Environment...........................................2-19
G.
Seismic & Geological Hazards..................................................2-19
H.
Flooding............................................................................2-19
I.
Historical, Cultural and Archaeological Resources ...........................2-19
J.
Public Services and Facilities....................................................2-20
K.
Significant Effects of Mitigation Measures.....................................2-20
I.
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Should the
Plan Be Implemented.............................................................2-20
Sources..................................................................................2-21
Tables
Page
2-A Number and Type of Units............................................................ 2-1
2-B Projected Housing Units...............................................................2-2
2-C Demand for Housing by Income Categories ........................................ 2-2
2-D Cupertino Housing Costs..............................................................2-3
Figures
2-A Infill Buildout........................................................................ 2-6
2-B Housing Units by Planning District .................................................. 2-8
t
I
11
L
FJ
1
Ir
SECTION 2
HOUSING
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A. MaSTING DEVELOPMENT AND CONDITIONS
The predominant character of Cupertino's existing housing is single family
residential; in 1990 approximately 73% were single family units.
NUMBER AND TYPE OF UNITS, 1990
Single Family Attached
1,986
Single Family Detached
9,022
Multifamily
4,032
Mobile Homes
6
TOTAL
15,046
Source: State Department of Finance (for City limits)
There are 17,460 housing units in Cupertino's planning area. The City and
planning area are largely built out. Most remaining housing growth will be single
family units on small infill sites,higher density development in the urban core and
some larger hillside sites.
;S #, ►..�
One measure of the existing housing need is provided by the Association of Bay
Area Governments (ABAG), which allocates the City's regional share of housing
need and distribution by income category. ABAG's projected need for Cupertino is
2,481 units. These units should meet the following income needs:
Very Low
498
Low
444
Moderate
623
Above Moderate
-M
Total
2,513
Source: ABAG, Housing Needs Detemvnations, January 1989.
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 2
Housing production between 1990-1995 is estimated to be 513 units as shown
below:
PROJECTED HOUSING UNITS (1990 - 1995)
While the 513 projected units on sites identified in the General Planare likely to
provide market -rate housing, the City expects to produce an additional 160-210 low
and moderate income units on mixed use or non-residential sites through its various
housing programs.
The number of projected units does not meet the regional fair share standard set by
ABAG. Therefore, the City authorized "A Study to Examine the Relationship of
Land Use and the Creation of Additional Housing Needs," (January, 1992). The
study determined the linkage between the development of land which results in
increased employment and the need for employee housing generated by individual
developments. The study also provided a methodology for determining the demand
for total and affordable housing units needed by employment generating uses and
the relationship between market rate housing projects and provision of affordable
housing.
The results of the study were:
a. Development of 100,000 square feet of buildings used for commercial,
office and industrial development is expected to generate the following
demands for housing, as indicated in the Table below:
DEMAND FOR HOUSING BY INCOME CATEGORIES
100,000 Square Feet of Building Used For
Market rate units
Affordable Units
Very Low Income
Lower Income
Median Income
Moderate Income
TOTAL
56 101 104
27
Vacant
Underdeveloped
Total
Single Family Detached
210
169
379(74%)
Single Family Attached
30
96
126(24%)
Multi -Family
0
8
8(2%)
Total Units
240
273
513
While the 513 projected units on sites identified in the General Planare likely to
provide market -rate housing, the City expects to produce an additional 160-210 low
and moderate income units on mixed use or non-residential sites through its various
housing programs.
The number of projected units does not meet the regional fair share standard set by
ABAG. Therefore, the City authorized "A Study to Examine the Relationship of
Land Use and the Creation of Additional Housing Needs," (January, 1992). The
study determined the linkage between the development of land which results in
increased employment and the need for employee housing generated by individual
developments. The study also provided a methodology for determining the demand
for total and affordable housing units needed by employment generating uses and
the relationship between market rate housing projects and provision of affordable
housing.
The results of the study were:
a. Development of 100,000 square feet of buildings used for commercial,
office and industrial development is expected to generate the following
demands for housing, as indicated in the Table below:
DEMAND FOR HOUSING BY INCOME CATEGORIES
100,000 Square Feet of Building Used For
Market rate units
Affordable Units
Very Low Income
Lower Income
Median Income
Moderate Income
TOTAL
56 101 104
27
8
8
7
7
7
32
35
36
41
25
40
147
191
196
I
I
1
M
I
I
1
I
I
b. Development of each market rate housing unit needs to be matched over the ,
next five years by development of 1.62 affordable housing units somewhere
in the City in order to meet the City's "Fair Share" goals as identified by the
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).
I
r
I
'J
I
1
11
It
11
I
I
I
�l
E
1
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 3
Recent housing costs in Cupertino are shown in Table 2-D.
TABLE 2-D
CUPERTINO HOUSING COSTS
Average Sales Price
(of existing and new units)
FM
Single Family Detached $374,375
Townhouses/condominiums $221,175
Source: San Jose Real Estate Board
In January, 1992, City staff conducted a survey of large apartment complexes in the
City and found average rents for one bedroom apartments at $713/month and two
bedroom apartments at $892/month. Rents for one bedroom apartments range from
$525/month to $1,050. Rents for two bedroom apartments range from $585/month
to $1,600/month (Planning Dept., 1992).
The 1990 Census reports the median gross rent as $975 for renter -occupied
housing units. This compares to $410 in 1980. Median monthly ownership (non -
condominium) costs in 1990 were $1,516 for units with a mortgage and $234 for
those with no mortgage. This compares to $488 (mortgage) and $121 (no
mortgage) in 1980. .
., l..mr,•
The issue of balancing employment and housing opportunities is pervasive in
Cupertino and the surrounding Bay Area. When job creation significantly exceeds
housing unit creation, the problems of housing affordability and commuting are
exacerbated. The balance is often measured by a jobs/housing ratio, which is the
ratio of employed residents to jobs. The ideal ratio is 1:1, whereby each job is
matched by an employed resident. Cupertino's 1990 jobs/housing ratio is 1.35:1.
Moommir's
In 1990, the median household income in Cupertino was $64,587 (Census 1990).
In 1980, the median household income was $30,312. Using ABAG's income
categories, which include Cupertino s fair share of county and regional averages,
approximately 50% of Cupettino's households have above moderate incomes, 20%
have moderate, and 30% have low and very low incomes.
Overpayment of housing is most often identified by comparison of monthly
housing payment to gross monthly income. By State of California and U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development standards, if payment exceeds
30% of gross monthly income, the household is said to be overpaying.
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 4
The current definition of each income category and the resulting "affordable"
monthly housing payment is shown below. (Housing is considered affordable
when a household pays less than 30 percent of its gross monthly income for
housing)
Maximum Affordable
M
Relation to Median Income* Income Rent
,
Household at or below 50%
(very low) $29,750 $744
b. To create a new slope density formula and other regulations for some of the
Household between 50% and 66%
(low) ** $38,600 $965
Household between 67% and 120%
(moderate) $71,400 $1,785
* Based on HUD Median Income for a family of four ($59,500),02/92.
** The common standard of 80% is adjusted down to 66% by HUD to offset the
relatively high median income for Santa Clara County.
City core. Mixed use development (residential with commercial or office)
The 1990 Census shows that nearly 33% of the households that are renter -occupied
and 30% of the households that are owner -occupied pay 30% or more of their
,
household incomes for rent or monthly ownership costs, respectively. Therefore,
1,864 out of 5,682 rental units and 2,694 out of 8,979 ownership units are not
affordable, using the above definition of affordable.
component, as well as require an affordable housing component for new
7. Housing Policy
The overall concept of future housing policy is:
M
a. To allow the existing General Plan entitlements for the valley floor, which
are mostly infill single family units;
b. To create a new slope density formula and other regulations for some of the
undeveloped hillside areas which will reduce the impact of residential
development in these sensitive areas;
c. To reallocate some existing General Plan entitlements from commercial
development to residential;
d. To locate higher density housing on major transportation corridors in the
City core. Mixed use development (residential with commercial or office)
would be encouraged or required.
e. To require housing mitigation for new office/industrial development, such as
on-site or off-site housing, housing fees and an affordable housing
,
component, as well as require an affordable housing component for new
residential development.
The proposed General Plan would create a significant amount of new housing
growth in addition to the existing built units, as shown below:
Number of Units
(urban service area)
Existing built 17,460
,
Proposed additional 2.584
TOTAL 20,044
1
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 5
iThe 2,584 additional units above existing units which are proposed in the General
Plan Amendment consist of:
Type Number of Units
Hillside 300
1 Neighborhood Infill 800
Core Area Intensification 1.484
2,584
` 8. Location of Housing
As shown in Figures 2-A and 2-B, the proposed General Plan buildout consists of
small infill development, low density hillside development, and more intense urban
core development. The more intense development is mostly in the non-residential
areas, along transportation corridors.
a. Non-residential areas: The existing non-residential areas are divided into
districts as shown in Figure 2-B. Maximum growth in the districts is
indicated, which total the 1,484 units allowed through reallocation of
�. existing General Plan build -out.
11
Is
1
Crossroads - Stevens Creek Blvd: Locating housing in this area supports
the "Heart of the City" concept of "creating a memorable image" which
"expresses the character of Cupertino through a diversity of uses, serving
City residents and scaled for pedestrians." Most of the units in this area
would be mixed use, that is, residential above or next to commercial or
office uses. Sufficient parcels exist which have potential for redevelopment
to include housing. They are either underdeveloped and therefore
vulnerable to change or have large parking areas which could be converted
to housing with below -grade parking. As properties redevelop, property
owners would be encouraged to include housing units in the project
Portions of West and East Stevens Creek Blvd.: Stevens Creek Blvd. may
appear "like an urban parkway... to create a sense of arrival." New
development would be oriented toward the street. Several strip shopping
centers are vulnerable to change, and could be redeveloped to conform to
the urban parkway concept and the proposed General Plan policy of
permitting mixed use residential development in this area
' North De Anza: Opportunities for converting existing office land uses into
residential are sought to improve the jobs/housing balnace and locate
housing near jobs. The Bandley area contains one-story offices which are
' adjacent to existing residential uses to the west and office uses to the east.
Major redevelopment would be required to convert the land use to
residential.
I
1
r
1
Vallco Park: Locating housing in this area aids the jobs/housing ratio,
places housing close to new jobs and fulfills the Vallco Area's role as a
focal point. Vacant and under-utilized land owned by major companies,
which have existing and future research and development facilities in this
area, would be utilized.
Infill buildout Figure 2-A
75
6
^" °.eee ♦i
_rillt
a
t
----------
• '
162
i
:
� 161 � .,
F'1�81pp1 �� �� 169` ; �••- ,.
..•. - s.� L-4 ... 1 11 171
179 �-
a • \ }60
I
a _
,
I '
la
1
.•.• :v ,w it / .......... .O '. j(•���j'��'
®""° •v � , " Baa,.. ♦ ® ..,... ,�.� I q7.e.., � .. ...._.'. 1 ,) ,� r. � / ❑ i
f } w ., i 1`••t �r }; E�.O/ M. r - - Q -
186
,i,�'°.-: aa✓,: �'�� '• o -Y ' .., ! � yI � �' i` \ 174 �� tlµ��,il�Y�y� -;"'Ewer
1. ,°" � � .d................_.i 165• t a F �^ j.,
b dl •• �� F sY:.•
L' y F , © aIIJ LJ ��.� • . Q l F I I -E -•+o - J— �` __ [%.•.
'a
t 175 •..�
,/ a�e�� `V'- 3 „•; 1 �i °<�• :'\ a�� ~' I '�•� ff 167 �-. {� �_ C-=�-- 1
e,
f F
�e �� a � I � c x� .l +i+• d..., ..a i _ ��:. R1} e� .3 i ; i�.: i
. .w
,
L a .. -_ �, L,. ;I ❑t — 8a las: al E
LLJ 177 f' 17x1 \
I 15
"192 r�
-O
E
.. o
sx �-i .,. ••v',�a i. w �; "' a u .f: ( �- l.x, I ' y .._. _ 000 01 � �1 ru/4 r "�U ,s .. � 1 .1' � it-�..
F 1
0 0 O �C O ° + �;1 , Lic.., ,,` �"il 9 J F F •.:
Y LLLrrr�E111
1
o
�• \ / ;� : t•6kw r '�- . `0
168
�
-
e
1 ]°
n �
a �7
__j / � sass -•,. •.. _ __ -- 'a� a .FY In .� , � .." �� -
J `
E.
�, ,��. / I x..99 ,. '." o O o hY���' \\ - !c»« 1.' Y 1� ` .Yiv r•� s'�°i
// e s` r p.l• : �' DO 00 1�5�33"A'r ...� \��.: . i. r... ,r i II` �0 '. i / It:� tl _ + I � ® -
" Y �:.. ': -...-' .;:./� .._ _"`:. .. •... _'pr fi3 oc [ y`\1'� \�.�. 52 , ���(\� �✓. � - �.1, + s..: 's.vl n -II .... `�
a
:/ .. � JS .cam`-.,L..� 1{A' ' Li •W � � : ..• # .. �� /I�a � ! 11:.( ♦ • '-t '
I av i ;,L �.r o.- ✓ r \' M C vH �i .�-,_�—g,�� 1 ,�. '.. .. , , ,y }.� 'hf �t �� (+ w- fJ'
__��� .fig ,._� �fi.a 4 'I�' 'fir � ,,._ e _ \ �':Vt "�-�X '� � x �� _ - Alv •"�.8"�r +�LL!jE, 81 ��y •% �C.k 1 Nl j sl -
9
L "
.-a <
' i ysa. 131. \ _: .. I .._• �'� i"ps .." .�'; ar .c' '*•' „ �•a 1 1 1•� i\' \
� � � �_ _ `> ®. \. �I � O❑ �\' � 5 \ ' 151 t • �s':
:�
C
/,. � "�� �•"" s e fi` ��:' ';i �� \ \ \ r,, t 1 .,• {-rjY.:k me
\� , I'' i _l�r � t tl �/,• 133• � H�� \� \� �.... � � - ,t'.1•i.-�. �.t ,
`., � ! (� " YY � _ Y�J i Ir-' Y m� (R } "FFA •:.�" '
•
a°
1 y (
e.
.. `1 1 i dra%si vs e ° .. - ° :. :..� J, e l ='� '\ �Y�•e'.e•• \ �� F� '•'.�\J I
'.o.a�^. ��mo�aa ' \ �.:..._ Y ' ,: 1 I Y w ; \��•, 4,1's' i � i' k•
I � � �� ��... � � e� v .�...� �a�7 •4��U �U"{l1` �� t.s :. ..,\� � 'p•^+',4' l-., .. �I ^_- !_s ,C,
qq
C_� f �__ +e..' ?:�:- 1 ' � �� �$':°� I t � `.�_ �.. i ....•r• \Y.. �' e '.3 "i \ �? n � r 'ti•.;,� .. :I a) '
w
31 ,
s 1 � ``+ u I j � � ,�. t (T-'� t-� P _ �\.. `�❑�•��•��� LR_,an, 1i'.J � � � .. J
,1 •
v4-17
'
rlve .. Lam- s %� "j ! e Fe,....1 t g"-•
s e .R
.^sisu'n � LLtJ+Wi ril '% •�`"' r; _!
: se
f _
r
- .-�.e�\.. \ / � �/.. � Y � '�.���.�%�' s L •..:.� ���L'1t1J ""r°� ji ..r`v' `LO
r� ".." ♦ �c� '� .!
.aa _
�-s� a
,•,.. "./ /� \ •. � <.,� �' '' s9. i \ www �\! I �
FP r2 '1 «,- ,�:• ryr. . .a - -� i � ♦" '
y'�.� !`-. -�a. Fe•+ Crr I � °;1 r��\ r-^,�rir' n\. �\\tl �\' :E I 'I o.... Lq �\\\�.. 1 H � r.wnrn.�.., 9 a � r
1 1 •� ,,, ,: M T- • r.- a ' \ x c=a• .w+.,. kx,m-�aww rFw :.wN ' ew1 awe rgo Legend: e , 1 ; ,yt •�• \\ _. Lacs—r,—sua,m sr°
Ikq.MIweY
------------
Bwnery LN
,r,,, ./. ._ - - �'_ C _. 137 y \ ♦•' L�., \ , \\ .: ^i..�' �N,YYw ' uo u �,w : . so
J I y \
4Uu°
,/-yam _ ew°w"„ab_c�.km a sv sro cao.+wm...-,. sv SFA r z m __
'� -. __ J / -'♦' ! , _ __ _ -T q�( C `W ♦. \\ y++, an Fm4r 9 sV 9M Rm6+ASavY, r w .YLM
• __ lww.+-Y:Y'YWEI.WY 1 n �/ _ J'1•\ 'NYnr 9ia-/ 9V �° . s, Ew SCI 5 5,
® ....... . .............
�._
,� ^ -� / .. .. _ 1 \ ••.` •� "r PtivTNa•Lv, 6Mn Fs Vw Fl 5FU
\ r r r
• 1 I !. \� 1 � .\ `l •4" \\\ILIs Sert. CmaEMru RVr:b SV t<D :kNakrrmn. a go -
S tl SV 1T skgL
11^t w
•„� .�` _'� • _ �•, �6 SkugrepSSe•�.n sP:r¢ SV SFO I,plva 0 SFU -aquy p,gnvpm
TTT
-v`/ {�[��y�, _ se \ Spars• R_. 9V.o I Ia EFo
I I gD.
.vYi:« s..,ec..s a•e o s syFo a—Frm.Y.w
sv w xFemw,k,xwM : v so 0977M go eFFFa. .I. :
o sk.y.0 F.,m 11 1 sV go ss wy}anxegN e ? V 3O ,V:k YpxY. wmw
o on�rw9emec,NM rvV FepinkMo 1 sV YU
s — o, 'z sv so r 135
>,espee a goo ® rm,weNa.y vv no
skN:,wa,w • I sF° ® rceFm.kyw ° eF.vi
am Navnp x 1 N ss° 7, ItrnANNN M SV yy ,ml`
F �kmmuV ° SV go .L Swv,Sp•p M VV YU MxMpIS U1
nv Vw, 9 ; SV SFO 3 Amn.F 5 Y SM1➢ yMkF
av A�Yg Z SV SFUb,q sV
a ]• menaklm sV sU 'mF
a r go
- r vo ma.kr+,oF. a sv go ����1./��
e:m.nx,.:a sv � I.Nwln.
w.p I v Z_worse a sv -ul
z s.so o go
ke,..
s se.-a.Ys.a.wpFm- z e r go a.aw sem
: u V go I, wwpa x s. vo
I n z , ry go xt
rwN go
sVgo T g
a♦,Y M. ] sV sso rWka �1NM.
e r go s° °oeww.. z sv so
5� . • s sv
w rama.. a F +•, o so sv. sm.vs
s,ean
r s.:lw-. : e Y o u.
�l n.:,,:po•..w u,�...
�It/ Land with Residential Potential
7� of
y Cl1�CfU•0�
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 8
0tr)
N C')
0
BAY
BAV U311M a)
0
illdfI Z U) co
N
r r
< In
> *0 CO CU
Lu C a) CU
0 (L 0
3AV KIM IL r 0 m
0
(n 'n .0 7m
to (D CO 0
2 0
........ Lu z 0> m
d
LL
ovow DNI131
avow Me
SYRR
GAIG -nlklOoj
0-0
HOUSING UNITS BY PLANNING DISTRICTS
Source:
Figure
2-B
General Plan EIR - Housing '
Section 2 - 9
South De Anza: A limited amount of mixed use commercial/residential use
is envisioned for under-utilized parcels in this area. When Highway 85 is
complete, the Rainbow Drive interchange lends accessibility to a major
transportation corridor for both commercial and residential development.
Bubb Road: Higher density residential use is desired in this area to improve
the jobs/housing ratio, since that many current occupants are consolidating
their businesses in other locations. Current low density office and light
industrial uses could provide mixed use development or be phased out
Qom: A small portion of the allowed build -out (184 units) could be located
at unspecified sites. This allows for flexibility in identifying sites or
responding to proposals that are not in the core area.
The potentially significant environmental impacts of development in these
areas are: visual compatibility with adjacent residential area; change in
community character due to higher -density development; sensitivity to the
Calabases Creek in the Vallco area; transportation relationship with new job
growth, that is, will the residents walk or bike to work in Cupertino or drive
to jobs out of the City. The social impact of providing affordable housing
also is significant.
b. Residential infill: Sites for approximately 220 potential single family
detached housing units exist in the neighborhood areas as shown in Figure
2-A. There are also sites for approximately 600 potential single family
attached and multi -family infill units, as shown. (These are potential units
as of 1990; some have been built since that date.)
There are no significant impacts identified with the remaining single family
detached infill projects because their construction will easily fit into existing
urbanized areas. One property, with a potential of 4 new units, is located on
Stevens Creek, which would require consideration of the riparian corridor
and flood plain if developed. The two larger single family attached projects,
City Center and Homestead North, may have significant effects. The City
Center development could have significant traffic impacts, since the Stevens
Creek De Anza intersection is at Level of Service D. The Homestead North
development could have significant traffic impacts since the De Anza
Boulevard and Homestead Road intersection is at Level of Service E.
Visual impacts on adjacent residential developments could be significant.
The Marian development at De Anza Boulevard and Homestead Road is
under construction; the environmental review determined that there are no
significant impacts.
c. Hillsides: Currently there are approximately 630 residential units in the
hillsides, including the senior residences on the Seminary property. There
are approximately 300 potential single family detached units in the western
foothills. The largest concentration of potential hillside units are on the
Kaiser "Gravel Pit" property, which is a large, depleted quarry on the
southwest edge of the City, the Kaiser Industrial Plant area, the Seminary
property, and the remaining buildout of Seven Springs Ranch.
ra,
I
11
li
1!
f
LJ
L1
1
1
I
1
r
11
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 10
If the two Kaiser properties and the Seminary property were developed, the
significant impacts would be: grading natural slopes; removing natural
vegetation; intruding on wildlife habitat and sensitive natural areas, such as
riparian corridors; interrupting the natural views of the hillsides from major
highways and viewpoints; changing the character of large, undeveloped
areas, loss of watershedareas, increased storm water runoff, and exposure
to seismic hazards from the Monte Vista Fault.
Numerous significant impacts were identified in the Seven Springs
Environmental Impact Report, and mitigations were proposed and included
in the approved use permit for the development. Significant impacts
identified were: seismic hazards associated with the Monte Vista Fault,
severe soil erosion, reduction of groundwater recharge function, increased
storm water runoff, and affected habitat areas and riparian corridor.
I: � ► : a1Y11►
Santa Clara County: Housing trends in Santa Clara County are similar to those in
Cupertino. According to a Santa Clara County report, "Alternative Futures,"
housing demand remains strong; housing construction is decreasing due to land use
policies and economic conditions; housing prices will continue to rise, although at a
slower rate than in the past; the gap between incomes and housing prices will
persist; workers, particularly young families, will continue to move out of the
county into areas with more affordable housing.
2. Bay Area: ABAG's "Projections 90" reports that "housing production may be the
most serious constraint to the economic health of the region." Their "Housing
Needs Determination Report" states that: "Local government directives or actions
that encourage job production and minimize housing production... are creating an
environment that could seriously affect the overall regional economy, and in the
long-term, their own financial health...." A minimum of 167,000 new dwelling
units were identified as required to accommodate the projected demand for
additional resident workers between 1990 and 1995. To move the market away
from the speculative price rises in housing costs would require 201,000 units
during that period. This is a higher number of units than were produced in
comparable previous periods; 100,000 units between April 1980 to January 1985,
and 159,000 between January 1985 and January 1989.
1. Consistency with General Plan Elements
The Housing Element is consistent with the other elements of the General Plan.
2. Adjacent Jurisdictions
Many of the cities adjacent to Cupertino have, in the past, created more jobs than
housing opportunities. According to ABAG's Projections' 90, the cities of Santa
Clara, Palo Alto, Sunnyvale, Mountain View and Milpitas had greater imbalances
between jobs and housing than Cupertino.
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 11
At the same time, corrective actions have and are being taken by these cities to
improve or maintain a balance between jobs and housing, such as rezoning non-
residential areas to residential uses. A number of factors have contributed to these
actions, including the requirements of sub -regional and regional agencies described
below.
3. Sub -regional Jurisdictions
The Golden Triangle Task Force
Six cities and the county participated in the Golden Triangle Task Force, begun in
1985. Its purpose was to work together to address traffic congestion problems in
Santa Clara County. A report issued in 1987 included a housing goal to achieve a
better balance among jobs, housing and transportation capacities by increasing
housing supply within the Golden Triangle area. Although Cupertino did not
participate in the Task Force, the proposed General Plan is consistent with this
goal.
The Congestion Management Agency (CMA)
Santa Clara County's CMA was formed in 1990 to fulfill the voter -mandated
requirement to prepare an annual congestion management program (CMP). The
transportation -related requirements of the California Clean Air Act are an additional
incentive to create an effective congestion management program. The most basic
requirement of the Congestion Management Program is that local jurisdictions are
responsible for ensuring that traffic level -of -service (IAS) standards are achieved
on all CMP System roadways within that jurisdiction. One of the most effective
tools that local jurisdictions have to achieve LOS standards is to reduce commutes
by locating higher -density housing closer to jobs, which is a basic policy of the
proposed General Plan Amendment
Santa Clara County Transportation Agency
The proposed General Plan is consistent with the Santa Clara County
Transportation Plan. The Transportation Plan calls for "continued efforts to link
land use and growth policies to the capacity of the transportation system, including
encouraging higher density development at transit stations." The proposed General
Plan would locate higher density/mixed use housing along future rapid transit
corridors, such as Stevens Creek Boulevard in Cupertino.
4. Regional Jurisdictions
Association of Bay Area Governments
As described previously, ABAG, through its "Regional Needs Determinations,"
identifies housing needs for each jurisdiction; in turn, each jurisdiction describes
how it will meet these needs. Subsequently, the State Department of Housing and
Community Development certifies whether or not the jurisdiction is in compliance
with State law. The proposed General Plan is consistent with ABAG's needs
identified for Cupertino: sites for approximately 2,500 housing units were needed
between 1990 and 1995, and 2,584 are proposed. (The 2,584 units represent full
build -out potential.)
it
I
li
1
11
11
11
IV
11
is
LJ
L1
1
u
1
ir
I
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 12
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
Similar to consistency with the County Transportation Agency, the proposed
General Plan is consistent with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's
plan. The Bay Area '91 Clean Air Plan calls for cities to "promote high density,
mixed use development in the vicinity of mass transit stations."
H. IMPACTS
A. SIGNIFICANTEFFECTS
The California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G, indicates that a project will
normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will:
• Have a substantial, demonstrable negative aesthetic effect;
• Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species;
• Interfere substantially with ground water recharge;
• Disrupt or adversely affect a prehistoric or historic archaeological site or a
property of historic or cultural significance to a community or ethnic or social
group;
• Induce substantial growth or concentration of population;
• Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing
traffic load and capacity of the street system;
• Cause substantial flooding, erosion or siltation;
• Expose people or structures to major geologic hazards;
• Extend a sewer trunk line with capacity to serve new development;
• Substantially diminish habitat for fish, wildlife or plants;
• Conflict with established recreational, educational, religious or scientific uses
of the area.
Based upon these criteria, the proposed General Plan Amendment would result in the
following significant effects.
\lIa [wo ►Y iso ow_ y m; I Lei. Kamen -3:65 111
Y a
1. Jobs/housing balance
The General Plan Amendment addresses the jobs/housing balance by providing
additional housing units. The proposed units meet the State regional needs
requirements. The jobs/housing ratio of the proposed amendment is 1.69 (which is
the ratio of employed residents to jobs). If there were not a significant number of
new housing units proposed in the project alternative, the jobs/housing ratio would
be exacerbated. The effects of a greater jobs/housing imbalance are higher housing
prices due to a greater demand than supply of housing, and increased traffic
congestion and air pollution due to longer commutes.
Mitigation: Develop policies and programs to increase supply of
housing. Refer to Mitigation III Al (ad) and 2 (a).
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 13
2.
Affordable housing
The General Plan Amendment will improve the availability of affordable housing.
If it were not available, the social effects would be lack of housing for the young,
elderly, and entry- and mid-level employees. ABAG identified numbers of housing
units to meet the needs of very low, low and moderate income residents; these
requirements would not be met if affordable new housing is not proposed.
,
Mitigation: Develop policies to increase supply and require developers to
provide assisted housing. Refer to Mitigation III B1 (a -k)
and 2 (b) 1-16.
,
3.
Established residential neighborhoods
Higher density housing proposed in existing non-residential areas could impact
adjacent residential neighborhoods. The effects could be visual intrusion of taller,
more massive buildings and change in community character, and traffic and noise
from larger number of people and cars.
Mitigation: Control intensity and design of residential development.
Refer to Mitigation III Cl (a) and 2 (a -b).
4.
Traffic
,
Subregional traffic congestion would increase if new housing, which is near jobs
and affordable to new employees, is not available since many new employees
would be forced to commute. On the other hand, reducing the commute distance by
providing more housing in Cupertino could increase local traffic.
Mitigation: Refer to transportation and land use mitigation programs.
5.
Parklands
Santa Clara County's Rancho San Antonio Park and the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District's Rancho San Antonio Preserve and Fremont Older Preserve
could be impacted by proposed adjacent housing. The effects would be loss of
adjacent visual open space and increased demands for parking. Additional
population and employees could increase demands for local, Cupertino parks,
which would require either dedication or purchase of land for neighborhood parks.
Mitigation: Refer to Parks and Open Space mitigation programs. ,
It
1
so
I
11
11
11
11
1
I
1
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 14
6. Agricultural and natural environment
Proposed housing development in the hillsides would impact agricultural and
natural lands by introducing structures, improvements, people, cars and animals
into relatively undeveloped areas. The effects would be reduction of agricultural
lands, such as grazing lands; reduction of natural vegetation including trees and
plants; intrusion into riparian environments; intrusion into wildlife habitat and
migration areas; alteration of natural land contours; reduction in watershed lands;
and water pollution from run-off. Proposed housing development in the core area
could affect the riparian corridors of Calabasas Creek in the Vallco Area and to a
lesser extent, Stevens Creek near Stevens Creek Boulevard, where one property
(Stocklmeir) could be developed.
Mitigation: Refer to Wildlife and Vegetation Mitigation program.
7. Seismic and geological hazards
Proposed housing will occur in areas subject to seismic and geological hazards.
The effects would be potential damage to the proposed housing and adjacent
properties.
Mitigation: Refer to Geotechnical mitigation programs.
8. Historical, cultural and archaeological resources
Proposed housing may occur in areas where there are historical, cultural and
archaeological resources. The effects would be damage to or loss of these
resources.
Mitigation: Refer to Historical/Archaeological/Cultural mitigation
programs.
9. Public services and facilities
Additional housing development will place increased demands on public services:
police, fire, school, library, utilities, sewage treatment, solid waste and water. The
effects of the increased demands are: impaired police and fire response time; lack of
appropriate fire -fighting equipment for high-rise buildings; inadequate school
facilities, staff, transportation and funding; overuse of library services and
resources.
Mitigation: Refer to Public Facilities, services and utility programs.
C. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CAN NOT BE MITIGATED
New housing development will occur in natural areas which will require disturbing or
changing the natural conditions. While mitigation measures are proposed to reduce the
impacts of this development, portions of the natural areas will be permanently
disturbed or changed.
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 15
M5 a 0:191#4 rewiNI-BYZE61 0 KeleIra :.tl
1. Air pollution
Air pollution would increase from traffic increases due to new population.
However, the effects would not be significant because the differences in traffic
vehicle emissions are very small.
2. Noise
No significant permanent or continuous sources of noise will result from the
proposed housing. Only temporary construction noise will result, and this can be
mitigated (see Noise section).
The no project and existing General Plan (modified) alternatives were considered.
1. Housing needs: The "no project" and "existing General Plan (modified)"
alternatives would result in not meeting ABAG's determined housing needs, both in
terms of numbers and affordability of units.
2. Jobs/housing ratio: The jobs/housing ratio is closest to being balanced under the
"no project" alternative of 1.35; the "existing General Plan (modified)" alternative's
jobs/housing ratio is 1.59.
3. Surrounding uses: The "no project" alternative would have the least impact on
surrounding uses. The "existing General Plan (modified)" alternative has little
impact on surrounding areas since it consists largely of small, infill projects.
4. Environmental resources: The "no project" alternative has the least impact on
environmental resources. The "existing General Plan (modified)" alternative has
little impact in the urban area on environmental resources since it consists largely of
small, infill projects. One location with potential development, the Stocklmeir
property, is adjacent to Stevens Creek. So while the overall environmental impacts
of development may not be significant, protection of the Creek would be important.
In the hillsides, the impacts of the Existing Plan Conditions would be the same as
for the General Plan Amendments.
The long-term effects of the proposed housing which adversely affect the environment
are: reduction of natural vegetation and wildlife habitat; the reduction of ground -water
recharge areas; the non -point pollution from increased impervious surfaces; and
irretrievable commitment of energy and water to support the projected urban
development.
Leffel .AI M 1.1. h LOS Ziaa_ y
The proposed amendments foster economic and population growth by allowing a
significant number of new housing units. The additional local population can serve as
an employment base for new commercial, office and industrial growth.
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 16
H. FCONONIIC AND SOCIAL EFFEM
Proposed housing will increase the supply and affordagbility of housing available to
Cupertino employees and others desiring to live in Cupertino. The econornic and social
effects are beneficial.
III. MITIGATION MEASURES
A. JOBS/HOUSING BALANCE
1. Proposed
a. Allow approximately 1,500 units in the existing non-residential areas. (Policy
3-1)
b. Consider specific locations within the planning districts for mandatory
residential or mixed use.
(Policy 3-3)
ec. Consider surplus school and urban church sites for higher density and mixed
use residential.
(Policy 3-4)
d. Other areas to consider which require more study are: Stelling between 280 and
Stevens Creek Blvd., Rancho Rinconada near Cupertino High School, Monta
Vista near the railroad tracks, and City lands. (Policy 3-5)
e. Allow a density bonus if a Transfer of Development Credits program is
adopted, which allows transfer of potential residential units from one location to
another. (Policy 3-6)
f. Mitigate new office/industrial development by providing at least 15% of the
nexus study housing demand by creating 28 units per 100,000 square feet of
development. [The breakdown of these units, eligibility of the buyers and term
of affordability shall be reviewed by the Affordable Housing Committee at their
' January, 1993 meeting and comments then referred to Council.] (Policy 3-25)
2. Existing
a. Allow accessory housing units on certain lots in single family districts. (Policy
3-10)
B. AFFORDABLE HOUSING
1. Proposed:
a. Encourage higher density affordable housing with density bonuses. (Policy 3-
2)
b. Encourage the conversion of existing market rate units to affordable rental units.
(Policy 3-19)
I
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 17
c. Encourage long-term leases from churches, school districts and corporations for
construction of affordable rental units. (Policy 3-20)
d. Give first priority for affordable units to people who live, work, attend school
or have family in Cupertino. (Policy 3-21)
e. Utilize the City's Affordable Rent Schedule as a guideline in setting affordable
rents. (Policy 3-22)
f. Investigate various financing strategies including:
Local and county bond financing
Bank financing of mixed use projects
Pension funds as sources
Transfer tax for sales of property
Redevelopment agency reactivation
g. Mitigate new officefindustrial development by providing at least 15% of the
nexus study housing demand by creating 28 units per 100,000 square feet of
development. [The breakdown of these units, eligibility of the buyers and term
of affordability shall be reviewed by the Affordable Housing Committee at their
January 1993 meeting and comments then referred to Council.] (Policy 3-25)
h. Waive park dedication fees for affordable units. (Policy 3-28)
i. Require every residential development to participate in the BMR program with
the exception of: affordable housing developments and office/industrial
developments with other housing mitigation requirements. (Policy 3-32)
j. Create a Housing Endowment Program for affordable housing. (Policy 3-41)
k. Ensure the long-term viability of affordable housing projects by requiring
developers of affordable housing to provide an adequate - long-term reserve for
maintenance. (Policy 3-42)
2. Existing:
a. Construct 160-210 very low and low income units. (Quantified Objectives)
Provide 25 moderate income units through the Mortgage Credit Certificates
Program and mixed use development. (Quantified Objectives)
c. Maintain 27 handicapped and 20 congregate care units. Assist 63 very low and
low income households through Section 8 Existing Program and 80 households
through Project March or similar matching service. (Quantified Objectives)
d. Cooperate with the county, private and non-profit housing developers to
identify sites for very low, low and moderate income housing. (Policy 3-11)
' General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 18
e. Foster a conducive environment for attracting low and moderate priced housing
programs financed by other levels of government. The use of mortgage
revenue bond programs will be encouraged. All such developments will meet
the City's design and service criteria. (Policy 3-12)
f. Participate in available county, state and federal programs that promote or
provide housing. (Policy 3-13)
g. Continue to make Housing and Community Development (HCD) funds
available to developers to help defray costs inherent in meeting or exceeding the
requirements for supplying below market rate housing. (Policy 3-14)
U
1e
If*
h. Make available HCD or general funds for site acquisition for low and very low
priced housing. Parcels purchased with HCD or general funds can be trade
available to private developers or a non-profit housing corporation capable of
constructing low and very low priced housing. (Policy 3-15).
Use City funds for programs that help supply affordable rental housing to low
and very low income households, particularly senior citizens and disabled
individuals who are on a fixed income. The City will contract with a non-profit
organization or use other mechanisms to supply this housing. Need will be
identified through census and other data. Priority will be given to Cupertino
residents. (Policy 3-16)
j. Give priority processing to applications that provide very low, low and
moderate income housing to reduce development costs associated with time
delays. (3-17)
k. Place the issue of affordable housing on the ballot to obtain Article 34
referendum authority should this be necessary to provide affordable housing.
(Policy 3-18)
1. Permit the construction of mobile homes and pre -fabricated houses on
permanent foundations, subject to compliance with zoning regulations, building
code, and other applicable City regulations. (Policy 3-46)
in. Conversion of rental forms of multiple family housing to condominiums will
not be permitted if the proposal significantly diminishes the present number of
rental units within Cupertino or substantially reduces the ratio of ownership -to -
rental units in effect at the time of the requested conversion. As a general guide,
rental units shall not be converted to single family ownership housing when the
rental vacancy rate within the Cupertino Housing Market Area is less than 5% at
' the time of application and has averaged 5% over the past six months. The
vacancy rate will be determined by surveys conducted by the City of
Cupertino's Planning Department. (Policy 3-47)
' n. Prior to approving any condominium conversions, insure that a significant
portion of the units remain part of the low and moderate income housing stock.
(Policy 3-48)
1
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 19
o. Prior to approving any condominium conversions, insure that the project has '
been upgraded to eliminate any health and safety hazards and to meet current
development standards. The City shall also reasonably demonstrate that
comparable replacement rental housing exists within the Cupertino area to
accommodate the displaced residents. (Policy 3-49)
p. Continue to work with local organizations to implement a program to provide a ,
temporary emergency shelter that rotates monthly among local churches.
(Policy 3-50)
1. Proposed:
a. Protect residential neighborhoods from noise, traffic, light and visually
intrusive effects from more intense developments with adequate buffering,
setbacks, landscaping, walls, activity limitations, site design and other ,
appropriate measures. (Policy 2-19)
2. Existing: '
a. Ensure that the scale and density of new residential development and
remodeling is reasonably compatible with the City's predominant single-family
residential pattern, except in areas designated for higher density housing. '
(Policy 2-15)
b. Keep the sights and sounds of the neighbors from intruding on residents.
Techniques can include greater building setbacks, wing walls, window
shutters, and non -transparent glass. (Policy 2-20)
D. TRAFFIC
See Transportation
'
E. PARKLANDS
See Parks and Open Space
,
F. AGRICl11.TURF AND NATURAL . ENVIRONMENT
See Wildlife and Vegetation
'
G. SEISMIC AND GEOLOGICAL HAZAM
See Geotechnical Features
'
H. FLOODING '
See Drainage and Flooding
I. HISTORICAL, CULTURAL .TURAI . AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ,
See Land Use
1.
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 20
�lilC7�C / y : ►I• I Yrl
See Public Facilities, Services and Utilities
Providing housing is proposed as a mitigation measure to address the jobs/housing
balance and affordable housing supply. The significant effects of additional housing
are discussed
in this and other sections.
low IIS 141na 8 I; ( ayn to I: smaxii go)wins wi•1.: ► •colei IN p
r.l • lu ' ul ►rr
Development allowed by the proposed General Plan Update would require an
irreversible commitment of natural resources for building construction, such as wood,
refined metals, petroleum, and stone. It would result in the irretrievable commitment of
energy and water to support the projected urban development that would occur under
the proposed General Plan Amendment. Where the development would involve
substantial grading, excavation, or other alteration to existing topography, these effects
would also be irreversible. Hillside development would result in irreversible loss of
natural vegetation and wildlife habitat.
General Plan EIR - Housing
Section 2 - 21
Sources
1. Affordable Housing Policies, Affordable Housing Committee, City of Cupertino, June 14,
1991.
2. "Alternative Futures: Trends and Choices," Santa Clara County Department of Planning and
Development, October 1990.
3. Association of Bay Area Governments, "Projections 90;' December, 1989.
4. Association of Bay Area Governments, "Projection 92;' July 1992.
S. "A Study to Examine the Relationship of Land Use and the Creation of Additional Housing
Needs," Planning Resource Associates, January, 1992.
6. "Bay Area'91 Clean Air Plan," Bay Area Air Quality Management District, October, 1991.
7. "Congestion Management Program for Santa Clara County," Santa Clara County Congestion
Management Agency, October 30, 1991.
8. "Housing Needs Determination," Association of Bay Area Governments, January
1989.
9. San Jose Real Estate Board
10. Santa Clara County Transportation Plan, October 29, 1991.
11. State Department of Finance
SECTION 3
TRANSPORTATION
AND
CIRCULATION
Table of Contents
Page
I. Environmental Setting............................................................. 3-1
' A. Existing Development and Conditions ...................................... 3-1
1. Regional....................................................................3-1
2. Local........................................................................3-5
�J
11
Iy
I
1
1
I
1
r
1
B. Consistency with Other Plans...............................................3-15
1.City General Plan ......................................................3-15
2.Other Cities and County Plans ....................................... 3-15
3.Congestion Management Program .................................. 3-15
4.Regional Plan .......................................................... 3-17
11. Impacts ............................................................................. 3-17
A. Significance Criteria.......................................................... 3-17
B. Traffic Forecasting Modeling Methodology ............................... 3-17
1. Travel Demand Model Description ..................................... 3-17
2. Future Trip Generation and Assignment .............................. 3-18
3. Future Roadway Network..............................................3-19
4. Future Transit Planning.................................................3-19
C. Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated .............................. 3-21
1. Traffic LOS (Cupertino Intersections) ................................. 3-21
2. Traffic LOS (Non -Cupertino Facilities & Intersections ............. 3-23
3. Air Quality ................................................................ 3-23
4. Noise......................................................................3-23
D. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated .......................... 3-24
1. Traffic LOS...............................................................3-24
E. Alternatives Analysis ............................ :............................ 3-24
1 No Project Alternative...................................................3-24
2. Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative ........................ 3-24
F. Local Short -Term Uses vs. Long -Term Productivity ...:................ 3-25
G. Growth Inducing Effects .................................................... 3-25
H. Economic and Social Effects................................................3-25
I. Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
Should the Plan Be Implemented ........................................... 3-25
III. Mitigation Measures.............................................................. 3-25
A. Traffic LOS (Cupertino Intersections) .......................................... 3-25
1. Proposed...................................................................... 3-25
2. Existing................:.......................................................3-27
B. Traffic LOS (Non -Cupertino Facilities & Intersections) ..................... 3-27
1. Proposed...................................................................... 3-27
Sources................................................................................. 3-29
Figures
Page
3-A Existing Freeway Level of Service A.M. Peak .............................. 3-3
3-B Existing Freeway Level of Service P.M. Peak ............................... 3-4
3-C Primary Circulation System .................................................... 3-5
3-D Bikeways Plan................................................................... 3-7
3-E 1990 ADT Traffic Flow Map ................................................... 3-9
3-F 1990 PM Peak Hour Traffic Flow Map ...................................... 3,10
3-G Tier 2 Procedure................................................................ 3-14
3-H CMP Regional Road System in Cupertino Area ............................ 3-16
3-I Santa Clara County T2010 Rail Corridor Priorities ........................3-20
Tables
Page
3-A Street Hierarchy.................................................................. 3-6
3-B Traffic Service Levels at Intersections ........................................ 3-8
3-C General Plan Intersection Level of Service (LOS) Analysis ............... 3-11
3-D Example of Calculations of TieredTraffic Program ......................... 3-13
3-E Local Data Used in Traffic Model for Each Land Use
Alternative Tested....:..........................................................3-18
3-F Proposed Roadway Improvements ........................................... 3-22
3-G Comparison of 1991 Land Use Database and the
Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative .............................. 3-24
I
1
r
1
1
4
11
[1
SECTION 3
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A. Existing Development and Conditions
1. Regional
Transportation Facilities. The City of Cupertino is located in the southwestern
portion of Santa Clara County whose regional transportation needs are served by
the existing thoroughfare, air, and rail transportation systems. The regional
thoroughfare transportation system includes: 1) the freeways of the State and
Federal system, 2) the expressways of the County, and 3) major City streets.
This system serving Santa Clara County is also linked to other regions: San
Francisco, Oakland, Santa Cruz County and San Benito County.
The County has several airports, none of which are in Cupertino. The San Jose
International Airport in north San Jose serves both general aviation and commercial
jet carriers. Moffett Field Naval Air Station in the northern part of the County,
between the cities of Sunnyvale and Mountain View, serves only military air traffic.
Several smaller airports serving general aviation needs are located in Palo Alto, East
San Jose and South County between the cities of Morgan Hill and Gilroy.
The County rail system includes Caltrain, the Southern Pacific Transportation
Company, the Union Pacific Railroad Company and the Guadalupe Light Rail
system. These companies provide commute service, long distance travel, and
freight services for the County.
Passenger rail service is provided by Caltrain which operates a commuter line from
the City of Gilroy to San Francisco. An AMTRAK passenger service line with a
stop in San Jose provides passenger rail service nationwide. Locally, the
Guadalupe Light Rail system administered by the Santa Clara County
Transportation Agency provides service from South San Jose to Northern Santa
Clara. Cupertino is currently not served by direct passenger rail service. However,
the City partially subsidizes a commuter shuttle that travels between the Sunnyvale
Caltrain depot and Cupertino employment centers.
Cargo and freight services for the County are provided by the Southern Pacific
Transportation Company and the Union Pacific Railroad Company.
t The Santa Clara County Transportation Agency (SCCTA) provides bus service as
well as light rail service in the County. The Agency offers 19 express routes and
62 local routes connecting residential areas to every major industrial park and
downtown in the County. Average daily ridership for the past year was, 133,100
for the bus system and 19,934 for the light rail.
1
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-2
Land Use Patterns. The regional land use patterns greatly influence traffic patterns.
The largest centers of employment in Santa Clara County are in the northern part of
the County, while most of the residential development, predominately low density,
single-family detached residences, are located in the eastern and southern portions
of the County. Peak period vehicular traffic consists of commuters traveling from
residences to jobs, creating heavy traffic congestion along commute corridors, and
near employment centers in the morning and along commute corridors and toward
residential areas in the evening.
The preponderance of jobs in relation to the housing supply in the County also has
resulted in a large net in -commute of workers across County lines, creating traffic
congestion on the inter -county thoroughfare system. Figures 3-A and 3-B show
the Existing Freeway "Level of Service" (LOS) for the a.m. and p.m. peak travel
periods respectively. LOS A is described as free flow operations with average
travel speeds near the posted limits. LOS F describes forced or breakdown flow at
very low travel speed. At LOS F, the number of vehicles attempting to travel
exceeds the capacity of the roadway.
As shown on Figures 3-A and 3-B, Interstate Route 280 (I-280) operates at Level
of Service F in both the morning and afternoon peak traffic hours within the City of
Cupertino. The freeway is heavily congested in the eastbound direction east of De
Anza Boulevard in the morning peak hour. In the afternoon peak hour, heavy
congestion exists in the eastbound direction along the entire length of the freeway
where is passes through the City.
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-3
LOS Com1m . to
Cooley Um
scw �mw�
D 1 2 3 t 5
ALAMEDA
LW
Co,,fl."
to
Cmmy
LM
LOS A.B.0
...... LOS D.E '
LOS F
Dat.. bEbat. Abrin & Y..
Data Wa. 001.1,,.E
LOS Saa.d On CALTRANS
FbaEm Car Data
EXISTING FREEWAY LEVEL -OF -SERVICE
A.M. PEAK
30, 1991
Figure
3-A
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-4
PALO
ALTO
ZLos LO6�"+ry `JPS Ix
/ xics ALTOS NTTL F'
VIEW i
eo
'D �$ SUNNfVAtE
��r, B5 g O �+ Canine
��5 yid tQ'r � SWU
mp\ aa77 y� O?M
f` A8
ALAMEDA
MILPITAS
F O.F6ifNJ SANS
JOSE
65 r y lol
Q
92
55
' 9 OS
SARATOGA Hound mss
9 V't,T� �,`4 Sm Trw BMA LOS
Cmulnue�
MONTE �t 3. Cwmy
SERENO LOS LR•
yxl GATOS
e
Is
Y \ LOStW
ny
t croy LB..
Sulo (mUaa)
EMEMEM
LOS A.B.0
..... LOS D.E
LOS F
— "Dae
o T 2 3 4 5
N
e
Dale a 6 Vaar
Was olnaA
ala W Mial
EXISTING FREEWAY LEVEL -OF -SERVICE Figure
P.M. PEAK 3-g
Source: Santa Clara County Congestion Management Program, October, 30, 1991
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-5
2. Local
Transportation Facilities. The City of Cupertino is bordered by the Cities of
Sunnyvale and Los Altos to the north, the cities of Santa Clara and San Jose to the
e east, San Jose and Saratoga to the south and Los Altos to the east. The
thoroughfare system serving Cupertino consists of 1) freeways: Interstate Route
280 (I-280) and State Route 85, (SR -85), 2) Lawrence Expressway, and 3) the
roadways of the City of Cupertino which include arterials, collectors and local
' streets. This roadway network, designed for automobile, truck and bus traffic, is
the primary transportation system for Cupertino. (See Figure 3-C and Table 3-A)
' Regional routes to Cupertino are provided by I-280, an east -west highway near
Cupertino's northern boundary, and SR -85 which consists of a north -south
segment between Homestead Road and Stevens Creek Boulevard and a north -south
arterial De Anza Boulevard/Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road between I-280 and Prospect
Road. The state route status of DeAnza Boulevard/Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road is
expected to be relinquished by the State once the West Valley Freeway (Highway
85) is completed between South San Jose and Cupertino.
1
4
1
1
1
1
1P
The City of Cupertino
Freeways and Expressways
Arterials
Major Collectors
Minor Collectors
::::: FutureFreeway
RWn I Dd.
. rrrrrwrrrr
PRIMARY CIRCULATION SYSTEM
SOURCE: City of
1990
Rd
Figure
3-C
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-6
Table 3-A
STREET HIERARCHY
STREET
Street Function
Typical Number of Lanes
CATEGORY
and Access
Characteristics
FREEWAYS AND
Inter-State/Inter-City
4 lanes or greater
EXPRESSWAYS
Highways carrying inter -city, inter -county and inter -state traffic.
Freeways and expressways do not provide direct access to abutting
(No access to adjoining
lands.
property)
Inter -City
4 lanes or greater
ARTERIAL
Streets and highways serving major metropolitan activity centers, the
(Limited access to adjoining
highest =Ettc volume corridors. The longest trip demand, and a high
property)
proportion of total urban area travel on a minimum of mileage. Service
to adjoining land should come second to providing access to major
freeways and expressways. This system carries the major portion of
trips entering and leaving an urban area, and normally will carry
important intra -urban as well as inter -city btu routes.
MAJOR
Inter-City/Inter-Nelghborhood
2-4 lanes
COLLECTOR
Streets and highways interconnecting with and augmenting the
(Direct and indirect access
arterial system and providing service to trips of moderate length at a
to adjoining property)
somewhat lower level of travel mobility. The system places more
emphasis on land access and distributes travel to geographic areas
smaller than those identified with the higher system.
2-4 es
MINOR
Inter-City/Inter-Neighborhood
COLLECTOR
(Direct access to adjoining
Streets penetrating neighborhoods, collecting traffic from local streets
property)
in the neighborhoods and channeling it into the arterial system. A minor
amount of through traffic may be carried on collector streets, but the
system primarily provides land access service and carries local traffic
movements within residential neighborhoods, commercial, and industrial
areas. It may also serve local bus routes.
LOCAL
Intra-Nelghborhood
2lanes
Streets not classified in a higher system, primarily providing direct
(Direct accgs to adjoining
access to abutting land and access to the higher systems. They offer the
property)
lowest level of mobility and usually carry no bus routes. Service to
through traffic is deliberately discouraged. Local streets may function to
"collect",traffic from the immediate neighborhood and provide access to
the other street categories.
SOURCE: City of Cupertino,February 1990
1�
1
I
I
1
1
I
11
1
1
Ip
1
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-7
Local access is provided by Lawrence Expressway, a north -south expressway,
which skirts the eastern boundary of the City, Homestead Road and Stevens Creek
Boulevard which are east -west arterials, and Wolfe Road and DeAnza Boulevard
which are north -south arterials. These arterials serve the major intercity travel
needs and access the major city activity centers.
The arterials are augmented by collectors which provide for local circulation needs.
They include the north -south routes of Foothill Boulevard, Bubb Road, Stelling
Road, Blaney Avenue, Miller Avenue and Tantau Avenue, and the east -west routes
of Pruneridge Avenue, Bollinger Road, McClellan Road, Prospect Road and
Rainbow Drive.
On these roadways, the Santa Clara County Transportation Agency (SCCTA)
provides bus service in Cupertino. SCCTA operates 3 express routes and 10 local
routes through Cupertino.
The street network is augmented by a system of bikeways that provide an
alternative means of circulation for people who prefer to travel to or around
Cupertino by bicycle. The developed system consists of 10.6 miles of bicycle lanes
(restricted right-of-ways) that follow the arterials and collectors which link major
Cupertino destinations and 0.7 miles of bicycle routes (shared right-of-ways) that
provide neighborhood bicycle circulation to schools and businesses. Currently,
50% of the adopted bikeway system (11.3 miles) has been completed. The
proposed General Plan Amendment will add another 9 miles of bicycle routes to the
system. The proposed Bikeway Plan is shown in Figure 3-D.
Cupertino does not have any airports or passenger rail service. The Southern
Pacific Transportation Company does operate a freight and cargo line that connects
Kaiser Cement in the foothills to southern destinations through western Cupertino.
The rail line is used once a day.
BIKEWAYS PLAN
of Cupertino. 1992
— Existing Bike Lanes and Routes
— Proposed Bike Lanes and Routes
.. Non -Cupertino Bikeways
Figure
3-D
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-8
Land Use Patterns. The land use pattern in Cupertino consists of large
employment/activity centers: Apple Computers, Tandem Computers, Hewlett
Packard and DeAnza College located at the interchanges along I-280 and SR -85 in
the northern portion of Cupertino; and housing, primarily single-family detached
residences, in the southern portion of the city. The regional location of industry
and housing in the surrounding environs reinforce this pattern. The large job
centers in Palo Alto, Mountain. View and Sunnyvale are accessible via I-280 for
Palo Alto and SR -85 for Mountain View and Sunnyvale. The majority of housing
is found in San Jose to the east of Cupertino and a smaller supply housing to the
south in the cities of Saratoga, Los Gatos and Campbell.
The resultant peak hour traffic patterns from these land use patterns consist of
heavy vehicle flows on the north -south routes: DeAnza Boulevard/Saratoga-
Sunnyvale Road arterial and Lawrence Expressway, and heavy traffic on the
primary east -west route: I-280 in the morning and the reversal of these flows
during the peak evening commute period.
Traffic Operations. The quality of traffic movement in Cupertino is defined in
terms of "Level of Service" (LOS) for signalized intersections. Cupertino utilizes
the LOS concept as measured in terms of delay which is an indicator of driver
discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption and lost travel time. Specifically, LOS is
measured by the average stopped delay per vehicle for a fixed study period. Delay
is a complex measure dependent on a number of variables including the quality of
progression, the signal cycle length, green time and the volume -to -capacity ratio of
the street system. Very low delay is described as LOS A, while very long delay is
expressed as LOS F. Table 3-B summarizes the characteristics of delay for various
LOS Levels.
Table 3-B
TRAFFIC SERVICE LEVELS AT INTERSECTIONS
Level of Stopped Delay Per
Service Vehicle (seconds) Description
A < 5.0 Free Flow (Very little delay) No congestion
B 5.1 to 15.0 Stable Flow (Slight Delay) Some congestion
C 15.1 to 25.0 Stable Flow (Acceptable Delay) Moderate congestion
D 25.1 to 40.0 Approaching Unstable Flow
(Tolerable Delay) High congestion
E 40.1 to 60.0 Unstable Flow (Unacceptable Delay) Near breakdown
F > 60.0 Forced Flow (Very Long Delay) Breakdown
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers, Transportation and Traffic Engineerin¢
Handbook, 4th Edition, 1991, and
Transportation Research Board, Hiphwav Capacity Manual, Special Report 209,
1985.
Figures 3-E and 3-F identify the existing (1990) average daily traffic (ADT) and
PM peak hour traffic volumes on the City's street system. Table 3-C describes the
LOS values for key City intersections based upon 1990 traffic counts, the 1990
street system and land use data. Two intersections currently exceed the City's LOS
"D" standard. The De Anza Boulevard/North I-280 ramp and the De Anza
Boulevard/Homestead Road intersections are both at LOS E. A current capital
project to widen De Anza Boulevard and the I-280 overcrossing will improve the
level of service at the LOS E intersections.
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-9
1990 ADT TRAFFIC FLOW MAP
Source: City of Cupertino, 1990
Figure
3-E
••
p�
• O J• •
m[.-� amsmi
ZhV H
J'i iww
ria
O JO
C
N, O O O
O O O O
O<> O
O u1 O
¢ N
N
O
O
O
N
N r
m 0
Nl9
Ono
Et w
in w
N r
N N
O
m'
W
� o
O L m
O
O
AAdX3 33N3tlAtll
o
po
O
0
o
N ¢ AH (1tl1Ntl1
0
M
O u
0008
o AH N
o
o
o
o OSNHO!`
xwU
-Z1
N j
O >
J
M
N
a
^ m
"
0000'
000yL
3=nor0606
000 Ly
O
o H3'I'IIN
p
v
O
O
O
w
M
M
J O
CU
"
0008
m `� p
0
w
o
AH A3NHl8
J
O
O O
ll_
w
M
M
N
=
0001.9
0085 0009
00M OpOLya
0006E
0O c
Ll
OAl9 MW 30
p0
OH 3ltlAANNf1S - tl001tltltlS
o
J
po
O
p
M
Cz
w
p
co
O
~
Z Z
N
Z
01
OOOSZ a
00021.
LU wp
z
04 ONII"1315 0003L
l=w
O N
c MARY Hy
o
w o
o
m w
iJ
n
N_I.
v
z
0006
ppb
6
4
J
O
o
000 p
ON 980E
a
m
e5
15 0
0
m
�t0
U
O
O
O
m
O
m
�
000 LZ
nn B M
n i
000
OAltl IIIN100j
�v
OH
w
CR
L U
W N
1990 ADT TRAFFIC FLOW MAP
Source: City of Cupertino, 1990
Figure
3-E
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation '
Section 3-10 A
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-11
Table 3-C
GENERAL PLAN INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) ANALYSIS
Intersections
1990
Existing
Proposed
Existing
General Plan
General Plan
Conditions
(Modified) •
Amemdment••
De Anza Boulevard at:
LOS
LOS
LOS
Homestead Road
E
D
D
D
Freeway 280 North Ramp
E
D
B -
Freeway 280 South Ramp
D
D
D+
E+
D with underpass
Stevens Creek Blvd.
E+ without underpass
Bollinger Road
D
D-
E+
Saratoga/Sunnyvale Road at:
Rainbow Drive
C
C+
D-
B -
D+
Prospect Road
D
Stevens Creek Boulevard at:
Freeway 85 West Ramp
C
C+
C+
C -
Freeway 85 East Ramp
C
C+
Stelling Road
D
C -
D
Wolfe Road/Miller Ave.
D
D
-
Wolfe Road at:
Homestead Road
D
D
D
Freeway 280 North Ramp
B
B+
B+
B+
Freeway 280 South Ramp
B
B+
Miller Avenue at:
Bollinger Road
N/A
D
D -
Stelling Road at:
Homestead Road
D
E+
D+
C
McClellan Road
D
D+
-
B
Rainbow Drive
C
C-
-
N/A = not available
• Model run on April 1991 Land Use database; also see Table 3-G for further data.
•+ With roadway improvements outlined in Table 3-D. Land Use tested does not incude 2,000,000 square feet of mitigated
officefindustrial development because no new net trip generation would result from this development. (See description
of Tiered Traffic Mitigation Program.)
Source: Cupertino Community Development Department
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-12
Traffic Impacts and Land Use Policy. The City has traditionally linked land use
and transportation planning by limiting land use types and intensities to a standard
Level of Service for the City's signalized intersections. In 1973, the City adopted
the Traffic Intensity Performance System (TIPS) which established a development
constraint based on how much locally generated traffic could be handled by the
local street system after deducting existing traffic and anticipated future commute
traffic. The TIPS program is applicable in the North DeAnza Boulevard and East
Stevens Creek Boulevard planning areas and a modified TIPS program is applicable
to the Town Center planning area.
In 1983, a floor area ratio (FAR) development restraint was applied to the balance
of commercial, office and industrial areas to control development intensity
commensurate with the City's desired intersection Level of Service. The General
Plan Amendment proposes to eliminate the TIPS Policy and replace it with uniform
FAR controls and a discretionary development allocation system which are detailed
in the Land Use section of this report.
Transportation Demand Management (TDM). In 1992, the City adopted the
Congestion Management Program's (CMP) model Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Ordinance which requires larger employers to plan and carry
out TDM techniques to increase employee vehicle occupancy and reduce the number
of vehicles traveling during peak periods. Such techniques include:
a)
ride share matching
b)
carpool/van pool
c)
shuttles
d)
transit incentives
Employers provide annual TDM reports to the CMP which will enable the City to
assess its progress toward increasing average vehicle ridership and thus reducing
traffic demand.
Tiered Traffic Mitigation Program. Proposed Land Use and Transportation Policies
will enable land owners/major employers to expand building area beyond limits
determined by the traffic computer modeling to maintain LOS D if traffic generation
from the additional development does not exceed traffic congestion levels
anticipated by the model. The number of peak hour trips for all reallocated growth
in potential residential, commercial, and office/industrial development is identified
in Table 1-B in the Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character Section of this
report. The policy allowing additional development if PM peak hour standards are
met is known as the Tiered Traffic Mitigation Program.
This transportation policy has three tiers. Tier I allows a nominal amount of
development if the project applicant agrees to be bound by a standard set of TDM
measures, such as carpooling, bus passes and appointing a TDM Coordinator.
Development under Tier 2 requires aggressive TDM measures on existing and
proposed development, including potential housing, telecommuting and shuttles.
Tier 3 is subordinate to the other tiers and allows new growth based on roadway
improvements that improve LOS levels.
Tier 2 is the most complex of the three tiers. It requires a detailed review of
existing traffic generation, the development of proven traffic reduction programs, a
methodical monitoring program to ensure that performance is maintained, and a
means to impose sanctions to guarantee performance. Figure 3-G describes the
Tier 2 procedure.
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-13
M
Conceptually, the Tiered Traffic Mitigation Program would work in the following
manner to completely mitigate the traffic generated by 2,000,000 additional square
feet of major office/industrial development. It is assumed that only the largest
office/industrial employers would qualify for this additional mitigated square
footage because only they command the level of resources, organization and
employment base which could so aggressively mitigate traffic impacts.
Table 3-D
EXAMPLE OF CALCULATIONS OF TIERED TRAFFIC PROGRAM
' Maior Office/Industrial Sq. Ft.
Existing Development 6,000,000
Committed & Reallocated Development 1,800,000
Additional Mitigated Development 2.000.000
S Total 9,800,000 Sq. Ft.
D Peak Hour Trips Subject = (2,000,000 sq. ft.) (1.7 peak hour trips/1,000 sq. ft.) =
3,400 trips
Tier 2 Mitigations
Housing
560 du's (50% linked directly and indirectly to jobs)
(560 du's) (.8 peak hour trips/du) (.5) = 244 trips
Aggressive TDM
On total development (20% trip reduction assumed)
' (9,800,000 sq. ft.) (1.7 peak hour trips/1,000 sq. ft.) (.2)= -3,332 trips
Estimated Trip Reduction -3,556 trips
' Trips subject to Tier +3,400 trips
The calculation illustrates how traffic generated by 2,000,000 square feet of
'
office/industrial development can be mitigated by requiring the construction of
employee housing and utilizing aggressive TDM measures on existing and
l
proposed development to mitigate traffic.
1
,
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-14
FIGURE 3-G
TIER 2 PROCEDURE
When a request is made by a major company for development exceeding the General Plan
trip allocation, the following procedure would be undertaken:
1. The city and owner would establish the trip character of existing development obtaining
information such as, volumes during peak hour and peak periods, the AVR (Average
Vehicle Ridership), employee occupancy rates.
2. Following a six-month stabilization period after the owner has implement a TDM
Program of his/her choice, the city and owner would review the trip generation
character and compare it to pre -TDM condition.
3. A review of AVR and other collected data would be made to assure that trip reduction
was not achieved by expanding into the peak period.
4. Calculate the number of trips saved to determine number of new square footage of
building. New development would be based on new trip generation factor established
and confirmed by the City. Example: if the new program establishes a one trip per
thousand sq. ft., then the building area allowed would be based on using this new
number multiplied by the number of trips saved.
5. The City and owner would enter into a development agreement to assure that the new
development building area and the existing building area do not exceed the trip
allotment. An annual report would be required to monitor performance. (One is
already required for Commuter Network.)
6. If results of the monitoring indicate that the trip allotment is exceeded, modifications
may be required, such as the following:
a. Allow a reasonable period of time for owner to implement additional TDM
strategies.
b. After two attempts of owner selected strategies, the City would require owner to
implement city selected strategies.
7. However, if the above attempts fail, then the following sanctions would be imposed:
a. Significant fees would be required for use on a Citywide solution. The fee would
be based on the number of trips above the allotment.
b. If the above fails, City has the right to modify or revoke the use permit or require
large monetary sanction that would be paid for violating the development
agreement.
I
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-15
M
B. CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS
1. City General Plan
The policy of the proposed General Plan Amendment is to maintain the LOS standard D
De Anza
for intersections except for the intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard and
Boulevard which would be allowed to decline to LOS E (maximum 45 second delay) in
order to implement the Heart of the City concept, a goal of the proposed General Plan
Amendment.
Traffic generated by additional development above the proposed General Plan
Amendment allocations must be fully mitigated by TDM measures on proposed and
Mitigated
existing development and in accordance with the proposed Additional
Development Policy.
2. Other Cities and County Plans
Surrounding cities also use a LOS criterion for development review and transportation
planning. The 1991 Congestion Management Program (see description below) requires
I
all member cities to use the same methodologies in calculating LOS as defined in the
1985 Highway Capacity Manual. Cupertino has adopted these LOS methodologies.
The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with Santa Clara County's T2010
Transportation Plan in that the City has adopted the model TDM ordinance which is
consistent with the Congestion Management Program. The proposed City policies are
also supportive of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in future highway projects and the
extension of rail along Stevens Creek Boulevard and North De Anza Boulevard or SR
85. City policies are also consistent with T2010 policies to link land use and growth
policies to the capacity of the transportation system, including encouraging higher
M
density development along the proposed Stevens Creek Boulevard and North De Anza
Boulevard rail corridors.
3. Congestion Management Program
The required proposed General Plan Amendment is also consistent with the Congestion
Management Program (CMP) which was required by the State following voter approval
of Proposition 111 in 1990. The basic thrust of the CMP is to ensure that level of traffic
congestion not deteriorate below a standard LOS E on roads in the Regional Road
System. Road segments operating at LOS F in 1991 will be set at a LOS F standard.
All cities in the County including Cupertino participate in this program. Figure 3-H
describes the regional road system: freeways, expressways and major arterials affected
by the CMP. The CMP road system includes the following facilities in Cupertino:
�t
I-280, SR -85, Lawrence Expressway, Stevens Creek Boulevard and De Anza
Boulevard/Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road.
I
General Plan E1R Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-16
CMP REGIONAL ROAD SYSTEM IN Figure
CUPERTINO AREA 3-x
Source: Santa Clara County Congestion. Management Agency, October 1991
AFEMMILIk
CUPERTINO, SARATOGA, CAMPBELL, LOS GATOS AND
WILVIs�
MONTE SERENO
A EA
Santa Clara County Congestion Management Program
CMP REGIONAL ROAD SYSTEM IN Figure
CUPERTINO AREA 3-x
Source: Santa Clara County Congestion. Management Agency, October 1991
I
!_1
I
I
It
No
I
I
I
t,
I
I
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-17
4. Regional Plan
The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission's Regional Transportation Plan in that they both seek to
improve the capacity of the transportation system by increasing capacity through
roadway improvements and increasing utilization by requiring TDM measures.
Improving system convenience and safety are also objectives of both plans. The City's
Additional Mitigated Development and Tiered Traffic Mitigation Policies also seek to
improve transportation system performance to ensure economic vitality and in a manner
that supports a healthy environment by decreasing vehicle volumes and the attendant
noise and air pollution.
II. IMPACTS
A. SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
According to the California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G(1), a project "will
normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will cause an increase in
traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of street
system." Based on the City's desired traffic LOS standard of D or better at all City
intersections, except Stevens Creek and De Anza Boulevards where LOS E is
acceptable to implement the Heart of the City concept, degradation of service below the
LOS D criterion would constitute a significant impact.
CMP has adopted a basic LOS standard of E for its regional roadway system. Facilities
currently operating at LOS F may continue to do so at that standard as long as
congestion is not worsen. As an interim policy for the base year CMP (1991), if traffic
LOS on any CMP facility operates at LOS F, then any project that impacts the facility at
or greater than 1 % of facility capacity must implement mitigation measures to eliminate
impacts. For the purposes of this Environmental Impact Report, this "one percent rule"
shall be used as a significance criteria for transportation facilities operating at LOS F
outside of Cupertino's jurisdiction.
B. TRAFFIC FORECASTING MODELING METHODOLOGY
1. Travel Demand Model Description
A computer model was employed to evaluate the traffic impact of the land use
alternatives on the City and regional thoroughfare systems. The model includes all the
arterials and a few collectors in Cupertino and all the major and minor arterials in the
County. Outside of the County, the modeled network is more skeletal, including just
the highways and some major arterials in adjoining counties and just the highways in
other areas of the nine -county San Francisco Bay Area. The traffic analysis compares
existing 1990 (1989 year end) traffic conditions to forecasted traffic from year 2000
land use alternatives on the following criteria: average daily traffic, and PM peak Level
of Service for various intersections.
The model was validated by having the model project 1990 traffic volumes for the
Cupertind roadways which were then compared to actual traffic counts. The
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) land use data for 1990 were used for
the regional data input and City of Cupertino 1989 land use and development data
comprised the local data for the model. The difference in the results were within
acceptable levels so that the model was calibrated to "real world" conditions. A more
detailed description of the travel demand model and its assumptions is provided in
Appendix B.
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-18
2. Future Trip Generation and Assi ng ment
Year 2000 trip generation and assignment are based on ABAG's Projections'90 of
employment and housing for the regional information component of the model. For
the purposes of the Cupertino model, only total dwelling units, retail employment
and non -retail employment are required for each traffic zone.
The City of Cupertino build out estimates by land use for the General Plan
alternatives comprise the local information inputs to the model. The local inputs are
estimated dwelling units and commercial, office and industrial square footage by
traffic zone. A summary of the local land use data input to the traffic demand model
is shown in Table 3-E.
Table 3-E
LOCAL DATA USED IN TRAFFIC MODEL FOR EACH LAND USE
ALTERNATIVE TESTED
1990 Existing Existing General Proposed General
Land Use Category Conditions Plan (Modified)* Plan Amendment
Commercial + Hotels (gsf) 3,498,000 5,174,588
Office/Industrial(gsf) 7,457,000 8,856,905
Residential (dwelling units) 17,460 19,052
* April 1991 Land Use Database; also see Table 3-G for further data.
** 2,000,000 gsf of additional mitigated development not included.
Source: Cupertino Community Development Department
I
1
I
I
I
I
5,128,000 y
9,292,000** 1�
20,044
I
The model then converts the square footage to employment. The number of '
government employees were assigned to the traffic zones that contain schools, the
civic center, libraries, post offices, etc. The model also incorporates enrollment
projections for De Anza College.
For the proposed General Plan Amendment, proposed dwelling units and non-
residential square footage was assigned to traffic zones according to the '
development priorities tables for each land use. Proposed additional mitigated
development of 2,000,000 square feet was not incorporated in the traffic model
because of proposed policies that require mitigation of traffic generation through
aggressive TDM measures on new and existing development. Cupertino's Travel
Demand Model does not contain an explicit transit component; however, transit and
ride sharing are expected to play an unknown but large role in mitigating peak hour
traffic from the 2,000,000 square feet of additional mitigated development. As
such, the square footage was excluded from the database used to run the model in t
lieu of modifying ridership model factors.
1-1
it
I
I
.1
11
t,
Ll
II
17
[1
I
I
Ir
Lr
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-19
3. Future Roadway Network
Several roadway widening and construction projects are underway or are in the
advanced planning stages. The projects are incorporated in the future roadway
network of the traffic model because their completion is assured within the time
frame of the proposed General Plan Alternative and they are expected to affect
traffic levels and circulation within the City. All of the below listed roadway
projects are fully funded:
• Construction of SR -85 (6 lanes, including 2 high occupancy vehicle lanes)
between I-280 in Cupertino and I-101 in South San Jose
• Widening of the North De Anza Boulevard/I-280 overcrossing from 4 to 6 lanes
The recently completed widening of I-280 which included two high occupancy
vehicle (HOV) lanes and auxiliary lane additions was also included in the roadway
network. Also, a proposed undercrossing at the Stevens Creek Boulevard and De
Anza Boulevard intersection, which has not been funded, was tested in the traffic
model to assess its impact on traffic LOS.
4. Future Transit Planning
In June 1992, the voters in Santa Clara County approved a tax measure to fund
specific transit and road improvements. The tax measure was sponsored by private
groups in order to negate the requirement for a two-thirds electorate vote. The
voting plurality issue is currently being litigated. Despite the legal challenge, the
planning process for the improvements is in progress.
The County's T2010 Rail Corridor Pr: orities are shown on Figure 3-I. Both the De
Anza and Stevens Creek/Alum Rock corridors pass through Cupertino. The plan
designates both of these corridors as Tier 2, meaning they are a lower priority than
Tier 1 and are planned for longer range development. The proposed General Plan
Amendment assumes that there will be no significant development of rail transit in
Cupertino within the time frame of the build out of the General Plan.
City of Cupertino representatives serve on the Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor
Joint Powers Board and Sunnyvale - Cupertino Corridor Joint Policy Board which
are advisory boards evaluating alternative alignments, transit vehicles, and timing of
improvements for each respective corridor. Given the long time frame for
completion of plans and construction of improvements, traffic modeling for the
proposed plan does not contain assumptions regarding ridership. The Land Use
Element contains a policy which advocates additional development intensity in
major boulevards served by mass transit. Until transit facilities are constructed or at
least committed to a specific construction schedule, the intensification can not occur
unless traffic generation is lessened via aggressive traffic demand management.
(Refer to the TDM discussion located previously in this Section.) No improvement
to the transit system has been assumed in the travel model forecasts of future traffic
impacts.
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-20
Go
�ty
S `.
. oJt�
z
00
(nU
0
.. 0
C
0 0
E' 0
0 c
�o
LL0)
1 ,
A4
i
I
cc
Cd
E
IJ•
SII•
I11
�
i •�'
Z
'
...
��
Q
I
Q
F-
=
0
I '..�
Z
U
'
'
Cr.
1
p
N
CD
O
H H
co
O U cc
?il
i
ami
N ,.:1 O
i
Y
�a
ora
SANTA
CLARA COUNTY
T2010
RAIL CORRIDOR
PRIORITIES
Figure
3-1
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-21
C. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED
1. Traffic LOS (Cupertino Intersections)
Table 3-C shows LOS conditions for 1) 1990 existing conditions, 2) Existing
General Plan (Modified) and 3) Proposed General Plan Amendment. Development
consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment could degrade traffic
operations at two intersections below the City's LOS standards which constitutes a
significant impact. Under the proposed General Plan Amendment, all analyzed
intersections would operate at LOS D or better except 1) De Anza Boulevard and
Bollinger Road, and 2) De Anza Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard which
degrade to LOS E+. In accordance with the General Plan Amendments, the City's
LOS standard for the latter intersection: De Anza and Stevens Creek Boulevards
would be set at LOS E (no more than 45 seconds weighted delay) to implement the
Heart of the City concept. This intersection is expected to operate at LOS E+ with a
40 second delay.
To achieve the LOS levels indicated under the proposed General Plan Amendment,
the following improvements to the roadway network in Table 3-F should be
completed within the time frame of the General Plan.
All of the proposed roadway improvements shown in Table 3-F are feasible within
the proposed General Plan Amendment time frame. The major De Anza Boulevard
improvements are all funded and programmed in the City's Capital Improvements
Program. Other listed projects are considered minor, including restripping and
signal modifications. One needed improvement is proposed within the City of
Sunnyvale's jurisdiction, that is, providing 2 southbound lanes on a segment of
Hollenbeck Avenue (Stelling Road) at Homestead Road where there is existing
street right-of-way.
Mitigation: Adopt land use controls to ensure that traffic LOS does not
degrade below LOS D (except Stevens Creek and DeAnza
intersection where LOS E is acceptable.) Adopt roadway
improvements to add capacity. Refer to Mitigation III Al a•I
and A2 a•h.
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-22
Table 3-F
PROPOSED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
De Anza Boulevard:
Homestead Road
Widen southbound approach to 4 lanes.
I-280 North Ramp
Widen NB & SB approaches to 3 lanes.
I-280 South Ramp
Widen NB & SB approaches to 3 lanes.
Stevens Creek Blvd. (at grade)
Widen NB approach to 4lanes, RTO SB.
Bollinger Road
Provide space for RTO NB & SB.
Saratoga/Sunnyvale Road at:
Prospect Road
Provide 8 Phase operation & 2 LTOs WB
Wolfe Road at:
Homestead Road
Lengthen NB RTO
Homestead Road at:
Stelling Road
Provide 2 lanes southbound.
NB = northbound
SB = southbound
RTO = right tum only
LTO = left tum only
it
11
t
It
r
11
A
1
r
I
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-23
2. Traffic LOS (Non -Cupertino Facilities and Intersections)
Development consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment is expected to
generate traffic that will increase congestion on the nearby freeway system and at
nearby street intersections outside of the City.
Although the General Plan Transportation Element deals directly with City streets, the
City is responsible for considering, as part of the Congestion Management Program
requirements, the freeways and adjacent streets in other jurisdictions. The City's
Transportation Element and modeling process did incorporate the surrounding area
growth patterns as well as the ABAG and MTC assumptions. The latest information
submitted by Caltrans indicates that the Level of Service at I-280 is F. The Cupertino
model runs indicate that SR 85 will be operating at Los F when it is completed. In
order to address the major freeways in the county, the Congestion Management Agency
will be preparing with local jurisdictions, a subregional plan that will be incorporated in
the City's future Deficiency Plan. It is anticipated that the subregional plan will be
completed within two years of adoption of Cupertino's General Plan Amendment.
However, developments that may precede the completion of the subregional plan will
be required to commence a Deficiency Plan at the time of development if the project
traffic exceeds the criteria of the "one percent rule." The one percent rule is a
requirement for a development to assist the City in preparing a Deficiency Plan when
the expected freeway traffic generated by the development exceeds one percent of the
freeway capacity. For example, a freeway has a capacity per lane of 2,000 vehicles per
hour. A three -lane freeway has a 6,000 vehicle capacity per hour. One percent of
6,000 is 60 vehicles. Therefore, if a project in Cupertino places more than 60 cars on
I-280, it would be required to assist the City in preparing a Deficiency Plan.
Furthermore, any analysis of site specific projects is required to analyze the traffic
impacts of intersections beyond the City's boundary whenever the project traffic
exceeds the one percent intersection capacity.
Mitigation: Conduct CMA traffic analysis of development projects and
prepare Deficiency Plan if required. Refer to Mitigation III A2 a -b.
3. Air Ouality
Development consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment is expected to
generate additional traffic and increase auto -related emissions which may have a
significant effect on air quality. The potential impacts and mitigations are discussed
under the Air Quality Section of this EIR.
Mitigation: Refer to Air Quality Section.
4. Noise
Traffic is considered the major contributor to the noise environment of Cupertino.
Development consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment is expected to
increase traffic volumes which will increase ambient noise. However, increased traffic
congestion will slow vehicle speeds which reduces ambient noise levels. The net
chWIge in noise levels from these two traffic conditions is potentially significant and is
discussed under the Noise Section of this EIR.
Mitigation: Refer to Noise Section.
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-24
D. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE MITIGATED
1. Traffic LOS (Cupertino Intersections)
According to Cupertino's traffic model, the proposed General Plan Amendment is
expected to deteriorate the LOS for the De Anza Boulevard/Bollinger Road
intersection to E+ which is below the City's General Plan traffic delay criterion of
D. The intersection lies on a boundary between the City and San Jose. No
additional feasible mitigation to the intersection has been identified to alleviate this
expected congested condition. The City may choose to either 1) accept a LOS of E
at this specific intersection or 2) reduce the proposed potential development level
commensurate with an improvement in traffic LOS to D or better.
E: ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
1. No Project Alternative
The "No Project" Alternative is the existing built condition as of 1990. The traffic
results of the "1990 Conditions" model run are used to approximate current
conditions because no significant new developments have been built and occupied
during this period that would add significantly to the traffic load. All analyzed
intersections are at LOS D or better except for two: De Anza Boulevard and
Homestead Road and De Anza Boulevard and the I-280 North Ramp. Proposed
roadway improvements indicated in Table 3-F are expected to improve the LOS at
these intersections to D or better. Under a separate model run regional growth
generated traffic is expected to add insignificant amounts of traffic to Cupertino's
street system even though the City's built condition would remain static under this
Alternative.
2. Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative
A separate run of the traffic model for the Existing General Plan (Modified)
Alternative was deemed unnecessary because of comparable traffic results available
from a previously completed model run using the April 1991 land use database. As
shown in Table 3-G, the differences between the April 1991 database and the
Existing General Plan (Modified)Altemative are statistically insignificant.
Table 3-G
COMPARISON OF 1991 LAND USE DATABASE AND THE EXISTING
GENERAL PLAN (MODIFIED) ALTERNATIVE
April 1991 Existing General
Land Use Land Use Database Plan (Modified)Alt. Differences (%)
Commercial 5,174,588 sq. ft. 5,246,000 sq. ft. + 71,412 (+1.4%)
Residential 19,052 DU's 18,560 DU's -492 (-2.6%)
Office/Industrial 8,856,905 sq. ft. 9,031,000 sq. ft. +174,095 (+2.0%)
Source: Cupertino Community Development Department.
III
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-25
The differences in the commercial and office/industrial buildout figures for the two
alternatives are due to minor corrections made in the land use database after April
1991. The residential buildout difference is due to a proposed reduction in hillside
density in the Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative.
The traffic model run of the 1991 land use database shows most analyzed
intersections operating at LOS D or better except De Anza Boulevard at Stevens
Creek Boulevard, and Stelling Road at Homestead road which are calculated to be
operating at LOS E+. Planned roadway improvements shown in Table 3-F will
change the LOS of these intersections to D or better.
F. LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES VS. LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
The Additional Mitigated Development Policy and Tiered Traffic Mitigation Policy
reflect the City's determination that additional growth should not be accommodated
unless traffic congestion can be mitigated primarily through reduction of travel demand.
Techniques to reduce travel demand, such as carpooling, transit use and on-site or
near -site housing will in the long-term help conserve energy resources and thus
enhance the long-term productivity of the environment.
G. GROWTH INDUCING EFFECTS
See Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character Section.
H ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS
I.
The Additional Mitigated Development Policy and Tiered Traffic Mitigation Policy help
implement the City's economic development objectives by providing for the reasonable
expansion needs of the major employers. While the TDM program requirements will
mitigate traffic impacts, it imposes an additional cost on developers/property owners
petitioning for the excess square footage and requires employees to modify their travel
behavior to reduce traffic congestion.
Development consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment would require an
irreversible commitment of energy (utilities and fuel) to support the planned
development.
MITIGATION MEASURES
A. TRAFFIC LOS (CUPERTINO INTERSECTIONS)
1. Proposed
a. In conjunction with the Tier 2 traffic mitigation procedures, require detailed
transportation system impact analysis (EIR) for any project which intends to
make use of any of the proposed 2,000,000 additional square feet of
office/industrial development . (Tiered Traffic Mitigation Program)
b. Continue to actively participate in the Congestion Management Program and
other regional efforts to control traffic congestion and its attendant air pollution
impacts. (Policy 41 Strategy No. 1)
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-26
c. Support the expansion of the County Transportation Agency bus fleet, and
support prioritizing commuter express service along expressways and City
arterial streets. (Policy 4-1 Strategy No. 2)
d. Support the extension of rapid transit along North De Anza Boulevard/Highway
85 Corridor and Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor. (Policy 4-1 Strategy
No. 3)
e. Maintain a reasonable minimum level of service D for major intersections during
the p.m. peak traffic hour (highest single hour) by imposing reasonable limits
on land use to ensure that principal thoroughfares are not unduly impacted by
locally generated traffic during the peak traffic hour.
In order to accommodate development which furthers a unique community
gathering place on Stevens Creek Boulevard, the intersection of Stevens Creek
and De Anza Boulevards may maintain a LOS E (No more than 45 seconds
weighted delay).
For land use and transportation planning purposes, the traffic peak hour should
not be allowed to expand into the peak period. Staggering of work hours
beyond current levels is not acceptable as a transportation demand management
(TDM) technique. The TDM technique must benefit both the peak hour traffic
and the average daily traffic volume. (Policy 4-2)
f. Carry out a citywide transportation improvement plan to accommodate peak
hour traffic flows on arterial streets and major collector streets at a minimum of
Service Level D. Service Level E is acceptable only for the intersection of De
Anza. (Policy 4-2 Strategy No. 3)
g. The City should consider an underpass at De Anza and Stevens Creek
Boulevards to improve traffic flow if needed to implement significant, new
growth. (Policy 4-2 Strategy No. 4)
h. Developers/employers may increase building area above levels allowed by
applicable Floor Area Ratios when it can be demonstrated that peak PM trips
can be reduced beyond base levels experienced by the specific applicants prior
to implementation of TDM programs. (Policy 4-3).
i. Coordinate bicycle route planning with surrounding cities and the County in
order to provide for the commuting needs of workers, shoppers and students
and the travel needs of park users. (Policy 4-9 Strategy 4)
j. Encourage freeway overpass construction to provide adequate design and width
to accommodate bicycle lanes and pedestrian crossings. (Policy 4-9 Strategy
No. 5)
k Use the Cupertino Scene and other media to provide educational material on
non -motoring travel. (Policy 4-9 Strategy No. 6)
1. Continue to work with the City Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee,
community groups and residents to eliminate hazards and barriers to bicycle and
pedestrian traffic. (Policy 4-9 Strategy No. 7)
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-27
2. Existine
a. Participate actively in developing regional approaches to meeting the
transportation needs of Santa Clara Valley residents. (Policy 4-1)
b. Develop the street construction plan that ensures that critical street
improvements are finished before or at the same time as major developments.
The plan should be based on the principle of equity, ensuring that land
developers help pay for street improvements. (Policy 4-4)
c. Discourage direct access from adjoining properties to major arterial streets.
Require access by interconnecting private driveway networks to connecting side
streets or other major entrance points unless this is unsafe or impractical
because of the established development pattern. (Policy 4-5)
d. Develop traffic management plans for neighborhoods affected by unacceptable
levels of through traffic. Design these plans based on the concept that commute
or through traffic should be redirected from local residential streets and minor
collectors to the freeway, expressway, and arterial and major collector streets.
(Policy 4-7)
e. Promote a general decrease in reliance on private cars by accommodating and
encouraging attractive alternatives. (Policy 4-9)
f. Encourage use of alternative transportation such as bicycles and motor bikes as
well as techniques that increase the number of people in each vehicle, such as
buses and van/car pooling (Policy 4-9 Strategy No. 1)
g. Require on-site bicycle facilities, including parking facilities, showers and
clothing storage lockers, in industrial and commercial developments. (Policy 4-
9 Strategy No. 3)
h. Consider the possibility of creating a shuttle service to link a propose bus
transfer station in Vallco Park with Town Center and North De Anza
Boulevard. Reassess the feasibility of requiring car or van pooling. (Policy 4-
9 Strategy No. 8)
B. TRAFFIC LOS (NON-CUPERTINO FACILITIES AND INTERSECTIONS)
1. Proposed
a. Continue to actively participate in the Congestion Management Program and
other regional efforts to control traffic congestion and its attendant air pollution
impacts by:
r:
1) requiring a separate traffic analysis using Congestion Management Agency
(CMA) methodology for projects that generate a large amount of peak hour
traffic.
2) preparing a deficiency plan as defined by CMA if the regional transportation
system is seriously congested. (Policy 4-1, Strategy No. 1)
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-28
b. Support the extension of rapid transit along North De Anza Boulevard/SR 85
Corridor and Stevens Creek Boulevard by the following means:
1) All right-of-way improvement projects shall be reviewed for potential
opportunities and constraints to rapid transit extension in these corridors.
2) Focus higher development intensities along the corridors and orient the
design of such developments to serve future transit patrons and pedestrians.
3) Seek the cooperative support of residents, property owners and businesses
in planning for a rapid transit extension. (Policy 4-1, Strategy No. 3)
c. After the completion of SR 85, the City should conduct a traffic analysis of the
street system to determine opportunities to improve the Level of Service.
(Policy 4-2, Strategy No. 5)
11 17. Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual Special Report (209), 1985.
ir
11
General Plan EIR Transportation and Circulation
Section 3-29
i
Sources
1.
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc., Traffic Model Documentation, December 1991.
2.
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. and City of Cupertino, Input and output data for traffic
model runs.
3,.
City of Cupertino, General Plan, February 1990.
4.
City of Cupertino, General Plan Amendment Background Report3-GPA-90:
Transportation. November 1991.
5.
Grigg, Glenn, City of Cupertino Public Works Dept. Verbal Communications, January
1993.
6.
Grigg, Glenn, City of Cupertino Public Works Dept. Written Communications, February 3
1
and 4, 1993.
7.
Institute of Transportation Engineers, Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook. 4th
Edition, 1991.
8.
Kelley, Fred, Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc., Verbal Communications, February 22,
1993.
9.
Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Draft Regional Transportation Plan for the San
1Francisco
Bay Area, April 1991.
10.
Molseed, Roy, Santa Clara County Transportation Agency. Facsimile Communications,
18, 1993,
eFebruary
11.
Roess, Roger and McShane, William, The 1985 Highway Capacity Manual: An Executive
Overview. 1986.
12.
City of San Jose, Horizon 2000 General Plan, revised December 1, 1987
13.
City of Santa Clara, General Plan Update: Program Environmental Impact Report. May 1,
1992.
14.
Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency, 1991 Congestion Management
Program for Santa Clara County adopted 10/30/91.
15.
Santa Clara County Transportation Agency, Santa Clara County Transportation Plan T2010:
Summary of Final Plan, March 1992.
16.
City of Sunnyvale, Transportation Element of the General Plan, 1981.
11 17. Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual Special Report (209), 1985.
ir
11
SECTION 4
PUBLIC UTILITIES/SERVICES
1
11
it
II
Table of Contents
Page
Introduction...................................................................... 4-1
A. Police Services.............................................................. 4-1
1. Environmental Setting .................................................. 4-1
2. Effects................................................................... 4-2
3. Alternatives..............................................................4-3
4. Long Term and Growth Inducing Effects ........................... 4-3
5. Economic and Social Effects .......................................... 4-3
6. Mitigation Measures .................................................... 4-4
B. Fire Suppression............................................................4-5
4-17
1.
Environmental Setting ..................................................
4-5
2.
Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated ........................
4-8
3.
Alternatives ..............................................................4-9
4.
Long Term and Growth Inducing Effects ...........................
4-9
5.
Economic and Social Effects..........................................4-9
4-19
6.
Mitigation Measures ....................................................
4-9
C. Schools......................................................................4-11
1. Environmental Setting.................................................4-11
2. Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated
-Overburdened School Sites.........................................4-13
3. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated .................... 4-15
4. Alternatives.............................................................4-15
5. Long Term and Growth Inducing Effects .......................... 4-15
6. Economic and Social Effects.........................................4-15
7. Mitigation Measures...................................................4-15
D. Library Facilities...........................................................
4-17
1.
Environmental Setting.................................................4-17
2.
Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated ......................
4-18
3.
Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated ...................4-18
4.
Alternatives .............................................................4
-18
5.
Long Term and Growth Inducing Effects ..........................
4-19
6.
Economic and Social Effects.........................................4-19
7.
Mitigation Measures...................................................4-19
8.
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
Should the Plan Be Implemented ....................................
4-20
E. Gas and Electric Services ................................................. 4-20
1. Environmental Setting.................................................4-20,
2. Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated .....:................ 4-20
3. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated .................... 4-20
4. Alternatives.............................................................4-21
5. Long Term and Growth Inducing Effects .......................... 4-21
6. Economic and Social Effects.........................................4-21
7. Mitigation Measures...................................................4-21
8. Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
Should the Plan Be Implemented .................................:.. 4-21
Table of Contents continued;
F. Waste Water................................................................
4-22
1.
Environmental Setting.................................................4-22
2.
Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated .......................
4-23
3.
Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated ....................
4-24
4.
Alternatives
5.
.............................................................4-24
Cumulative, Long Term and Growth Inducing Effects...........
4-24
6.
Economic and Social Effects.........................................4-24
7.
Mitigation Measures...................................................4-25
8.
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
Should the Plan Be Implemented ....................................
4-25
G. Solid Waste Management ................................................. 4-25
1. Environmental Setting.................................................4-25
2. Significant Effects WhichCan Be Mitigated ........................ 4-27
3. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated .................... 4-27
4. Alternatives.............................................................4-27
5. Long Term and Growth Inducing Effects .......................... 4-27
6. Economic and Social Effects.........................................4-28
7. Mitigation Measures...................................................4-28
8. Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
Should the Plan Be Implemented .................................... 4-29
H. Water Resources........................................................... 4-29
1. Environmental Setting.................................................4-29
2. Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated ....................... 4-33
3. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated .................... 4-33
4. Alternatives.............................................................4-33
5. Long Term and Growth Inducing Effects .......................... 4-34
6. Economic and Social Effects.........................................4-34
7. Mitigation Measures ................................................... 4-34
Sources.................................................................................4-36
Figures
Page
4-A Crimes by Types................................................................. 4-1
4-B Central Fire Protection District Station Locations ............................ 4-5
4-C Central Fire District Calls for Service by Type ............................... 4-6
4-D Per Capita Circulation.......................................................... 4-17
4-E Water Utility Service Area ..................................................... 4-30
4-F Water Supply and Demand....................................................4-32
Tables
4-A K-8 Student Generating Ratios...............................................4-13
4-B Wastewater Generation for 1990 .............................................4-22
SECTION 4
PUBLIC UTILITIES/SERVICES
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the Public Utilities/Services Section is to compare the Project Alternatives
to the capacity of key services and utilities. This part evaluates the physical capacity of
utility systems and of service oriented facilities. For this analysis, present capacities of
utility systems and accepted levels of service are used as a base for comparison.
A. POLICE SERVICES
1. Environmental Setting
The City of Cupertino currently contracts with the Santa Clara County Sheriffs
Department for police services and has done so since its incorporation in 1955.
These services include general enforcement, traffic patrol, and
investigations/detective services. The City is charged based upon the actual law
enforcement activity time and the costs are determined by the officers' hourly rates
for actual hours worked.
The County Sheriffs Department currently serves Cupertino from a substation
location in the City of Saratoga. There are 5 swing shift, 2 midnight shift and 4 day
shift officers to service the Cupertino area. There are approximately 1.1 officers per
1,000 Cupertino population. This officer ratio is much smaller than the 1989
California average of 2.00 officers per 1,000 population. The County Sheriffs
Department also has officers in adjoining cities (Saratoga, Monte Sereno, Los Altos
Hills) that can respond to the City if needed. Additionally, a multi -jurisdictional
response from non -county officers (San Jose, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara) can occur if
the City of Cupertino required it. The County Sheriffs Department provides
adequate coverage for residents and non-residents. The County Sheriff's
Department oversees all county unincorporated lands, as well as Los Altos Hills,
City of Saratoga, City of Monte Sereno, Santa Cruz summit mountain areas and
Stanford University. The Department's primary function is to enforce laws and
ordinances, crime prevention, maintenance of peace and order and preparation of
necessary records and reports.
Crimes reported in the City of Cupertino have generally decreased since 1985. The
majority of crimes reported are crimes of assault, while crimes to property are
second highest as indicated on Figure 4-A below.
3000 2569
2500 2269
2000 2143 2095
1000
„ ftiff
500 287 243 226 262
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-2
2. Effects
The California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G "Significant Effects," item
(z), indicates that "a project will normally have a significant effect on the
environment if it will interfere with response plans or emergency evacuation plans."
Based upon this criteria, the proposed General Plan Amendment would result in a
significant impact, if the new development occurred without increases in staffing
and equipment needed to maintain acceptable levels of service.
a. Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated
Police Services
Under the proposed General Plan Amendment, the population of the City with
the planning area would increase from 45,570 (1990) to 52,114 (build -out)
(10,758 increase). Using the 1990 ratios of 1.1 sworn officers per 1,000
population, the 6,544 -person increase in population would require an additional
3-5 Police Department sworn officers, above the 1991 number of 47 existing
sworn officers. These additional officers will be funded through the City
General Fund. Adequate projections for this amount have been built into the
City's budget.
Without an increase in police personnel, the population growth and
development that could occur under the proposed General Plan Amendment
could result in cases where the desired response time would not be met. Other
factors beside population that could influence the need for police services, and
the size of the Department, are the location of development, characteristics of
the future land use types and population characteristics.
The land use mix proposed under the General Plan Amendment includes an
increase of 1,072,000 sq.ft. of commercial building and 3,835,000 sq.ft. of
office and industrial building area above the 1990 "as built" condition. Office
and industrial uses create little impact to the Police Department except that the
vehicles added on the roadway can cause an increase in vehicular incidents
(accidents, traffic speeding citations). The increase in commercial building
area, if retail in nature, may trigger an increased need for officers to handle theft
related cases.
The effects on response time could be compounded by expected traffic
congestion on the roadway network in the City (see Transportation and
Circulation Section). However, emergency vehicle preemption controls exist
on most intersections. The intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard and De
Anza Boulevard is allowed under the proposed General Plan Amendment to
operate at a level of service "E" (unstable flow - high delay) to implement the
"Heart of the City" concept. If police needed to use those thoroughfares to
respond to a particular emergency, traffic congestion could delay the response
time beyond the non -emergency, average response time of 6.5 minutes,
compared to the 3 minutes average emergency response time. Residential
construction in the hillside areas will occur in a cluster arrangement which will
make access easier. Because of the remoteness of the area response times could
be delayed. However, since residential development density is proposed to be
very low, the number of calls can be expected to be less than that which would
result from more intense development scenarios.
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-3
1
Procedures have been developed for Police Department review of specific
development projects early in the planning process. A pre -hearing meeting
process has been created which brings the Sheriffs Department with other
service providers together to identify impacts to their services early in the
planning process.
Mitigation: Recognize fiscal impacts to the County Sheriff and City of
Cupertino and continue to analize sheriff's contract on an
annual basis to determine appropriate staffing requests.
Refer to Mitigation 6 al, a3, a4 and cl.
b. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated
o
None.
3. Alternatives
The Sheriffs Department reviewed the proposed General Plan Amendment and the
Alternatives discussed under this EIR. The Existing General Plan requires eleven
officers to protect Cupertino, based upon the crime projections from previous
years. The Proposed Project would require an additional 3 swom officers. The
City shares the cost of officers with other communities being served. The cost to
the City of Cupertino is based upon actual officer hours used. Future costs are
based on hours charged in past years. Based upon these estimates, funding can be
met through the City General Fund.
ffects
4. Long Term and Growth InducingEffects
1l
I1
i
The General Plan Amendment defines appropriate areas for growth in the future,
and adoption of the Plan does not induce development. The projected growth will
keep pace with the City's ability to provide police services. Major annexations are
not proposed as part of this plan. Over the long term, if the Sphere of Influence
area is proposed for annexation, the environmental impact would be reevaluated
prior to such an action in accordance with CEQA. Projected growth resulting from
implementation of the General Plan Amendment would add cumulatively to the
demand for police protection and related services. Any cumulative impact would be
minimized by the implementation of the mitigations for said growth.
5. Economic and Social Effects
The majority of proposed development will occur in high-rise buildings located in
the core of the city. The location of the development in the core areas will make it
easier for officers to arrive at incidents, but because the incidents may occur within
multi -story structures response times could be delayed. Hillside area development,
due to the remoteness of the area, could delay response times. However, fewer
calls can be expected, due to the very low density of residential development
allowed in the hillside areas.
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-4
6. Mitigation Measures
a. Proposed
1) Recognize fiscal impacts to the County Sheriff and City of Cupertino
when approving various land use mixes. An increase in retail activities
relates to an increase in thefts and related criminal activity. An increase
in growth may increase vehicle traffic which increases the risk of
automobile accidents. Both relate to a need for additional officers.
(Policy 6-40)
2) Continue to request County Sheriff review and comment on
development applications for security measures. (Policy 6-41)
3) Major subdivisions (5 or more lots) involving subdivided lots of 5 or
more acres shall cluster development, reserving 90% of the land in
private open space to protect the hillsides from adverse environmental
impacts. (Policy 2-43)
4) Encourage clustering of development for minor subdivisions (4 or fewer
lots) of property over 5 acres in size. Encourage reserving and
dedicating 90% of the land in private open space to protect the hillsides
from adverse environmental impacts. (Policy 2-45)
b. Existine
1) Continue to support the Neighborhood Awareness Program and others
intended to help neighborhoods prevent crime through social interaction.
(Policy 6-37)
2) Consider the relationship between building design and crime prevention
in reviewing all developments. Develop criteria with help from the
Sheriffs Office to determine the degree to which crime prevention
standards should override esthetic concerns. (Policy 6-38)
3) Encircle neighborhood roads with a public road to provide visual
accessibility whenever possible. (Policy 6-39)
c. Mitieation Measures - Not Part of Project
1) Continue to conduct an annual review of Police Department staffing,
equipment, and facilities with respect to trends in crime, police response
time, historical and forecast (short and long term) population growth,
recent development approvals, proposed development, and financial
resources.
2) Encourage the use of mobile data terminals in emergency vehicles to
provide field access to the public safety computer system.
3) Continue to place emergency traffic preemption controls on most traffic
signals by the Public Works Department.
4) Re -design the beat structure to retain acceptable levels of service (6
minutes response times) to all properties within the Urban Service Area.
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-5
5) Encourage a Sheriffs Department representative to attend and participate
in pre -hearing review meetings to provide early project review
comments.
B. FIRE SUPPRESSION
1. Environmental Settin
The City of Cupertino fire fighting and emergency medical services are provided by
the Central Fire Protection District. There are three fire stations in the city: 20215
Stevens Creek Blvd., 22620 Stevens Creek Blvd., and 21000 Sevens Springs
Road, as shown on the following map, Figure 4-B.
0
Stwau creek
R i it
0- Central Fire Protection District Station
1. Stevens Creek Boulevard - West.
2. Stevens Creek Boulevard - East
3. Seven Springs
CENTRAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
STATIONS LOCATIONS
Source: Central Fire Protection District, December 1992
Figure
4-B
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-6
Like most suburban fire fighting organizations, the District operates with relatively
few fire fighters. The three fire stations are staffed by a total of fifteen fire fighting
personnel on a 24-hour per day basis. Response times within the City are an
average of 5 minutes for an initial response. This is considered adequate for fire
suppression purposes. The District provides similar services for the Town of Los
Gatos, Monte Sereno and a portion of Saratoga. The majority of service calls are
medically related, as indicated on the following graph, Figure 4-C.
1000
900
q 800
o 700
t 600
C 500
a 400
I
1 300
s 200
100
0
1980 1985 1990
0 Hazardous ❑ i-lres ® Vehicle ® Other ® Medical
Materials Accidents
CENTRAL FIRE DISTRICT CALLS Figure
FOR SERVICE BY TYPE 4-C
Source: Central Fire Protection District, December 1992
I0
Ii
'J
If
V
I1
I1
I1
it
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-7
This part discusses the City's current efforts to minimize risk from fire and to
responsed to fires and other types of emergencies when they occur. The role of the
Fire Department in regard to hazardous materials is summarized in this section.
However, the overall response of the City to hazardous materials is discussed in the
"Hazardous Materials" section.
The District currently operates under mutual aide agreements with the State of
California, Santa Clara County and nearby cities, including San Jose, Saratoga,
Sunnyvale, Santa Clara and Campbell. The mutual aid agreements with
surrounding jurisdictions augment the district's fire response capabilities. Volunteer
fire companies are also available for fire protection, if needed.
The City of Cupertino has identified a high risk fire hazard area in the hillside areas.
These are areas that because of topography or restricted access make fire truck
accessibility more difficult. Construction in these areas requires special fire
prevention design techniques including frequent grade breaks in roadways, on-site
building fire sprinklers and/or water sources and class "A" roofing. The location,
spread, and size or urban fires are less predictable than wildland fires because they
can be started and not detected for some time because of the remoteness of the open
space areas. Open spaces are mapped and subject to weed abatement by the Santa
Clara County Weed Abatement Department. The property owners are primarily
responsible but, if needed, the County can contract the work to be completed and
then place a lien on the property for the cost of the abatement.
The assessment of potential damage from urban fires must concentrate on the public
buildings or other facilities whose high occupancy or critical functions justify a low
level of acceptable risk. All high rise or contiguous buildings, multi -story
apartments, commercial and industrial structures containing flammable substances,
hazardous materials or explosives are given careful attention. Business inspections
occur monthly by the Central Fire District personnel in order to identify hazardous
situations or buildings. The District actively collects data pertaining to each business
such as amount, type and storage methods of hazardous materials used, floor plans,
structural information and other pertinent fire -fighting information. This
information is used to assist in responding to emergency calls at these properties.
The District has adopted the Uniform Fire Code and the National Fire Code to
address peak load water supply requirements, minimum roadway widths, and
clearances around new structures. The codes also direct new construction and
include recommendations on the type of building materials in urban and rural
construction.
The City of Cupertino has a good safety record in terms of fire protection and
number of fire losses. This record is reflected in the City's fire insurance protection
classification of Class 3 (Barnes, 1992), on a scale of 1 to 10, with Class 1
indicating the highest protection level. The fire insurance protection classification is
designated by the Insurance Service Office (ISO) and is the rating of the District's
ability to defend against major fires in the District. The ratings consider water
supply, water storage, communications, and the District's staffing and equipment.
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-8
2. Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated
General Effect of Increased Development on Fire Services
Based upon the proposed General Plan Amendment, the population of the City
would increase from 45,570 (year 1990) to 52,114 (build -out), which is an
increase of 6,544. The increase in population will necessitate an increase in staff of
(three personnel and one emergency medical unit which is not considered
significant. The needs can be accomplished with staff and equipment. The increase
in staffing and equipment costs historically has been funded by its share of the
Countywide 1% gross property tax levy and the States Special District
Augmentation Fund. The projected increased costs for the next 5 years have been
restricted for funding into the District. The effects on response time could be
compounded by traffic congestion expected under the proposed General Plan
Amendment. The intersection of Stevens Creek and De Anza Boulevards will be
allowed to decrease to level of service "E" (unstable flow, high delay) (see
Transportation and Circulation Section). If emergency firefighting equipment
needed to use these thoroughfares to respond to a particular emergency, traffic
congestion could delay the response time beyond the response standard. Most
intersections, however, have emergency vehicle preemption controls which would
allow movement of vehicles blocking the emergency vehicles.
Mitigation: Incorporate fire suppression into equipment and design of
buildings and maintain good traffic flow. Refer to Mitigation
Section 6 (a, 1.14) and 6 (b, 1.5).
High Rise Structures
A high-rise structure is defined as a building of five stories or greater or 60 feet in
height. The major difference in a high-rise structure versus a low-rise structure
deals with the accessibility to the fire. In a horizontal structure, fire fighting is
generally accomplished from the exterior of the building inward, while a high-rise
fire is generally attacked by entering the building and fighting the fire from within.
The staffing and equipment requirements for a high-rise building differ dramatically
from low-rise structures of the same size because of the nature of the fire fighting
attack.
Mitigation: Incorporate fire suppression into design of buildings. Refer
to Mitigation Sections 6 (a, 1.12) and 6 (b, 1.5).
Hillside Development
Although the majority of existing development is within the urbanized valley floor,
some semi -rural, hillside development is projected. While most new residential
development will be clustered, hillside developments, due to their accessibility
difficulties, are subject to greater damage from fire than valley floor development. ,
Mitigation: Ensure that subdivision, hillside residential zoning, and
building codes incorporate fire protection requirements
regarding access, water availability, and consruction materials
and practices. Refer to Section 6 (a, 1-14) and 6 (1.5).
d. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated
None.
5. Economic and Social Effects
The Central Fire Protection District funds itself through a special assessment
District and impact to the City of Cupertino is minimal. There are no expected
social effects from the General Plan Amendment related to fire services.
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-9
3. Alternatives
The Existing General Plan (Modified) Aternative would require an increase in staff,
Continue to require fire sprinklers in new residential construction located in
two fire fighting personnel, one fire marshall and one emergency medical unit.
These are the same requirements as the proposed General Plan Amendment. The
decrease in hillside development is not significant enough to change employee
Require new hillside development to have frequent grade breaks in access
requirements. The decrease in hillside development would require the same
employee/equipment requirements.
!,
ffects
Require new hillside development to upgrade existing access roads to meet
4. Long Term and Growth InducingE
The increase in population as a result of the implementation of the General Plan
r,
Amendment would add cumulatively to the demand for fire suppression services.
Involve the Central Fire Protection District in the early design stage of all
No growth inducing effects to fire services are expected as a result of the General
Plan Amendment.
5. Economic and Social Effects
The Central Fire Protection District funds itself through a special assessment
District and impact to the City of Cupertino is minimal. There are no expected
social effects from the General Plan Amendment related to fire services.
6. Mitigation Measures
a. Proposed
1)
Continue to require fire sprinklers in new residential construction located in
hillside areas and on flag lots. (Policy 6-6)
2)
Require new hillside development to have frequent grade breaks in access
routes to ensure a timely response of fire personnel. (Policy 6-7)
!,
3)
Require new hillside development to upgrade existing access roads to meet
Fire Code & City Standards. (Policy 6-8)
'
4)
Involve the Central Fire Protection District in the early design stage of all
projects requiring public review to assure fire department input and plan
modifications as needed. (Policy 6-9)
5)
Encourage cooperation between water utility companies and the Central Fire
Protection District in order to keep water systems in pace with growth and
firefighting service needs. (Policy 6-10)
fire fighting
6)
Encourage utilities to consider Central Fire Protection District
needs when upgrading water systems. (Policy 6-11)
7)
Attempt to involve the Central Fire Protection District in the design of public
roadways for review and comment. Attempt to ensure that roadways have
frequent median breaks for timely access to properties. (Policy 6-12)
\
8)
Continue to promote fire prevention through Cry initiated public education
programs either through the government television channel and/or the
Cupertino Scene. (Policy 6-13)
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-10
9) Recognize that multi -story buildings of any land use type increases fire
exposure risks. Ensure that adequate fire protection is built into the design
and require on-site fire suppression materials and equipment as required for
safety of the community. (Policy 6-14)
10) Consider adopting a residential fire sprinkler Ordinance. This will reduce
fire flows and then reduce the need for fire fighting personnal and
equipment. (Policy 6-15)
11) Coordinate with the Central Fire District in considering new guidelines for
fire protection for Commercial & Industrial uses. (Policy 6-16)
12) Discourage the use of private residential entry gates which act as a barrier to
emergency service personnel. (Policy 6-17)
13) Major subdivisions (5 or more lots) involving lots over 5 acres shall cluster
development, reserving 90% of the land in private open space to protect the
hillsides from adverse environmental impacts. (Policy 2-43)
14) Encourage clustering of development for minor subdivisions (4 or fewer
lots) of property over 5 acres in size. Encourage reserving and dedicating
90% of the land in private open space to protect the hillsides from adverse
environmental impacts. (Policy 2-45)
b. Existing
1) Encourage the County to put into effect the fire reduction policies in the
County Public Safety Element. (Policy 6-3)
2) Encourage the Midpeninsula Open Space District and the County Parks
Department to continue efforts in fuel management to reduce fire hazard.
(Policy 6-4)
3) Encourage the Midpeninsula Open Space District to consider "green" fire
break uses for open space lands. This could include commercial timber
harvesting. (Policy 6-5)
4) Allow public use of private roadways during an emergency for hillside
subdivisions that have dead-end public streets longer than 1,000 ft. or find a
second means of access. (Policy 6-18)
5) Continue to require smoke detectors in new residential construction and
continue to support fire protection agencies' education of homeowners on
installation of smoke detectors. Use the Cupertino Scene to publicize fire
hazards and correction methods. (Policy 6-19)
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-11
c. Mitigation Measures - Not Part of This Proiect
1) Continue to conduct an annual review of the Central Fire Protection District
staffing, equipment, and facilities with respect to trends in response time,
historical and forecast short and long-term population growth, recent
development approvals, proposed development, and financial resources
(ongoing budgetary review, City of Cupertino).
2) Provide an adequate number of highly trained and equipped personnel to
respond to fire, flood, chemical release and medical emergencies within the
established response time (ongoing, Central Fire Protection District).
3) Continue fire and hazardous materials mutual aid agreements with
surrounding jurisdictions (ongoing, Central Fire Protection District).
4) Continue to place emergency traffic preemption controls on key traffic
signals by the Public Works Department (ongoing, Cupertino Public Works
Department).
5) Continue to involve the Central Fire Protection District in Pre -hearing
review for early review of projects during the planning stages.
C. SCHOOLS
1. Environmental Settine
Cupertino K-12 students attend schools in two districts: the Cupertino Union
School District and the Fremont Union High School District. The Cupertino
School District serves K through 8 grades, with 18 open elementary educational
sites; seven of which are located in Cupertino; four junior high schools, two located
in Cupertino. The Fremont Union High School District serves 9th through 12th
grade,operating and maintaining five senior high schools and one continuation
school, with three high schools located within the City. The Fremont Union High
School District boundaries encompass the cities of Cupertino and Sunnyvale as well
as portions of Los Altos, Santa Clara, San Jose and Saratoga. The Fremont District
operates and maintains five senior high schools and one continuation school. There
is also the Foothill/De Anza Community College District which operates two
community colleges in the District. The DeAnza campus is located in Cupertino.
The District is the 8th largest community college district in the United States with a
1991 enrollment of 20,000 students.
General Plan E1R Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-12
a. Population History
In the 1960's the number of students entering elementary schools grew quickly
and then declined in the 1979s. The decline resulted from a declining birth rate,
changing development trends from single family to multiple family housing, the
conversion of large tracts of land from residential or agricultural zoning to
commercial/industrial development, the lack of available land for further large
scale residential development, and rapidly escalating housing costs which made
housing less affordable for young families with children. In the mid 1980's the
school population reached its lowest point in overall enrollment since the 1950's
and then began to climb again, reflecting the demographic shifts in the
community and in housing growth. The subsequent decline in enrollment
resulted in the closure of ten schools (nine elementary and one junior high) in
the City of Cupertino by 1991. Four of the closed sites have been sold, one
remains to be sold, one is used for alternative education, one will reopen in
September 1994, one was converted to a junior high school and two remain in
reserve status for possible reopening in the event enrollment increases beyond
existing capacity.
The forecasts show continued increases in enrollment through the year 2001.
b. Funding Sources
Fluctuation in school enrollment and inadequate funding for new facilities have
complicated planning for schools in Cupertino. Until the passage of
Proposition 13 and with the requirement for a two-thirds majority vote, new
schools were financed through bond issues. The Cupertino Union School
District is funded through the state's revenue limit system established in 1972.
The current revenue limit for the school district is $3006 per student. As local
property tax receipts increase, state funds decrease to ensure that the district's
base funding does not exceed its revenue limit. The district receives no funding
from the state for new facilities to accommodate enrollment growth. The
Fremont Union High School District is a "basic aide" district which is
supported by the local property tax base. Revenues are dependent on assessed
valuatins and are not generally affected by student enrollment] Approximately
80% of the District's budget is from this source, and since these funds are
unrestricted, the Board of Trustees determine how they. are to be allocated.
These funding sources have not kept up with ongoing maintainance and new
capital improvement requirements to meet existing and projected enrollment.
After State enabling legislation was enacted in 1987, the Districts began
assessing a fee against new construction to help pay for school facilities. The
maximum fee allowed is $1.65 per square foot for residential (the amounts
currently assessed are $0.33 to the Cupertino District and $0.65 to the Fremont
District). Periodic inflation adjustment to the maximum fee of $1.65 per square
foot is allowed. As of January 1, 1993, an increase in the maximum school
facilities fee for residential development increased to $2.65 per square foot.
The School District must justify the additional fee of $1.00 per square foot to
mitigate school facility impact. This additional fee must be divided between
both Districts. The Districts have agreed that the fee will be divided by
allocating $0.60 per square foot to the Cupertino District, and $0.40 per square
foot to the Fremont District. The maximum fee for commercial is $0.27 per
square foot (the amounts currently assessed are $0.06 to the Cupertino District
& $0.00 to the Fremont District). Senior citizen housing is charged at the
non-residential rate.
I
11
I
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-13
Finally, the District receives a share of State Lottery revenues. The amount of
income generated from this source is unstable. The State Lottery revenues are
expected to steadily decline.
2. SiQttificant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated - Overburdened School Sites
The Cupertino Union School District is completing a developer fee study
(demographic and land use studies) to determine if the existing developer fees are
adequate to pay for incoming students resulting from new construction or changes
in land use. It is likely that the Districts will seek an increase of construction fees to
overcome projected impacts. The Board of Trustees of the Fremont Union High
School District will consider increasing the fee in Cupertino from $0.65 to $0.84
per square foot. If the increase is approved, the new fee will be effective May 1,
1993.
The existing and future housing mix is the primary factor used in the calculation of
the number of potential students. The Fremont Union District's demographic study
assumed. 1,386 new housing units in Cupertino. The Existing General Plan
(Modified) Alternative projects 1,100 units and the Proposed General Plan
Alternative projects 2,584 dwellings. The type of dwelling is a major factor in
determining student population per household.
The Fremont Union High School District estimated that the housing mix would
include 1,369 single-family and 17 multi -family units while the City of Cupertino
estimated housing mix is 1,108 single family and 1,484 high density housing units
for the Proposed General Plan Alternative. Therefore, the students generated from
the General Plan Amendment may not exceed those projected by the Fremont Union
High School District because of the residential density type. Historically, the
student generating ratios for multi -family housing is much lower than for single-
family housing.
The Cupertino Union School District's demographic study is not fully completed.
The District is calibrating student generating ratios related to dwelling unit type.
For the purpose of this study, a composite dwelling unit yield is used to calculate
student yield. Table 4-A describes student generating ratios, and K-8 yield
resulting from new growth from the Existing General Plan (Modified) and
Proposed General Plan Amendment.
Table 4-A
K-8 STUDENT GENERATING RATIOS
Based upon Alternative Plan
K-8 Yield per
Housing Units Housing .Unit Student Yield
Existing Gen. Plan (Modred) 1,584 .226 358
Proposed Gen.Plan Amend. 2,584 .226 584
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-14
These factors do not account for significant increases in birth rates or immigration
of ethnic groups with significantly higher birth rates than the California average. It
assumes that adult residents of higher density housing will have the same
inclination to enroll in adult education classes on average as the current population.
Further, it assumes that the multi -family student generating ratio is the same in
Cupertino as in other communities. It may be possible that the Cupertino multi-
family student generating ratio may be higher because of the cost of land being so
high that the moderate income families may be more likely to purchase or rent multi-
family units rather than single-family units.
The elementary school District estimates that student yields from existing
households will increase and as a result the existing active school sites may reach
capacity. The student growth resulting from new residential development identified
in Table 4-A will necessitate measured responses from the Cupertino Union School
District. The growth issue will be particularly critical in the core area of the city
where much of the new residential growth will occur. The District will develop a
strategy which will begin with the least expensive solutions such as altered school
assignment boundaries to equalize the load among schools and the use of modular
classrooms. If the need cannot be met via student shifting and modular classrooms,
the District may have to consider reopening closed schools. This option is
expensive due to the need to complete major repairs and upgrades. School impact
fees will be employed to fund required improvements. However, potential
expansion of school facilities required to accommodate increased demand may not
be fully funded by impact fees collected and therefore outside funding sources or
other alternatives would be required. One alternative would be to limit residential
growth to ensure that school capacity is not exceeded.
The students projected based on the growth scenarios will eventually reach the high
school District. The Fremont Union High School District indicates that under
existing population and land use configurations the District needs to provide twelve
new classrooms at a cost of $2,388,000. District wide projected housing increases
will require the placement of 55 additional classrooms at a cost of 11 million
dollars, for a total cost of 13 million dollars. The District's developer fee is
projected to generate enough funds to cover these costs. The impact related to
Cupertino growth under existing zoning is estimated to be between $1.75 - $2.5
million for one new building, depending on the type of building required. The
proposed zoning changes to increase housing under the General Plan Amendment
could further impact the District. The District would need to locate other funding
sources not currently available for this building and teacher costs. Impacts could
result in impacted classrooms and reduced services to students.
The District's demographic studies may result in increased developer impact fees
that could mitigate some of the impacts, but these monies cannot be applied to
teacher's salaries, so other funding sources would be required.
Development under the proposed General Plan Amendment could increase the
number of students served by local school districts beyond existing capacity.
Mitigation: Share information with the district and monitor school
enrollment rates. Refer to mitigation 7 (a, 1-6).
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-15
3. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated
Busing has been'stopped at the junior high school level. Elementary school busing
is available only to those students who must cross expressways (Lawrence and
Foothill). By decreasing busing, more parents will drive their children, increasing
the number of vehicles on the roadway and increasing local carbon levels and
perhaps incidents of vehicle related accidents.
4. Alternatives
The "No Project" Alternative does not necessarily equate to less impact because the
Districts are today significantly impacted and is difficult to estimate the changing
population characteristes, i.e., whether the existing population will have more
children than the past decade. The Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative
will help relieve the hillside busing difficulties but will not relieve the existing
impacted situation. Shifting of school attendance boundaries will be required.
Possibly the placement of modular classrooms will also be required.
5. Long Term and Growth Inducing Effects
The Cupertino Union School District has sold 6 school sites which are
unretrievable. Realignment of school attendance boundaries will occur to
accommodate additional students due to future growth. This will result in the
construction of new facilities or the placement of portable structures on existing
land owned by the District. A reduction in open space area surrounding the existing
schools will occur placing more students on publicly owned open space areas (see
further discussion in the Open Space and Parks Section). An increased number of
students per classroom may result in curriculum standards being reduced or an
overall reduction of service available to students.
6. Economic and Social Effects
If the Cupertino District cannot raise the additional funding required to purchase
portable buildings then the new students created, as a result of the General Plan
Amendment, will be added to the existing school facilities. Therefore, the
classroom sizes will increase and the teachers' ability to effectively teach students
will decrease.
The re -drawing of the schools attendance boundary lines would adversely affect
some students. This impact is a result of students being moved from their existing
schools to another school within the District. This would require that the students
adjust to a new school setting, become familiar with new students and teachers.
7. Mitigation Measures
a. Proposed
1) Recognize the financial impacts of increased residential development on the
school Districts' ability to provide staff and facilities. Work with the
districts to assure that the continued high level of school services can be
provided for new development. (Policy 2-65)
2) If busing continues, encourage District staff to become more involved in
hillside roadway design to meet the minimum standards required for busing
access. (Policy 2-66)
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-16
3) Create pedestrian access between new subdivisions and school sites.
(Policy 2-67)
4) Continue to provide School Districts with building permit data which will
enable the District to record the type of construction, location and their
square footage to plan for future schooling needs. (Policy 2-68)
5) Major subdivisions (5 or more lots) involving subdivided lots of 5 or more
acres shall cluster development, reserving 90% of the land in private open
space to protect the hillsides from adverse environmental impacts. (Policy
2-43)
6) Encourage clustering of development for minor subdivisions (4 or fewer
lots) of property over 5 acres in size. Encourage reserving and dedicating
90% of the land in private open space to protect the hillsides from adverse
environmental impacts. (Policy 2-45)
b. Existing
Allow land uses not traditionally considered part of a college such as
lodging or conference facilities and institutional office and research facilities
to be built at De Anza College. Final determination of the intensity,
character, and ultimate desirability will be evaluated with regard to the
effects on traffic and the consistency with the college's education nature.
(Policy 2-69)
c. Mitigation Measures - (Not Part of This Project)
1. The local school districts within Cupertino have adopted a school impact
fee, in accordance with State legislation. The fee is assessed at the time of
building permit issuance and is levied upon all new residential, industrial
and commercial developments within the city.
Provide early notification in the planning process to the school districts for
school impact fees. Implementation of the above -listed mitigation measures
would reduce potential impacts to schools. However, potential impacts to
school services may not be mitigated below a level of significance. Any
expansion of existing school facilities could result in temporary air quality
and noise impacts due to construction, as well as removal of on-site open
space.
d. Any Irreversible Environmental Changes
None.
I
Ll
I .l
1
if
i
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-17
D. LIBRARY FACILITIES
1. Environmental Setting
The Cupertino library is operated by the Santa Clara County Library services. The
building is owned by the City of Cupertino for which the County pays a rental fee
to the City. The County of Santa Clara pays for library services through designated
portions of the property tax within the County, special district augmentation funds
and miscellaneous revenues. The City of Cupertino pays for Sunday services,
through the City General Fund. The Library encompasses 37,000 square feet
(25,454 sq.ft. public area), has seating for 143 patrons and shelving space for
212,000 volumes. The library is the reference facility for all County Libraries and
holds the largest childrens and adult collection of all County libraries (Janice Yee
inventory July 1991). The library contains an 1,800 sq.ft. program room with a
maximum occupancy of 100. The library houses a technical services workroom
where all books and other materials acquired by the library are ordered, cataloged,
and processed. The building's basement is used for the storage of periodicals and
for the City of Cupertino Building Department plans storage. The library is open 52
hours per week. November 1992 circulation was 84,494 items. An average of 904
people entered and exited the building on Sundays (Jan - May 1990, S. Fuller
memo April 12, 1990).
The 1991 circulation was 856,000 items. The number of people who use library
facilities continues to increase. As of July 1992, 37,312 or approximately 92% of
Cupertino residents have library cards. Figure 4-D depicts a decade of library per
capita circulation. During peak usage times, the library seating is nearly at capacity
for customer use. The library is approaching its shelving capacity. Additional
shelving can be added only by removing existing seating areas, which would
reduce seating capacity. The library recently (May 1992) implemented a
computerized catalog system which is expected to result in an increase in library
circulation due to the easier accessibility to materials.
22
20
Note: 1986-1988 circulation decreased due to constructionof
the library extension
18
c
0 16
2
0
8
14
0
A
CL 1
Co
U
a`> 1
a
Years 4
82-83 83-84 8485 85-86 86.87 87.88 88-89 89.90 90.91 91-92
PER CAPITA CIRCULATION
Figure
4-D
Source: Santa Clara County Library 1993
2
0
8
6
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-18
2. Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated
The California Environmental Quality Act Appendix G(w), "Significant Effects
indicates that a project "will normally have a significant effect on the environment if
it will ... conflict with established... educational... uses of the area. Appendix I of
the CEQA guidelines indicates that a project could have a significant effect if it
would result in the need for new or altered governmental services. The criteria used
to estimate library impact is decreased levels of service due to inadequate staffing to
meet the need. Based on the criteria, the proposed General Plan Amendment would
result in a significant impact if it would allow new development without appropriate
increases in library staffing. Development under the proposed General Plan
Amendment could result in an increase in the number of patrons using the library.
Given the current conditions at the library, the potential increase in usage is
considered a significant impact.
Potential buildout under the proposed General Plan Amendment would result in a
population increase of approximately 6,544 persons. Many of the users of the
library are not residents of Cupertino but daytime employees (existing non-resident
employees 8,077) or other county residents who need to use the reference material
at the Cupertino facility. The combined population increase and projected employed
non-residents could have significant impacts on the heavily used library. Patrons
today experience delays when checking out materials and when attempting to
receive reference services. These delays will continue to worsen during peak usage
times.
3. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated
Increased land development will increase demand for service. There are budget
constraints that the County of Santa Clara places on the County -wide library
system. In 1991-1992, the City of Cupertino paid $43,705 for Sunday services
and for the Library Commission activities. The Cupertino 1992-93 fiscal year will
include a 11% budget increase for Sunday library services ($48,175.00). If the
County decides to maintain the 1991-92 fiscal budget at the same level as previous
years, and if the State budget is reduced, then the library will need to make choices
regarding services. These choices may include a reduction of operating hours, or
discarding of items to make room for new materials being purchased. This may
increase inconvenience for patrons in their use of the building and materials.
Mitigation: Monitor population growth and continue cooperative effort
with County Library services to meet serving requirements.
Refer to Mitigation Sections 7 (b, 1-7) and 7(c, 1-3).
4, Alternatives
The library building is experiencing overcrowding of material space. Additional
population increases could require a larger building to continue the current level of
service, collection size and seating capacity as preferred by library staff. According
to the County "if new construction is involved, the City of Cupertino will have to
provide funding"(Jaech, September 1991). The projected City budget does not
include funding for a new structure. Therefore, continued discarding of materials
will occur to make room for new material. Discarding is normal for a library,
except when material which is still popular must be discarded. Decreased
construction or population may decrease the use of the library, but this is not
guaranteed.
A
1
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-19
5. Long Term and Growth InducingEffects
ffects
The long term effects of approving the proposed General Plan Amendment will
include patrons waiting in longer lines, not only during peak library usage time but
also non -peak usage times. Also, with the continuing need to purchase current
library materials, other items from the collection must be discarded. This will affect
residents' ability to get the materials that they require. This may include residents
being delayed while materials are shipped from another library. Or, the materials
may not be available from the County system requiring residents to use other
adjoining communities public libraries.
6. Economic and Social Effects
An increase in population and day -time, non-resident work force (see the
jobs/housing imbalance in the Housing Section for further discussion) is likely to
increase the type and range of materials needed to meet the needs of its users. This
will impact residents as explained in the long term impact portion of this part.
7. Mitigation Measures
a. Existin
None.
b. Proposed
1) Recognize that if the community desires a higher level of library service,
that this would require the cooperation between the County of Santa Clara
and City of Cupertino in expanding library services and facilities if deemed
necessary. (Policy 2-70)
2) Integrate and coordinate the Library system into all applicable General Plan
goals, such as transportation, pedestrian and bike trails. (Policy 2-71)
3) Encourage the library to incorporate new technology to improve service
levels into the library system. Encourage the adjustment of library
collections and programs to meet the needs of Cupertino residents,
businesses and ethnic population. (Policy 2-72)
4) Actively seek methods to increase library facilities. (Policy 2-73)
General Plan EBR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-20
c. Mitigation Measures -Not Part of This Project
1) Monitor and evaluate library services on an annual basis to determine future
needs for library services with respect to population forecasts, approved and
proposed development, and financial resources (ongoing, City of Cupertino
budgetary process).
2) Monitor and evaluate library services on an ongoing basis with regard to the
changing needs of the community and requirements to meet that need
(ongoing, Library Commission).
3) Continue the operation of the Library Commission which advises the City
Council on the adequacy of library service within the community and such
other matters relating to library services. The Commission serves as liaison
between the City and the Santa Clara County Library system (ongoing).
8. Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Should the Plan Be Implemented
None.
E. GAS AND ELECTRIC SERVICES
1. Environmental Setting
Gas and electric services are provided by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
The company currently has approximately 400 personnel located at the Cupertino
Service Center on Blaney Avenue. These employees include administrative service
and maintenance personnel. There are two electric distribution substations serving
Cupertino, and the power transmission for the area is served by the Morita Vista
substation. Power is generated from various sources, including: fossil fuel,
hydroelectric, nuclear, wind, and geothermal plants. the power generated from
these sources are fed into a large grid system serving Northern California. P.G. &
E. brings electric power into Cupertino on overhead and underground transmission
lines crossing the City.
Power lines serving new development are placed in underground conduits,
although on-site transformers are often above -ground. Power. lines in older areas
of the City are still on poles. Criteria used to set priorities for undergrounding
include the ability to coordinate with other street improvements, the cost of
undergrounding, location along major thoroughfares, and financial support from
neighboring property owners for related improvements. Many remaining overhead
powerlines are in backyard easements, making maintenance, especially tree
trimming, very difficult. Space and water heating are the dominant users of
electricity and natural gas in businesses and residences.
2. Sionifrcant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated
None.
3. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated
Continued residential and nonresidential construction will use more energy which is
unretrievable.
11
r
II
io
�r
it
I ID
I
I
I
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-22
F. WASTE WATER
1. Environmental Setting
Waste water collection and treatment in the Cupertino Urban Service Areas is
provided by the Cupertino Sanitary District and the City of Sunnyvale. The
Cupertino Sanitary District serves the majority of the Cupertino Urban Service Area
while the City of Sunnyvale serves a small portion of the City within the San Jose,
Rancho Rinconada area; which is generally located South of Stevens Creek
Boulevard., East of Tantau Avenue, North of Bollinger Road and West of
Lawrence Expressway. The City of Sunnyvale's remaining sanitary district
boundary includes the City of Sunnyvale itself, Moffett Field Naval Air Station,
and the NASA Ames Research facility.
Cupertino Sanitary District: The District owns and maintains a sewer main system
which collects and transports waste water to the San Jose/Santa Clara Water
Pollution Control Plant located in North San Jose adjacent to the San Francisco
Bay. The District purchases water treatment capacity from the plant. The District
has purchased capacity of 8.6 million gallons per day from the San Jose/Santa Clara
Treatment Plant.
Table 4-B describes the estimated wasterwater generation by land use types for the
three Alternatives.
Land Use Categories
Retail Sq. Ft.
Hotel Sq. Ft.
Office/R&D/Industrial Sq.Ft.
Residential (SF) Dwellings`
Total -Gallons Per Day (GPD)
Table 4-B
WASTEWATER GENERATION FOR 1990
Existing Development, Existing General Plan (Modified),
and Proposed General Plan Amendment
1990 Existing Existing General Plan General Plan
Development (Modified) Amendment
Building Area
and Dwellings
3,359,000
139,000
7,457,000
9,302
6.697
ME
255,284
66,720
1,342,260
2,204,574
810,337
4,679,175
Building Area
and Dwellings
4,721,000
525,000
9,031,000
9,792
Building Area
GPD and Dwellings GPD
358,796
4,431,000
333,756
252,000
687,000
243,600
1,625,580
11,292,000
2,032,560
2,320,704
9,792
2.320,704
884.147
8,791
1.063,711
5,441,227 .
6,087,731
Notes:
1. Gallon per day coefficients were used to calculate the gallons per day for each square foot of
building space and each dwelling unit. The coeffiecients are as follows: Retail/sq. ft. .076,
Hotel/sq. ft. .480, Office/R&D/Inddsq. ft. .180, Residential coeffiecients are expressed in gpd, per
unit, not square feet. The coeffiecient is 237 gpd per single-family (SF) and 121 gpd per multi-
family (MF) residential unit.
2. Single family dwellings located in Rancho Rinconada are excluded because they are served by
Sunnyvale. (Total 1,4961 dwellings")
3. A conservative coefficient of .18 gpd/sq. ft. was used for combined office/R&D/Industrial
classification. A coefficient of .14 is normally used for office.
4. Single family attached dwellings are factored in residential multifamily category.
5. Institutions, including schools and churches, are not included in the above calculations.
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-21
4. Alternatives
P.G. & E. can accommodate the growth under the General Plan Amendment with
reconstruction or reinforcement of existing facilities which is being completed.
Additionally, further energy use may require the purchase and installation of one
gas regulator pit, further reinforcement of existing facilities, installation of
distribution main feeders at both the Wolfe Road and Stelling Road substations, one
gas regulator station would be installed. Decreased development may equate to a
decreased in energy use if remaining uses are not modified to high energy use
facilities.
5. Lone Term and Growth InducingEffects
ffects
Cumulative impacts would include the increase in energy use by new development
both during construction and following construction.
6. Economic and Social Effects
Continued efforts in energy conservation will be supported and required. The
social effects of supporting energy conservation include the requirement that people
continue to concentrate on energy issues and energy saving measures on a daily
basis. This may include an ongoing effort both by the City and by P.G. & E. to
keep the general public informed about these techniques.
7. Mitieation Measures
a. Existing
None.
b. Proposed
1) New construction will include Title 24 building requirements and will
incorporate new energy efficient materials.
2) Continue to act as a liaison between P.G. & E. and the community in
providing energy efficiency. (Policy 5-38)
c. Mitigation Measures - Not Part of This Project
1) Energy conservation will continue to be emphasized to reduce energy usage.
8. Sienificant Irreversible Environmental Changes Should the Plan Be Implemented
Development allowed by the General Plan Amendment would require an
irreversable commitment of energy to support the projected urban development.
I
i
it
I
its
I
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-23
As evidenced by Table 4-B, additional growth as indicated. will not exceed the plant
capacity. Institutions, including schools and churches, are not factored in the
study. Cupertino Sanitary District representatives indicated that the waste water
generation from these facilities will not significantly alter the conclusions of Table
4-B. The major sewer impediment relates to water quality problems associated with
the San Jose/Santa Clara Treatment Plan.
Sunnyvale Sanitary District: The City of Sunnyvale owns and maintains a sewer
main system which collects and transports waste water to the City of Sunnyvale's
Water Treatment Control Plant, located on Borregas Avenue. The Treatment Plant
has a daily capacity of 29 million gallons per day. The existing users are generating
approximately 15 million gallons per day.
The plant capacity is expected to be sufficient for the growth projected in the
General Plan Amendment to the year 2005. This will result in the required upgrades
to the existing transport system but the impacts are not considered significant.
2. Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated
Development under the proposed General Plan Amendment would increase demand
for wastewater treatment. This would result in a mitigable impact to wastewater
treatment services.
The Cupertino Sanitary District will experience localized problems specifically in
the area bordered on the North by Stevens Creek Boulevard, West of Wolfe Road,
South of Homestead Road and East of Denison Avenue. This will require
upgrading to the tributary lines, which costs will be partially paid for by private
developers. The costs associated with this upgrading is dependent upon the size of
the lines needed to serve a particular type of development and the amount of
discharge from that development.
The Sunnyvale Sanitary District has the capacity to treat increased growth if the land
use types remain as currently zoned. If a change in zoning allowed high discharge
users, such as industrial or manufacturing, the discharge from these types of users
would exceed current capacity. The proposed General Plan Amendment is not
proposing to change the current zoning to allow high discharge users where they
are not presently allowed, so no impacts are identified for the District.
Development under the proposed General Plan Amendment will increase the
amount of outfall to the San Francisco Bay and other waterways which will impact
salt water fauna.
Outfall to the San Francisco Bay waters has a significant impact on water quality
and wildlife. Because the South Bay has limited circulation, pollutants build up and
increasingly degrade the Bay's water quality. Because of the fresh water impact to
salt water, outfall continues to present an ongoing hazard for the fish, birds and
other wildlife living in and around the Bay and for the people who daily use and
enjoy the Bay. Until the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control plant
completes its reclamation project (1996) these fresh waters will continue to flow
into the Bay and cause the impacts identified. After this project is implemented
many communities will begin recycling these discharge waters into a usable source
of water for plants and other related uses. This will decrease the amount of water
discharged to Bay waters and reduce the amount of impacts.
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-24
Mitigation: Monitor development and continue efforts to reduce waste
water. Upgrade deficient tributary lines when development
occurs. Refer to Mitigation Section 7(b,1.5) and 7(c,l).
3. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated
None.
4. Alternatives
The"No Project" Alternative does not equate to lesser impact to the District. If
existing development square footage and land use types remain but are concentrated
in the urban core, this concentration could stress existing sanitary line capacity.
The Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative will relieve the outfall line pump
station adjustments required to accommodate the additional flow produced from this
location.
5. Long Term and Growth Inducing Effects
The approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment will result in an increase of
approximately 1,072,000 sq. ft. of commercial, 3,835,000 sq. ft. of office and
industrial, 750 hotel rooms and approximately 2,600 housing units. The ultimate
construction of this amount of development will result in the generation of
wastewater which will add to the cumulative increases in the demand for the
collection, treatment and processing for these wastes.
The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) has recently raised its
concerns regarding copper and nickel concentration exceedences in wastewater to
the San Francisco Bay. One source of copper in the water pollution control plant
influent is from the existing water supply. The Santa Clara Valley Water District,
the County water wholesaler, adds copper sulfate to the water to prevent algae
formation. Another copper source is from copper piping corrosion. The nickel
source in the influent is "permitted" industry discharges.
Public hearings held by the RWQCB are ongoing. Future discussions will
concentrate on what evidence exists that nickel and copper levels are hazardous to
biota in the Bay. Further, the evidence will be reviewed to determine scientific
defensibility. It is unclear what, if any, regulations or prohibitions will result.
Due to the nature of the copper and nickel sources, any additional growth which
increases the use of water or increases permitted industry discharges could
exasterbate any existing condition. Until further information is known, no specific
impact conclusion or mitigation regarding the General Plan Amendment can be
made. The Cupertino Sanitary District is recommending alternatives in order to
allow growth and address the existing copper discharges. One recommendation
includes changing the type of anti -algae product or further encouraging the use of
non-portable water, thus reducing discharges to the Bay.
6. Economic and Social Effects
The costs associated with the upgrading of the tributary lines will be borne
primarily by the private developer. This will occur incrementally as the owners of
the properties in the area of Wolfe Road, North Stevens Creek Boulevard, South
Homestead Road propose construction. The need for additional capacity by new
development will require the upgrade to facilities. Because of this cause and effect,
the developer will be responsible for the costs for upgrades.
it
� 4
I
I f"
I
it
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-25
7. Mitigation Measures
a. Existiniz
None.
b. Proposed
1) Consider impacts on the sanitary system if significant industrial uses are
proposed in the Stevens Creek Boulevard area. (Policy 6-59)
2) Recognize that new high discharge users in the Vallco area and the Stevens
Creek Boulevard & Blaney Avenue area will require private developers to
upgrade tributary lines. (Policy 6-60)
3) Continue policy of required low flow toilets and shower heads to reduce
water flow.
4) Major subdivisions (5 or more lots) involving subdivided lots of 5 or more
acres shall cluster development, reserving 90% of the land in private open
space to protect the hillsides from adverse environmental impacts. (Policy
2-43)
5) Encourage clustering of development for minor subdivisions (4 or fewer
lots) of property over 5 acres in size. Encourage reserving and dedicating
90% of the land in private open space to protect the hillsides from adverse
environmental impacts. (Policy 2-45)
c. Mitigation Measures - Not Part of This Project
1) Continue to involve the Sanitary District's early in the planning process in
order to evaluate the impacts to the Sanitary Districts. This will enable the
private developer to be notified of any related improvements as a result of
their project (ongoing, Pre -Hearing review).
8. Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Should the Plan Be Implemented
Development allowed under the General Plan Amendment would require the
upgrading of some tributary lines, increase demand for wastewater treatment, and
increase outfall to the San Francisco Bay.
G. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
1. Environmental Setting
In recent years, region -wide concerns have been expressed regarding existing
landfill capacity and the lack of potential landfill sites to meet future needs. This
concern is compounded by a growing recognition of environmental impacts
associated with landfill usage. Santa Clara County will exhaust its landfill capacity
by the year 2013. All publicly owned landfills are expected to reach capacity in the
1990's.
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-26
To assure adequate landfill capacity to meet future needs, the City of Cupertino has
entered into a joint powers agreement with five other Northwest cities in the County
to provide a solution to common solid waste concerns. In 1989, Cupertino
finalized a contract for the landfill at Newby Island, located in North San Jose,
bordering Milpitas. Newby Island is a 342 -acre site, which is capable of processing
up to 800 tons of refuse daily, recovering more than half for recycling. The terms
of the agreement are for 30 years (2019) or upon depletion of the tonnage allocated,
(2,050,000 tons) which ever comes fust. Newby Island has a permitted capacity of
approximately 50.8 million cubic yards, with a remaining capacity of approximately
27.1 million cubic yards. A recycling facility called The Recyclery, is adjacent to
the Newby Island landfill. The City of Cupertino contracts with this facility for its
material recycling.
In 1991, the City of Cupertino generated 36,392 tons of solid waste which was
transported to Newby Island. The sources of this waste was as follows: 34%
(12,358 tons) commercial, 34% (12,290 tons) industrial, 31% (11,308 tons)
residential and 1% (436 tons) self -haul. The City of Cupertino diverted
approximately 9,044 tons from being landfilled during 1991. This diversion is
approximately 19.9% of the total solid waste stream.
As a result of concerns regarding lack of potential landfill area, Assembly Bill 939
was adopted. This bill mandates that all cities and counties in California recycle
25% of their solid waste streams by the year 1995 and 50% or the maximum
amount feasible by the year 2000. Additional, each city and county must develop a
Source Reduction and Recycling Element that will serve as the recycling plan to
meet the goals of AB 939. This Element has been adopted by the City Council.
The City of Cupertino intends to meet the objectives of AB 939 through
implementation of strategies contained in its Source Reduction and Recycling
Element (SRRE). To aid in obtaining the solid waste diversion goals of AB 939,
the City's SRRE outlines provisions to:
- reduce the use of non -recyclable materials
- replace disposable materials and products with reusable materials and
products
- reduce packaging
- encourage product substitution toward less toxic materials
- purchase repaired or repairable products
- purchase durable products
- increase the efficiency of materials used in the commercial & industrial sector
- reduce generation of yard waste and promote backyard or on-site composting
According to the SRRE, the City will increase existing source reduction activities
through a rate structure modification, economic incentives, technical assistance and
public education and regulatory programs.
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-27
2. Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated
Appendix G(e) of the CEQA Guidelines states that a project "will normally have a
significant effect on the environment if it will conflict with adopted environmental
plans and goals of the community where it is located," or "...breach published
national, state, or local standards relating to solid waste or litter control." Based on
these criteria, the proposed General Plan Amendment would result in a significant
impact if it would interfere with the achievement of the waste diversion levels
mandated by AB 939, or result in a substantial need for new, altered, or expanded
solid waste services not met by the proposed plan. Development under the
proposed General Plan Amendment would increase the demand for solid waste
services.
The City will place emphasis on commercial recycling, since commercial solid
waste (including commercial, industrial and self -haul sectors) constitutes 69% of
the solid waste generated in the City.
The proposed General Plan Amendment is estimated to require a total annual solid
1
waste disposal amount at buildout of 49,236 tons per year. The City agreement
allows a maximum of 2,050,000 tons. Therefore, the City of Cupertino will meet
the disposal requirement. The City of Cupertino's residential, commercial, and
system -wide recycling programs, will further help to reduce solid waste at the
landfill.
An indirect impact is increased traffic along roadways used to access waste disposal
sites and the associated increase in litter and refuse along these routes. This can be
mitigated by all haul trucks being covered as required by law.
Mitigation: Continue emphasis to meet AB939 state mandate to meet
waste reduction goals. Refer to Mitigation Section 7(b,1-5)
and (d,1-8).
3. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated
Air quality impacts from solid waste disposal activities which include increases in
vehicle -related exhaust emissions. Traffic impacts from such uses may include
increased traffic on access roads leading from the users to the waste facility and
increased safety hazards along these roadways resulting from the increased traffic.
'
4. Alternatives
The existing Newby Island contract provides for the capacity to meet the solid
waste distribution under all alternatives reviewed.
5. Long Term and Growth Inducing Effects
Projected growth resulting from implementation of the General Plan Amendment
will cumulatively add to the demand for collection, treatment and disposal services
of the solid waste generated by new development.
The operation of a solid waste disposal site requires the excavation of the existing
topography thereby destroying the native vegetation and disrupting the natural
wildlife habitat in the site area. Additional potential impacts to surface and ground
water quality can occur due to leachate contamination. These are potential impacts
which are considered unique to solid waste disposal facilities. The City of San
Jose, the community that the solid waste facility exists in, requires that the approval
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-28
of solid waste sites include planning for their eventual, phased restoration to
recreational or open space uses. Such planning for future uses must include the
revegetation/reforestation of the re-contoured topography, thereby restoring
vegetation and assisting in the re-establishment of the wildlife habitat.
6. Economic and Social Effects
The City of Cupertino's source of funding for integrated waste management
activities is the Resource Recovery Fund. All revenues within this fund can only be
used for the purpose of expenditures related to solid waste related programs,
including disposal, curbside recycling, household hazardous waste events, spring
and fall clean-ups, and other special events.
Revenue for the resource recovery fund comes from rates from refuse collection by
the Los Altos Garbage Company, the refuse collector for the City of Cupertino. The
City of Cupertino collection agreement with the Los Altos Garbage Company is for
a period of ten (10) years, effective February 21, 1989. The estimated annual
program costs through 1995 are $968,000. Increases in garbage rates for all
garbage service in the City will be increased to generate additional revenue to offset
new program costs. The City will continue to expand the recycling efforts in the
commercial sector, thus reducing disposal costs to the City. Additionally,
contingency funding sources for the City might be obtained from special taxes or
assessments or rate structure modifications.
7. Mitigation Measures
a. Existing
1) Residential yard waste pickup program.
2) Residential curbside collection operation.
3) Multi -family recycling operation.
4) Commerical and industrial recycling program.
5) Cardboard drop off program.
b. Proposed
1) Continue to expand the City's commercial and industrial recycling program
to meet AB939 waste stream reduction goals. (Policy 6-54)
2) Continue to streamline the City's residential curbside recycling program in
the next decade. All City-wide residential zoning districts should be
included in the curbside recycling program. (Policy 6-55)
3) Modify existing on-site waste facility requirements to all multi -family
residential, commercial and industrial land uses to have 50% of their
garbage area dedicated to recycling and 50% dedicated to solid waste.
(Policy 6-56)
4) Continue public education regarding the reduction of solid waste disposal
and recycling. (Policy 6-57)
I
I
14
It
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-29
5) Continue to encourage City staff to recycle at all City facilities.
(Policy 6-58)
c. Sipnificant Mitigation Measures - Cannot Be Mitigated
None.
d. Mitigation Measures - Not Part of This Proiect
1) Continue residential rate structure in place per can rate with higher cost to
customer as more cans are used. (ongoing, Public Works)
2) Commercial mixed recycle rate; 63% reduction in cost for mixed recyclable
program for the commercial customers. (ongoing, Public Works)
3) Purchasing programs for products with recycled material content, retread
tires, reduced packaging and bulk purchases. (ongoing, City-wide)
4) Use of double -sided copiers in offices and print shops. (ongoing,
City-wide)
5) Use of electronic mail, routing slips. (ongoing, City-wide)
6) Use of non -disposable cups and utensils in food service programs.
(ongoing, City-wide)
7) Reuse of uniforms and shop rags in public motor pool garages and
facilities. (ongoing, Public Works)
8) Programs to provide education and information to employees and the
general public on source reduction. (ongoing, Public Information Division)
8. Sianificant Irreversible Environmental Changes Should the Plan Be Implemented
Potential lack of future landfill sites to meet future disposal needs requiring
aggressive packaging changes and resource reuse.
H. WATER RESOURCES
1. Environmental Setting
The Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) is a public agency responsible for
Santa Clara County's flood control, water importation, groundwater recharge, and
water treatment and distribution within Santa Clara County. The following four
major water retailers are responsible for distribution within the City's boundaries:
San Jose Water Works, California Water Service; Cupertino Municipal Water
System, and the Reglin Mutual Water System, as shown in the following water
utility service area map, Figure 4-E.
I
I
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-30
Cupertino Municipal Water System
r■
■
51■i
California Water
1—
n�aW getl I 1 1
1 r
� 1
a
a
KENN on an i ■ 1/...
f s Bo�IInOu qC
1
f San Jose Water Works
.Imp.
dY,
■
■ IReglln Mutual Water System
r■.� 1
The City of Cupertino
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Water Company Service Areas
--- Urban Service Area Boundary
-- Boundary Agreement Line
®Area Subject to Lease Agreement
San jose Water Works
WATER UTILITY SERVICE AREAI Figure
4-E
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-31
The water retailers that serve the City of Cupertino residents presently provides
water service to a population of about 45,570 persons with an area of
approximately 13 square miles. Cupertino's water supply is primarily from
imported water sources. Some local water supply is available from water runoff
into local reservoirs/streams and through natural recharge of subbasins. The
primary importation water supplier is from the San Felipe Project, the State Water
Project and the Hetch-Hetchy system.
Groundwater: The Santa Clara Valley Water District has ten storage reservoirs with
a capacity of 169,000 acre-feet of storage. These reservoirs collect local run-off
' during the winter storms for later release to percolation ponds. From these ponds,
water percolates and recharges the underground aquifers. In addition to local
run-off, water imported from the State Water Project and the United States Bureau
of Reclamation's Central Valley Project is also utilized to recharge the Santa Clara
Valley groundwater basin.
As a result of urban development and the corresponding increase in water demand
and the six year drought, a long-term overdraft of the groundwater has occurred.
This has caused the lowering of the groundwater table and compaction of certain
aquifers which in turn has caused significant land surface subsidence county -wide.
A potential source of contamination of groundwater is contamination from private
wells not constructed in accordance with current sanitary standards, abandoned
wells that are not properly sealed and possible hazardous materials spills, ie., gas
station tank leaks. The Santa Clara Valley Water District administers the locating,
survey and proper sealing of such wells and ongoing hazardous material water
contamination mitigation and monitoring.
If
I
Water conservation: The City of Cupertino Water Conservation Ordinance went into
effect on May 6, 1991. This Ordinance includes prohibitions of water usage,
inverted rate structure and increased water rates. As a result of the 1992 winter
rains and the fact that in May 1992, the Santa Clara Valley Water District announced
reduction in the mandatory water rationing county -wide from 25% to 15%, these
Ordinances were amended. This was a result of winter rains which increased
'
reservoir water retention up to 40%. The Ordinance eliminated certain restrictions
from the conservation list.
The Santa Clara Valley Water District states that they would be able to supply the
required increased water, projected under the General Plan Amendment because the
1
projected demand is 0.6% of the proposed Association of Bay Area Governments
for Santa Clara County water needs through the year 2005. The Water
projection
Utility Enterprise report provides water supply and use information. The June,
1992 report projected districtwide water use through the year 2010, which is 400
thousand acre-feet annually as shown in Figure 4-F. The projected water supply
through the year 2010 will exceed the acre-feet demand.
If
I
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-32
NORTH SANTA CLARA COUNTY, ZONE W-2
Water Supply (Thousands of Acre -Feet)
500
400
300
200
100
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Zulu cure cute
Recorded Imported ® Recorded Local
® Projected Imported Projected Local
NORTH SANTA CLARA COUNTY, ZONE W-2
Water Use [Thousands of Acre -Feet)
500
400
300
200
100
0 .........
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Rcrd. Munk. & Ind. ® Rcrd. Agricultural
ON Proj. Munic. & Ind. Proj. Agricultural
WATER SUPPLY AND DEMANDI Figure
4-F
Source: Water Utility Enterprise, SCVWD, June 1992
I
K
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-33
2. Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated
Appendix G(f), (g), (h) (i), and (n) of the CEQA Guidelines, a project "will
normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will substantially degrade
water quality; contaminate a public water supply; substantially degrade or deplete
ground water resource; interfere substantially with ground water recharge; or
encourage activities which result in the use of large amounts of ... water."
Water Supply: Development under the proposed General Plan Amendment would
increase the demand for water. This would result in less remaining water for
overall users. By having less water available, because more will be used, this may
expedite the need for structural modifications i.e., expand capacity of existing
reservoirs or construct new reservoirs. It may also result in increased research in
the application of reclaimed water. Overall, the Santa Clara Valley Water District
has planned for long term of growth in the District serving area, through the year
2005. The water supply needed for long term growth, under normal rainfall
conditions, will be available to meet the proposed General Plan Amendment needs.
Water Ouality: Water quality degradation from siltation during construction projects
allowed under the proposed General Plan Amendment would constitute a potentially
significant impact. During construction, grading and vegetation removal would
expose sediments to rain or wind erosion and subsequent transportation of
sediments into one of the creeks in Cupertino by storm water. The silt load that
would be generated could degrade the quality of water in the creeks and South San
Francisco Bay, and could obstruct natural flow patterns or adversely affect
biological resources.
3. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated
Water that will be used under the Proposed General Plan Amendment growth is
unretrievable.
r4.
Alternatives
Under the Existing General Plan (Modified) growth scenario the Santa Clara Valley
Water District indicated that they could serve the water retailers. This is because the
amount of water projected under this scenario is less. than 0.1% of the estimated
water usage projected through the year 2005. This amount of water usage was
based upon all jurisdictions in the Association of Bay Area Governments with
"No
water usage amounts based upon General Plan build -out. The Project"
Alternative will allow the Reglin Mutual Water System, a nonprofit organization
operated by the homeowners, and which serves a portion of the hillside area, to
remain an operator under existing conditions. If upgrades to the system is required,
annexation by an adjoining water company would be desirable. The two adjoining
water systems, Cupertino Municipal and San Jose Water, can continue to serve
existing users as required.
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-34
5. Long Term and Growth Inducing Effects
Projected development under the General Plan Amendment will result in a demand
for water supply.
Projected development under the proposed General Plan Amendment would
increase the amount of impervious surfaces, thereby adding cumulatively to
increased amounts of storm water runoff, which would lead to a degradation of
water quality and could lead to increased flood hazards.
The Reglin Mutual Water System, is in need of certain upgrades to the system and
ongoing maintenance to create an adequate suitable system. To achieve these much
needed upgrades, annexation by an adjoining water company would be desirable.
6. Economic and Social Effects
If drought conditions and growth continue, the water retailers will be required to
continue with drought tactics. This will include water reduction methods such as
inverted rate structures or other methods to encourage water conservation. Inverted
rate structures and other such methods require an increased fee for the same
amounts of water usage. The general public will be required to curtail their water
usage or budget to accommodate the increased fees.
7. Mitigation Measures
a. Existing
1) Continue to support the Santa Clara Valley Water District to find and
develop ground water recharge sites within Cupertino's planning area and
provide for public recreation at the site where possible. (Policy 5-26)
b. Proposed
1) Actively pursue interagency coordination for regional water supply problem
solving. (Policy 5-29)
2) Recognize that additional capacity requirements placed on the Reglin Mutual
Water System may require that one of the adjoining utility companies annex
and service users in the next decade (through year 2001). Recognize that
if annexed by the Cupertino Municipal Water System an increase in capital
improvement projects and required financing would be required to enhance
the water supply system. (Policy 5-30)
3) Continue to keep Cty-wide efforts of water conservation similar to those
being conducted on a region -wide scale. Many of these conservation efforts
are outlined in the Santa Clara Valley Water District Drought Plan and
County -wide Water Use Reduction program. (Policy 5-31)
4) Continue providing the public information regarding the status of the
drought and water conservation techniques. Consider sending regular
notices to households and businesses on water prohibitions, water
allocations and conservation tips. Continue to broadcast conservation video
tapes on the City's government channel. Continue to provide water
conservation kits to the community upon request. (Policy 5-32)
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-35
5) Prohibit excessive water uses throughout the City, irrigation of existing
landscaping during the daylight hours, require large water users to perform
water audits. These and other policies shall be enforced until such time as an
official declaration has been made by Santa Clara Valley Water District that
the drought conditions no longer exist. (Policy 5-33)
6) Undertake programs for long-term water conservation at City buildings
including installation of low flow toilets and installation of automatic
shut-off valves in sinks of park buildings. (Policy 5-34)
c. Mitigation Measures - Not Part of this project
1) Continue to involve the water retailers in the early planning stages of
development and evaluate their ability to service these users (ongoing,
Community Development Department).
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-36
Sources
1. California Cities, Towns and Counties. 1990.
2. California Water Service Company letters of July 20, July 21, May 22, April 29,
1992.
3. Central Fire Protection District letters of December 21, March 27, 1992.
4. City of Sunnyvale Sanitary District, Public Works letter of May 22, and June 19,
1992.
5. County of Santa Clara Library Department letter of April 12, 1990, April 26 and
October 21, 1991 and June 24, December 22, and March 25, 1992.
6. County of Santa Clara Sheriffs Department letter of December 23, 1992, October 24,
1991.
7. Cupertino Library Commission Annual Report 1991.
8. Cupertino Sanitary District letters of June 11, November 4, and February 18, 1992.
9. Cupertino Union School District letters of October 23, 1991, December 18,
November 11, August 31, March 3, 1992
10. Disposed Waste Characterization Study for the City of Cupertino. CalRecovery.
September 1991.
11. Documentation of the Need for Development Impact Fees. Recht Hausrath &
Associates. September 12, 1991.
12. Enrollment Projections 1991-2001 Cupertino Union School District. Morgan
Woollett & Associates. April 1992.
13. Environmental Impact Report, City of Cupertino General Plan 1990.
14. Final Budget, City of Cupertino 1990-1993. Adopted July 2, 1990 and July 1992
respectively.
15. Fremont Union High School District letters of October, 25, and May 10, 1991 and
December 16, May 19, April 29, and April 24, 1992.
16. General Plan, City of Cupertino dated February 1990.
17. Commission letters of December 23, and March 18, 1992.
18. Pacific Gas & Electric letters of December 21, and June 1, 1992, May 13, October 23,
and May 14, 1991
19. Reglin Mutual Water Company letter of May 14, 1991 and May 20, 1992.
General Plan EIR Public Utilities/Services
Section 4-37
Sources continued
20. San Jose Water Company letter of December 11, 1992, January 27, 1992 and May 8,
1991.
21. Santa Clara Valley Water District letter of May 23, 1991.
22. Source Reduction and Recycling Element, City of Cupertino, April 1992.
23. Long Range Facility Master Plan. Cupertino Union School District. April 1980.
24. Water Supply Master Plan Overview, Santa Clara Valley Water District. 1991.
I
1
li
L,
1
I
I
I
1
i�
I
SECTION 5
AIR QUALITY
I
I�
1
Table of Contents
Page
I. Environmental Setting................................................................ 5-1
A. Air Quality Regulatory Context...................................................5-1
1. Federal..........................................................................5-1
2. State............................................................................. 5-3
3. Clean Air Plan..................................................................5-3
4. Bay Area Air Quality Management District ................................. 5-3
B. Sources of Air Pollution...........................................................5-4
1. Carbon Monoxide............................................................. 5-4
2. Ozone........................................................................... 5-8
3. Suspended Particulates........................................................5-9
C. Toxic Air Pollutants...............................................................5-10
1. Toxic Air Contaminants ... :.................................................. 5-10
2. Other Types of Toxics Controls............................................5-11
3. Toxic "Hot Spots..............................................................5-12
D. Cupertino's Air- Quality...........................................................5-12
E. Cupertino General Plan Amendment............................................5-17
F. Consistency with Other Plans...................................................5-17
II. Impacts..................................................................................5-18
A. Significant Criteria................................................................5-18
B. Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated...................................5-19
1. Vehicle Emissions............................................................5-19
2. Construction and Mining....................................................5-19
3. Toxic Pollutants...............................................................5-19
C. Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated...............................5-19
D. Effects Found Not To Be Significant...........................................5-19
1. Low Levels of Pollutants from Homes and Offices ......................5-19
2. CO Buildup Along Highway 85 ............................................5-20
E. Alternatives Analysis.............................................................5-20
III. Mitigation...............................................................................5-20
A. Mitigation Measures..............................................................5-20
1. Existing........................................................................5-20
2. Proposed.......................................................................5 20
B. Effects of Mitigation Measures ..................................................5-21
Glossary 5-22
Sources..................................................................................5-24
Tables
Page
5-A Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards.................................5-2
5-B Modeled Carbon Monoxide Concentrations (PPM) .............................. 5-7
5-C Major Stationary Sources of Pollutant Emissions Within the City of
Cupertino (tons/year)...............................................................5-10
5-D Exceedences of State Standards - San Jose Monitoring Station ...............5-12
5-E Total Bay Area Emissions (tons/year)............................................5-13
Figures
5-A
Bay Area Carbon Monoxide Exceedences.........................................5-5
5-B
Map of Receptor Locations..........................................................5-6
5-C
Bay Area Ozone Exceedences.......................................................5-8
5-D
Bay Area Particulate Exceedences..................................................
5-9
5-E
Bay Area Carbon Monoxide--One-Hour Background Values
.................5-14
5-F
Bay Area Ozone--One-Hour Background Values...............................5-15
5-G
Bay Area Total Suspended Particulate (TSP)....................................5-16
I
JI
I
1
1
1
19
L�
I
I
I
1
I
SECTION 5
AIR QUALITY
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The primary factors which determine air quality aro the location of air pollutant sources and
the amount of pollutants emitted from stationary and mobile sources. Meteorological and
topographical conditions are also important Atmospheric conditions, such as wind speed,
wind direction, and air temperature gradients interact with the physical features with the
landscape to determine the movement and dispersal of air pollutants. The San Francisco
Bay area is a large shallow basin surrounded by hills which taper into a series of sheltered
valleys. The Santa Clara Valley is one of these protected valleys and is surrounded by the
Santa Cruz mountains to the South and West and by the Diablo Range to the East. These
mountains act as a natural barrier that prevents the free flow of air and dispersion of
contaminants.
Air flow commonly drains down the valley toward the Bay at night and reverses the flow
up the valley by day. This daily recirculation compounds the pollution problem in the
valley since the pollutants drift back and forth, constrained laterally by the valley walls.
The prevailing regional wind pattern in the Bay area transports pollutants from the urban
areas to the north into the South Bay. An example of this is the summer prevailing wind
pattern which generally flows through the Golden Gate into the Santa Clara Valley carrying
with it pollutants from the San Francisco and Oakland metropolitan areas. In the winter,
periods of calm weather are characterized by light winds that flow from the Central Valley
into the bay area through the Carquinez Strait. Horizontal air flow, or wind, is a major
factor that influences pollutants dispersion. On days when wind speeds are low, as
typically in the case of the Santa Clara Valley, the potential air pollutant concentration is
high. Topography influences wind patterns in individual communities.
Regulation of air quality is achieved through both Federal and State ambient air quality
standards and emission limits for individual sources of air pollutants. These air quality
standards are identified in Table 5-A.
a,:
The Federal Clean Air Act requires that the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) identify National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to
protect health and welfare. The National Air Quality Standards have been
established for ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur
dioxide (SO2), suspended particulate matter (PM10) and lead (Pb). Major
amendments to the Federal Clean Air Act were signed into law on November 15,
1990. These amendments prescribe new planning requirements and attainment
deadlines for areas that do not attain National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS). The Federal standards for ozone and carbon monoxide are less stringent
than the State ambient air quality standards for these pollutants. The Federal act
prescribes planning and control requirements similar to those contained in the
California Clean Air Act (CCAA).
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 2
FEDERAL AND STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
National
Edm= Califomia
Pollutant Averaging Time Standard Standard
Ozone
I -Hour
0.12 ppm
0.09 ppm
Carbon Monoxide
8 -Hour
9.0 ppm
9.0 ppm
1 -Hour
35.0 ppm
20.0 ppm
Nitrogen Dioxide
Annual
0.05 ppm
------
1-Hour
------
0.25 ppm
Sulfur Dioxide
Annual
0.03 ppm
--------
24-Hour
0.24 ppm
0.05 ppm
1 -Hour
--------
0.50 ppm
Total Suspended
Annual Mean
75 ug/m3
-------
Particulates*
24 -Hour
250 ug/m3
--------
Suspended Particulate
Annual Mean
50 ug/m3
30 ug/m3
Matter (PM10)
24 -Hour
150 ug/m3
50 ug/m3
Lead
24 -Hour
1 ug/m3
--------
*Former standard now replaced by PM 10
EXPLANATION: All of the standards are measured in terms of the concentration of the
pollutant in a volume of air. Ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide
are measured in parts per million (ppm). Total Suspended Particulates and Suspended
Particulate Matter (PM10 - particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter ) are
measured in micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3). The standard figures reflect an average
of readings taken over a specific period of time.
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; California Air Resources Board; Bay
Area Air Quality Management District
The Federal act contains planning time frames and attainment goals which are significantly
different from those contained in the CCAA. These time frames and deadlines also vary by
pollutant. Those areas within each State that do not meet federal primary standards are
designated as non -attainment areas. If the standards are met, the area is designated as an
attainment area. The Federal act contains a classification system for ozone non -attainment
areas that includes five different classifications with varying attainment deadlines, based
upon ambient levels of ozone. The CCAA contains a classification system that includes
three different classifications, with attainment deadlines based upon when an area is
projected to attain the standard. Efforts are underway to adjust the CCAA planning
requirements, submittal dates, and classification system to more closely parallel and
coincide with those contained in the Federal act. These adjustments will require
amendments to the CCAA.
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
General Plan EIR Air Quality
Section 5 - 3
California has adopted ambient standards which are more stringent than the Federal
standards for the criteria air pollutants. Criteria pollutants are so titled because they
are pollutants that are subject to the National ambient standards. The Environmental
Protection Agency has established acceptable concentration levels for these
pollutants according to certain health and welfare criteria. Under the California
Clean Air Act (CCAA), patterned after the Federal act, areas have been designated
as attainment or non -attainment with respect to the State ambient air quality
standards. The intent of the California Clean Air Act of 1988 is to establish a
planning process which will result in attainment of the State's health -based ambient
air quality standards at the earliest practicable date. If possible, District plans should
achieve a reduction in district wide emissions of 5% per year for each non -
attainment pollutant or precursors. Areas that cannot achieve the 5% per year
pollutant reduction target specified in the Act can comply with an alternative
requirement, which requires that a plan include every feasible measure and an
expeditious adoption schedule. Neither "feasible" nor "expeditious" is defined in
the act.
�Wy1I TI iIMQM
The nine -county Bay area (which includes Santa Clara County) has been designated
as a non -attainment area with respect to the State standards in ozone, particulate
matter (10 microns or greater) and carbon monoxide. To achieve the State air
quality standards for ozone and carbon monoxide, the Bay area 1991 Clean Air
Plan (CAP) has been adopted (Bay Area Air Quality Management District, October
1991).
The goal of the CAP is to improve air quality throughout the 1999s through tighter
industry controls, cleaner vehicles, cleaner fuels, and increased commute
alternatives to reduce conventional automobile trips. The CAP encourages cities
and counties to adopt measures in support of this goal.
The Bay Arra Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) is the regional agency
empowered to regulate air pollutant emissions in the nine -county San Francisco Bay
area air basin. The BAAQMD regulates air quality through its permit authority over
most types of stationary emission sources and through its planning and review
activities. The District's goal is to reduce per capita exposure to pollutant levels
which exceed the State standards by 50% by 1994 and by 75% by 1997. The Bay
Area Air Quality Management District operates a regional air quality monitoring
network that provides information on average concentrations of those pollutants for
which State or Federal agencies have established ambient air quality standards.
A district will be classified as either having "moderate," "serious," or "severe" air
pollution for each relevant pollutant based on the estimated date of attainment.
Districts classified as "moderate" will be in attainment by the end of 1994; districts
classified as "serious" will achieve attainment by the end of 1997; while districts
classified as "severe" will not achieve attainment before the end of 1997, or are
unable to determine when attainment will be achieved. The BAAQMD has declared
itself as having "severe' air pollution with regard to ozone. With respect to carbon
monoxide, the District classified itself as "serious," with attainment expected by
1997. The California Clean Air Act requires varied attainment procedures for each
of the classifications.
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 4
The BAAQMD has determined that they cannot meet the five -percent per year
emission reductions required under the CCAA and must adopt all "feasible" control
measures. The CCAA requires that the district adopt and implement a schedule to
achieve the State standards based on the "cost-effectiveness of the measure as well
as other factors including, but not limited to, technological feasibility, total emission
reduction potential, the rate of reduction, public acceptability, and enforceability."
These "feasible" control measures were adopted in the 'Bay Area 1991 Clean Air
Plan." Based upon the control measures outlined in the plan, the State goal will be
met.
Computer modeling has been used for many years in Bay Area planning for
attainment of the ozone standard. Currently the BAAQMD uses the Urban Airshed
Model to determine future levels of ozone. Among the inputs to the model are
emission inventory projections, air quality monitoring data, ozone precursors which
are based upon ABAG projections in population, employment, housing and land
use patterns. Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) projections on
mobile source emissions by location, trip type, time and mode; and emissions from
other commercial and industrial sources are areas also estimated. The model can be
used to determine net emissions and to forecast future air quality.
There are literally millions of sources of air pollution in the Bay Area. These sources
range from industrial smoke stacks and motor vehicles to individual use of personal
grooming products, household cleaners and paints. The earth, itself, and its plant and
animal life are natural sources of air pollutants. Source inventories identify human
activity pollution generation as significantly greater than natural source pollution. The
following sources are those sources which most significantly affect California and
Cupertino residents alike.
Carbon Monoxide (CO) is an odorless, colorless, poisonous gas which is highly
toxic and is formed by the incomplete combustion of fuels. Carbon monoxide
interferes with the transfer of oxygen to the blood, can cause dizziness and fatigue,
and can impair central nervous system functions. Carbon monoxide is a "localized
pollutant." High concentrations of the pollutant are found near the source, although
there can be a wide spread "cloud" of high background levels. The major source of
carbon monoxide is automobiles, so higher concentrations are generally found near
heavily traveled roadways. The emission of carbon monoxide is also highly
dependent on traffic speed, with emission levels increasing significantly as traffic
slows and idling increases. Carbon monoxide is a highly localized pollutant, and if
one location within the region is exceeding the standard, the entire region is
identified as in non -attainment. The following Bay area pollutant data summary
between 1983 - 1990 for exceedences, shows a fluctuating trend:
1
General Plan EIR Air Quality
Section 5 - 5
Source: Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Bay Area, 1991, Cieaa
Air Plan. BAAQMD 7/91
Vehicles are the primary source of emissions associated with land use changes resulting
from dense development. For example, increased development within the Vallco (Stevens
Creek/Wolfe Rd), Town Center (Stevens Creek/De Anza), and core area are part of the
General Plan Amendment. These increased densities will produce concurrent increases in
trip generations to and from these areas and within the city, which in turn produces more
vehicular emissions. Additionally, with an increase of vehicles on the roadway, average
speeds are slower, increasing emissions. Motor vehicles produce about 50 percent of
ozone elements and 80 percent of the carbon monoxide elements. The most widely -used
indicator of vehicular emissions impact is modeled projections of concentration of carbon
monoxide at nearby sensitive receptor locations. Vehicular pollutant emissions, and
therefore concentrations in the air, are proportional to the number of vehicle trips per hour
on nearby streets. Roadside concentrations also are proportional to the average vehicle
emissions rate, which is based on average speed.
In order to estimate air quality impacts, five receptor locations were evaluated, as shown in the
following figure:
F
4
2
83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
Year
Bay Area Carbon Monoxide
Exceedence Days Summary 1983-1990
Figure
5-A
Source: Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Bay Area, 1991, Cieaa
Air Plan. BAAQMD 7/91
Vehicles are the primary source of emissions associated with land use changes resulting
from dense development. For example, increased development within the Vallco (Stevens
Creek/Wolfe Rd), Town Center (Stevens Creek/De Anza), and core area are part of the
General Plan Amendment. These increased densities will produce concurrent increases in
trip generations to and from these areas and within the city, which in turn produces more
vehicular emissions. Additionally, with an increase of vehicles on the roadway, average
speeds are slower, increasing emissions. Motor vehicles produce about 50 percent of
ozone elements and 80 percent of the carbon monoxide elements. The most widely -used
indicator of vehicular emissions impact is modeled projections of concentration of carbon
monoxide at nearby sensitive receptor locations. Vehicular pollutant emissions, and
therefore concentrations in the air, are proportional to the number of vehicle trips per hour
on nearby streets. Roadside concentrations also are proportional to the average vehicle
emissions rate, which is based on average speed.
In order to estimate air quality impacts, five receptor locations were evaluated, as shown in the
following figure:
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 6
in
3AV U3111W p tt. fiz m p (D mto¢ E,` m awv o 0 tea, rn e u!A 2 6 c.9 cuZ u0 as0mx O t2rnmN sN2E— > OL
QaA1e VZHV 30 G H C mO C O O
U t /// g d
"0 -6
0v ai ai
0 d / En- co U CU ca > m�cQQ
_¢ QQ=mma�i=C c
avow ONI1313 r--7 m T /// 0 m O
_
ig
cc
0 I /// I Nf7466 r` GD
F- ✓ .�'/ 1
a.
5avow esnaCCI
W t
-------
wiaTuwaoi .� •.�
�'T---- _- ------------------------
MAP OF RECEPTOR LOCATIONSI Figure
5-B
Source: Citv of Cupertino. December. 1992
General Plan EIR Air Quality
Section 5 - 7
The modeled carbon monoxide concentrations at the five receptor locations, are shown in the
following table:
Table 5-B
CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN
MODELED CARBON MONOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS (PPM)
General Plan General Plan
Receptor Streets 1991 Traffic Modified Proposed
Area Contributing Pk. Hr. 8-Hr.Ave. Pk. Hr. 8 -hr Ave. Pk. Hr, 8 -hr Avs
1. Mariani I-280
(De Area) Homestead 8.7 1.5 11.1 1.7 7.4 1.3
2. Town Center I-280
(De Anja) De Anja 8.0 1.4 9.6 1.5 5.5 0.6
3. Stelling Rd.
I-280
(Jollyman)
Stevens Creek, 7.6 1.0 10.1 1.0 5.1 0.9
De Ansa, Stelling
4. Homestead
I-280
(Tantau)
Homestead 6.2 1.1 8.2 1.2 5.3 0.9
Lawrence
E. Wolfe Rd.
5. Vallco West
Perimeter Road 7.4 1.1 8.9 1.2 5.4 0.8
(Wheaton Dr.)
Stevens Crk. Bl.
I-280
Wolfe Rd.
NOTES:
1. See Figure 5-B, area map with receptor areas identified
2. Ambient Air Quality Standards for CO are 35 ppm for peak hour
conditions and 9 ppm for continuous 8 -hour average.
3. To obtain total estimated worst-case concentrations, background
concentrations of 6 ppm for peak hour and 3 ppm for 8 -hour average
must be added.
The carbon concentrations shown in Table 5-B are the sum of contributions from the streets
listed. Only the highest concentration provided by any of the sixteen wind direction
computations are listed. Most days and most wind conditions produce considerably lower
concentrations then those modeled.
Many factors related to the increased growth projected within the proposed General Plan
Amendments will affect Air Quality in the community. New residential construction will
increase local short trips thus increasing adjacent carbon monoxide emissions. Alternatively
this housing construction improves the jobs/housing balance which will reduce vehicle
emissions city and region wide. Due to the Bay Area non -attainment status any increase in
carbon monoxide emissions related to new development would be considered a significant
impact until region wide attainment is reached
1
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 8
Project development under the Proposed General Plan Amendment will affect the overall
quantity of carbon monoxide air pollutant This could result in significant adverse effect in
air quality and possibly further exceedences region wide.
Ozone (03) is the most prevalent of the various oxidants found in the atmosphere.
It is a colorless gas formed by the complex chemical reaction between hydrocarbons
and oxides of nitrogen in the presence of sunshine. Unlike other pollutants, ozone
is not emitted into the atmosphere by any source; rather, it is created from ozone
precursors that eminate from combustion, factories, automobiles and from other
solvents and fuel evaporation.
Ozone causes a respiratory irritation, reduces resistance to lung infection and may
aggravate the medical condition of persons with pulmonary conditions and lung
disease. Ozone is also damaging to vegetation. The California Clean Air Act
defines a "severe" air basin as one that cannot demonstrate attainment of the
California ozone standard by 1997. The Bay Arra falls into this severe category.
The CCAA requires that severe ozone areas:
"..reduce overall population exposure to ambient pollutant levels in
excess of the standard by at least 25 percent by December 31, 1994,
40 percent by December 31, 1997, and 50 percent by December 31,
2000, based on average per capita exposure and the severity of
exceedences, so as to minimize health impacts, using the average
level of exposure experienced during 1986-1988 as the baseline."
Figure 5-C shows that the exceedence trend is fluctuating downward as shown
below:
N
d
U
C
d
V
lU
!n
U
X
W
Year
Bay Area Ozone
Exceedence Days Summary 1983-1990
Source: Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Bq Area, M. Ckm Air Plan. BAAQMD 7/91
Figure
5-C
I
[1
11
7
I
I
General Plan EIR Air Quality
Section 5 - 9
=-1-f . ',n
PM 10 refers to suspended particulate matter which are less than 10 microns (one -
one -millionth of a meter) in diameter, and which can be inhaled and cause adverse
health effects. Particulates in the atmosphere result from many kinds of dust and
fumes produced from industrial and agricultural operations, combustion, and
atmospheric photochemical reactions. Demolition, construction, wind blown dust
and vehicular traffic are major sources of particulates in urban areas. Particulate
concentrations near major sources generally are higher during winter when more
fuel is burned and meteorological conditions favor the concentration of directly
emitted contaminants. Very small particulates of certain substances (sulfates and
nitrates) may cause lung damage or may contain absorbed gases (chlorides or
ammonium) that may be injurious. Particulates can also damage physical materials
and reduce visibility.
Between 1988 and 1990 the San Francisco Bay Area National standard was not
exceeded but the State standard was exceeded. The State standard is very stringent
and only one County within the State (Lake County) currently attains this standard.
The California Legislature, when it passed the California Clean Air Act of 1988,
recognized the relative intractability of the PM 10 problem and excluded it from the
basic planning requirements for achievability. The control measures in the CAP
program will reduce PM10 through the outlined control measures for other
emission criteria. As shown in Figure 5-D, 1990 was the first year in almost a
decade where some decrease can be seen.
F607 W
50
to
40
U
C
30
lv
U
X
W
20-
10,
0
83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
Year
Bay Area Particulate (PM 10) Figure
Exceedence Days Summary 1983-1990 5.D
Source: Dreg Environmental Impact Report for the Bey Areal, 1991, Clean AU Plan. BAAQMD 7191
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 10
Construction from buildout anticipated under the proposed General Plan
Amendment would generate air pollutants intermittently over the buildout period,
primarily suspended particulates (dust) generated by earth moving, traffic on
unpaved surfaces, and wind erosion. Particulate matter less than 10 microns in
diameter (PM10) would remain suspended for a longer period, potentially
aggravating any existing respiratory conditioned persons exposed to the
construction dust. The State and Federal 24-hour PM 10 standard would be violated
at times on and near construction sites and visibility could be affected temporarily.
In light of the non -attainment status of the Bay Area for PM10, and the proximity of
existing sensitive receptors, construction impacts, although temporary, would be
considered a significant impact.
Lem CON4 (016111 Zr .r
In addition to criteria pollutants, there is another class of regulated pollutants known as
toxic or hazardous pollutants. These pollutants are controlled through limitations on
specific emissions rather than through ambient air quality standards. The air pollutants
are referred to in State Legislation as Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC).
The following table depicts the major stationary sources of pollutant emission sources
generated within the City of Cupertino.
MAJOR STATIONARY SOURCES OF POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
WITHIN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO (tons/year)
TAC's are airborne substances capable of causing short term (acute) and/or long
term (chronic) or carcinogenic adverse human health effects. TAC's may be
emitted from a variety of common sources including gasoline stations, automobiles,
dry cleaners, industrial operations, painting operations and quarry operations. As
of January 1992, the California Air Resources Board had identified a total of fifteen
substances as TAC's: arsenic, asbestos, benzine, cadmium, chloroform, tetra-
chloride dioxin, ethylene dibromide, ethylene dichloride, ethylene oxide, hexavalent
chromium, methylene chloride, trichloroethylene, vinyl chloride, and terchloro-
ethylene.
Facility Partic.
Organ, NOx(a) CO(bl
1.
Delia's Cleaners -
15.1 -- ---
2.
Digital Equipment Corp. 0.6
24.7 5.5 1.0
3.
Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical 0.4
298.1 --- ---
4.
Kaiser Cement & Gypsum 250.0
390.0 2042.0 2722.0
5.
McClellan Square Cleaners -
2.7 --- --
6.
Measurex Corp. -
2.6 --- ---
7.
One Hour Martinizing by Lee -
2.4 -- - -
8.
Siemens Optoelectronics -
2.0 -- —
9.
Syva Company -
2.0 --- ---
a = Nitrogen Oxide
b= Carbon Dioxide
Source: BAAQMD Permits (1990)
1. Toxic
Air Contaminants
TAC's are airborne substances capable of causing short term (acute) and/or long
term (chronic) or carcinogenic adverse human health effects. TAC's may be
emitted from a variety of common sources including gasoline stations, automobiles,
dry cleaners, industrial operations, painting operations and quarry operations. As
of January 1992, the California Air Resources Board had identified a total of fifteen
substances as TAC's: arsenic, asbestos, benzine, cadmium, chloroform, tetra-
chloride dioxin, ethylene dibromide, ethylene dichloride, ethylene oxide, hexavalent
chromium, methylene chloride, trichloroethylene, vinyl chloride, and terchloro-
ethylene.
General Plan EIR Air Quality
Section 5 - 11
A number of other substances have yet to be reviewed for inclusion in the list of
designated TACs or have limited health information available. State legislation
requires facilities to submit to the local Air Pollution Control Agency a
comprehensive Air Toxic Emission Inventory Plan for all listed TAC's. After the
local Air Pollution Control Agency receives a completed emissions inventory it is
required to identify high priority facilities for which health risk assessments must be
performed.
Air toxics have been regulated at the Federal level since enactment of the 1977
Clean Air Act. Under this legislation, seven air toxics were identified as Hazardous
Air Pollutants (HAP) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was required
to adopt the National Emission for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS). The
NESHAPS were designed to control HAP emissions to a point at which resulting
HAP concentrations would be within a "ample margin of safety" in preventing
adverse health effects. This regulatory approach failed to result in significant
reductions in air toxic emissions.
The 1990 Federal Clean Air Act amendments offer a technology based approach to
reducing air toxics. The amendments regulated 189 substances, including all
designated HAPS under a two phased strategy. The first phase involves requiring
facilities to install Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MALT) to reduce air
toxic emissions. The MALT standards will be promulgated through successive
regulations over the next decade. The second phase of control involves determining
the residual health risk represented by an air toxic emission source after
implementation of MACE standards. Residual risk standards are to be set within 8
or 9 years after MACT standards.
For the Bay area, the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act is implemented and enforced by
the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. The Bay Area Air Quality
Management District's Board adopted a Toxic Air Contaminant Reduction Plan to
reduce the health risk to Bay Area residents from toxic air contaminants. The
explicit goal of the plan is to reduce the toxicity of emissions from sources subject
to BAAQMD jurisdiction to less than 50% of the 1989 levels by 1995.
Implementation of the plan will reduce the emissions of both carcinogens and
non -carcinogens, and will encourage the use of source reduction to eliminate
pollution before it is generated.
• ,MEVA.. ... . .
Tanner Bill: Assembly Bill 1908 (Tanner Bill, 1983) established the state air toxics
program and the methods for designating certain air toxics as Toxic Air
Containments (TACS). For further discussion on the Tanner Bill and emissions
related refer to the Hazardous Materials Section.
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 12
The Air Toxic "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act of 1987, (Assembly
Bill 2588), provides for the regulation of over 200 air toxics, including all fifteen of
the designated TAC's. Under Assembly Bill 2588, specified facilities must submit
to the local air pollution control agency a comprehensive emissions inventory of
these substances. After the local air pollution control district receives completed
emission inventories, it will be required to identify high priority facilities; these high
priority facilities must perform health risk assessments. The determination of the
facility priority is based upon such factors as pollutant potency, toxicity, quantity
and volume of materials released as compared to the location of potential receptors
(residences, hospitals, schools and work sites etc.) In the Bay. Area, the Bay Area
Air Quality Management District implements AB2588 and is responsible for
prioritizing air toxics emitting facilities. The purpose of AB2588 is only to identify
and evaluate risk from air toxic sources; AB2588 does not regulate air toxic
emissions. The act is generally considered a risk -identifying, information -oriented
legislation. The health risk assessment document identifies quantities of chemicals
produced and the effects impacts related. The effects of the chemicals are based
upon conservative criteria with assumptions that receptors spend 24 hours a day for
70 years at one location. There are thirteen facilities (BAAQMD Toxics Inventory,
December, 1991) within the City of Cupertino which have been required to submit
a health risk assessment.
The majority of these facilities are listed in Table 5-D with the exception of
Measurex which is not required to complete a health risk assessment. Six others
are required to comply including Dryclean USA (Stevens Creek Boulevard),
Gettler-Ryan (Stevens Creek Boulevard), Intersil (N. Tantau), Scotty's Cleaners
(DeAnza), Vallco Village Cleaners (No. Wolfe Rd.) and Wardrobe Cleaners
(Stevens Creek Boulevard).
• •11' ; r • : 1: • 1 V
One way of identifying air quality impacts in Cupertino is monitoring data. The closest
air quality monitoring facility to Cupertino is in San Jose. Air quality exceedence data
from the years 1987-1990 is as follows:
EXCEEDENCES OF STATE STANDARDS
SAN JOSE MONITORING STATION•
• . :i:�:i's pc'
Ozone NM 30 10 23
Carbon . . . 1 2 , 1
Source: BAAQMD
• 4th Street monitoring station, San Jose.
NM = not monitored
' General Plan EIR Air Quality
Section 5 - 13
The measured concentrations of ozone vary substantially from year to year. As shown, the
State standard is exceeded often and is heavily dependent upon weather patterns. Another
problem pollutant for the South Bay is carbon monoxide which is also dependent on both
weather and vehicle emissions. Most of the carbon exceedences have occurred during mid-
winter evenings. In the past decade, both ozone and carbon monoxide exceedences have
' been reduced dramatically by superior emission control systems on new automobiles in the
past ten years.
Another way of understanding the air quality in Cupertino, is by comparison with other
Bay Area air basins. The following pollutant contour maps (Figure 5-E, 5-F and 5-G)
show background levels of carbon monoxide, ozone, and particulate matter, prepared by
the BAAQMD from District monitoring data and modeling studies. The maps indicate that
the ozone (oxidant) standard is the one most likely to be exceeded in the Cupertino area of
all the pollutants monitored.
' Table 5-C indentifies major Cupertino stationary emission sources produced partially by
stationary and partially by mobile sources for particulates, reactive organics, nitrogen
oxides and carbon monoxide:
For comparison purposes the following Bay Area totals are provided:
TOTAL BAY AREA EMISSIONS (tons/year)
Panic.
Organ.
NQ
co
Stationary Sources 83,220
82,490
72,270
149,285
Mobile Sources 15,695
85,045
97,455
711,750
Sources: Source Inventory (1987), Reference 5
It is clear that the annual emissions from Cupertino sources are a very small portion
of total Bay area emissions. This comparison puts the Cupertino contributions into
perspective.
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 14
l `• I
d
�. \\ b .� •� SOLARO I
YANIN �J r
W Y.• y l / J 1
CONTRA �(
3
-• 1' \ �- cost. S�
SAN 3 9
FRANC4C \
M �•
ATE
by
ELEVATION: �
600- 2mm ` 1
. ,... LOOO,
O 10 20 MILES
0 16 32 RY 4L -
BAY AREA CARBON MONOXIDE - Figure
ONE HOUR BACKGROUND VALUES 5-E
Source: BAAQMD, 1994
w
N
AI
w
A�
1
ELEVATION:
O $00-2400
ow, 2.000
140 20 MILES
1 1
O M 12 KM
General Plan EIR Air Quality
Section 5 - 15
SOLANO
Osucoa
VrCOMTKA
c�1• COSTA (
1
If
Y AN
1
.1..1.11
:....Ib
A
W.
.,�
iUo
Source: (BAAQ`ID)
Y AREA OZONE - ONE HOUR BACKGROUND V
Figure
5-F
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 16
SOLANO
\ 1
YARIN
W W.
CONTRA
�' \ u�• COSTA S
rani 1�
SAN
i
i
rRANCISC I lv,,l ` •� �-
ALAAL
rum• � rrrr
r �•
�AT[O •
A
•\ 4
�.lrnaanro" l�
ELEVATION:
Q600 -2A00' -J ��••
4
10 20 MILES 4 Source: (BAAQMD)
0 b 32 RY
BAY AREA TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATE JSP)
Source: BAAQMD, 1984
Figure
5-G
General Plan EIR Air Quality
Section 5 - 17
qffell) U:4.,41 01 • ►I :: a U Inveriml ►la ul g
Persons most sensitive to emissions resulting from buildout would probably be located
in residences, schools, parks, or health care facilities. Fortunately these sensitive
receptor locations are not on the major arterial streets analyzed, and would therefore be
much less affected.
The projected General Plan Amendment air quality data is based upon assumptions of
atmospheric conditions, amount of projected building construction and estimated
vehicle trip data. The State Air Resources Board projections were based upon present
traffic volume counts (1993), and composite emission factors for a mix of vehicles
operating in 1993.
The General Plan Amendments also allow some new Research & Deveopment ( R &
D) which will increase stationary sources of emissions. These sources are under
stringent controls by Bay Area Air Quality Management District source control
standards. The amount of hydrocarbon emissions from an additional acre of electronic
R & D manufacturing is estimated by the District at 6 pounds per day -- about the same
amount as is emitted by a half mile of automobile traffic on Stevens Creek Boulevard in
one hour.
Highway 85: Cal Trans performs air quality transportation planning based upon
regional modeling. As such, a macroscale analysis of Highway 85 projected air quality
impacts was not considered necessary. Nevertheless, some area -wide conclusions can
be reached. It is generally known that stop and go conditions of local streets increase
the amount of carbon monoxide. Therefore, since some traffic will flow from the local
streets to the highway, local concentrations will be somewhat reduced. When Highway
85 opens 1995-1996, the highest carbon monoxide concentrations can be expected
adjacent to the freeway. Freeway features such as park and ride facilities, HOV lanes,
ramp metering, and car pool lanes help minimize air pollutant emissions. However, the
depressed roadway somewhat increases the emissions adjacent to the roadway due to
the "trapped" air between the depressed roadway.
The proposed General Plan Amendment does not contribute significantly to local basin
air pollution and would not cause incidents exceeding ambient standards. However,
there are unavoidable vehicle emission and air quality problems to be dealt within the
region. Increases in the number of residents, vehicles and vehicle miles traveled in the
area will continue to intensify the problem. Because all new trip -generating projects
contribute to this regional problem additional vehicle emissions would be considered a
significant impact until regional attainment is achieved
The Air Quality policies and mitigation measures are consistent with other sections of
the General Plan Amendment and other plans of the City. These policies and related
actions are also consistent with the policies of the BAAQMD, the MTC and the Santa
Clara County Congestion Management Plan.
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 18
11. IMPACTS
Virtually all of the impacts on air quality from the General Plan Amendment can be
successfully mitigated. The continuing impact on Cupertino residents from overall Bay
Area air pollution, especially ozone, cannot be eliminated through actions in the General
Plan Amendment.
M3 Lei ►IIS 16121► y M: YYin
Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines states that a project
would normally have a significant effect on the environment if it would result in:
• increases in emissions which result in violation of standards.
• Emissions which contribute substantially to existing or projected violations of
standards.
• Emissions which expose sensitive receptors to substantial polldtion concentrations.
The Bay Area basin is already in violation of State Ozone and Carbon Monoxide
standards. Therefore, the addition of one additional vehicle trip, the building of a
single store or residence would contribute to an existing violation of standards. Can
Cupertino, by its own actions, eliminate the Bay Area's status of violatiing State air
quality standards? Clearly this is not possible. How then should the impacts of the
General Plan Amendments be evaluated? Some of the actions, such as building homes
closer to jobs and requiring intensive trip reduction measures from employers,
contribute to reducing air pollution. Other action, such as expanding housing, offices
and commercial centers, potentially add to air quality problems.
On balance, the actions proposed in the General Plan Amendment. can be successfully
mitigated so that there will be no significant air quality impacts.
The overall effects of the General Plan Amendments on air quality are expected to be as
follows:
Ozone - This clearly is a region wide problem. The mitigated expansion called for
in the General Plan Amendment represents significant growth for the City of
Cupertino but not significant growth on the scale of the region as a whole.
CO - This a much more localized problem. High concentrations of CO at specific
intersections could be significant, especially if the intersections are close to
population concentrations. Accordingly, mitigations of these impacts is crucial.
PM - New construction along with continued mining operations in the City can both
contribute to signifcant particulate pollution unless carefully mitigated.
Toxic pollutants - Large concentrations of these individual toxic pollutants can be
significant at specific locations. Therefore, careful screening of building and
operating permits is needed to identify dangerous sources.
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 19
B. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED
1. Vehicle Emissions (carbon monoxide and ozone)
Expansion of office/commercial space and building 2,600 additional residences will
' potentially add more trips and aggravate the ozone and CO problems.
Mitigation: Careful controls on added trips through Transportation
System Management measures and placing more
housing near jobs will mitigate this impact. (See
Transportation Mitigations III al, 2 and B)
2. Construction and Minine
Earth moving, tearing down buildings and building new ones will release dust and
related suspended particulates. The level of impact could be significant, especially
near construction sites.
Continued mining operations at the Kaiser properties could generate significant
' levels of particulates.
Mitigation: Strictly enforced controls on dust and related
particulates from construction sites and on mining
operations will effectively control these emissions.
(SeeAir Quality Mitigations III al and 2)
3. Toxic Pollutants
There are many toxic pollutants used in business operations, and less often in the
' home, which can be significant risks to health.
Mitigation: Careful review of business and building permits to
ensure that all significant sources of toxic pollutants
' are identified and successfully controlled. (See Air
Quality Mitigations III al and 2)
C. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE MITIGATED
Medically sensitive persons
' While effects from all pollution sources can be reduced to a generally acceptable
minimum, persons with especially sensitive medical problems will continue to be
affected
' D. EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT
' 1. I Dw Levels of Pollutants from Homes and Offices
2,600 additional housing units will be built, along with additional stores and
offices. Each residence, store and office will release small amounts of toxic
contaminants. These pollutants are typically found in every household and
business operation and are not significant at the very low levels of concentration
found in most residences and commercial operations.
d
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 20
Ari .�• •�. :�
Some additional traffic will be added to Highway 85 as a result of buildout under
the General Plan Amendment. The added traffic is expected to be a very small
portion of the total autos using the facility. In addition, the previously approved
EIR for Highway 85 included mitigation for a builtout under the existing General
Plan. The few trips added under the General Plan Amendment are not expected to
have a significant impact.
A "No Project" alternative would not necessarily by itself result in significant improve-
ments in emissions due to the region wide contribution of emissions and existing non -
attainment status. The General Plan Modified Alternative does not contribute signifi-
cantly to local and Bay Area air basin pollution, and would not directly cause incidents
exceeding ambient standards. However, there are unavoidable vehicle emission and air
quality problems to be dealt with in the South Bay now and in future years.
III: MITIGATION
Methods for reducing vehicle emissions are generally focused upon three strategies:
reducing the number of vehicle trips generated, reducing the number of vehicle miles
traveled, and reducing the number of vehicle minutes traveled. Clearly these strategies are
not always mutually exclusive. The strategies for addressing decreasing emissions can also
be found in the Land Use Transportation section.
MkVillwyAl
1. ming
a. Continue to assess air pollution effects of future land use and circulation
planning. (Policy 5-4)
b. Look into buying more fuel-efficient vehicles for City use. (Policy 5-11)
c. Use the Cupertino Scene and other publication to tell residents about the danger
of inhaling pollutants while jogging and bicycling near busy streets. Expand
the par course and jogging trails to meet demand. (Policy 5-12)
d. Promote a general decrease in reliance or private cars by accommodating and
encouraging attractive alternatives. (Policy 4-9)
a. Continue to require the use of water or oil to control dust during construction
activities. (Policy 5-5)
b. Initiate a city wide public education program regarding the implication of the
Clean Air Act and provide information on ways to control emissions. (Policy
5-6)
c. Actively pursue cooperation among regional wide agencies to improve air
quality. (Policy 5-7)
'
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 21
1
d. Ensure that local land use decisions support the goal of clean air. (Policy 5-8)
e. Continue to allow home occupations in all residentially zoned properties.
(Policy 5-9)
f. Increase street trees on public property and tree planting on private property.
(Policy 5-10)
g. Continue to actively participate in the Congestion Management Plan and other
'
regional efforts to control traffic congestion and its attendant air pollution
impacts. (Policy 4-1, Strategy No. 1)
h. Support the expansion of the County Transportation Agency bus fleet, and
City
support prioritizing commuter express service along expressways and
arterial streets. (Policy 4-1 Strategy No. 2)
i. Support the extension of rapid transit along North De Anza Boulevardi ighway
85 Corridor and Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor. (Policy 4-1 Strategy No.
3)
'
j. Maintain a reasonable minimum level of service D for major intersections during
the p.m. peak traffic hour (highest single hour) by imposing reasonable limits
on land use to ensure that principal thoroughfares are not unduly impacted by
'
locally generated traffic during the peak traffic hour. (Policy 4-2)
k. Carry out a city wide transportation improvement plan to accommodate peak
hour traffic flows on arterial streets and major collector streets at a minimum of
Service Level D. Service Level E is acceptable only for the intersection of De
Anza. (Policy 4-2 Strategy No. 3)
'
B. EFFECTS OF MITIGATION MEASURES
Proposed mitigation Policy 5-5 may create impacts. The use of drinking water to
control dust during a drought should be discouraged. The use of non -potable water
would be an adequate substitute. Another impact is the use of water or oil to control
dust. The runoff of the soil which could contain minute sediments of motor oil or
'
gasoline could effect bay waters species. Both effects are not considered significant.
1
1
1
is
1
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 22
GLOSSARY
1. Air Basin or airshed - region which, due to its geography and topography, tends to contain
air pollutants emitted within iL
2. Air monitoring - Sampling for and measuring of pollutants present in the atmosphere.
3. Airllpo cation - The presence of gases and suspended particulates in the atmosphere in excess
of Air Quality Standards.
4. Air Quality - the amount of pollutants in the air relative to adopted Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
5. Air Quality Criteria - Varying amounts of pollution and lengths of exposure at which specific
adversity effects to health and comfort take place.
6. Air Quality Standard - The prescribed level of a pollutant in the outside air that cannot be
exceeded during a specific time and a specific geographical area.
7. Air Resources Board - The State of California Agency responsible for air pollution control.
8. Ambient Air - Any portion of the atmosphere not confined by four walls and a roof; outside
air.
9. Ambient Air OualityStandards - concentration limits established for the most significant air
pollutants by state and federal agencies.
10. Association of Bay Area Govemments.- (ABAG) - The Regional Planning Agency for San
Francisco Bay Area.
11. Bay Area Air Ouality Management District (BAAOMD) - A regional agency charged with
controlling particulates discharged into the atmosphere from stationary sources. The regional
district for Cupertino (includes all seven Bay Area Counties, Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin,
Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara and the southern Sonoma and western
Solano Counties).
12. Carbon Monoxide - (CO) - A colorless, odorless, toxic gas produced by the incomplete
combustion of carbon -containing substances. One of the major air pollutants, it is emitted in
large quantities by exhaust of gasoline -powered vehicles.
13. Clean Air Act (CAA) - The Federal Legislation that provides the legal basis for the National
Clean Air Program.
14. Concentration - the amount of a pollutant in a given volume of air.
15. Dispersion - the process of mixing, dilution, and transport of air pollutants after being
emitted by a source.
16. Emission - discharge of a substance from a source into the air.
17. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - The Federal agency responsible for air quality.
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 23
e18. Fossil Fuels - Coal, oil, and natural gas; so-called because they are the remains of ancient
plant and animal life.
19. Mobile Sources - Sources of pollutants that move, such as pollution generated from
automobiles.
' 20. )fig - the mathematical procedure of using known source missions and meterological
information to compute expected air pollutant concentrations.
21. Monitoring - regular measurement of air pollutant concentrations.
' 22. Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) - Gases formed in great part from atmospheric nitrogen and oxygen
when combustion takes place under conditions of high temperature and high pressure;
considered a major air pollutant
1
1
23. Oxidants - a highly reactive group of chemicals formed in the atmosphere (ozone is the most
common form in air) by the photochemical reactions of hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and
sunlight. In elevated concentrations oxidants can cause vegetation damage, eye irritation,
headaches, and impaired breathing.
24. Ozone (03) - A pungent, odorless gas, toxic in high concentrations, a product of
photochemical process, a major air pollutant.
25. Particulate - A particle of solid of liquid matter, soot, dust, aerosols, fumes and mists.
26. Particulate Matter (PM) - airborne non-gaseous pollutants, including the smallest particles of
dust, stroke and liquid, of a size that can reach the lungs when inhaled. Particulate matter is
produced by industrial processes, combustion, vehicles, and natural sources such as plants.
Certain types of PM can damage plants and materials, reduce visibility, and irritate the
respiratory system.
27. Parts Per Million (ppm) - The number of parts of a given pollutant in a million parts of air.
One ppm equals .0001 percent.
28. Precursor - A number of compounds that physically change in composition after being
emitted into the air and eventually turn into air pollutants. Organic compounds and nitrogen
oxides are precursors for ozone.
29. ,fig - A term used to describe many air pollution problems, it is a contraction of smoke and
' fog, in California it is usually used to describe ozone and/or the irritating haze resulting from
the sun's effect on pollutants in the air, including those from automobile exhaust.
1
r
1
30. Source - a process, activity, or machine that emits air pollutants.
31. Stationary So_ urces - sources of pollutants that are not movable such as factories and
references.
32. Total SusDcnded Particulate Matter (TSPM) - A statistical measurement of particulate air
pollution.
General Plan EIR - Air Quality
Section 5 - 24
Sources
I . Air Quality Impact and Mitigation Study. General Plan Update, City of Cupertino, July,
1991, prepared by H. Stanton Shelly.
2. Article "Bay Area Air Board Declares Way on Autos" - by Dan Levy, San Francisco
Chronicle, October 31, 1992.
3. Article "Hot Spots Extend Into Homes Areas" San Jose Business Journal, September 9,
1991.
5. Bay Area Air Quality Management District Clean Air Plan, April 4, 1991.
6. City of Cupertino. General Plan Amendment. Technical Appendix - D. Air Quality Impact
and Mitigation Measures dated May 23, 1983 by H. Stanton Shelly.
7. Cily of Saratoga General Plan Air Quality Section dated June, 1987.
8. Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Bak Area 1991. Clean AirPlan prepared by the
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, July 1991.
9. General Plan. City of Cupertino, July 1979
10. General Plan. City of Santa Clara, March 15, 1991.
11. A Guide to Air Quality Elements for Local General Plans prepared by Henry Hilken, May,
1988.
12.
UN
13. Santa Clara County General Plan, Air Quality Section, 1981.
14. Final EIR - Route 85. Volume 1. Caltrans. July 1987.
I
I
LJ
SECTION 6
I
NOISE
I
C!
C
1
I
1
I
1
r
I
I
u Table of Contents
Page
I. Environmental Setting..................................................................6-1
A. Measurement of Noise............................................................. 6-1
B. Major Noise Sources...............................................................6-1
1. Freeways....................................................................... 6-1
2. Local Arterials and Collectors ................................................ 6-2
3. Railroad........................................................................6-2
4. Aircraft..........................................................................6-2
5. Industrial/Commercial......................................................... 6-2
6. Fixed Noise Sources.......................................................... 6-3
7. Short Term Noise Sources ................................................... 6-3
C. Cupertino Noise Environment.................................................... 6-3
1. Sensitive Receptors............................................................6-3
' 2. General Plan....................................................................6-3
3. General Plan Land Use - Noise Standards ................................. 6-3
4. Municipal Code Noise Standards ............................................ 6-5
II. Impacts - Effects........................................................................ 6-7
A. Existing Conditions................................................................ 6-7
B. Municipal Code - Noise Impact .................................................. 6-8
C. Comparison of Existing Conditions and Proposed Plan Amendment ....... 6-8
D. General Plan - Noise Impact......................................................6-9
E. Impacts.............................................................................. 6-9
1. Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated ............................... 6-9
2. Effects Found Not to be Significant........................................6-11
3. Significant Effects Which Cannot be Mitigated ........................... 6-11
4. Alternatives Analysis ................. 6-11
5. Cumulative, Long -Term and Growth Inducing Effects..................6-11
III. Mitigations..............................................................................6-12
A. Proposed...........................................................................6-12
B. Existing.............................................................................6-12
C. Mitigations Not Part of the Project..............................................6-13
Glossary....................................................................................6-14
Sources
I
1
do
i
Tables
Page
m
6-A Cupertino Municipal Code Noise Maximus ....................................... 5
6-B Existing Noise Conditions.............................................................6-7
6-C Maximum Permitted Exterior Noise Levels Exposure ............................. 6-7
6-D Existing and General Plan Amendment Noise Conditions ......................... 6-8
Figures
6-A Cupertino General Plan Noise Standards ............................................ 6-4
6-13 Receptor Locations..................................................................... 6-6
e
SECTION 6
NOISE
I. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The purpose of this section is to provide a comparison between anticipated noise generation
from the proposed General Plan alternative, existing noise levels and other plan alter-
natives.
A. MEASUREMENT OF NOISE
Sound is a result of a vibration of an object which is transmitted through the air in
waves which in rum vibrate the human ear drum. This sound is measured in units
called decibels (dB). Noise is the unwanted sound perceived as detrimental. Since the
human ear does not hear all sounds equally, special "A weighting" decibel measurement
(dBA) is used to simulate human hearing. Acceptable levels of noise vary from land
use to land use. At any one location, the noise will vary over time, from the lowest
background or ambient levels to that of a single event, such as a passing airplane.
' Various techniques have been developed which measure the effects of noise levels over
a period of time. The State of California utilizes the measurement called "Community
Noise Equivalent Level" (CNEL) which places a weighted factor on sound events
occurring in the evening hours. A similar measure promoted by the Federal
` Environmental Protection Agency is called "Day -Night" level (Ldn). Leq is frequently
used and is the energy equivalent noise level, otherwise defined as the single steady
noise level which has the same sound energy as the actual widely -varying noise level
being described. Leq is the 24-hour average noise level, with a nighttime penalty of 10
dB to account for the fact that the nighttime period is expected to be significantly more
' quiet than daytime.
B. MAJOR NOISE SOURCES
The City of Cupertino is a semi -urban area, with many residents located adjacent either
to commercial/industrial land uses or heavily traveled roadways. The City of Cupertino
exercises direct noise control through land use and transportation planning. It is
recognized that decisions about the type, location and intensity of land uses effect the
amount of noise generated and the extent of the related impacts. Decisions about
roadway location, design, capacity and traffic management methods have similar
applications. The most widespread and continual sources of noise in Cupertino are
transportation facilities. Unfortunately, in terms of improvement of the noise
environment, these same facilities are those over which the City has least control
because Cupertino roadways are frequently used by residents of adjoining communities
eto get to their destinations.
1. Freeways
Cupertino experiences traffic noise from two freeways; Interstate 280 and
Highway 85. The construction design of these roadways is controlled by the State
of California. By depressing a road through a developed area and using sound
walls, acceptable noise levels may be maintained on adjacent properties. Other
factors, such as pavement texture, gradient, and building orientation can be altered
to minimize adverse effects. The discussion on the recent sound wall noise
phenomenon is in Section 5 (Long Term Impacts) of this report.
LJ
General Plan EIR - Noise
Section 6 - 2
Cupertino has several major, high capacity, arterials, including; De Anza Blvd.,
Stevens Creek Blvd., Homestead Rd., and Wolfe Rd. Additionally, the City has
several major collectors including Bollinger Rd., Stelling Rd. and Foothill Blvd.
These roadways carry average daily traffic (ADT) volumes between 17,000 (low
end) on Bollinger Rd. and 66,000 vehicles (high end) on De Anza Blvd. Most
areas of the city have at least one large -volume street nearby providing the dominant
ambient (background) noise environment. One example of traffic noise intrusion
on the quality of neighborhood life is the effect of heavy duty truck trips to and
from the Kaiser Permanente Plant and Stevens Creek Quarry located in the Western
foothills. The individuals living or working near the truck routes are impacted by
the related truck noise. There are up to 1,500 truck trips each working day, which
generate 90 decibel (very loud) noise levels next to the roadway. When trucks
change speed or gears or use their "Jakes" brakes, the truck noise problem
worsens.
The Southern Pacific Transportation Company has one rail line through the City of
Cupertino. The line parallels Highway 85 in a North to South direction, with one
freight train service daily from the Kaiser Permanente plant. Noise levels
associated with this are approximately 85 to 90 decibels at a distance of 50 feet for a
period of about 2 minutes. The majority of land uses adjoining the track are single
family residential.
.yr•
Moffett Field Naval Air Station is located 6 miles to the North. The aircraft
passovers to and from this facility are expected to stop with the closure and
evacuation of Moffett Field in 1994. Noise levels in Cupertino up to 70 dBA occur
several times per hour during practice operations. The City of San Jose Airport
became International in 1984. This airport is located 6 miles to the East, but the
runway position and approaching take -off patterns do not normally bring aircraft
over Cupertino.
Industrial/commercial land uses involve a number of activities which create potential
adverse noise impacts. The commercial activities which historically have created
noise impacts to adjoining properties include: delivery vehicles loading and
unloading, truck movements, equipment compressors, air-conditioning and
mechanical equipment noise. The proposed General Plan Amendment includes an
increase of mixed use projects (residential attached to either industrial or commercial
uses). There are existing General Plan design control policies which attempt to
ensure compatibility between different land uses. Overall, these policies have been
effective and should remain effective for the new land use designations.
C.
General Plan EIR - Noise
Section 6 - 3
Permanent equipment is also a source of some noise complaints. The most serious
problems are typically refrigeration and air-conditioning units and other related
pumps or compressors. The City has a Fixed Noise Source Ordinance
administered by the Noise Officer which outlines maximum noise levels on
receiving properties based upon land use categories.
VAN41TITI n. ►
Temporary activities, such as construction, are major sources of annoying noise.
Construction activities in particular often last for several months and generate a
number of complaints. Some construction noises are unavoidable, but new
advances in muffling can reduce noise from jack -hammers, portable compressors,
and generators. The days, hours, and noise intensity of construction operations are
controlled by City ordinance.
Primary access routes with high vehicle usage create noise that impacts the most
sensitive segment of the Cupertino population. This population includes
residences, schools, parks, nursing homes and churches. Many of the City's
sensitive receptors are located along heavily used roadways and are today
experiencing high noise levels.
Bore . r• ,1
The General Plan provides a policy framework for guiding future land use and
urban design decisions. The plan also contains a system of control and abatement
measures serving to protect residents from exposure to excessive or unacceptable
noise levels. The noise element describes techniques to help protect interior and
exterior environments from disruption by city noise (see section VI of this
document for specific policies). The policies address land use compatibility,
transportation noise, non -transportation noise sources and noise attenuation
techniques. The Cupertino General Plan Noise Element is in conformance with the
State Government Code content requirements.
The following is the Cupertino General Plan maximum noise exposure based upon
land use types (Figure 6-A).
To Leon:
From: Don Woolfe
Include in Land Use Section, Hillside Area
In summary, implementation of the proposed General Plan
Amendment which includes reduction of building densities in the foothill
area located in the western portion of the City will provide the following
beneficial impacts:
1. Preserve additional biotic habitat
2. Reduce the quantity of sedimentation, erosion, and harmful
surface drainage into drainages and onto roads, etc.
3. Reduction of negative impacts on stream corridors and
drainages which ultimately drain into San Francisco Bay.
This has the secondary, but nonetheless important benefit of
improving the water quality of the Bay.
4. Reduction of traffic impacts on local roads. For each dwelling
unit eliminated, traffic impacts are reduced by approximately
11 trip ends per day.
5. Reduction if visual impacts. Density reduction, along with
sensitive site planning requirements will lessen. visual impacts
and help to retain the natural open -space qualities of the
foothills. Also, reduced density will inevitably result in reduced
grading and site development.
6. Reduction of impacts on public services. Reduced densities in
the foothill areas also means reduction of fire hazards, response
time and impacts on water supply.
General Plan EIR - Noise
Section 6 - 4
Land Use Category
Residential - Low Density
.le Family, Duplex,
Mobile Homes)
mss aWMWI-
Residential - Multi Family
Transient Lodging
(Motels, Hotels)
Schools, Libraries, Churches,
Hospitals, Nursing Homes
Concert Halls,
Amphitheaters
001111111MMITI
MMMAuditoriums.
Sports Arena, Outdoor
Spectator Sports
Playgrounds, Neighborhood
Parks
- . .. '
----iii ii%�
Office Buildings. Commerd . at
and Professional Centers
Industrial, Manufacturing,
Utilities, Agriculture
O Normally Acceptable
Conditionally Acceptable
Normally Unacceptable
Clearly Unacceptable
CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN NOISE STANDARDS_] Figure
6-A
Source: City of
1990
The Community Noise Standards set the basis for noise constraints to future
development. For this reason, the General Plan exposure levels may be slightly higher
than the Municipal Code maximums. Existing ambient noise levels determine the type
of land use that is appropriate for an area. The potential to expose sensitive receptors to
noise levels above recommended standards would also act as a constraint to future
development.
General Plan Elft - Noise
Section 6 - 5
The Planning Department conducts the review and approval of new and modified
construction projects. During project review, compliance with the noise ordinance
is confirmed. This is achieved through the Building permit, Conditional Use
Permit, Variance and Tentative Map review process. During review if the project
has potential to create noise above the maximum noise level, the applicant may be
required to complete a noise analysis. A licensed acoustical engineer will determine
compliance with the noise ordinance and outline methods to achieve compliance.
Compliance techniques may include design methods such as the provision of earth
berms and sound walls. The Municipal Code also places limitations on the days and
time of commercial deliveries adjoining residential properties, and the days and time
of construction activity. Further, the Municipal Code is applied to one-time site
specific noise incidents. An example may include noisy pool equipment or dog
barldng incidents. The City's "Noise Control Officer" enforces the noise ordinance.
The Cupertino Municipal Code, Section 10.48.51, outlines the maximum noise levels
on receiving properties based upon land use categories as depicted in Figure 6-B.
CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTION 10.48.040
Maximum Noise Level
Land Use on the receiving, propcM
Night Time Day Time
Residential 50 dBA 60 dBA
Non-residential 55 dBA 65 dBA
An acoustical engineer conducted field noise measurements at eight representative noise
receptor locations. The measurements were made (June 1991), in order to determine
citywide existing noise levels for impact analysis. The following are the noise receptor
locations:
General Plan EIR - Noise
Section 6 - 6
RECEPTOR
,f
Sfmw Crest,
v r
I
LOCATIONS
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
r 1. De Anza Blvd. south of Homestead
r 2. De Anza Blvd. near Rodrigues
3. Stelling Rd. near Highway 85
4. Miller Ave. north of Bollinger Rd.
/ 5. Homestead Rd.
6. Wheaton Dr. near Valloo perimeter Rd.
1.--- _ 7. Tantau Ave. sout of Bernhard
8. Blaney Ave. south of Pacifica
r.
Note: Noise levels at each monitoring location are dependent upon four major
factors: nearby traffic volumes, traffic speeds, distance to the roadway, and the
size of obstructions between the noise source and receptor. None of the locations
measured had significant obstructions between noise source and receptor
microphone.
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS Figure
6-B
Source: City of Cupertino, December, 1992
General Plan EIR - Noise
Section 6 - 7
II. IMPACTS - EFFECTS
A. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The results of the receptor location noise
are as follows:
Table 6-B
EXISTING NOISE CONDITIONS (1)
Table 6-C
MAXIMUM PERMITTED EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL EXPOSURE
Land Use Municipal Code (dBA) General
Pla>L(1)(2)
Day Plight
Residential 60 50 60 (3)
Non -Residential 65 55 70 (4)
1. No differentiation between day and night.
2. Ldn, CNEL, dB.
3. Conditionally acceptable noise level for single-family.
4. Conditionally acceptable noise level for commercial/office.
Locations Existinc
ExistinE (2)
Ambient
Traffic
1.
De Anja Blvd.
South of Homestead 66
69
2.
De Anza Blvd. near
Rodrigues 73
69
3.
Stelling Rd. near
Highway 85 (3) 65
65
4.
Miller Ave. North 66
65
5.
Homestead Rd. East
of Tantau Ave. 68
68
6.
Wheaton Dr. near
Vallco Permitter Rd. 53
54
7.
Tantau Ave. South
of Barnhart (4) 59
61
8.
Blaney Ave. South
of Pacifica 60
62
(1) Measured in Leq
(2) Peak hour, 50 feet from roadway
(3) Stelling Rd. at Jollyman
(4) Tantau Ave. South of Phil Way
In order to identify levels of impact the following comparison of existing Municipal Code
and
General Plan maximums are provided:
Table 6-C
MAXIMUM PERMITTED EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL EXPOSURE
Land Use Municipal Code (dBA) General
Pla>L(1)(2)
Day Plight
Residential 60 50 60 (3)
Non -Residential 65 55 70 (4)
1. No differentiation between day and night.
2. Ldn, CNEL, dB.
3. Conditionally acceptable noise level for single-family.
4. Conditionally acceptable noise level for commercial/office.
' General Plan EIR - Noise
Section 6 - 8
The Noise Element of the General Plan specifies 60 dB, Ldn or CNEL as normally
acceptable for residential land use without any special noise insulation requirements.
This level may not be achievable due to existing traffic background levels and
construction, economic or aesthetic constraints. The General Plan noise specifies 60-
70 dB, Ldn or CNEL as conditionally acceptable for residential land use, but
construction in these areas requires that design and insulation features be incorporated
to reduce interior and exterior noise levels.
Title 24 of the California Administrative Code regulates interior noise levels for new
multi -family residential dwellings. Title 24 specifies the maximum allowable sound
transmission between dwelling units in new multi -family buildings, and limits
allowable interior noise levels in new multi -family residential units to 45 dBA, CNEL.
For new multi -family construction proposed in areas where the existing exterior noise
level is greater than 60 dBA, CNEL, Title 24 requires that an acoustical analysis be
performed to demonstrate that interior noise levels would not exceed 45 dBA, CNEL.
B. MUNICIPAL CODE - NOISE IMPACT
C.
When comparing the daytime noise levels permitted by the Municipal Code to the
existing ambient noise conditions, it is determined that most receptors are currently
experiencing noise levels above the maximum allowable (Table 6-B and 6-C). This is
primarily attributed to background traffic noise. For single event noise incidents such
as dog barking, the Municipal Code allows brief day time noise incidents above the
maximum These events, if occurring on site with existing ambient noise levels above
the maximum, would require a baseline adjustment to accommodate the site.
The following Figure represents existing and proposed updated conditions.
EXISTING AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
NOISE CONDITIONS (1)
Existine Existin General Plan General Plan
Ambient Traffic 2 (modified) Alternative
Locations
1.
De Anza Blvd. So. of Homestead
66
69
69
69
2.
De Area Blvd. near Rodrigues
73
69
69
69
3.
Stelling Rd. near Highway 85 (2)
65
65
66
66
4.
Miller Ave. North
66
65
66
67
5.
Homestead Rd. East of Tantau Ave.
68
68
69
68
6.
Wheaton Dr. near Vallco Permitter Rd.
53
54
55
55
7.
Tantau Ave. South of Barnhart (3)
59
61
61
61
8.
Blaney Ave. South of Pacifica
60
62
62
62
(1)
Measured in Leq
(3)
Stelling Rd. at Jollyman
(2)
Peak hour, measured 50 feet from roadway
(4)
Tantau Ave. South of Phil Way
General Plan EIR - Noise
Section 6 - 9
When comparing the Cupertino General Plan allowed maximum residential noise levels
to the existing noise conditions, the majority of the receptor locations, are experiencing
"conditionally acceptable" ambient noise levels. The existing ambient noise conditions
at one location (DeAnza/Rodrigues (Fig 6-F, No.2) is experiencing "normally
unacceptable" noise levels. New residential development at this location will be
required to incorporate noise reduction features or consider disapproval of residential
projects that cannot obtain the "normally acceptable" range of noise levels and Title 24
interior noise standards.
tut• : y
The California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G indicates a project will normally
have a significant effect on the environment if it will increase substantially the ambient
noise levels on adjoining areas. Noise impacts are considered significant if
development allowed by the proposed General Plan Amendment would cause noise
levels to increase by five decibel (dBA); or if the process creates a noise environment
that is incompatible with existing or planned uses (perceptible level).
a. Short Term Noise Impacts from Construction Activity
Short term construction noise impacts are considered significant if construction
activities affect sensitive receptors for a substantial amount of time, or, if noise
levels endanger the hearing of sensitive receptors near the construction site, or if
construction activities would affect receptors during the sensitive evening noise
period.
Construction activities consistent with the development allowed in the General Plan
would generate high noise levels on or adjacent to construction sites intermittently
during construction. Construction would, however, be temporary and would not
cause any long term adverse impacts. The Cupertino Municipal Code outlines
restrictions with regard to construction activities and allowed hours and days of that
construction. The Cupertino Noise Officer is responsible for overseeing and
enforcing the Noise Ordinance.
Mitigation: Limit construction activity to weekday time periods and
prohibit noisy construction equipment. Refer to
mitigation III B11
Residences adjoining I-85 right-of-way can expect significant increases in ambient
noise levels above existing conditions. An estimated 8-9 decibel increase is
projected during the peak hour, which equates to a maximum noise level of 62
decibels (L.eq) (sound walls and depressed roadway included). This decibel level is
below the maximum allowed in the General Plan but exceeds Municipal Code
maximums. When the roadway is first opened to traffic, the sound will be distinct
and noticeable because adjoining residences are not currently experiencing roadway
noise from this source. The specific impacts and mitigations were addressed in the
Environmental Impact Statement completed by the Traffic Authority and are
available for reference, with the City of Cupertino Public Works Department.
' General Plan EIR - Noise
Section 6 - 10
The final Environmental Impact Statement for Route 85 Transportation Corridor
(July 1987) studied the decibel levels at De Anza College before and after
construction. The study concluded that the existing noise measurement (60 feet
from the freeway) is 54 decibels. Following construction the decibel level is
projected to increase to 62 decibels (8 decibel increase). The impact to Cupertino
residents could have been much greater except that the roadway is semi -depressed
or wholly depressed (8 - 20 ft. below grade). Also, sound walls of 10-14 feet in
height have been placed along the right-of-way.
�1 The California Department of Transportation has had to address a recent noise
phenomenon. Complaints from residences who live near freeways (adjoining and
up to 2 miles) indicate that noise has significantly increased since the sound walls
were constructed. As a result, Caltrans conducted studies on soundwall reflection
�i and diffraction. Reflection is described as noise reflecting from one soundwall to
the opposite side of the street when only one sound wall exists. Diffraction occurs
when noise waves emanate upward from a source to the top of the barrier where
they then bend downward toward the earth.
The noise readings taken at locations where citizens have expressed concerns, show
decibels well below the maximum threshold decibel levels set by the Federal
Highway Administration. The readings were normal for a quiet urban daytime
setting (about 50 decibels). The studies conducted by Caltrans find no objective
evidence that soundwalls cause perceivable increased noise levels at distant
receivers. Meteorologic conditions, including temperature inversions, and wind
speed and direction can account for significant fluctuations in noise levels.
Additionally, noise can be affected by the amount of ground cover or landscaping
between the noise source and receiver. These conditions can explain the perceived
noise level increases for long-distance receivers.
Caltrans continues to pursue resolution of the perceived increased noise after noise
barriers. According to a Caltrans memorandum from the Department of
- Transportation (May 27, 1992) a new research project has been proposed through
the National Cooperative Highway Research Program to study the influence of
noise barriers on people at distances of one-quarter mile to two miles from
freeways. These research results will be available by 1995.
Long-term noise impacts would, to a large extent, result from motor vehicle traffic
on roadways within the City boundaries. Figure 6-D identifies the projected decibel
increases expected under the General Plan Amendment at the eight receptor sites.
Most sites will experience a 3 decibel or less increase, which is considered
imperceptible. The 3 decibel or less noise increase is a result of additional vehicles
being added to an already impacted roadway. When this occurs the average speeds
are reduced which in tum offsets anticipated increased noise levels.
Mitigation: Consider existing and future noise levels when locating
and approving designs for residences and work places.
Refer to mitigation III b and c.
c. Long Term Noise Imyac s: Siting of Development
Anticipated development under the proposed General Plan could expose additional
residential or employee populations to unacceptable ambient noise levels. This is
considered a potentially significant impact.
II
General Plan EIR - Noise
Section 6 - 11
The Municipal Code noise level is already exceeded at several of the receptor sites.
During review of new development careful consideration must be given during the
design to provide additional insulation from exterior noise sources. This may
include shifting living areas or sensitive receptors away from the roadway or the
application of noise reduction techniques such as earthen beans.
The 3 decibel increase in traffic -generated noise levels, as a result of implementation
of the proposed General Plan, would not be significant but because many of the
locations city-wide are already experiencing decibel levels over the minimum, any
increase would be considered significant.
The development of land uses consistent with the General Plan Amendment would
result in a decrease in anticipated traffic generated noise levels. This occurs as a result
of vehicles being added to an already impacted roadway which decreases vehicular
speeds which will in turn slow down traffic and thus reduce the potential background
vehicular noise.
The areas designated for new residential uses would include the siting of new
residential units within existing commercial/industrial settings. These new residences
would be exposed to traffic and fixed noise sources which create greater noise exposure
than those uses found in strictly residential areas. These proposed mixed use
developments will require design mitigations to assure compatibility between the uses.
a. The continued, ongoing truck noise from quarry operations.
b. Existing citywide noise levels currently exceed the Municipal Code noise level
maximums.
X111• 31n
The "No Project" alternative would not increase noise levels. The General Plan
(Modified)" alternative would result in an increase in stationary source noises as a result
of new commercial/industrial construction. The additional traffic under this scenario
would decrease noises adjoining major roadways due to increased vehicle compaction
which would result in decreased vehicle speeds and related noises.
�l 11 •. 1 ./ 1 ' 111 ..1 . N . 1 1 1 1 '
Existing and proposed noise levels are consistent with the existing General Plan noise
requirements, but exceed the Municipal Code maximum by 9 decibels during the
daytime and up to 19 decibels during the night time.
Increased industrial, commercial and office development projected under the Proposed
General Plan Amendment will increase stationary noise sources. These noise sources
will increase daytime background noise.
General Plan EIR - Noise
Section 6 - 12
An increase of any development will bring a concomitant increase in vehicular activity
which will increase noise sources City-wide, especially on the urban fringe areas. This
is true except in those instances where existing congested roadways are further
impacted by additional vehicles being added to the traffic, thus slowing down traffic
and related noise.
` III. MITIGATIONS
The Cupertino Municipal Code in conjunction with the General Plan is used as a review
tool to determine compliance with the noise standards. Further, these policies and codes are
used as a process for bringing project noises into conformance with the noise maximum
standards.
A. PROPOSED
i None
B. EXISTING
1. Use figures 6-K, 6-L, 6-H, 6-N and the Cupertino Municipal Code to evaluate
land use decisions. (Policy 6-24)
\� 2. Be sure that design and improvement of roads along the West Valley
transportation corridors are designed and improved in a way that minimizes
neighborhood noise. (Policy 6-25)
3. Continue to support an enactment of stricter state laws on noise emissions from
new motor vehicles and enforce existing street laws on noise emissions. (Policy
6-26)
4.
Continue to review the needs of residents for convenience in safety and make
them a priority over convenient movement of commute or through traffic where
practical. (Policy 6-27)
!,
5.
Continue to evaluate solutions to discourage abuse of local streets through
modified street design. Examples include meandering streets, diverters,
landscape islands, street closures, and widened parking stripes. (Policy 6-28)
6.
Continue to work toward improving the noise environment on Foothill Blvd. by
restricting quarry traffic especially during late evening and early morning hours.
It is preferable that the restrictions be voluntary. Encourage alternative to truck
transport, specifically rail, when feasible.(Policy 6-29)
7.
Work to carry out noise mitigation measures listed in the Edward Pack &
'
Associates (County of Santa Clara) report to diminish noise from Kaiser
Permanente truck traffic for homes located near Foothill and Stevens Creek Blvd.
(Policy 6-30)
8.
Require new commerciaUmdustrial developments to locate their delivery areas so
they are away from existing or planned homes. (Policy 6-31)
General Plan EIR - Noise
Section 6 - 13
Continue active enforcement of Section 10.45 of the Municipal Code limiting
commercial and industrial delivery hours adjoining residential uses. (Policy 6-32)
10. Continue to require analysis and implementation of techniques to control the
effects of noise from industrial equipment and processes for projects new homes.
(Policy 6-33)
11. Continue to restrict non -emergency building construction work near homes
during evening, early morning, and weekends. (Policy 6-34)
12. Develop a comprehensive noise ordinance that gives time restrictions on
commercial and industrial deliveries, establishes procedures for regulating noisy
animals. (Policy 6-35)
13. Exercise discretion in requiring noise walls to be sure that all other measures of
noise control have been explored and that the noise wall blends with the
neighborhood. (Policy 6-36)
1. As a mitigation to the construction of Highway 85 significant sound wall placement
will occur along the right-of-way at the direction of the State of California.
Additionally the roadway depression significantly mitigates roadway noise to
adjoining properties.
The development industry plays an important role in the sound attenuation for
individual projects. The design and construction measures utilized to achieve the
required exterior noise levels include the use of sound attenuation walls or soil
berms to attenuate outdoor areas. This technique together with proposed siting of
buildings to orient private outdoor spaces away from noise sources can reduce
onsite noise levels. Interior noise level reduction measures include the use of
proposed building materials and orientation for outdoor areas and windows away
from noise sources. These noise reduction features are applied to new project
evaluation and consideration of disapproval of the projects that do not fall within the
"normally acceptable" noise range.
3. The Mitigation Monitoring requirement (AB3180) is complied with through project
conditions of approval.
4. Chapter 35 of the California Building Code establishes minimum noise insulation
standards to protect individuals residing in multi -family dwellings and commercial
lodging facilities. The standards are used to specify appropriate design standards
and building materials.
General Plan EIR - Noise
Section 6 - 14
Glossary
Ambient noise - a relatively steady background noise which is an accumulation of different
noise sources most of which are transportation related.
2.BSA - "A -weighted" decibels wherein lower and higher frequencies are de-emphasized similar
to human hearing rather that hearing a "flat" frequency response.
Decibels - (dB) a shorthand logarithmic unit which avoids having to deal in the extremely large
numbers describing sound in its basic engineering units.
4. F=uency - the sound or pitch
5. L�5Q - median noise level often used as a descriptor
6. L&q - energy equivalent noise level. Essentially the same as Lam, except that during the night
time period 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
7. Noise - unwanted or undesirable sound
Sound - rapid dflucuation of air pressure higher and lower than normal atmospheric pressure.
9. Single event noise - an unusual, occasional or temporary noise such as loud music,
construction work or an ambulance siren.
10. Operational noise -a continuous or frequent noise related to the basic use of properties such as
heating and cooling systems.
I
General Plan EIR - Noise
Section 6 - 15
,i
Sources
1.
Community Noise, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Noise Abatement and
Control, Washington, D.C., December 1971.
2.
Proceedings, Conference on Noise as a Public Health Hazard, American Speech and Hearing
Assoc., Washington, D.C., June 1968.
3.
Noise from Construction Fnuipment and Operations_. Building Equipment. and Home
Appliances, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Noise Abatement and
Control, Washington, D.C., December 1971.
4.
A Guide to Airborne. Impact and Structure -home Noise Control in Multi -Family Dwel =,
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D.C., September 1967.
5.
Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requite to Protect Public Health and
Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Noise Abatement and Control, Washington, D.C., March 1974.
6.
Highway Noise - A Design Guide for HighwayEngineers, National Cooperative Highway
Research Program Report 117, Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1971.
7.
Highway Noise - A Field Evaluation of Traffic Noise Reduction Measures, NCHRP Report
144, Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1973.
8.
Noise Insulation Problems in Buildings, Report to Santa Clara County Airport Land Use
Commission, Paul Veneklasen and Assoc., Santa Monica, CA, January 1973.
9.
Guidelines for the Preparation and Content of Noise Elements of the General Plan, California
Office of Noise Control, Berkeley, Feb. 1976.
10.
Noise Pollution, Public Health and Safety Section of General Plan, Planning Department,
City of Cupertino, 1983.
11.
Noise Impact Mitigation Study, H. Stanton Shelley, Cupertino, CA, July 1991.
and
12.
Effects of Noise Barriers on Distant Receptors, California Department of Transportation,
Sacramento, CA, Revised, March 2, 1992.
I
SECTION 7
GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY
I.
II
Table of Contents
III. Mitigation Measures...................................................................7-16
A. Non -seismic and Seismic Land Hazards.......................................7-16
Page
Environmental Setting..................................................................7-1
2. Existing........................................................................7-17
A.
Existing Development and Conditions...........................................7-1
1. Proposed.......................................................................7-17
1. Regional........................................................................7-1
2. Existing........................................................................7-17
2. Local ............................................................................7-2
B.
Consistency with Other Plans ....................................................
7-9
1. City General Plan..............................................................
7-9
2. Other Cities and County ......................................................
7-9
3. Regional Plan.................................................................7-10
Impacts..................................................................................7-10
A.
Significance Criteria..............................................................7-10
B.
Significant Effects which can be Mitigated.....................................7-11
1. Non -seismic Land Hazards..................................................7-11
2. Seismic Hazards ........ ........................... .... .......................7-11
3. Erosion and Sedimentation..................................................7-14
4. Mineral Resource Extraction................................................7-14
C.
Significant Effects Which Cannot be Mitigated................................7-14
D.
Alternatives Analysis.............................................................7-15
1. No Project Alternative ................... ..........................
.... .......7-15
2. Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative.............................7-15
E.
Local Short Term Uses vs. Long Term Productivity .........................7-15
F.
Growth Inducing Effects.........................................................7-15
G.
Economic and Social Effects.....................................................7-15
H.
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Should
the Plan be Implemented .........................................................7-16
III. Mitigation Measures...................................................................7-16
A. Non -seismic and Seismic Land Hazards.......................................7-16
1. Proposed.......................................................................7-16
2. Existing........................................................................7-17
B. Erosion and Sedimentation.......................................................7-17
1. Proposed.......................................................................7-17
2. Existing........................................................................7-17
C. Mineral Resource Extraction.....................................................7-18
1. Proposed.........................................................:.............7-18
2. Existing........................................................................7-18
IV. Mitigation Measures Not A Part Of The Project...................................7-18
A. Non -seismic and Seismic Land Hazards.......................................7-18
B. Erosion and Sedimentation.......................................................7-18
C. Mineral Extraction.................................................................7-19
Sources..................................................................................7-20
Tables
Page
7-A Explanations: Geologic and Seismic Hazards Map
of the Cupertino Planning Area ....................................................... 7-8
7-B Acceptable Exposure to Risk Related to Various Land Uses.....................7-12
7-C Technical Investigations Required to Design Structures Based Upon
Acceptable Level of Risk for Various Land Use Activities .......................7-13
Figures
7-A Seismic and Geological Hazards......................................................7-3
7-B Mineral Land Classification Map ..................................................... 7-5
I
.r SECTION 7
69 GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY
I. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
1! A. EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND CONDITIONS
1. Regional
The Santa Clara Valley has chiefly been formed by alluvial deposits carried by
streams originating in the surrounding Santa Cruz and Diablo mountain ranges
which eventually flow into South San Francisco Bay.
The Santa Cruz Mountains to the southwest consist of a number of complex ridges,
with rugged slopes varying in steepness from 40 to 60 percent. The mountains
crest at typical elevations of 2,000 to 3,400 feet. The eastern edge of the Valley is
defined by the Diablo Range which consists of several parallel ridges with slopes
varying between 20 and 60 percent. The foothills crest at elevations ranging from
t 900 to 2,000 feet with taller peaks (4000+ feet) on more distant ridges from the
valley floor.
The gentle to moderately sloped foothills (elevations 900 - 2,000 feet) consist of
sedimentary deposits derived from the older mountain ranges. These bedrock
materials are characterized as semiconsolidated gravel, sand, silt and clay which is
classified by geologists as the Santa Clara Formation. More consolidated forms of
these materials are known as sandstone, siltstone and mudstone. In the mountains,
the predominant bedrock belongs to the Franciscan Assemblage which includes a
mixture of highly sheared and broken sandstone, shale, chert,.greenstone and
graywacke. Of lesser extent, but similar age, are rocks of the Great Valley
Sequence; marine shale, and ophiolitic units (serpentinite, diabase and basalt)
' found in the Diablo Range. Because of the inherent weaknesses in these materials,
they are incapable of supporting steep slopes without experiencing slope failures.
The instability of these materials are further amplified by the areas high seismic
activity.
,t.
.'
IT
I M.
The Santa Clara Valley is located in a region of very high seismic activity. The
major earthquake fault systems are the San Andreas along the crest of the Santa
Cruz Mountains and the Hayward and Calaveras fault systems in the Diablo Range.
Other potentially active faults located in the valley and hill areas of the Valley
include the Berryessa, Crosley, Clayton, Quimby Shannon, Fvergreen, Sargent,
Silver Creek, Monta Vista and Berrocal faults.
A prominent feature of the hillside areas are the presence of quarrying
operations.There are two active mining operations in the Cupertino planning area,
Stevens Creek Quarry and Permanente Quarry, located in the unincorporated area of
Santa Clara County in the western foothills. These quarries are designated as
"Regionally Significant Con-struction Aggregate Resource Areas" by the State
Mining and Geology Board. Santa Clara County policies and use permits govern
these activities.
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 2
The Santa Clara County General Plan policies "are intended to recognize the value
of the County's aggregate resources and to insure that the resource is used in the
wisest possible manner." Two of the major policies in this regard state:
Protect the resource areas from encroachment or urban development
Encourage the conservation and extraction of the State -designated and other
mineral deposits
The County policies include numerous references to protection of the environment,
including neighboring land uses, traffic, noise, water supply, and visibility.
Specifically, the County policies state: "Quarry operating measures should be
adopted which mitigate potential adverse impacts upon land uses neighboring these
quarry sites,„ and "New or significant expansions of quarries and mines shall be
approved only if compatible with neighboring land uses, free from hazardous traffic
impacts, and not disruptive of the environment..” County policy also states that
"Access routes to new quarrying sites should discourage the truck transport of
extractive resources, except on expressways, freeways, and designated truck
routes, " and "Alternatives to truck transport should be encouraged where feasible."
Related to other jurisdictions, a County policy specifies that "new quarry operations
within the Sphere of Influence of a city should be consistent with that city's General
Plan policies."
2. Local
The Cupertino Planning Area is situated in the western portion of the Santa Clara
Valley, its physical setting encompassing topographic extremes, ranging from the
nearly flat valley floor to the high ridges and narrow stream canyons of the Santa
Cruz Mountains. For descriptive purposes, Cupertino can be divided into three
large geologic terrain units categorized by generally similar topographic and
geologic characteristics. These units are the valley floor, foothills and mountains,
and are shown in Figure 7-A.
Valley Floor: This unit is the large and relatively flat Santa Clara Valley basin
which is partially filled by stream sediment, or alluvium. The valley floor is the
most intensively and extensively urbanized area of the three terrain units.
Geologically young, unconsolidated mixtures of gravel, sand, silt and clay derived
from the Santa Cruz Mountains were carried to the valley floor by Stevens Creek,
Permanente Creek and other streams and deposited in a rather broad, fan -shaped
land form known as an alluvial fan. The alluvial material represents an
accumulation of sediments that spans tens, to perhaps hundreds of thousands of
years.
Since the formation of the original alluvial surface, the role of the area streams has
changed dramatically. The major streams are no longer depositing sediments on the
valley floor, but are deeply eroding the debris. The erosional activity of
Permanente, Regnart and Stevens Creeks has entrenched their stream courses into
narrow, steep -walled canyons, like the Blackberry Farm and Deep Cliff areas.
Foothills: The Foothills Terrain Unit lies west of the Valley Floor and consists of
hillside terrain of low topography and gentle to moderately steep slopes. The
foothills have elevations of 900 to 1,000 feet above sea level and have experienced
little intense urban development (mainly single-family residential construction on
larger lots).
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 3
The sedimentary deposits of the foothills are older, more consolidated and
deformed compared to the sediments of the valley floor. They were deposited by
ancient streams in the Santa Cruz Mountains and were uplifted by strong mountain
building geologic forces which deformed them into folds and displaced them along
faults.
The bedrock materials are predominantly semi -consolidated gravel, sand, silt and
clay and classified by geologists as the Santa Clara formation. When the materials
are consolidated enough to be called rock, they are referred to as conglomerate,
sandstone, siltstone and shale. Because of the inherent weaknesses in the bedrock
materials; that is, poor consolidation and clay richness, these materials are incapable
of supporting or maintaining high, steep slopes without experiencing wide spread
slope failures, such as landslides and rock avalanches.
The deformation of the bedrock define the two major fault zones which delimit the
east and west boundaries of the Foothill Terrain Unit. The Berrocal Fault is located
along the western margin and the Monta Vista Fault located to the east dividing the
foothills from the valley floor. Both faults are called thrust faults (i.e. dip -slip) in
which the land on the western side of the fault has been uplifted relative to the land
on the eastern side of the fault.
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 4
Mountains: The Mountains Terrain Unit lies west of the foothills and the Berrocal
Fault zone. The unit has the highest and most steep topography (e.g. Skyline
Boulevard, upper Stevens Creek Canyon and Montebello Ridge). Elevations range
from 1,800 feet near Stevens Creek Reservoir to 2,800 feet along Monte Bello
Ridge.
The bedrock materials generally consist of consolidated materials of sedimentary,
igneous and metamorphic origins. The most abundant rocks belong to the
Franciscan Assemblage which includes a mixture of highly sheared and broken
sandstone and shale, greenstone (altered volcanic rock), chert (silica -rich
sedimentary rock) and limestone. The Franciscan Assemblage is typically confined
to the Monte Bello Ridge area which is bounded on the east by the Berrocal Fault
and on the west by the San Andreas Fault.
Mineral Resources: There are identified mineral resource areas in Cupertino s City
Limits and planning area. State law requires that jurisdictions recognize these areas
and emphasize their conservation and development. The State Mining and
Reclamation Act of 1975 finds that the "extraction of minerals is essential to the
continued economic well-being of the state and to the needs of the society...... The
Mineral Land Classification Map, Figure 7-B, indicates that mineral resource areas
exist in a swath running northwesterly through the valley and foothill areas of
Cupertino. The Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ) are shown and defined as:
MRZ-2: Areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral
deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood for their presence
exists.
MRZ-3: Areas containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be
evaluated from available data.
Most of the mineral resource areas are in the developed valley floor. The remainder
is in the less developed areas, which includes the Seminary property, Inspiration
Heights, the western edge of the Regnart Canyon Area, and the relatively
undeveloped areas of the western City limits. Although mineral resource areas are
identified, there are no active mining operations in the City limits. There is a
depleted gravel pit in the southwest area of Cupertino.
Cupertino does not support the development of new mining operations in these
areas due to their proximity to residential development. Existing and particularly
new hillside residences tend to be large -lot, expensive, estate homes, and State
Public Resources Code considers 'low density residential uses with high unit
value" to be land uses which are incompatible with mining operations.
Proposed policies acknowledge that mineral resource areas exist outside the City
limits; future extraction should be limited to present operations in terms of noise and
traffic. Incompatible land uses should not be allowed in and around these areas.
Land Instability: From a public safety and health standpoint, the most important
characteristics of soils are those connected to its ability to support man-made
structures. These characteristics can be further divided into seismic and non-
seismic hazard categories. A related concern is erosion and sedimentation of soil
which is the result of the lack of vegetation protecting the soil layer.
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 5
AVO
'Y'
-4�
0)
ilia,
[:4:
4
"V.
A A -,
lupi'
In
V _j IS
Awl
t' W�4-
ry
• Drill bole
V4�
Outer boundary of areas wbjad to
wbastizaum and limit of area. clessified
MRZ-1 Areas where adequate Lnf--Um M&mu*
that w upilicant depowls — pr=en4 Or
,here it is judged that little hkchbood exists
for their presence.
MR7-2 Areas, whore adequate inf—tatim indi-t- that
ugnificant mineral deposits = peserst, Or
,tff, it is judged that a high likelihood for
their presence exists.
hff,Z.3 Areas ooviLinmg mineral deposits the sillni8CA000
of wWb amort be evaluated ften available data.
MINERAL LAND CLASSIFICATION MAP
Source: State of California Resources Agency, Department of Conservation, V
Figure
7-B
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 6
Non -seismic Hazards of Unstable Land: Areas that are hazardous because of
seismic conditions may also be hazardous without earthquakes. Land stability
hazards may occur over a longer period of time or occur instantly as a result of a
sudden and heavy rainstorm (a non -seismic event) or a catastrophic earthquake.
There are several categories of unstable land that are of concern in the Cupertino
area.
a) Expansive Soils/Soil Creep: When the soil contains a sufficient percentage of
certain clay minerals, it can swell when wet and shrink when dry. This
shrink/swell potential can vary from slightly to highly expansive; which is thus
related to the potential hazard of the soil. These soil types can affect the
structural integrity of buildings by causing cracking and movement of the
foundation. As these soil types are commonly encountered, standard building
engineering techniques have been developed to counter the shrink/swell effects.
In the hillsides, expansive soils pose the additional problem of progressive
downhill soil creep. Standard construction practices are inadequate on such
soils and specialized engineering studies must be conducted to develop property
with such soils.
b) Landslide: The sudden movement of soil on sloping land is affected by
numerous factors, such as, the degree of slope, the type of soil and its water
content, the orientation of soil layers and the vegetative cover. Steeper slopes
are more susceptible to land sliding as are slopes that are underlain by
unconsolidated or high clay content bedrock materials. When water is added,
the soils become heavier, more lubricated and less cohesive, which increases
the chances for land sliding. The orientation of the rock and sediment layers
can facilitate land sliding. There is a particular concern when the layering is
angled downslope at the same incline as the slope itself. The lack of vegetation
can increase landslide potential, since plant roots bind soil and capture and hold
water protecting soils from water impacts.
Seismic Hazards of Unstable Land: The Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act
of 1972 required the mapping of earthquake faults sufficiently active and well
defined so as to constitute a hazard to structures from surface faulting or fault creep.
The term active is defined as a fault which has had surface displacement within
Holocene time (within the last 11,000 years). Within the Cupertino planning area,
the San Andreas Fault is the only Special Studies Zone.
The San Andreas Fault is actually part of a larger fault system that includes the
Hayward, Calaveras and other faults and is collectively known as the San Andreas
Fault System. The system extends over 700 miles from the Gulf of California,
through the California Coastal Range to Point Arena where the fault system leaves
the coast. The fault is characterized by right -lateral, strike -slip displacement where
the relative motion of the land plates are horizontal. The "Pacific Plate" (west of the
San Andreas fault) moves north/westward past the "North American Plate" at a
slow and continuous rate of a few centimeters per year.
The Alquist-Priolo Act does not preclude cities from adopting policies or criteria
that are stricter or more comprehensive than in the Act. Cupertino's seismic
planning includes consideration of the San Andreas Fault System, as well as the
Monta Vista and Berrocal Faults which are not considered Special Studies Zones by
the State because of the lack of geologic evidence that the faults have been active
during recent geologic times past 11,000 years).
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 7
There are certain land instability phenomena that are associated with seismic
activity. They are: ground shaking, ground failure and ground rupture. A related
seismic hazard is potential flood inundation resulting from failed creek or water
impoundments.
a) Ground Shaking: Earthquakes are an expected occurrence iri this area and
ground shaking is the most commonly experienced phenomenon of an
earthquake. The effects of ground shaking are most severe on fine-grain soils
that are compressible and saturated with water as may be found along water
courses and the San Francisco Bay.
Conversely, ground shaking is less intense and shorter, and damage less, in
areas of solid bedrock. During severe quakes, damage from ground shaking
may range from light (cracked chimneys) to severe (collapse of buildings).
b) Ground Failure: A secondary effect of strong ground shaking is ground failure,
which includes landsliding, liquefaction, differential settlement, lateral
spreading, ground lurching and other phenomena involving ground surface
displacement due to the failure of the underlying materials during earthquake
shaking.
Land sliding has already been discussed. The other phenomena are discussed
together because they are usually confined to saturated, granular alluvial mate-
rials of the valley floor. Liquefaction is the significant strength reduction of
water -saturated silt or sand that results in a "quicksand condition" and ground
failure. Differential settlement is the compaction of subsurface soil that results
in differential settling of the ground surface, causing damage to structures.
Lateral shading is the horizontal displacement of flat -lying material toward an
open or "free" face, such as the steep bank of a stream channel. Ground
lurchin results in cracking and fissuring of the surface when strong earthquake
shaking is directed toward a stream channel. Fissures and cracks in the earth
run parallel to the edge of the embankments. City areas where these land
instability phenomena are of concern are shown in Figure 7-A and Table 7-A.
c) Ground Rupture: Ground rupture does not occur very frequently during an
earthquake and when it does it is limited in extent. Ground, or surface rupture
occurs when fault displacement reaches the surface. Ground rupturing is
associated with moderate to great earthquakes, and is usually confined to rather
narrow zones along fault traces. If it occurs in developed areas, damage can be
very severe. The State Mining and Geology Board has adopted criteria that
prohibits the placing of a structure for human occupancy across an active fault
trace within a Special Studies Zone. Figure 7-A shows the fault zones within
the Cupertino planning area. The San Andreas Fault Special Study Zone does
not underlay any developed Cupertino areas. The Monta Vista Fault underlies
urban areas in Cupertino. The City's seismic planning requires new structures
to be set back from this fault to mitigate potential ground -rupture damage to
structures.
d) Potential Flood Inundation: A potential secondary effect from earthquakes is
flood inundation from dam failure, landsliding into a reservoir and seiches,
which are water waves generated in a relatively enclosed body of water such as
a reservoir. Such seismically induced flood hazards are discussed in the
Drainage and Flooding Section of this report.
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 8
EXPLANATIONS: GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS MAP
OF THE CUPERTINO PLANNING AREA
Geologic Taff aln Unit General Geoiogld5elamlo Hazard Specific Hazard
Hazards Within Terrain Unit Zone Map To Be Considered
Symbol M Haz Zone
VALLEY FLOOR: Nearly flat,
GROUND SHAKING - Moderate to locally severe
- Ground Shaking
urbanized valley floor; steep
VIII to IX intensity for max. probable event (8.3M)
- Ground Failure
walls of Stevens Creek
on San Andreas Fault. X to XII intensity within
VF - 12/3
- Flood Inundation
Canyon; low rolling foothills
1000 ft. and VII to Vill intensities at distance > 1000 h.
(Calabazas Creek)
area near St. Joseph
from max. probable event on Monte Vista Fault.
Seminary and Monte
Vista substation
GROUND FAILURE - Moderate to high landslide
potential along steep Stevens Creek canyon
VF -4
- Ground Shaking
walls; Moderate -high potential lateral spreading
- Ground Failure
and ground lurching, Stevens Creek Carryon
(landsliding, lurchirn
walls, liquefaction potential low -moderate
lateral spreading)
GROUND RUPTURE - Moderate potential
-
- Ground Shaking
along and wAn 300ft east of Monte Vista Fault trace
- Ground Failure
VF -5
(liquefaction)
- Flood Inundation
FLOOD INUNDATION - Moderate -high potential
along Stevens Creek under seismic or non -seismic
conditions, and along Calabazas Creek under
VF - 6
- Ground Shaking
non -seismic conditions
- Ground Rupture
(Monte Vista Faun)
FOOTHILLS -Gentle to
GROUND SHAKING - Moderate to locally severe VIII
F-1
- Ground Shaking
steep, partially urbanized
to IX intensity for max. probable event (8.3M) on San
- Ground Failure
hillside area located west
Andreas Fault. X to XII intensity within 2000 ft. west
(landsliding)
of Valley Floor, generally
of Monte Vista Fauh for max. probable event (7.OM)
east of Montebello Ridge
F-2
- Ground Shaking
GROUND FAILURE - Moderate to high landslide
- Ground Failure
potential under seismicinon-seismic conditions for
- Ground Rupture
slopes> 15%; ground lurching, fracturing within
2000 ft. west of Monte Vista Fauh trace during
F-3
- Ground Shaking
maximum probable earthquake.
- Ground Failure
- Ground Rupture
GROUND RUPTURE - Moderate potential along and
w/n 300ft. east and 600 ft. west of Monte Vista Fault
and Bertocal Fault
F-4
- Ground Shaking
(Same as
- Ground Failure
FLOOD INUNDATION - Moderate -high potential
VF - 5)
- Flood Inundation
along Stevens Creek under seismic or non -seismic
conditions
MOUNTAINS - Moderate
GROUND SHAKING - Moderate to locally severe
M-1
- Ground Shaking
to steep hill- side areas of
X to XII intensity for max. probable event (8.3M) on
- Ground Failure
Montebello Ridge and
San Andreas Fault. X to XII intensity within 2000 ft.
(landsliding)
Santa Cruz Mountains
from Berrocal Fault for max. probable event (7.OM)
GROUND FAILURE - Moderate to high landslide
M-2
- Ground Shaking
potential under seismidnon-seismic conditions for
- Ground Failure
slopes> 15%; ground lurching, fracturing within
(lurching, fracturing,
2000 ft. west of Berocal and San Andreas Fault
GROUND RUPTURE - High potential w/n 600 ft. of
M-3
- Ground Shaking
San Andreas Fault trace; Moderate potential 600'
- Ground Failure
west of Bernocal Fault trace
- Ground Rupture
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 9
Erosion and Sedimentation: Erosion can be caused by wind or water when soil is
left uncovered by fire, overgrazing, grading and other activities that remove
vegetative cover. The primary concern in Cupertino is water -generated erosion of
hillside land which causes sedimentation which clogs storm drains and water
percolation facilities and destroys hillside and streamside habitats.
B. CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS
Certain existing safety and disaster preparedness policies and strategies are
proposed for deletion because they already have been implemented and no further
action is required. The Proposed Plan is consistent with the General Plan in that it
seeks to improve disaster preparedness by involving businesses, neighborhoods
and individuals, not just city government, in disaster planning and locate
development and require seismic reinforcement that minimizes undue seismic risk to
lives and property.
The mineral resources policies are consistent with other elements in the General
Plan.
2. Other Cities and County
Santa Clara and Sunnyvale's General Plan are consistent with Cupertino's General
Plan, in that all cities require geotechnical review of development proposed in
geologically hazardous areas. New structures must be built to the Uniform
Building Code Standards which incorporate seismic considerations.
Cupertino's General Plan is consistent with the County's Plan, in that both plans
recognize the need to identify geologically hazardous areas and that an acceptable
level of risk from seismic hazards should be scaled to the project under
consideration and the nature of the hazard. The focus of the County Plan, of
course, is more regional than Cupertino's General Plan, in that the County Plan
must consider crucial emergency facilities county wide and how they relate to each
other in the event of a disaster, and how all private and public agencies are
organizationally prepared to meet an emergency. There is a County disaster
preparedness plan, and Cupertino coordinates and maintains consistency with this
plan.
Cupertino s proposed mineral resources policies are consistent with County policies
related to recognizing and protecting the existing mineral extraction areas and
requiring mitigation for environmental impacts. However, the County has not
established specific traffic and noise limitations, as has the City.
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 10
3. Reeional Plan
There is no regional plan for disaster preparedness.
The State Public Resources Code requires that Cupertino establish mineral resource
management policies for areas that have been classified by the State as containing
important mineral resources. These policies must recognize mineral information
classified by the State Geologist and transmitted by the Board, and emphasize the
General Plan conservation and development of the identified mineral deposits. The
Proposed Plan recognizes the mineral information, as shown in Figure 7-B. The
mineral deposits are not identified for conservation and development since they are
within the city limits and are subject to either existing or future residential
development
The city policies do, however, recognize the existing mineral resource extraction
areas outside the city limits, namely the Permanente and Stevens Creek Quarries.
City policies support the continuance of these quarries as long as existing traffic and
noise levels are not exceeded.
H. IMPACTS
A. SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
According to the California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G, a project will
normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will:
(a) Conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the
community where it is located;
(b) Have a substantial, demonstrable negative aesthetic effect;
(c) Substantially degrade water quality;
(d) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system;
(e) Increase substantially the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas;
(f) Cause substantial flooding, erosion or siltation; .
(g) Substantially diminish habitat for fish, wildlife or plants;
(h) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community;
(i) Expose people or structures to major geologic hazards.
Earthquakes cannot be avoided or predicted with certainty and all existing and
future development will be affected by earthquakes in this seismically active area.
The possible effects from an earthquake include ground shaking, surface rupture,
ground failure and seismically -related flood inundation. A secondary effect of large
earthquakes includes fire damage caused by quake -ruptured natural gas lines and/or
downed electrical transmission lines.
The level of risk varies depending on the severity and location of the earthquake,
the type of soil and the type and usage of the building. Cupertino uses an
"acceptable level of risk" concept in its land use planning which relates land use and
building design standards to the degree of geologic and seismic hazards for a
particular area. (See Tables 7-B and Q. For example, the lowest risk exposure is
assigned to highly critical structures, such as, a large dam or vital public utility
facility and high occupancy structures, such as, movie theaters or large office
buildings. An ordinary risk category is assigned to minor transportation routes and
low to moderate occupancy buildings, such as, single family residences, small
commercial buildings and warehouses.
The last major earthquake was the Loma Prieta Earthquake of 1989 which occurred
on the San Andreas Fault in a remote mountain area 9 miles northeast of Santa
Cruz. The magnitude of the quake was 7.1 as measured on the Richter scale. In
comparison to the San Francisco Earthquake of 1906 (magnitude 8.3), the 1906
quake had more than 30 times the energy of the Loma Prieta Earthquake. The
greatest loss of life and damage to property during the Loma Prieta earthquake
occurred in areas where geologic hazards existed such as unconsolidated soils in
1 San Francisco, Oakland and Santa Cruz.
I
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 11
IB.
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED
1. Non -seismic Land Hazards
Development consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendments would
expose additional population and structures to non -seismic hazards of unstable
land, such as expansive soils/soil creep and landslides. Exposure to such geologic
hazards is expected to be greater in the hillsides than on the valley floor. It is noted
that the plan amendments include a reduction of building density within the hillside
areas. This new policy will ultimately result in the reduction of hazards risk,from
both seismic and non seismic hazards.
Mitigation: Use public education and comprehensive geologic review
process for new development to minimize risk. Refer to
Geology mitigation III Al a -j and 2 2-g.
2. Seismic Hazards
Earthquakes cannot be avoided or predicted with certainty and all existing and
future development will be affected by earthquakes in this seismically active area.
The possible effects from an earthquake include ground shaking, surface rupture,
ground failure and seismically -related flood inundation. A secondary effect of large
earthquakes includes fire damage caused by quake -ruptured natural gas lines and/or
downed electrical transmission lines.
The level of risk varies depending on the severity and location of the earthquake,
the type of soil and the type and usage of the building. Cupertino uses an
"acceptable level of risk" concept in its land use planning which relates land use and
building design standards to the degree of geologic and seismic hazards for a
particular area. (See Tables 7-B and Q. For example, the lowest risk exposure is
assigned to highly critical structures, such as, a large dam or vital public utility
facility and high occupancy structures, such as, movie theaters or large office
buildings. An ordinary risk category is assigned to minor transportation routes and
low to moderate occupancy buildings, such as, single family residences, small
commercial buildings and warehouses.
The last major earthquake was the Loma Prieta Earthquake of 1989 which occurred
on the San Andreas Fault in a remote mountain area 9 miles northeast of Santa
Cruz. The magnitude of the quake was 7.1 as measured on the Richter scale. In
comparison to the San Francisco Earthquake of 1906 (magnitude 8.3), the 1906
quake had more than 30 times the energy of the Loma Prieta Earthquake. The
greatest loss of life and damage to property during the Loma Prieta earthquake
occurred in areas where geologic hazards existed such as unconsolidated soils in
1 San Francisco, Oakland and Santa Cruz.
I
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 12
ACCEPTABLE EXPOSURE TO RISK
RELATED TO VARIOUS LAND USES
Land uses and structural types are arranged below according to the level of exposure to acceptable risk
appropriate to each group; the lowest level of exposure to acceptable risk should be allowed for Group 1 and
the highest level of exposure to acceptable Tisk for Group 7.
e
r
Land Uas
Group
.Extra Pro)ect Cost To
Reduce Risk To
Acceptable Level
EXTREMELY
Group 1 VULNERABLE STRUCTURES (nuclear
As required for maximum
LOW
reactors, large dams, plants manufact-
attainable safety
damage; resist major earth-
uring/ storing hazardous materials)
quake (max. prob. on local
Group 2 VITAL PUBLIC UTILITIES, (electrical
Design as needed to remain
some strue. 6 non-struc.
transmission intertie0substantions,
functional attar max. prob.
regional water pipelines, treatment
earthquake on local faults
plants, gas mains)
faults; need not design to re-
Group 3 COMMUNICATION/TRANSPORTATION
5% to 25% of project cost
ORDINARY
(airports, telephones, bridges, freeways,
2% of project cost; to 10%
RISK
evac. routes)
project cost in extreme cases
SMALL WATER RETENTION Design as needed to remain
STRUCTURES functional after max. prob.
earthquake on local faults
EMERGENCY CENTERS (hospitals,
fire/police stations, post -earthquake aide
stations, schools City Hall, De Anza
College)
Group 7 VERY LOW OCCUPANCY BUILDINGS
Group INVOLUNTARY OCCUPANCY
FACILITIES (schools, prisons,
convalescent and nursing homes)
HIGH OCCUPANCY BUILDINGS
(theaters, hotels, large office/
apartment bldgs.)
(warehouses, fern structures)
MODERATELY
Group 5 PUBLIC UTILITIES, (electrical feeder
5%to 25%of project cost
LOW
routes, water supply turnout lines,
(farts land, landfills, wildlife areas)
damage; resist major earth-
sewage lines)
quake (max. prob. on local
twits) w/o collapse, allowing
Design to minimize injury,
some strue. 6 non-struc.
FACILITIES IMPORTANT TO LOCAL
loss of fife during maximum
ECONOMY
probable earthquake on local
faults; need not design to re-
main functional
ORDINARY
Group MINOR TRANSPORTATION (arterials
2% of project cost; to 10%
RISK
and parkways)
project cost in extreme cases
LEVEL
LQW-MODERATE OCCUPANCY
BUILDINGS (small apartment bldgs.,
single-fam, resid., motels, small
oommerciaVol ice bldgs.)
Group 7 VERY LOW OCCUPANCY BUILDINGS
Design to resist minor earth -
(warehouses, fern structures)
quakes w/o damage; resist
mod. earthquakes w/o strue.
OPEN SPACE 6 RECREATION AREAS
damage, w/some non-struct
(farts land, landfills, wildlife areas)
damage; resist major earth-
quake (max. prob. on local
twits) w/o collapse, allowing
some strue. 6 non-struc.
damage
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 13
TECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS REQUIRED TO DESIGN STRUCTURES
BASED UPON ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF RISK FOR VARIOUS LAND
USE ACTIVITIES
Description Of Technical Evaluations
UBC 1976 Edition, Uniform Building Code
Soils Soils and foundation investigation to determine ability of local soil
conditions to support structures
Geology Determine subsurface structure to analyze potential faults, ground
water conditions and slope stability
Seismic Hazard Detailed soils/structural evaluation to certify adequacy of normal UBC
earthquake regulations or to recommend more stringent measures
In Cupertino, earthquake damage was limited, since most of the homes are single
story, wood frame structures of relatively recent construction which is considered
one of the safest class of structures, capable of withstanding severe ground shaking
with only minor damage. Newer buildings are subject to modem building codes
which include seismic safety requirements. Building types most vulnerable to
damage from ground shaking include unreinforced masonry and tilt -up structures.
There is only one unreinforced masonry structure in Cupertino; it has not suffered
any earthquake damage yet. Residential damage from the Loma Prieta Earthquake
was predominantly chimney breakages. Nonresidential damage was also minor,
except for the St. Joseph Seminary, an older structure, and the "Motorola"
building, a tilt -up building. Both buildings were subsequently demolished. Other
tilt -up structures were damaged but have since been repaired or remain unoccupied
Mitigation: Use Geologic review process to minimize risk. Refer to
Geologic mitigation III A2 a -g.
Hazard Zone Map Symbol
VF 12356 F 1234
M 123 VF
Land Use Activity
Evaluations Required
Evaluations Required
(Table 6-D)
Uniform Bldg. Code (UBC)
Uniform Bldg. Code (UBC)
Groups 1 to 4
Soils
Soils
Seismic Hazard
Seismic Hazard
Geology
Uniform Bldg. Code (UBC)
Uniform Bldg. Code (UBC)
Groups 5 to 7
Soils
Soils
Geology
Description Of Technical Evaluations
UBC 1976 Edition, Uniform Building Code
Soils Soils and foundation investigation to determine ability of local soil
conditions to support structures
Geology Determine subsurface structure to analyze potential faults, ground
water conditions and slope stability
Seismic Hazard Detailed soils/structural evaluation to certify adequacy of normal UBC
earthquake regulations or to recommend more stringent measures
In Cupertino, earthquake damage was limited, since most of the homes are single
story, wood frame structures of relatively recent construction which is considered
one of the safest class of structures, capable of withstanding severe ground shaking
with only minor damage. Newer buildings are subject to modem building codes
which include seismic safety requirements. Building types most vulnerable to
damage from ground shaking include unreinforced masonry and tilt -up structures.
There is only one unreinforced masonry structure in Cupertino; it has not suffered
any earthquake damage yet. Residential damage from the Loma Prieta Earthquake
was predominantly chimney breakages. Nonresidential damage was also minor,
except for the St. Joseph Seminary, an older structure, and the "Motorola"
building, a tilt -up building. Both buildings were subsequently demolished. Other
tilt -up structures were damaged but have since been repaired or remain unoccupied
Mitigation: Use Geologic review process to minimize risk. Refer to
Geologic mitigation III A2 a -g.
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 14
now u• . m" .,.
Erosion and sedimentation of soil will result from development consistent with the
proposed General Plan Amendments. Protective vegetative cover will be removed
when grading associated with development occurs, allowing bare soil to be eroded
by wind and water. These eroded soils will likely end up in the storm drainage
system or nearby streams, causing sedimentation, pollution and clogging of water
percolation facilities. Hillsides may be potentially marred by the loss of top soil.
The adoption of the proposed amendments would also result in reducing erosion
and sedimentation impacts within the watershed west of the City.
Mitigation: Control timing of development and plant exposed slopes.
Refer to mitigation III B2.
The significant impacts relate to mineral resource extraction operations in the
unincorporated area of Santa Clara County. The County's General Plan describes
the impacts:
...impacts include alterations in topography and drainage patterns, removal of
vegetation, disruption of topsoil, the generation of noise and dust, additional
traffic and associated hazards, change in the visual appearance of the land,
increased erosion, destruction of wildlife habitat, reduction in surface water
quality, and increased energy consumption.
Mining of alluvial sources can result in impacts on stream bank stability, channel
location and gradient, and replenishment of groundwater supply. Major riparian
areas, important habitat for many species of birds and animals, may be disrupted.
Fishery resources may be disrupted by streamed siltation, destruction of pool and
riffle areas, and instream crossings.
Increased truck traffic along haul routes is the most problematical impact of quarry
operations. Truck traffic affects not only adjacent property owners, but all users of
the routes. Traffic generated by quarries not only increases the volume of traffic on
the roads, but may create safety hazards or contribute to the breakdown of roads not
designed to withstand the weight of such heavily loaded vehicles.
Mitigation: Seek cooperation with the County to control quarrying and
implement reclamation and noise controls. Refer to
mitigation III CI and 2.
LOAM Lei 010 :.r 00_ ftl &VAIN I lei. 1194W. Leis .3u rr : r I►
With regard to quarry operations,the Santa Clara County General Plan states:
In some cases it may not be possible to mitigate adverse impacts such as visual
appearance or increased truck traffic to insignificant levels. Should that be the case,
decision -makers would need to weigh the unmitigable impacts against the regional need
for the resource.
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 15
D. ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
1. No Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative represents the existing built environment. This
alternative would expose fewer people and structures to potential geologic hazards
because of the lack of intensification and urban expansion. Less erosion and
sedimentation would be expected because of general lack of development activity on
vacant land, particularly in the hillside areas.
It
The No Project Alternative would maintain mineral resource areas and extraction as
they currently exist. For the City limits, this would mean no mineral resource
extraction would be occurring. Since the active mineral resource areas are in the
County, and the City has no jurisdiction over them, the no project alternative cannot
affect those activities and the environmental impacts associated with mineral
extraction in the County would continue.
2. Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative
This alternative is identical to the proposed plan amendments in terms of hillside
residential densities. The geologic, erosion and sedimentation impacts from hillside
residential development are identical.
The existing General Plan calls for identifying mineral resource areas to allow
extraction. If this policy were applied to lands within the City limits, the impacts
previously identified would be augmented by additional extraction impacts in the
City.
E. LOCAL SHORT TERM USES VS. LONG TERM PRODUCTIVITY
'
None. See Land Use Section.
F. GROWTH INDUCING EFFECTS
None. See Land Use Section.
G. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS
Planning to reduce geologic hazards through appropriate siting of structures,
'
foundation design and building codes will increase private and public development
costs in the near term but will reduce future costs and save lives in the event of a major
earthquake.
The Santa Clan County General Plan states:
"Because the availability of a ready supply of reasonably priced construction aggregate
either directly or indirectly affects many aspects of the economy, the extraction of
mineral resources is essential to the continued economic well-being of Santa Clara
County. The construction industry, developers, cement manufacturers, asphalt
L
producers, truck drivers, and ultimately, all users of the finished products are affected
by the cost of aggregates."
It
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 16
Proposed policies acknowledge the existing mineral resource extraction areas in the
County, so those resources will continue to be available as long as existing noise and
traffic impacts are not increased. New extraction areas in the City limits would not be
available. These policies, which could limit the availability of nearby construction
materials, could increase the need to import materials and thus increase construction
costs.
H. SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES SHOULD THE
• Increased erosion and sedimentation will increase degradation of streams and the
watershed.
• Continued or new mineral extraction in the unincorporated area will alter natural
land forms.
• New hillside residents will be exposed to the geologic hazards characteristic of the
hillsides.
III. MITIGATION MEASURES
A. NON -SEISMIC AND SEISMIC LAND HAZARDS
1. Proposed
a. Continue the public education program to help residents reduce earthquake
hazards. (Policy 6-2)
b. Continue to provide training to the community on self -preparedness for
emergencies. (Policy 6-44)
c. Encourage businesses to prepare for disasters by having on-site emergency
supply containers. (Policy 6-47, Strategy 1) '
d. Continue to publish and distribute a general informational booklet with
instructions to minimize earthquake risks for owners of homes and businesses
and distribute it with the Cupertino Scene. (Policy 6-2, Strategy 2).
e. Activate the Public Information Office either on the Emergency Operating
Centers or in City Hall and as quickly as possible after an emergency. (Policy
6-43, Strategy 1)
f. Publish and promote emergency preparedness activities and drills. (Policy 6-2, ,
Strategy 3)
g. Encourage community leaders/owners of buildings with dependent populations
to prepare their buildings and clients for emergencies through emergency
planning, training and drills. (Policy 6-47, Strategy 6)
11
e. Upgrade construction standards for non -engineered residences to reduce
earthquake damage. (Policy 6-1, Strategy 4)
f. Adopt a geotechnical review procedure that incorporates the above concerns.
(Policy 6-1, Strategy 5)
rg. Continue the program that requires project applicants to record a covenant
informing future residents in high-risk geologic areas of the risk and that more
information is available in City Hall records. (Policy 6-2, Strategy 1)
B. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION
None proposed.
2. Existing
Continue to restrict the extent and timing of hillside grading operations to April
through October. Require performance bonds during the remaining time to
guarantee the repair of any erosion damage. All graded slopes must be planted as
soon as practical after grading is completed. (Policy 6-22)
10
11
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 17
distribute to
h.
Actively translate emergency preparedness materials and
appropriate foreign language populations. (Policy 6-2, Strategy 4)
i.
Create and maintain a computerized calling program to alert and evacuate
neighborhoods in disasters. (Policy 6-47, Strategy 3)
j.
Train neighborhood groups to respond to disasters as they request assistance.
Assist in neighborhood drills. (Policy 6-47, Strategy 4)
2. Existing
a.
Adopt and use a formal seismic/geologic review process to evaluate new
development proposals in all parts of the City. (Policy 6-1)
b.
Use the table on an acceptable level of risk to identify reasonable levels of risk
for land uses. (Policy 6-1, Strategy 1)
based
c.
Use Table 6-E to find the necessary geotechnical and structural analysis
on the proposed location of a development in a specific hazard zone. (Policy 6-
1, Strategy 2)
d.
Give a high priority to using new earthquake -resistant design techniques in
buildings. (Policy 6-1, Strategy 3)
e. Upgrade construction standards for non -engineered residences to reduce
earthquake damage. (Policy 6-1, Strategy 4)
f. Adopt a geotechnical review procedure that incorporates the above concerns.
(Policy 6-1, Strategy 5)
rg. Continue the program that requires project applicants to record a covenant
informing future residents in high-risk geologic areas of the risk and that more
information is available in City Hall records. (Policy 6-2, Strategy 1)
B. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION
None proposed.
2. Existing
Continue to restrict the extent and timing of hillside grading operations to April
through October. Require performance bonds during the remaining time to
guarantee the repair of any erosion damage. All graded slopes must be planted as
soon as practical after grading is completed. (Policy 6-22)
10
11
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 18
C. MINERAL RESOURCE EXTRACTION
1. Pro on sed
a. New mineral extraction areas may be considered within Cupertino's sphere of
influence, but the cumulative impact of existing and proposed activity should ,
not exceed present operations in terms of noise and traffic. Work with County
to assure that mining operations outside the City limits are consistent with the
City's General Plan.
b. Conserve mineral resource areas outside the City by not allowing incompatible
land uses in and around identified mineral resource areas. (Policy 5-23)
2. ExistinE
a. Continue to work toward improvement of noise environment cause by quarry
and cement truck traffic along Foothill Boulevard (Policy 6-29)
b. Carry out noise mitigation measures listed in Pack & Associates report to
diminish noise from Kaiser Permanente truck traffic. (Policy 6-30)
c. Control scenic restoration and noise pollution as well as air and water pollution
in mineral extraction quarrying, processing and transportation. (Policy 5-22)
IV. MITIGATION MEASURES NOT A PART OF THE PROJECT
A. NON -SEISMIC AND SEISMIC LAND HAZARDS
The Municipal Code requires the preparation of a preliminary soils report prior to the
issuance of a building permit for the construction of any structure. The purpose of the
report is to identify any potential soil or slope hazards that would require specialized
construction engineering. Said report may be waived by the City, if City engineering
staff is familiar with the soil conditions of the site. In the case of individual residential
lots, a letter of review from a licensed soils engineer may be satisfactory in lieu of a
soils report.
The City Grading Ordinance authorizes the Director of Public Works to require, at his '
discretion, an engineering geological investigation and/or a soils engineering
investigation for any project that requires a grading permit.
Other non -project mitigation measures that avoid or minimize soils and geologic
impacts are the Unsafe Building Ordinance, the Unreinforced Masonry Building
Ordinance, the Toxic Gas Ordinance, the Uniform Building Code enforced by the City
as well as the requirements of the State Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones. These
measures when implemented through the development review process are intended to
mitigate potential hazards to new development.
B. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION
The City Grading Ordinance requires the provision of an interim erosion and sediment
control plan whenever a grading plan is submitted. Said plans must meet established
grading, drainage and erosion and sediment control standards to be approved.
11
I�
A
A
I,
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Section 7 - 19
C. MINERAL EXTRACTION
Santa Clara County has a number of mineral resource policies that provide mitigation
for mineral extraction impacts:
New or significant expansions of quarries and mines shall be approved only if
compatible with neighboring land uses, free from hazardous traffic impacts, and not
disruptive of the environment.. (Santa Clara County General Plan, Policy NE 82)
Sound walls and planted screening should be employed along haul roads on sites where
necessary to reduce sound transmission to adjacent residences. Sound barriers should
also be erected where necessary to mitigate truck noise impacts on private residences
located near quarry access point to public mads. (Santa Clara County General Plan,
Policy NE 89)
Alternatives to truck transport should be encouraged where feasible. (Santa Clara
County General Plan, Policy NE 93)
The extraction of mineral resources, including sand and gravel, should be carefully
conditioned and regulated to mitigate potential adverse environmental impacts,
including mitigation measures for potential increases in siltation and/or pollution of
water resources in order to adequately protect the local water supply. (Santa Clara
County General Plan, Policy NE 85)
New quarrying activities should be discouraged where significantly visible from the
Valley floor, where screening techniques can not minimize the visual impact of the
quarry operation, and/or where later rehabilitation of the site will not reduce the
remaining visual impacts to a less than significant level. (Santa Clara County General
Plan, Policy NE 87)
Designated mineral resource areas should be protected from preclusive and/or
incompatible land use development, to permit the ultimate extraction and utilization of
the resources. (Santa Clara County General Plan, Policy NE 79)
General Plan EIR - Geology, Soils and Seismicity i
Section 7 - 20
- II
Sources "I
1. Antonucci, Joe, City of Cupertino
Verbal communication, October 1992.
2. City of Cupertino, General Plan, February 1990.
3. City of Cupertino, Municipal Code, Sections 16.04, 16.08, 16.12, 16.42, 16.44, 16.60.
4. City of Cupertino, Loma Prieta Earthquake Damage Surveys, 1989.
5. Cotton, William, Geotechnical Background Renort for the Seismic Safety Element of the
City of Cupertino General Plan, undated.
6. Santa Clara County, General Plan, 1981, reprinted 1990.
7. State of California, Public Resources Code, Title 14, Article 6. e
8. U.S. Geological Survey, The Loma Prieta Earthquake of October 17. 1989, 1989.
�I
1
1
�I
11
SECTION 8
DRAINAGE AND FLOODING
0
VD
e ��
I.
II
Table of Contents
Page
Environmental Setting........................................................... 8-1
A. Existing Conditions......................................................... 8-1
1. Regional.................................................................8-1
2. Local.....................................................................8-1
B.
Consistency with Other Plans .............................................
8-2
1. City General Plan .......................................:...............
8-2
2. Other Cities and County Plans ........................................
8-2
3. Regional Plan ...........................................................
8-2
Impacts............................................................................
8-3
A.
Significance Criteria........................................................
8-3
B.
Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated .............................
8-3
1. Storm Runoff...........................................................
8-3
2. Inundation Caused by Dam Failure ...................................
8-3
3. Inundation Caused by Failure of Water Storage Tanks
............ 8-3
C.
Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated .........................
8-4
D.
Alternatives Analysis.......................................................
8-5
1. No Project Alternative ..................................................
8-5
2. Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative .......................
8-5
E.
Local Short Term Uses vs. Long Term Productivity8-5
F.
Growth Inducing Effectst..................................................
8-5
G
Economic and Social Effects8...............................................
-5
H.
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
Should The Plan Be Implemented .........................................
8-5
III. Mitigation Measures............................................................. 8-5
A. Storm Runoff................................................................ 8-5
1. Proposed.................................................................8-5
2. Existing..................................................................8-6
B. Inundation Caused By Failure Of Water Storage Tanks ................ 8-6
1. Existing..................................................................8-6
IV. Mitigation Measures Not A Part Of The Project ............................. 8-6
A. Storm Runoff................................................................ 8-6
B. Inundation Caused By Dam Failure ....................................... 8-7
Sources.................................................................................. 8-8
tl
Figures "I
Page
8-A Extent of Flooding As A Result of Failure of
Man -Made Water Storage Facilities ........................................... 8-4
�I
11
SSECTION 8
isDRAINAGE AND FLOODING
I. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A. EXISTING CONDITIONS
1. Regional
Numerous intermittent and perennial streams traverse the Santa Clara Valley,
originating in the Santa Cruz Mountains to the south or the Diablo Mountain Range
to the east and eventually flowing into South San Francisco Bay. The Santa Clara
Valley drainage area that empties into South San Francisco Bay is about 690 square
miles. The major watersheds are the Coyote Watershed which drains the east side
of the valley and the Guadalupe Watershed which drains the south-central side of
the valley. Nine smaller watersheds drain the west side of the valley.
2. Local
Cupertino is located within three of the nine smaller watersheds: Calabazas, Stevens
Creek and Permanente Creek. Some of the major streams that traverse the City of
Cupertino are: Calabazas Creek, Regnart Creek, Stevens Creek and Permanente
Creek. These streams and others collect the surface runoff from storms and convey
it to the Bay. When these stream courses cannot convey the storm flow, overflow
of the stream banks occurs and potential flooding of nearby structures and property.
An important consideration in this pattern of drainage and flooding is the largely
undeveloped hillsides above Cupertino which function as a watershed. Rainfall
held by the soil and vegetation results in less hillside runoff and less potential for
flooding downstream until the ground becomes saturated and cannot absorb
1 additional rainfall.
The Santa Clara Valley Water District has the primary responsibility for freshwater
flood control. The District's improvements to stream channels are designed to carry
the "100 -year flood" which is defined as the theoretical flood magnitude which has
a 1% chance of occurring in any given year. The boundaries of the 100 -year flood,
that is, the area that theoretically would be flooded to a depth of one foot or more if
a 100 -year flood occurred, have been mapped by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency through the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The
NFIP provides federal flood insurance protection to participating jurisdictions, such
1 as Cupertino, and individual property owners within the flood plain.
Flooding has been a problem in Cupertino, particularly along Stevens Creek and
Calabazas Creek. The heavy storms of 1980, 1983 and 1986 caused severe
flooding in the vicinity of Miller Avenue and Calabazas Creek. Severe flooding
occurred along Stevens Creek in 1955. Flooding has not been reported as a
problem along Permanente Creek in Cupertino because of the lack of urbanization
in this Cupertino watershed.
Li
11
Areas around Stevens Creek, between Stevens Creek Boulevard and I-280, are
more intensively urbanized, but the creek retains its natural character because of
community opposition to structural flood control improvements in this reach.
Affected property owners residing in the flood plain must maintain federal flood
insurance to obtain federally backed loans. A flood warning and preparedness plan
has also been developed by the Santa Clara Valley Water District and emergency
services staff of other local governmental agencies for the affected neighborhoods.
B. CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS
1. City General Plan
The Existing General Plan policies strive to reduce the risks posed by flood hazards
to a reasonable level. City policies prohibit construction in the flood plains and
prohibiting fill materials and obstructions that may increase downstream flood
potential or modify natural streamsides. City policy also restricts grading which
can cause sedimentation of streams and increase flood risk. Existing policy also
calls for the seismic safety of City water storage facilities. The General Plan
Amendment proposes additional flood hazard policies as an extension of the City's
existing objective to reduce the flood hazard.
2. Other Cities and County Plans ,
All cities in Santa Clara County and Santa Clara County participate in the National '
Flood Insurance Program and must adhere to certain floodplain management
measures, such as the prohibition of new construction in designated floodways and
the adoption of certain damage resistant construction standards for new buildings in
flood hazard areas. '
3. Regional Plan
None.
AI
'
General Plan EIR Drainage and Flooding
Section 8-2
1
While the City is not responsible for the modification of stream channels, it does
have jurisdiction over, and thus responsibility for, the approval of development of
adjacent property. By its authority to approve land use plans and development,
Cupertino is directly involved in determining the design of stream channel
modifications. For example, the historical urbanization of land in the vicinity of the
watershed of Calabazas Creek by Cupertino and surroundings jurisdictions has
irrevocably altered the natural character of the creek. The creek has been
channelized and concrete -lined in most places to convey runoff and prevent
flooding of nearby structures.
,
Alternatively, Stevens Creek has remained in mostly a natural condition in
Cupertino because of City and property owner action. Between Stevens Creek
Boulevard and Stevens Creek Dam, the Stevens Creek 100 -year flood plain was
,
rezoned for non -urban uses, enabling the retention of the creek in its natural
character. Current land uses include a private golf course, agricultural land, and
public parks. As long as this zoning is maintained, there is no need for a flood
protection project.
Areas around Stevens Creek, between Stevens Creek Boulevard and I-280, are
more intensively urbanized, but the creek retains its natural character because of
community opposition to structural flood control improvements in this reach.
Affected property owners residing in the flood plain must maintain federal flood
insurance to obtain federally backed loans. A flood warning and preparedness plan
has also been developed by the Santa Clara Valley Water District and emergency
services staff of other local governmental agencies for the affected neighborhoods.
B. CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS
1. City General Plan
The Existing General Plan policies strive to reduce the risks posed by flood hazards
to a reasonable level. City policies prohibit construction in the flood plains and
prohibiting fill materials and obstructions that may increase downstream flood
potential or modify natural streamsides. City policy also restricts grading which
can cause sedimentation of streams and increase flood risk. Existing policy also
calls for the seismic safety of City water storage facilities. The General Plan
Amendment proposes additional flood hazard policies as an extension of the City's
existing objective to reduce the flood hazard.
2. Other Cities and County Plans ,
All cities in Santa Clara County and Santa Clara County participate in the National '
Flood Insurance Program and must adhere to certain floodplain management
measures, such as the prohibition of new construction in designated floodways and
the adoption of certain damage resistant construction standards for new buildings in
flood hazard areas. '
3. Regional Plan
None.
AI
' General Plan EIR Drainage and Flooding
Section 8-3
II. IMPACTS
A. SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
According to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Appendix
G (q) states that a project "will normally have a significant effect on the environment if
it will cause substantial flooding, erosion or siltation."
B. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED
1. Storm Runoff
Planning for the urbanization of infill areas in Cupertino will increase the amount of
ground area covered by impervious surfaces, such as, streets, buildings and
parking lots. Increases in impervious surfaces will increase the volume of storm
water runoff and accelerate the rate at which runoff flows. These changes impact
streams by increasing the volume of runoff that the stream channel must convey.
1 Heavier flows can erode creek beds, remove riparian vegetation and thereby reduce
stream capacity. Development near streams has the potential to cause erosion and
reduce stream capacity through siltation. Development that occurs upstream thus
can have impacts that affects all areas downstream of the development.
The potential for flooding impacts is tempered by the relatively small amount of
vacant land planned for urbanization in the City. Of the approximately 6,400+
acres in the City, 119 vacant acres (1.9%) are planned for residential, commercial
and industrial land uses. The other 399 vacant acres (6.2%) are planned for lower
intensity hillside residential uses which will help to preserve the watershed potential
of these lands. Any intensification will increase runoff; however, the major
intensification expected would be, for example, the replacement of a surface
parking lot with a parking structure, with little increase in impervious surface areas.
Mitigation: Continue flood management practices. Refer to Mitigation
III Al (a -b) and A2 (a -c).
1 2. Inundation Caused by Dam Failure
The Stevens Creek Dam/Reservoir is primarily a water conservation facility used to
recharge groundwater and provide for irrigation. The dam, however, can act to
' reduce flooding by controlling runoff from the Santa Cruz Mountains. This type of
flood protection becomes ineffective when the dam is at capacity or during
unusually heavy rains. A potentially significant impact exists from flooding caused
by dam failure which may be triggered by a major earthquake.
Mitigation: Stevens Creek Dam was strengthened in 1982 to comply with
dam safety standards. Refer to Mitigation IV B1.
3. Inundation Caused by Failure of Water Storaee Tanks .
Likewise, a major earthquake may cause the failure of water storage tanks situated
in the hillsides as shown in Figure 8-A. A potentially significant impact exists for
downslope residences in the vicinity of the tanks because of the possibility of injury
and property loss.
Mitigation: Analyize risk and complete alterations if required. Refer to
Mitigation III B 1 (a).
General Plan EIR Drainage and Flooding
Section 8-4
EXTENT OF FLOODING AS A RESULT OF FAILURE OF Figure
MAN-MADE WATER STORAGE FACILITIES g -A
Source: City of Cupertino, February 1990
11
[l
1
C. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE MITIGATED
Flooding impacts to developed properties within the 100 -year flood zone, to the extent '
they are not protected by channel improvements constructed by the Water District or
private developers, are considered significant and not mitigated. Such property
owners, however, can obtain flood insurance at subsidized rates due to the City's
participation in the National Flood Insurance Program.
r �61.3 Aue Feet • 'Mann of Iva Tank 0.30
Min. m
.. e\20MILGel... MIIi Ga;.
,Y '1
` / E W,
6 fi
l
Ave.
—Vosa
/r P'itl A•;`—O.IS.M.
/ orIn
r
, r -v
/f 10 FAcre Fael c '\ `, ru,,.
v
„r
L" 12.2 Acre Feil \ ``
_..Itr
'41III..Gal..0.10 Min.
d�
'• 20 MIt. Gal.
\, ,Reglln Mutual � iRese"oh,
`System X6113 Acre Feet
•-. ;\ • 20 Mit. Gal.
✓dw.:
Flood Limit
•
Slovene creek, �
=� �—M„ Line
\
Reservoir-_---
—.._ Natural or Man Made Wafer Course
3700 Acre Feel
.--- Urban Service Area Boundary
1 BII:200'Mll: Gal
Boundary Agreement Line
Note: Flood Inmtdawn Area lot Failure
-
of Slovens Creek Reservoir Is Bases Upon
r N
Mar,mum 3700 Acre Feat Storage Capacity.
EXTENT OF FLOODING AS A RESULT OF FAILURE OF Figure
MAN-MADE WATER STORAGE FACILITIES g -A
Source: City of Cupertino, February 1990
11
[l
1
C. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE MITIGATED
Flooding impacts to developed properties within the 100 -year flood zone, to the extent '
they are not protected by channel improvements constructed by the Water District or
private developers, are considered significant and not mitigated. Such property
owners, however, can obtain flood insurance at subsidized rates due to the City's
participation in the National Flood Insurance Program.
' General Plan EIR Drainage and Flooding
Section 8-5
D. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
1. No Proiect Alternative
The "No Project" Alternative is the continuation of the existing built condition of the
City. This Alternative would have less potential for flooding impacts because of the
smaller amount of intensification and thus smaller impervious surface area.
2. Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative
This Alternative would also have less potential for flooding impacts because of the
less intense and smaller amount of development in the hillside areas, and thus
smaller amount of impervious surface area.
E. LOCAL SHORT TERM USES VS. LONG TERM PRODUCTIVITY
Urbanization of the remaining vacant land in the City will preclude the use of the land
for the percolation of storm runoff to recharge the ground water aquifers which will
increase the Santa Clara Valley's reliance on imported water supplies.
F. GROWTH INDUCING EFFECTS
fNone. See Land Use Campatibility and Visual Character Section.
G. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS
Property owners with structures in the 100 year flood zone will be subject to economic
loss in the event of a major flood. The purchase of flood insurance will reduce
potential economic loss.
H. SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES SHOULD
THE PLAN BE IMPLEMENTED
Waterways may be rerouted and altered by flood control projects.
Soils for percolation of ground water will be covered by buildings, paving
and landscaping.
III. MITIGATION MEASURES
A. STORM RUNOFF
1. Proposed
a. Strive to minimize the quantity and improve the quality of storm water runoff
consistent with the protection of groundwater quality and groundwater recharge
areas. (Environmental Resources Element, Goal F)
b. Encourage the reduction of impervious surface areas and investigate
opportunities to retain or detain storm runoff on new development.
(Policy 5-36)
II
General Plan EIR Drainage and Flooding
Section 8-6
2. Existine
a. Adopt stringent land use and building code requirements to prevent new
construction in already urbanized flood hazard areas recognized by the Federal
Flood Insurance Administrator. For example, the finished floors of new
construction must be higher than the water level projected for the 100 year
flood. A description of flood zone regulations and a map of potential flood
hazard areas will be published in the Cupertino Scene. (Policy 6-20)
b. Continue the policy of prohibiting all forms of habitable development in natural
flood plains. This includes prohibiting fill materials and obstructions that may
increase flood potential downstream or modify natural streamsides. (Policy 6-
21)
c. Continue to restrict the extent and timing of hillside grading operations to April
through October. Require performance bonds during the remaining time to
guarantee the repair of any erosion damage. All graded slopes must be planted
as soon as practical after grading is complete. (Policy 6-22)
B. INUNDATION CAUSED BY FAILURE OF WATER STORAGE TANKS
1. Existin
a. Program necessary funds to evaluate the structural integrity of municipal water -
storage facilities, including distribution line connections and any necessary
repairs. Possible flood speeds and flooded areas should be included. The
study consultant will confer with the City's geological consultant to determine
the geology and maximum expected ground shaking intensities of the tank site.
(Policy 6-23)
IV. MITIGATION MEASURES NOT A PART OF THE PROJECT
A. STORM RUNOFF
The City of Cupertino and the Santa Clara Valley Water District plans and
implements various projects to control flooding in the Cupertino area, including
diversions, watershed management, flood plain management, channel
improvements, and a major storage facility (Stevens Creek Dam). Furthermore, the
City's development review process requires all new development to convey storm
runoff to appropriate storm drainage facilities. Along Stevens Creek just South of
I-280, where residents have accepted a higher level of flood risk, the District has
developed a flood warning system and flood preparedness plan.
2. A current Water District project is the Calabazas Creek channelization which will
provide 100 -year flood protection along Calabazas Creek from the eastern City
limits to Miller Avenue. Planning and environment studies have been completed but
construction has not been scheduled.
3. In accordance with the National Flood Insurance Program and the Cobey-Alquist
Flood Plain Management Act, the City's Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance
regulates the design of any new development in a flood hazard area. The lowest
floor of any development must be at or above the 100 -year flood elevation.
I11
I�
11
is
it*
11
3. The risk of tank failure during an earthquake is minimized by ongoing maintenance
work conducted by City workers on municipal water tanks. This includes ongoing
inspections, maintenance and replacement of tanks, connections and valves. No
significant water leakage was reported after the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake (Jim
Davis, 1992).
General Plan EIR Drainage and Flooding
Section 8-7
4. The City's Grading Ordinance minimizes the erosion of soils and the resultant
sedimentation of stream courses which reduces flood capacity, by discouraging
grading during the rainy season, requiring the preparation of erosion and
sedimentation plans, limiting cut and fill, requiring erosion planting as well as other
1
measures.
B. INUNDATION CAUSED BY DAM FAILURE
1. Under the 1973 National Dam Inspection Act and related State regulations, the
Water District must submit semi-annual dam reports to the California Department of
Water Resources, Division of Dam Safety. Thus, failure of dams due to improper
construction or inadequate monitoring poses little risk. In 1982 Stevens Creek Dam
was strengthen to Division of Dam Safety standards for seismic safety, allowing the
dam to operate at its capacity of 3,700 acre-feet.
2. The San Jose Water Company has installed flexible couplings and check valves in
the 20 -million gallon Regnart Road Reservoir to minimize valve and waterline
failure during an earthquake. The 8-10 acre-feet Voss Avenue Pond was
determined to be safe by an engineering consultant (Soil Foundation Systems, Inc.
1976).
I11
I�
11
is
it*
11
3. The risk of tank failure during an earthquake is minimized by ongoing maintenance
work conducted by City workers on municipal water tanks. This includes ongoing
inspections, maintenance and replacement of tanks, connections and valves. No
significant water leakage was reported after the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake (Jim
Davis, 1992).
General Plan EIR Drainage and Flooding
Section 8-8
13. Santa Clara Valley Water District, Report on Flooding and Flood Related Damages, Santa
Clara County. January 1, to April 30, 1983. Oct. 11, 1983.
14. Santa Clara Valley Water District, Stevens Creek: A Plan for Flood Warning and '
Preparedness Vol. 1. Sept. 1978.
15. Santa Clara Valley Water District, Summary of District Activities, February 1992.
16. Soil Foundation Systems, Inc., Stability Study Report for Existing Dam, Alcalde Knolls,
Cupertino, California March 1976. ,
11
11
11
Sources
1.
City of Cupertino, General Plan, February 1990.
2.
City of Cupertino, Municipal Code, Section 16.52.
a.
City of Cupertino, Municipal Code. Section 16.08.
4.
Davis, Jim, City of Cupertino.
Verbal Communication, May 1992.
5.
Dreste, Dennis, Santa Clara Valley Water District
Verbal Communication, May 1992.
6.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Flood Insurance Program, Flood
Insurance Rate Maps, various dates.
7.
Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Control Program, Loads Assessment Report: Volume
I, February 1991.
8.
Santa Clara Valley Water District, Calabazas Creek PlanningStudy, tudv, (Guadalupe Sloueh to
Miller Ave.) Engineer's Report and Draft Environmental Impact Report, September 1989.
9.
Santa Clara Valley Water District, Flood Control Handbook for the Flood Control Zones
Advisory Committees, September 1991.
11.
Santa Clara Valley Water District, Planning Study for Stevens Creek (Central Ave..
Mountain View to Stevens Creek Dam), Northwest Zone Proiect No. 1029, August 1974.
12.
Santa Clara Valley Water District, Planning Study consisting of the Engineer's Report and
[')raft NPOahVe Derlarstinn fnr the Stevens Creek Dam Modifications. March 1985.
13. Santa Clara Valley Water District, Report on Flooding and Flood Related Damages, Santa
Clara County. January 1, to April 30, 1983. Oct. 11, 1983.
14. Santa Clara Valley Water District, Stevens Creek: A Plan for Flood Warning and '
Preparedness Vol. 1. Sept. 1978.
15. Santa Clara Valley Water District, Summary of District Activities, February 1992.
16. Soil Foundation Systems, Inc., Stability Study Report for Existing Dam, Alcalde Knolls,
Cupertino, California March 1976. ,
11
11
11
u
II
�0
SECTION 9
�i
OPEN SPACE AND PARKS
ti
II
II
[1
C
II
II
it
11
II
Table of Contents
' Page
I. Environmental Setting..............................................................9-1
A. Existing Conditions..:..........................................................9-1
1. Open Space Land Definition ............................................ 9-1
2. Open Space Land Designations..........................................9-1
B. Consistencv with Other Plans............................................9-1
O 1. Consistency with Other Elements.......................................9-10
2. Adjacent Jurisdictions....................................................9-10
II. Impacts-Effects.....................................................................9-13
A. Significant Effects............................................................9-13
B. Significant Effects Which can be Mitigated................................9-13
1. Increased Park and Recreational Demands............................9-13
2. Visual Relationship of Development Adjacent to Parks..............9-13
3. Vegetation, Wildlife habitat and Water Courses in Parks ............ 9-14
4. Residential Development of Potential Parkland .......................9-14
C. Significant Effects Which Cannot be Mitigated ...........................9-14
D. Effects Found Not to be Significant........................................9-14
E. Alternatives Analysis.........................................................9-15
1. Increased Park Demand..................................................9-15
2. Visual Relationship of Adjacent Development to Parks..............9-15
3. Vegetation, Wildlife Habitat and Water Courses to parks ...........9-15
4. Residential development of potential parkland ........................9-15
F. Local Short Term Uses vs. Long Term Productivity .....................9-15
G. Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Should the Plan ......9-15
H. Growth -Inducing Effects....................................................9-15
I. Economic and Social Effects................................................9-16
III. Mitigation Measures.....................................................................9-16
A. Increased Park and Recreation Demands..................................9-16
B. Visual Relationship of Development Adjacent to Parks..................9-18
C. Vegetation, Wildlife Habitat and Water Courses in Parks...............9-18
D. Residential Development of Potential Parkland ...........................9-19
E. Mitigation Not a Part of the Project.........................................9-19
ISources........................................................................................9-20
II
io
N
II
Tables
Page
9-A Park and School Inventory .......................................................... 9-3 ,
9-B Park and Recreation Land Needed ................................................. 9-6
Figures ,
9-A Park and School Locations.......................................................... 9-4
9-B Park Access Status ....................................... .......... ..................9-7 '
9-C Existing and Proposed Open Space ................................................ 9-8
9-D Trail Linkages........................................................................9-11
9-E Regional Trail Connections........................................................9-12 1
foI
11
11
Oil
11
U
SECTION 9
OPEN SPACE AND PARKS
' I. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A. EXISTING CONDITIONS
1. Open Space Land Definition
Open space land is defined by the State of Californiaas any parcel or area of land or
water which is essentially unimproved and devoted to an open -space use as defined
in this section, and which is designated on a local, regional or state open -space plan
as any of the following:
' a. Open space for the preservation of natural resources
( preservation of biotic species, watershed lands, streams, etc)
b. Open space for the managed production of resources
( preservation of agricultural lands, groundwater recharge, mineral deposits, etc.)
c. Open space for outdoor recreation
( park and recreation land, scenic highways, scenic or cultural resources)
d. Open space for public health and safety
(flood plains, fault zones, unstable soils, high fire risk areas, etc.)
(Source: California Government Code Section 65560)
2. Open Space Land Designations
IN
Cupertino's open space lands are found on the land use map which accompanies
this document. The open space designations which reflect the above definitions are:
Public Parks, Private Open Space and Private Recreation.
These lands serve the functions defined above. City parks provide the outdoor
recreation and preservation of natural resources functions. The Santa Clara County
parks and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District preserves serve all four
functions. For example, the rural hillsides preserve the public safety function of
reducing exposure to the hazards of faults and steep slopes.
a. Private Open Space (identified on land Use Map included in Proposed
General Plan Amendment)
Three areas are designated as private open space. They were created through
subdivision and zoning actions, where proposed development was clustered to
'
provide for open space. The open space areas are dedicated to the City, and
allowed uses vary according to the conditions of approval. These three areas
r
are:
• De Anza Oaks
• Regnart Canyon Area
10
• Voss Pond "Site"
IN
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 2
b. Private Recreation
Deep Cliff Golf Course is the only land with the private recreation designation.
c. Public Parks (see Figure 9-C)
1) Regional Parks and Preserves
There are Santa Clara County Parks and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District parks in Cupertino's planning area.
They are:
Rancho San Antonio County Park 167
Stevens Creek Park 777
Upper Stevens Creek Park 1200
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Fremont Older Open Space Preserve
734
Montebello Open Space Preserve
2899
Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve
594
Saratoga Gap Open Space Preserve
411
2) Park Sites and Ratios
The parks designation is applied to neighborhood and community -wide
parks. There are ten neighborhood parks and three community -wide parks,
which are Memorial Park (which includes the Quinlan Community Center,
Senior Center, and the Sports Center), McClellan Ranch Park, and
Blackberry Farm Picnic Grounds/Golf Course. The neighborhood parks
program goal is to provide 3 acres of parks per 1,000 population. This
objective is based on the National Recreational and Park Association
national standard.
Parks and schools which have recreation areas secured by joint agreements,
as well as Sedgwick, Monta Vista and Cupertino High School grounds, are
included in the ratio. A 25 year agreement exists with the Cupertino School
District for use of school district land for recreational purposes. The
agreement includes the use of eight schools. In return Cupertino will
perform maintenance and scheduling for after school sports and recreation.
Portal and Collins schools are not included in the agreement due to the
School District's interest in maintaining them in a reserve status. Blackberry
Farm Golf Course is not included in the parks/population ratio since it is a
limited -purpose facility.
Figure 9-A is a map of the park and school locations, and Table 9-A is an
inventory by name and acreage.
11
U
NI
tl
I
I
I
0
Neighborhood Park
A_1 n
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 3
PARK AND SCHOOL INVENTORY
ACREAGE BY NEIGHBORHOODS
Acreaee School
Acreaee
IL-2 Portal 3.8 Collins Elem.* 2.92
Tile. t 1 71
li
P-1 Twee Oaks 3.1 0
I*Not included in park ratio
toSource: City of Cupertino, 1992
IN
A-2
McClellan Ranch
18.7
0
10
F-2
Blackberry Farm*
33
Garden Gate Elem.
3.13
B
Linda Vista
11
Monta Vista H.S.
10
H-1
0
Kennedy Jr. H.S.
16.6
4.19
H-2
Jollvman
Lincoln Elem.
3.29
1-1
Wilson
Reenart Elem
3.81
5.98
C
0
Fremont Older
0
'
J-1
0
Cupertino H.S.
10
E-1
Varian
6.3
Stevens Creek Elem.
3.1
IL-2 Portal 3.8 Collins Elem.* 2.92
Tile. t 1 71
li
P-1 Twee Oaks 3.1 0
I*Not included in park ratio
toSource: City of Cupertino, 1992
IN
F-1
0
Homestead H.S.
10
F-2
Memorial
27.8
Garden Gate Elem.
3.13
G
Somerset Square
1.7
0
H-1
0
Faria Elem.
4.19
H-2
Jollvman
12
0
1-1
Wilson
10.4
Eaton Elem.
5.98
I-2
Fremont Older
11.8
J-1
0
Cupertino H.S.
10
J-2
0
Hyde Jr. H.S.
Sedgewick Elem.
7.75
4
1
K
0
0
IL-2 Portal 3.8 Collins Elem.* 2.92
Tile. t 1 71
li
P-1 Twee Oaks 3.1 0
I*Not included in park ratio
toSource: City of Cupertino, 1992
IN
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
LL =
O
c
� a
r
CL
a
O�
e
3a
U
I
it
i O®O®
o
�! N
a
a a
O `
M
—.
Z /
� 1 ti�WW WWWWW /.
I
PARK AND SCHOOL LOCATIONS
Source: City of Cupertino, December, 1992
Figure
9-A
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 5
3) Park Needs Assessment
Table 9-B includes an assessment of 1990 park needs by neighborhood.
The assessment indicates that the system currently has a a park needs ratio
of 4.40 acres per 1000 residents, city-wide, which exceeds the policy of 3
acres per 1000 population. However, ratios in some individual
neighborhoods are not met.
4) Park Access
An existing policy in the General Plan states that the City should ensure that
"Each household is within a half mile walk of the park and that the route is
reasonably free of physical barriers including streets with heavy traffic."
These physical barriers include land forms, railroad tracks, streambeds, and
major streets. Major streets are included because they discourage some
people, especially young children, from visiting parks. Figure 9-B
demonstrates the half mile access radius around each park and school,
recognizing physical barriers. The existing General Plan indicated radii
only for parks; schools have been added in recognition that they serve as
neighborhood resources for active recreation. Also, this radius map
includes barriers not utilized in the existing General Plan, therefore
accessibility is more conservatively evaluated in the Proposed General Plan
Amendment.
The radius map indicates that neighborhoods N, A-1, C, O, F-1, F-2, L-1,
L-2, and M are deficient in access to parks and school yards. Perhaps the
most important of these are A-1, O, L-1, and L-2 because they consist of
existing residential neighborhoods. Further examination of just the park
radii indicate additional inaccessibility.
5) Park Funding
The current park bond funding obligations are:
-$5,000,000 for Wilson Park, due 2009
-$9,070,000 for the Sports Center, due 2010
-$32,970,000 for Fremont/Older school and Blackberry Farm due 2016.
Another source of funding is the park dedication fee. Current City Council
policy directs that these funds be used to retire debt service and reimburse
the General Fund for previous improvements.
Currently the City has two identified future park purchases: the Stocklmeir
property located adjacent to Stevens Creek Boulevard and potential high
school sites, both of which are unscheduled park purchases in the Capital
Improvement Program. They will remain so until the properties are
available for purchase. The three high schools in Cupertino -- Monta Vista,
Cupertino, and Homestead -- are possible sites for purchase if the Fremont
Union High School District sells them in the future, although they have no
plans to do so. Homestead High may be an unlikely candidate for purchase
since it is on the fringe of the city limits which reduces its accessibility to the
maximum number of Cupertino residents. Should these or other park
opportunities arise, no existing funding mechanism exists for purchase.
Other methods would need to be identified.
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 6
PARK AND RECREATION LAND NEEDED
ACRES/1000 PEOPLE
Not.:
1. L�W rot rv.ilsbl. for requisitim in rrioborboW G.
2 4.9 saes (Swck4rcG propmy) of ruuvsl open spa will be scquirod Wjccm to Stews crook pa existing opert Two plm.
3. Park IW in rrighborhod 0 will not be rcquird lw, a .sc of closc pruslmiry to other puke.
SuPPI/ Ass mpslons:
Schools with pim apeman seat MW other schools with long Tanc avcilsbiliry of reaeuim seas arc included in the ratios. They uc Stevw Creek,
Gwdm Gate, Vncoh Pais, Rcgrut4 Bum, Kcsvody. Hy&, Sedgwick, Hamar" High School. Mmu Vito High School W Cupstim High School.
Blckberry Fsrrn is M included beuusc it is • limited p rpoto (cility.
Bud on 260 persms Per household
Source: City of Cupertino, December, 1992
6. Other Parks and Recreational Resources
The City's parks are complemented by Santa Clara County and Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District parks and preserves, as shown on Figure 9-C. These
parks ring Cupertino's western foothills and ridge lines. They serve as Cupertino
and regional resources for hiking, biking, nature appreciation and other recreational
activities.
GIII�E����3f�E3s�i]•i3F��11•�'3F��
!�lar�
•���i83�Eilrr�
•'� •
�ilE�i����9t��
C��'l���Ei�i�i;•�ia�i�f3>•�i�i��E�'
[.m:armr_�����.�EYn�1����il•il�:l���
r:�, as��b>•�td�llf.�Sll�bS��E�L!■Fi�SE�rL•S�
1�'�t��lllSE�i.�ilE(Il•�Elt��l��tl•
Rmsk����Ef3•!E£�Ll�F�Ef�EiF�Ef�?•
rl �
�lY��lil�L'����i•3i���t&��1�3r��
E��Y�Ii����FS�l�1��fF����l����1♦�
L>S!1.�r��E��Eb�E:il�3�■F�I��l♦■L•g���
E3+lIu�Ef31<�L:��EFe
�E�1•<F&1'��3���i�i3:��
Not.:
1. L�W rot rv.ilsbl. for requisitim in rrioborboW G.
2 4.9 saes (Swck4rcG propmy) of ruuvsl open spa will be scquirod Wjccm to Stews crook pa existing opert Two plm.
3. Park IW in rrighborhod 0 will not be rcquird lw, a .sc of closc pruslmiry to other puke.
SuPPI/ Ass mpslons:
Schools with pim apeman seat MW other schools with long Tanc avcilsbiliry of reaeuim seas arc included in the ratios. They uc Stevw Creek,
Gwdm Gate, Vncoh Pais, Rcgrut4 Bum, Kcsvody. Hy&, Sedgwick, Hamar" High School. Mmu Vito High School W Cupstim High School.
Blckberry Fsrrn is M included beuusc it is • limited p rpoto (cility.
Bud on 260 persms Per household
Source: City of Cupertino, December, 1992
6. Other Parks and Recreational Resources
The City's parks are complemented by Santa Clara County and Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District parks and preserves, as shown on Figure 9-C. These
parks ring Cupertino's western foothills and ridge lines. They serve as Cupertino
and regional resources for hiking, biking, nature appreciation and other recreational
activities.
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 7
T
Q
■
` �..
-------------------------
PARK ACCESS STATUS
Source: City of
1992
Figure
9-B
Ob VOOM
• y
C
C
W
2
^o
C
¢
o
m
D.
Q
�r
a
N
O
N
Q
WB =VV•O
�E.��'���'
O � r � i
f►
I
T
Q
■
` �..
-------------------------
PARK ACCESS STATUS
Source: City of
1992
Figure
9-B
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 8
Rancho Sen
>.Couniv Park
< I
�JJr•1 r•�F��V � I � 11 ` 1'.
•
i
yy Lr>nV ryy.J�y Y>nVyJ ". .
^Jiv�q(JLolilv79<JY<J ;` SleeTrC >Y.'
N. i
neve s. Creek r4sJd' ° L„^� )^�%I
;ounly Perk\�\,
� N �Proposed',
Stevens Creek J(Jy� (Steven:
Trail Corridor ��•, '" Ln�iCiee
N.
kt
•' •`\�• Saratoga Gap . 5.'(' �� �.�t\� �\l
•\•;:\,` Preserver '� i .-)Y.A�,�-.i'�i i:.
r >yar���J rel<�y��n >LHy - ♦-- —
Ji5^�•CNJ��y
�L.
' 7 \`', C !
Baler to+next figure for
detalletl descrlptlon of
City Park
$I x\
The City of Cupertino
.�.®`.`.
Existing County Parks
L J>
Existing "dPeninsula Regional
Open Space Preserve
Proposed City Open Space
Proposed Expansion of
-------
------
Regional Open Space Lands
L�
Public Access To Open Space
Preserves
•—•mow.
Proposed Open Space Linkage
---
Urban Service Area Boundary
---
Boundary Agreement Line
EXISTING AND PROPOSED OPEN SPACE Figure
9-C
of
m
1992
II
I to
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 9
7) Future Park Needs and Plans
Four types of park needs are identified for the future: neighborhood parks,
regional parks, trail connections and recreational facilities.
'
a) Neighborhood parks
The neighborhood park system is considered nearly complete. The
remaining property identified for park purchase (unprogrammed in the
Capital Improvement Program) is the 4.9 acre Stocklmeir property.
However, the 3 acres/1,000 population ratio is recommended for
continuance, to be applied in neighborhoods where potential park
acreage exists for either existing of future residents.
The projected park demands and ratios are shown on Table 9-B. These
projections indicate that the Citywide ratio exceeds the 3 acres/1,000
population ratio, although one sub -region does not.
The proposed neighborhood parks are:
Neighborhood N: provide a public neighborhood park based upon the
City's park dedication ordinance. Subsequently redraw the boundaries
of neighborhoods N and E-1 to reflect the additional site.
Neighborhoods J-1, J-2, K: make the final determination regarding a
16
neigh-borhood park site after the completion of the Sedgwick School
master plan.
1
Non-residential areas where new residential development is proposed:
where feasible.
provide active, public park space
A minimum park size of less than 3.5 acres may be considered
'
according to a list of priorities, which is based on existing access to
parks and schools.
b) Regional Parks
Acquisition of additional parkland within the Seminary property is
proposed. The property is contiguous to Rancho San Antonio County
The
Park and Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve (MROSD).
existing park and preserve are extremely popular recreational areas for
the region. Expansion could offer additional opportunities for hiking,
biking and jogging, and could serve as buffer to the existing park for
visual relief and plant and wildlife protection. Santa Clara County,
MROSD, Cupertino and surrounding jurisdictions would need to jointly
'
identify park expansion areas and funding sources.
II
I to
1. The Parks and Recreation policies are consistent with other elements of the General
Plan.
2. Adjacent Jurisdictions
a. Santa Clara County '
Rancho San Antonio County Park: The City's plans call for open space linkage '
along Permanente Creek between the Park and the western foothills, connecting
to Stevens Creek Park, as does the County's plan. The proposed residential
development on the adjacent Seminary property would need to reflect the Park's ,
Master Plan which calls for site design which is sensitive to park use and
atmosphere. The County's Plan identifies the Seminary lands adjacent to the
Park as visually sensitive areas. Traffic from future park use is not considered
significant. However, over -flow parking on Cristo Rey Drive is considered a '
potential safety hazard for through traffic. Future development, both
neighborhood park and residential, will need to address these concerns: visual
relationship to the Park; protection of wildlife habitat as it relates to the Park;
trail connections; and parking and circulation.
Stevens Creek Park: Trail connections are shown between Rancho San Antonio
and Stevens Creek Parks and between Stevens Creek and Upper Stevens Creek
Parks. These connections are consistent with County plans and policies which
state that "a county wide system of hiking, bicycling and horseback riding trails
should be provided which includes trails within and between parks and other '
publicly owned open space lands, as well as trails providing access from the
urban area to these lands." The connections between the two Stevens Creek
parks are consistent with County plans, which are to seek trail easements as
properties develop.
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 10
'
c) Trail Connections
Trail connections are sought within the City and the region. The
potential inter -city linkages are shown on Figure 9-D. The Calabazas
Creek Trail, for example, would link residential areas with job centers.
Inter -city trails could also link regional trails. They will be studied for
feasibility and future implementation. The proposed regional
,
connections are shown on Figure 9-E. Greenbelt linkages between
Rancho San Antonio County Park and Stevens Creek Park, and
between Stevens Creek Park and Upper Stevens Creek Park are
'
proposed. The connection between the proposed Bay to Ridge Trails
could go through Cupertino, as shown in Figure 9-E; this connection
will need to be considered in the development of a specific trail plan.
'
Trail linkage along Stevens Creek within the Blackberry Farm and Deep
Cliff Golf Courses will be considered.
d) Recreational facilities
A future recreational facility, such as a gymnasium or swimming pool,
will be considered since the neighborhood park program is nearly
,
complete and since a parks needs assessment indicated that a facility is
desired.
'
B. CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS
1. The Parks and Recreation policies are consistent with other elements of the General
Plan.
2. Adjacent Jurisdictions
a. Santa Clara County '
Rancho San Antonio County Park: The City's plans call for open space linkage '
along Permanente Creek between the Park and the western foothills, connecting
to Stevens Creek Park, as does the County's plan. The proposed residential
development on the adjacent Seminary property would need to reflect the Park's ,
Master Plan which calls for site design which is sensitive to park use and
atmosphere. The County's Plan identifies the Seminary lands adjacent to the
Park as visually sensitive areas. Traffic from future park use is not considered
significant. However, over -flow parking on Cristo Rey Drive is considered a '
potential safety hazard for through traffic. Future development, both
neighborhood park and residential, will need to address these concerns: visual
relationship to the Park; protection of wildlife habitat as it relates to the Park;
trail connections; and parking and circulation.
Stevens Creek Park: Trail connections are shown between Rancho San Antonio
and Stevens Creek Parks and between Stevens Creek and Upper Stevens Creek
Parks. These connections are consistent with County plans and policies which
state that "a county wide system of hiking, bicycling and horseback riding trails
should be provided which includes trails within and between parks and other '
publicly owned open space lands, as well as trails providing access from the
urban area to these lands." The connections between the two Stevens Creek
parks are consistent with County plans, which are to seek trail easements as
properties develop.
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 11
b. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Two preserves owned by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
(MROSD) adjacent to Cupertino could be affected by future development - the
Fremont Older and Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserves. The Fremont
Older Preserve is located in the hills above Cupertino and Saratoga, adjacent to
Stevens Creek County Park. Rancho San Antonio is located adjacent to the
County's park and the jurisdictions of Cupertino, Los Altos, and Los Altos
Hills.
Proposed development adjacent or near any of these park properties raises
concerns about visual compatibility and the environmental impacts mentioned
previously. The hillside areas adjacent to the MROSD lands are proposed for
very low density development, which will reduce the these impacts. Impacts
associated with development near Rancho San Antonio are discussed above.
New development, city-wide, creates additional regional park users. The City
provides community park and recreation opportunities, but residents and
workers also will seek the walking, jogging and nature -appreciation
opportunities offered by the County and MROSD lands. Fremont Older and
Rancho San Antonio parks are very popular in the region, with existing parking
and usage problems.
L
�_1.�;
Ran
Cakbazas
Se kAmm�io
\ H I�.-
E 1 lL��-;`. G (
F-2 3
L-2
E :
Creek
A)ti,,
`'S..
"Jo2:
L.�..i�.'
L---�'.t..
F
' E-2
%
Bt�
H-2Linde
�sm�e>u
Vista Park
j o
t`
P-1 v
Trail Linkages
1 f_
c
4@§Mlo Possible Trait LkL"Agq
tJ _ r i `::
P-2
Optional7YeilLfnkage
E E
TRAIL LINKAGES
Figure
9-D
Source: City of Cupertino, December, 1992
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 12
Sonoma Io Petaluma ***a Napa ••' 0,
to Fairfield
County 0 �•' / oa Solano County
o••••• 0000 o
0.
`\•• i _J°° 000 00 °o to Crizxly 191mtd
�• ••
00000 °p o
�WildlifeRclugc
••• • •
•• ' r* i s_ •• 0
i
Marin County a.
to Kentfield
000
to
San
Francisco
to son Bruno
Mountain e
San Mateo
County
The Bay Trail
FOOOO,
Spine and Spur Trails
ConnectorTrails T
N
a�9w9�
4 '^
"°° to Rodeo p
° to Ridge Trail
to Refugio Vallcy Park
to Wildcat Canyon
Regional Park Contra Costa County
i
to lake Mcrtttt,___
0
• t
ss v.
Alameda County
10 Carin Regional
lark
••• ..-
OU
�� •°oo
•.. •�•: •
°:•.o
° ...••°
0
o
°0
0
o
0
0 0
0
Santa Clara o
0 0
lCounty 00
oO0
°0
0
o
0
C to Stevens Creek
0
101.0a a °
` Rcwrvoir
M
Crcck TTrail Morgan Bill
il
REGIONAL TRAIL CONNECTIONS
Association of Bay Area
1989
Figure
9-E
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 13
c. Regional Trail Plans
Both the Santa Clara County and Bay to Ridge Trail Plans can for trail
connections between the Bay, Stevens Creek Park and beyond, as discussed
previously, which is consistent with Cupertino s plan. Specific linkages will be
considered when a trail plan is developed.
H. IMPACTS - EFFECTS
■
A. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
The California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G, indicates that a project will
'
normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will:
(b) Have a substantial, demonstrable negative aesthetic effect;
'
(k) Induce substantial growth or concentration of population;
(t) Substantially diminish habitat for fish, wildlife or plants;
(w) Conflict with established recreational, educational, religious or scientific uses
'
of the area.
Based upon these criteria, the proposed General Plan Amendment would result in
significant effects in these areas.
B. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED
1. Increased park and recreational demands
Proposed increases in population and workers will increase park usage. The effects
of increased usage are intensification of visitors at existing parks; need for
1
additional park land and recreational facilities; and parking resulting from these
increases, particularly at Rancho San Antonio.
Mitigation: Increase the supply of park laud and seek access agreements
on private land. Refer to Open Space and Parks Mitigation
A 1 (a -p and 2 (a -h)
■ 2. Visual relationship of development adjacent to parks
Residential development is proposed adjacent to open space areas, county parks and
open space preserves. The proposed residential development on the Seminary
property will be very visible from Rancho San Antonio County Park and Preserve
due to the number of units and the highly exposed nature of the property. The
' existing retirement center on the Seminary property demonstrates that there is
significant visual impact between development and the park. Although residential
development would be low density, it still could impact parks if it were on ridge
lines, if architecture and colors were obtrusive, and if grading and landscaping were
not sensitive to the terrain.
' Mitigation: Create hillside design and land use policies to protect visual
quality of open space. Refer to Open Space and Parks
Mitigation III B 1 and 2
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 14
3. Vegetation, wildlife habitat and water courses in parks
Proposed development adjacent to parks could impact vegetation, wildlife and water
courses in the parks. Development in the hillsides could occur hypothetically in or
near sensitive natural areas, such as the riparian corridor, which could inhibit
growth of vegetation, displace or threaten wildlife, and create run-off or erosion
damaging to creeks. Residential development in other hillside areas near parks
could interfere with wildlife movement between private and public property.
Mitigation: Protect riparian environment from development including
control of house location and fencing. Refer to Open Space
and Parks Mitigation III C 1 (a) and 2 (at)
4. Residential development of potential parkland
Residential development could occur in areas with parkland potential. The
contiguous, open lands of the Seminary property offer the opportunity for Rancho
San Antonio Park expansion, which could be jeopardized if developed. The
Rancho San Antonio Park Master Plan indicates plans to purchase two small areas
for additional parking and a transitional corridor, respectively. Therefore, there are
no adopted plans to purchase the areas where residential development is proposed.
The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District's Master Plan classifies the
Seminary property as high priority open space land, therefore, the possibility exists
that purchases could be made in this area. However, accompanying text in the
District's plan refers to other factors besides ratings which determine acquisition
priorities, such as public support and cost. MROSD's 1978 Master Plan also
shows high ratings for the western hillsides in Cupertino's turban service area. If
the District or any other agency plans to acquire additional open space in the
hillsides in the future, such plans may be adversely affected by residential
development.
Mitigation: Pursue acquisition and Joint Powers agreement to manage
growth. Refer to Open Space and Parks Mitigation III D 1
(a -c)
muff ly : ►Y 7�_ y b y. : ►) : _ u M1 a
1. Residential development of potential parkland
If purchase of potential parkland in the western hillsides, or neighborhood sites is
not accomplished, then the existing undeveloped lands may be developed, making
all or portions of the land unavailable for park purchase.
rNINTUTS-AWN 01021 ► • tt3 -) *1 141a IV : ►Y
1. Traffic
Road capacity for park traffic is not a significant impact. The park impacts
associated with traffic are parking and park capacity.
If the District or any other agency plans to acquire additional open space in the
hillsides in the future, such plans may be adversely affected by residential
development.
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 15
E. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
The "no project," and "existing General Plan (modified)" alternatives were considered
'
1. Increased park demand
The "no project" alternative would not increase park demand; demand would be
maintained at the level described in the 'Existing Conditions" section. The
'
"Existing General Plan (Modified)" alternative slightly reduces the City-wide
parks/population ratio from the existing ratio, but the ratio would still be above the
3 acres/1000 standard.
'
2. Visual relationship of adjacent development to parks
'
The "no project" alternative would not add new development, so the visual rela-
tionship would be the same as existing development. The impacts of the 'Existing
General Plan (Modified)" alternative are the same as the Project Alternative.
'
3. Vegetation, wildlife habitat and water courses in parks
The "no project" alternative would not create any additional impacts on vegetation,
wildlife habitat and water courses in parks. The impacts of the 'Existing General
Plan (Modified)" alternative are the same as the project alternative.
4. Residential development of potential parkland
"no
The project" alternative would not result in the development of potential
parkland. The 'Existing General Plan (Modified)" alternative allows development
1
on several potential parkland sites -- the Stocklmeir property and small parcels in
neighborhoods, such as J-2.
11
F. LOCAL SHORT TERM USES VS. LONG TERM PRODUCTIVITY
The long-term effects of proposed development on open space and parks are: decrease
in natural vegetation and wildlife habitat, degradation of creeks due to run-off or
'
erosion, and decrease in potential park lands. The proposed General Plan amendments
are designed to provide a managed approach to future growth, so that City officials,
staff, residents and property owners can plan for and balance various needs.
'
G. SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL. CHANGES SHOULD THE
PLAN BE IMPLEMENTED.
Loss of natural vegetation, wildlife habitat and parkland are likely to be irreversible.
H. GROWTH -INDUCING EFFECTS
The open space and parks programs are not growth -inducing.
11
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 16
M:(1K#J 9M8 1 [674,10 611bikTai rain Zia
Purchase of additional parkland could have an economic effect on residents and
businesses, depending on the funding method. Continuation of the existing park fee on
new residential development supports recent park purchases, but raises the cost of
housing. Recent parkland purchases were also funded by a utility tax; funding
mechanisms for future purchases have not been identified.
III. MITIGATION MEASURES
a. Provide trail linkages within and between properties for both recreational and
wildlife activities, most specifically for the benefit of wildlife which is
threatened, endangered, or designated as species of special concern. (Policy 5-
20)
b. Develop a City trail plan which links major employment centers, the Heart of
the City and major open space areas. (Policy 5-42 Strategy)
c. Seek cooperation from private land owners for public use of private open space.
(Policy 5-44)
d. New residential development in Neighborhood N should provide a public
neighborhood park based upon the City's park dedication ordinance.
Subsequently the boundaries of neighborhoods N and E-1 should be redrawn to
reflect the additional park site. (Policy 5-50)
e. Make the final determination regarding a neighborhood park site after the
completion of Cupertino Union School District's Sedgwick School master plan.
(Policy 5-51)
f. New residential development in non-residential areas shall provide park and
recreational space and facilities. The need for dedication of public park land and
the provision of private recreational space and facilities shall be determined
when a master plan is submitted for the development, based on the following
criteria:
1) Where feasible, public park space should be provided as opposed to private.
Active park areas are encouraged which will serve the community need.
Passive areas are acceptable, when appropriate to an urban setting. Features
could include paths, benches, water features, picnic tables, public art, trees
and gardens. They should be oriented toward the street or an activity area
where it is easily assessable to the public. Passive areas deemed
inaccessible or unlikely to be used by the public should not be credited
toward park dedication. Providing public trail connections may be given
partial credit toward park dedication.
2) New residential developments should be encouraged to blend their
recreational facilities into the community at large.
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 17
3) Park fees should be collected based on a formula which considers the extent
to which the public and/or private park space and facilities meet the park
need.
The City of Cupertino recognizes the public benefit derived from a recreational
gymnasium and swimming pool and should such a facility be developed, the City
shall pursue all possible partnerships, including school districts, non-profit
organizations and the corporate community as a means of funding and operation the
facilities. (Policy 5-53)
2. Existing:
a. Actively pursue inter -agency cooperation in buying properties near the western
planning area boundary to complete a continuous open space green belt along
the lower foothills. Purchase of the Seminary property is a top priority.
(Second sentence is new. Policy 5-41)
b. Continue to plan and provide for a comprehensive system of trails and
pathways consistent with regional systems. (Policy 4-10)
c. Work to keep the watershed and storage basin properties of Stevens Creek
Reservoir in public ownership if the Santa Clara Valley Water District decides to
abandon it. (Policy 5-40)
d. Work to provide the open space lands and trail linkages described in Figure 9-
C. (Policy 5-42)
e. Encourage the continued existence and profitability of private open space and
recreation facilities through incentive and development controls. (Policy 5-43)
Provide park land equal to a minimum of three acres for each 1,000 residents.
(Policy 5-45)
g. Ensure that each household is within a half mile walk of the park and that the
route is reasonably free of physical barriers including streets with heavy traffic.
(Policy 5-46)
h. The City's park acquisition program is defined by Table 9-B. The Acquisition
Program is based upon three broad acquisition objectives:
1) Complete the Neighborhood Parks Acquisition Program
2) Maintain an adequate inventory of sports fields
3) Retain creek site and other natural open space areas identified in the Open
Space section of the General Plan. (Policy 5-52)
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 18
a. Apply a slope density formula to low intensity development in the hillsides.
Density shall be calculated based on the foothill modified, foothill modified 12
acre, and 5-20 acre slope density formulae. Actual lot sizes and development
areas will be determined through zoning ordinances,clustering and identification
of significant natural features. (Policy 2-36)
b. No structures shall be located on ridge lines if visible from new and established
valley floor vantage points unless it is determined that significantly greater
environmental impacts occur if structures are located elsewhere. (Policy 2-47)
c. Locate proposed structures to minimize the impacts on adjacent properties and
public open space. (Policy 2-48)
d. Colors and materials of roofs and walls shall blend with the natural hillside
environment. (Policy 2-46)
e. Effective visible mass shall be reduced through such means as stepping
structures down the hillside, following the natural contours, limiting the height
and mass of the wall plane facing the valley floor. (Policy 2-50)
f. Outdoor lighting should be low intensity and shielded so as not to be visible
off-site. (Policy 2-51)
Provide development standards which limit the height and visual impact of
structures. (Policy 2-52)
2. Existing:
a. Follow natural land contours and avoid mass grading in new construction,
especially in flood hazard or hillside areas. Grading large flat yard areas shall be
avoided. (Policy 2-54, Strategy 1)
b. Be sure that natural land forms and significant plants and trees are disturbed as
little as possible during development. All cut and fill shall be rounded to natural
contours and planted with natural landscaping. (Policy 2-57)
...
Minimize lawn area and maximize the number of native trees. (Policy 5-16)
2. Existing:
a. Emphasize drought tolerant native plants and ground covers when landscaping
properties near natural vegetation, particularly for control of erosion from
disturbance to natural terrain. (Policy 5-15)
eGeneral
Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks
Section 9 - 19
'
b.
Confine fencing on hillside property to the area around a building, rather than
around the entire site, to allow for migration of wild animals. (Policy 5-17)
c.
Retain creek beds, riparian corridors, water courses and associated vegetation in
their natural state to protect wildlife habitat and recreation potential and assist
ground water percolation. (Policy 5-28)
D. RFSMENMALDEVELDPNIENT
OF P RKLAND
'
1. Proposed:
a.
Explore a joint powers agreement involving the cities of Cupertino, Los Altos
Hills, Palo Alto, Saratoga and Santa Clara County for the purpose of hillside
'
protection in the unincorporated area (Policy 2-60)
b.
Actively pursue inter -agency cooperation in buying properties near the western
'
planning area boundary to complete a continuous open space green belt along
the lower foothills. Purchase of the Seminary property is a top priority.
(Second sentence is new. Policy 5-41)
'
Neighborhoods J-1, J-2, K: Make final determination
c.
a regarding a
neighborhood park site after the completion of Cupertino Union School
District's Sedgwick School master plan. (Policy 5-51)
E. MITIGATION
NOT APART OF THIS PROJECT
Rancho San Antonio County Park and Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve
(MROSD) appear to be operating at recreational and parking carrying capacity.
Measures will be taken by the County and MROSD to increase parking capacity and
' encourage use of alternate park resources to alleviate the demand at these facilities.
1
ri
I,
II
General Plan EIR - Open Space and Parks ,
Section 9 - 20
Sources
1. City of Cupertino, General Plan, February, 1990. '
2. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Master Plan, April 1978.
3. Rancho San Antonio Master Plan, Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department, '
Program Phase, April 1990.
4. Rancho San Antonio Master Plan Initial Study, Santa Clara County Parks and ,
Recreation Department, August 15, 1991.
5. Santa Clara County General Plan, 1981, Reprinted 1990.
6. Santa Clara County Trails and Pathways Master Plan, May 1978.
I
I
4
I
1
iI
1
1
1
1 SECTION 10
11
VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE
11
lie
1
1
11
1
1
is
1
Table of Contents
Page
I. Environmental Setting.............................................................10-1
A. Existing Conditions.............................................................10-1
1. Regional.....................................................................10-1
2. Local.........................................................................10-1
B. Consistency With Other Plans.................................................10-6
1. City General Plan...........................................................10-6
2. Other City and County Plans..............................................10-6
3. Regional Plan...............................................................10-6
II. Impacts...........................................................................10-7
A.
Significance Criteria............................................................10-7
B.
Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated.................................10-7
1. Habitat Loss.................................................................10-7
2. Introduced (Exotic) Species...............................................10-8
3. Pesticides and Poisoning..................................................10-8
C.
Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated.............................10-9
D.
Alternatives Analysis...........................................................10-9
1. No Project Alternative.....................................................10-9
2. Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative ...........................10-9
E.
Local Short Term Uses vs. Long Term Productivity .......................10-9
F.
Growth Inducing Effects.....................................................10-10
G.
Economic and Social Effects................................................10-10
H.
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Should The Plan Be
Implemented...................................................................10-10
III. Mitigation Measures...............................................................10-10
A. Habitat Loss...................................................................10-10
1. Proposed..................................................................10-10
2. Existing...................................................................10-12
B. Indtroduced Species.......................................................... 10-12
1. Proposed.................................................................. 10-12
2. Existing ................ ................................................... 10-12
C. Pesticides and Poisoning.....................................................10-13
1. Proposed..................................................................10-13
2. Existing................................................................... 10-13
IV. Mitigation Measures Not A Part Of The Project...............................10-13
Sources..................................................................................10-14
Figures
Page I
10-A Vegetation Resources......................................................... 10.2
II
II
II
II
II
401
11
II
I I
II
11
II
til
11
I
1 L
SECTION 10
VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A.
1 1.
The streams, baylands, undeveloped valley floor, foothills and mountain ranges of
Santa Clara County support a variety of plants and animals. Several of these plant
and animal species which inhabit various niches in the baylands, foothills and
mountains are considered rare or endangered For example, San Francisco Bay
' National Wildlife Refuge located in the baylands near Alviso is home to at least
five rare or endangered animal species and is part of the Pack Flyway used by
waterfowl and other migratory birds.
' The urban, built-up areas, including traversing streams, parks, vacant lots and
backyards support a resilient urban flora and fauna adapted to urban life.
However, the major concentrations of natural vegetation and wildlife occur in the
baylands, foothills and mountains.
2. LQgd
Cupertino's vegetation and wildlife resources occur primarily in the streamside,
foothill and mountain environments. This section describes Cupertino's plant
communities and the wildlife resources associated with them.
I
' Vegetation in Cupertino's planning area can be classified into six distinctive plant
communities: Non -Native Grasslands, Oak Woodland, Mixed Riparian
Woodland, Chaparral, Mixed Evergreen Forest, and Coniferous Forest (Figure 10-
A).
0.A). At times these plant communities may intergrade with each other, blurring the
' boundaries between them.
Non -Native grasslands are commonly found on level terrain, the lower slopes of
' the western foothills and in scattered areas along the Montebello Ridge system.
This plant community is dominated by non-native plant species of mainly
European origin which have largely supplanted the native California grasses.
' Commonly occurring plants include wild oat, rye grass, clover and yellow star
thistle. Individual valley oaks, coast live oaks and blue oaks may occur in this
habitat, as well as scattered patches of coyote brush and poison oak.
11
11
Herbaceous annuals are also expected in this grassland habitat and are most
evident in the Spring season wildflower displays. Commonly occurring plants
include California poppy, lupine, owl's clover, baby -blue eyes and farewell -to -
spring.
General Plan EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife
Section 10 - 2
Grass and- ......,
rner E'
t :rry • rtgp4cdoLS,, -�WRleptarla
S0orest ! 1(
V:.:
••� Qua
i Riparian•, �..� t: t r �
`j,�� L. . Flowiri9
�oothlll; t�.:.� �L-�:':�•..;..
Y. Woodland 5I.
Grassland .Deciduous`" /'
4 /" 'Flo»e�•�_1j.3' R`paran %
:Chaparra
j
In erm n I�•�
--.o:'.:0 %;.'•�' rasslan`d, .. ......_..
:•• • •�• Mixed Grassland: ,per..,..
,• •� • 4s «� • l ' ^ '^ „ ?erman- I Foothill;%%'%;i
s ry• • Eveigreen•ForesC,.,,a ...p.
hap
ra
• •e«
• •. ..v:. �.:. Q... ..::.d:.
4 • p. Grassland:.1:::of.
j
%• Conllerous�.
: 4
e • • ♦..yr . .93.'4:q''" .�.q`i`' :``; `:' Grassland, • Forest ; a .. ,
�•oe°•�io °Oq.•-e °°a�e °iiia r•as
•r«.« •1•° « err •ser« s ••°° «
VEGETATION RESOURCES Figure
10-A
Oak Woodland occurs primarily in the foothills on north -facing slopes and shaded
southern ravines. This plant community may also occur on level terrain. The
overstory is characterized by coast live oak, blue oak, valley oak, California bay
and California buckeye. The dominant tree species is the coast live oak, a
broadleaf, evergreen tree. The understory consists of a varying mixture of shrubs
and ground cover, creating a patchwork of different plant associations. Shrubs
include poison oak, coyote brush, blue elderberry and sticky monkey flower.
Annual grasses are also common understory plants which include ripgut brome
and wildoat.
Mixed Riparian Woodland occurs along watercourses near the foothills and in the
urbanized areas within the City. The overstory consists of one or more tree
species including red and arroyo willow, California bay, California buckeye,
Fremont's cottonwood, western sycamore, white alder coast live oak, big leaf
maple and dogwood. The understory creek bank vegetation is composed of
various shrubs and vines which may include poison oak, blue elderberry coyote
brush, California blackberry, hoarhound, curly dock and horseweed. Herbaceous
plants may be found growing in the creek bed; they include water cress, umbrella
sedge and stinging nettle.
General Plan EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife
Section 10 - 3
Non-native, ornamental plants also inhabit the riparian corridor being more
common near disturbed sections of the corridor. The ornamentals include blue
gum, Monterey pine, English walnut, periwinkle, English Ivy and hypericum,
thistles and mustard. Riparian woodland is considered scarce because it only
forms along water courses and lakes and because most of this habitat type in
California has been lost to agricultural uses and urbanization.
Chaparral is a scrubby, dense vegetation type that often intergrades with Oak
Woodland. This plant community is often found on dry, rocky, steep slopes with
little soil. Slopes are typically south facing. Dominant species include California
sage, poison oak, toyon, coyote brush, red berry and sticky monkey flower.
Mixed Evergreen Forest is found on moist, well -drained slopes and dominated by
broadleaved trees forming a closed forest. Relatively little understory grows
under the dense canopy of trees Characteristic tree species include big leaf maple,
madrone, California bay and douglas fir.
Coniferous Forest is situated at higher elevations on the Montebello Ridge system
and occupies moister slopes than those occupied by the Mixed Evergreen Forest.
The Coniferous Forest typically grows within reach of.summer fogs. The
dominant tree is the douglas fir, however, coastal redwood, California Bay,
tanbark oak also occur. Understory plants include sword fern and evergreen
huckleberry.
The mosaic pattern of habitat distribution and interspersion coupled with the
presence of mixed riparian habitat and oak woodland habitat create numerous
niches for the area's very diverse wildlife resources. Certain wildlife species can
be expected to concentrate their activities in certain habitats while others, such as
mule deer, bobcat, coyote and mountain lion, have larger home ranges utilizing a
wide variety of habitats.
Many animal species move freely between the oak woodland and chaparral plant
communities. Insects and acorns associated with the oaks provide an abundance
of food for deer, jays, woodpeckers, squirrels, other small mammals, and
insectivorous birds. The shrubs and trees provide protective cover for birds and
mammals and nesting places for bird species, including raptors and owls.
Understory grasses also provide cover for small mammals and reptiles, as well as,
foraging area for seed or insect -eating species.
Bird species that may be found in the oak woodland and chaparral include scrub
jay, western bluebird, California quail, nutall's woodpecker, great homed owl, red-
tailed hawk and Cooper's hawk. Typical mammal and reptile species include
western gray squirrel, deer mouse, mule deer, brush rabbit, and striped skunk,
western fence lizard, garter snake, and alligator lizard.
The non-native grassland plant community supports a less diverse fauna than the
other described plant communities. The community is less structurally diverse,
providing poorer escape cover and nesting substrate, and less diverse food
resources.
General Plan EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife
Section 10 - 4
The habitat is expected to receive little use by amphibians which are intolerant of
the dry conditions and lack of protective cover. However, certain amphibians,
such as western toad, California tiger salamander, arboreal salamander, and
California slender salamander may utilize the grasslands during the rainy season,
using rodent burrows for protective cover.
Reptiles are fairly common in the undisturbed grassland areas, but are more
susceptible to predation by raptors in mowed grassland areas where protective
cover is reduced. Like amphibians, reptiles use rodent burrows for shelter.
Reptiles expected to occur in the grasslands include western fence lizard, western
rattlesnake, southern alligator lizard and common king snake.
Burrowing mammals known to occur in grasslands include California meadow
mouse and California ground squirrel which feed primarily on seeds. Other
mammal species that utilize grasslands as part of larger ranges include mule deer,
Audubon cottontail, coyote, bobcat and mountain lion.
Mixed Riparian Woodland is considered one of the most valuable wildlife habitats
in California. The value of this habitat in supporting a diverse and abundant
wildlife population stems from its usefulness in providing diverse nesting and
roosting sites for birds, escape cover for a variety of wildlife species, numerous
feeding and watering areas and preferred migratory routes for numerous species.
According to the 1991 Rancho San Antonio Park Master Plan Initial Study, nearly
75% of the wildlife species observed or predicted to occur in the park are
expected to use the mixed riparian woodland habitat.
All of the amphibian and many of the reptilian species are expected to utilize
riparian habitat. The riparian habitat provides year around water and pools
necessary for the aquatic breeding western toad, pacific tree frog,.California newt
and perhaps the California tiger salamander. Other resident amphibians include
the arboreal salamander, ensauna and California slender salamander.
The riparian habitat provides an important water source for many mammals,
particular. during the summer and fall when water is less available in other
habitats. Lush vegetation and high insect populations provide cover and food for
the black -tailed deer, brush rabbit, deer mouse, squirrels, coyote, raccoon and
numerous insectivorous birds.
Fauna adapted to the moist and cool clime of the Mixed Evergreen Forest and
Coniferous Forest include chickadees, stellars jay, bushtit and other passerine
birds. Several raptors are predicted to occur in these areas: osprey, sharp -shinned
hawk, Cooper's hawk and golden eagle. Mammals which use these habitats
include the black -tailed deer, coyote, bobcat and mountain lion.
' General Plan EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife
Section 10 - 5
' F_ndaneeredRare and Threatened S=ies and S ri s of Simcial Concern
The California Department of Fish and Game's California Natural Diversity Data
D.A= (CNDDB) and recent park studies were reviewed to determined if there were
any species in the Cupertino area that are considered endangered, rare or
' threatened by state or federal authorities. These categories are defined by the U.S.
Endangered Species Act of 1973, the California Endangered Species Act of 1984
and the Native Plant Protection Act of 1977. These federal and state laws were
established to prevent extinction and confer authority to the government to protect
certain species of plants and animals. The three categories are generally defined
as followed:
e An endangered species is one in serious danger of becoming extinct
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
' A threatened species is one that, although not presently faced with extinction,
is likely to become an endangered species in the near future unless special
protective measures are taken.
• A rare species (this status is only used for plants) is one that has such a small
population throughout its range that it could become endangered if its current
environment is further harmed.
' A search of CNDDB records for the U.S.G.S. Cupertino Quadrangle revealed no
information of occurrences in Cupertino of species listed as endangered,
threatened or rare. The Stevens Creek County Park Master Plan indicated the
possible presence of the endangered San Francisco Garter Snake within the park.
Species of concern that are not officially designated as endangered, threatened or
' rare but that may meet those criteria are protected under the California
Environmental Quality Act. These "species of special concern" are also tracked
by the State through CNDDB.
One plant species of special concern, the San Joaquin saltbrush, has been
observed and recorded in Stevens Creek County Park within the Cupertino
planning area. San Joaquin saltbrush has "candidate 2" status for federal listing;
that is, information indicates possible endangered or threatened status, but more
research is needed.
Animal species of special concern believed to reside or utilize habitat in the
Cupertino planning area are California red -legged frog, California tiger
salamander, Coopers hawk, sharp -shinned hawk, golden edge, yellow warbler and
burrowing owl. Other species of special concern are considered aerial transients
in this area and would make infrequent use of habitat in Cupertino. They include
California gull, merlin, osprey and black swift.
Other species of concern not included on the State Fish and Game Department list
include western leatherwood and valley oak. Western leatherwood has been
identified in Rancho San Antonio County Park, and valley oak in various
' locations in Cupertino. Both plant species are designated on California Native
Plant Society, List 4, species of limited distribution.
L
1
General Plan EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife
,
Section 10 - 6
A Countywide biological survey commissioned by Santa Clara County identifies
the mountain lion as locally unique. Mountain lions have been observed around
Bryan Canyon in Cupertino.
B. CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS
1. Cid' y General Plan
'
The Proposed Plan Amendment is consistent with the existing General Plan in
that it continues and extends the existing policy base and practices which afford
protection to natural vegetation and wildlife resources. New policies will provide
further protection to resources by:
a) lowering hillside residential densities,
'
b) clustering development away from sensitive areas,
c) requiring open space easements with subdivision,
d) relandscaping with native plants in natural areas and
'
e) providing no expansion of the Urban Service Area
within the time frame of this General Plan.
la_ns
'
2. Other Cily and o untoP,
The surrounding cities, being located in different environmental settings, may '
have different wildland resources and land use policies oriented to those
resources. The cities of San Jose, Sunnyvale and Santa Clara, all have baylands
habitat and specific general plan policies focused on baylands resources. All
cities are responsible for the protection of endangered, threatened and rare species
and species of special concern. 40
The Proposed Plan Amendment is also consistent with the County General Plan. '
The City's hillside slope density formulae provide a transition between the
intensely developed urban area and the County's low density hillsides. The
Proposed Plan applies a 5 to 20 acre, foothill 1/2 acre and foothill modified slope '
density formulae to its hillsides, while the County applies a 20 to 160 acre curved
line slope density formula. The less restrictive city formulae reflect foothill
development patterns and urban service availability for city hillsides, not
characteristic of hillsides located in the County. The Proposed Plan incorporates
by reference the County's hillside policies which are applicable to unincorporated
hillside territory within Cupertino's planning area. The Proposed Plan and County
General Plan both provide for very low density residential uses in the hills,
protection of vegetation and wildlife resources, clustering of development and
preservation of open space upon subdivision.
3. Regional Plan
None.
�I
11
General Plan EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife
Section 10 - 7
II. IMPACTS
A. SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
According to the California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G, a project will
normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will:
(a) Conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community where
it is located:
(b) Substantially affect a rare, threatened or endangered species of animal or plant
or the habitat of the species;
(c) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species;
(d) Substantially diminish habitat for fish, wildlife or plants; and
(e) Create a potential public health hazard or involve the use, production or
disposal of materials which pose a hazard to people or animal or plant
populations in the area affected.
B. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED
1. Habitat Loss
The habitat of an animal in its living area and the environmental characteristics of
that areas that contributes to its survival (water, climate, food, shelter, space).
Development of natural areas to accommodate human occupation and activity
alters or fragments the habitats rendering them ill-suited or unsuitable for animal
species.
1 Residential development of the hillsides will manifest itself as grading, street and
home construction, utility installation, fencing and landscaping. Such residential
development may induce secondary development effects, such as, the widening of
existing roads to accommodate emergency vehicles; the undergrounding of
utilities; the construction of flood control structures, sedimentation basins, etc. to
manage increased runoff and erosion; the trimming and clearance of vegetation
for fire protection purposes; and the construction of hillside water storage
facilities to provide adequate water supplies. The allowance of human settlement
in the hillsides thus has a potentially significant impact on vegetation and wildlife
through denudation and habitat loss. However, the policy of density reduction
contained within the proposed Proposed Plan Amendment would reduce biotic
impacts vis a vis the current General Plan.
1
General Plan EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife
Section 10 - 8
Development of vacant lands in urban areas has much less of an impact on
wildlife. such lands are often small in size, discontiguous and lacking of the water
and vegetation necessary to provide food, shelter and escape cover necessary for
the survival of wildlife. such parcels, highly disturbed by surround human
activity, typicaly can only support resilient urban specis: house sparrows, pigeons
and certain rodents. Urban adopted species are minimally affected by the
development of vacant urban lands.
Mitigation: Lower development intensity, cluster allowed development, and use
design standards to protect natural environment. Refer to vegetation
and wildlife mitigatoin III Al a -r and 2 a -j.
Exotic plant and animal species can be introduced into a new. area by human
activity. Introduced species may prey upon or compete with native species (those
naturally occurring in the area) for water, sunlight, food, shelter and space. The
non-native species may invade natural habitats or be introduced into habitats that
have been disturbed by humans, ultimately displacing native species. In certain
cases the introduction of exotic species may so alter the natural habitat of an area
that the establishment of other exotic species becomes feasible.
Mitigation: Emphasize use of native plants in future landscaping. Refer to
vegetation and wildlife mitigation III Bl a -d and 2a.
Examples include predation of native species by household pets, such as cats and
dogs; the replacement of native bunchgrasses by European grasses across most of
the state's grasslands; and the replacement of native vegetation with exotic
ornamental plants used for landscaping.
3. Pesticides and Poisoning
Human activity can introduce toxics into wildlife populations. The endangerment
of certain predator bird species by the bioaccumulation of the pesticide DDT and
the lead poisoning of migratory waterfowl and condors by the accidental
consumption of lead shot and bullets are well documented. Continuing concerns
have been expressed over the use of legal pesticides and their effects on
vegetation and wildlife.
Debris carried by storm runoff into San Francisco Bay carries a variety of heavy
metals: lead, mercury, cadmium, etc. that may have deleterious effects on marine
wildlife and potential effects on people through the bioaccumulation of toxics
through the food chain.
Mitigation: Manage stormwater runoff to protect bay fromnon-point pollution.
Refer to vegetation and wildfire mitigation III CI a-jf
General Plan EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife
Section 10 - 9
Certain plant communities, like chaparral and the coast redwood forest, are adapted to
a periodic regime of wildland fires. For these plant communities, fire may be
necessary to return nutrients to the soil through the fire ash, prepare the seed beds by
burning the accumulated plant litter, stimulate the reproduction of fire -adapted plants
and eliminate less fire-resistant competing plants. Fire will continue to be suppressed
in the hillsides irrespective of whether additional hillside development occurs because
of the proximity of habitable structures in even remote areas.
Fire suppression will allow existing plant communities to continue to mature,
accumulating additional litter and deadwood which presents an increasingly greater
fire hazard. Suppression of fire will slow the cycling of nutrients from plant biomass
to soil and inhibit the germination of new plants. Infrequent fires fueled by heavy
loads of deadwood are expected to be much hotter than periodic fires that consume
light to moderate fuel loads. Such very hot fires will consume vegetation that might
otherwise survive a low intensity fire, leading to greater potential for soil erosion.
New housing development will occur in natural areas which will require disturbing or
changing the natural conditions. While mitigation measures are proposed to reduce
the impacts of this development, portions of the natural areas will be premanently
disturbed or changed.
L. 1:4 agra Im
The No Project Alternative would preclude approximately 515 acres of vacant
urban, agricultural and hillside land from being developed. Hillside lands
comprise the largest category of these vacant lands (399 acres). The alternative
would have the least impact on vegetation and wildlife resources because there
would be no new hillside development. Further encroachment of human
settlement into the hills would stop and further vegetation and habitat loss would
also cease. The introduction of exotic species and the introduction of additional
toxics would also be curtailed.
M9MR91MM"Ra NUFF Mid Orono
This alternative would have the same hillside vegetation and wildlife impacts as
the Proposed General Plan Alternative because the hillsides land use policies are
identical. Less storm runoff would be expected under this alternative because of
the smaller amount of building intensification and thus fewer impacts on marine
wildlife susceptible to storm water pollution. Approximately 197 acres of vacant
urban, agricultural and hillside land would be developed; assuming that the larger
hillside parcels would be subdivided, reserving 90% of the area for private open
space.
Urbanization of additional wildlands in the City will preclude its use for natural
vegetation and wildlife habitat.
General Plan EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife
Section 10 - 10
H.
: .r1. 11►la ► al2a"
See Land Use Section.
AORM6 I ISM111010360isi
Additional hillside development will diminish local recreational and leisure
opportunities associated with natural habitats.
Vegetation and wildlife habitat will be disrupted or displaced by development.
HL MITIGATION MEASURES
a. Preserve and protect special areas of natural vegetation and wildlife habitation
as integral parts of the environment. (Environmental Resources Element,
Goal D)
b. Preserve and acquire open space lands for the preservation of natural re-
sources, the managed production of resources, for outdoor recreation, and for
public health and safety. (Environmental Resources Element, Goal G)
c. Apply a slope -density formulae to low -intensity residential hillside develop-
ment in the hillsides. Density shall be calculated based on the foothill
modified, foothill modified 1/2 acre, and the 5-20 acre slope density formula.
Actual lot sizes and development areas will be determined through zoning
ordinances, clustering and identification of significant natural features.
(Policy 2-36)
d. The 5-20 slope density designation shall provide special hillside protection to
form a continuous open space/low density buffer west of the existing
urban/suburban development pattern. The area shall include the Kaiser
property, the Seminary property, Regnart Canyon area, and Inspiration
Heights area and other similar properties. (Policy 2-37)
e. In the 5-20 slope density area, require that adjacent properties with lots less
than 5 acres in size be consolidated if held in common ownership at the time
of General Plan amendment approval and if only one of the lots is developed.
Consolidation can be achieved by permitting development on only one of the
commonly -held parcels. (Policy 2-38)
f. Rezone a portion of Inspiration Heights from RI -10 to RHS zoning district.
(Policy 2-39)
I
1
II
7
U
I
I
I
1
General Plan EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife
Section 10 -11
g. Existing, vacant legal lots are not considered buildable in the foothill modified
and foothill modifiedl/2 acre slope density designations if they are
substandard in lot size. They are also considered unbuildable if development
is proposed on slopes greater than 30%, or on any other areas where studies
have determined the presence of health and safety problems; this also applies
to any lot in an R-1 zoning district An exception process will be created for
an applicant to seek discretionary approval for an unbuildable parcel. (Policy
2-40)
h. Apply all hillside protection policies to the Seminary Property, and
specifically protect the prominent knoll on the northeast side of the property
and the steep, wooded southwest comer of the property. (Policy 2-41)
i. The current urban service area shall not be expanded. The intent of this policy
is to limit future development to lands within the existing urban service area.
(Policy 2-42)
j. Major subdivisions (5 or more lots) involving subdivided lots of 5 or more
acres shall cluster development, reserving 90% of the land in private open
space to protect the hillsides from adverse environmental impacts. (Policy 2-
43)
k. Establish a private open space zoning district which would allow an owner to
designate portions of his property for open space with provisions for trail
easements, maintenance standards and other items consistent with preserving
the property in its natural state while retaining it in private ownership. (Policy
2-44)
1. Encourage clustering of development for minor subdivisions (4 or fewer lots)
of property over 5 acres in size. Encourage reserving and dedicating 90% of
the land in private open space to protect the hillsides from adverse
environmental impacts. (Policy 2-45)
in. No structures or improvements shall occur on slopes greater than 30% unless
an exception is granted. (Policy 2-53)
n. Hillsides policies found in the Santa Clara County General Plan in effect in
1992 are included in the Cupertino General Plan by reference and are
applicable to the unincorporated hillside area. These policies are incorporated
because they are consistent with hillside protection goals. If changes are
proposed in the County plan which are inconsistent with the City's hillside
protection goals, then the City should protest those changes as well as not
incorporate them into the City's General Plan. (Policy 2-58)
o. Explore a joint powers agreement involving the cities of Cupertino, Los Altos
Hills, Palo Alto, Saratoga and Santa Clara County for the purpose of hillside
protection in the unincorporated area. (Policy 2-60)
p. Encourage the clustering of new development away from sensitive areas such
as riparian corridors, wildlife habitat and corridors, public open space
preserves and ridgelines. (Policy 5-14)
General Plan EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife
Section 10 - 12
q. Provide open space linkages within and between properties for both
recreational and wildlife activities most specifically for the benefit of wildlife
which is threatened, endangered, or designated as species of special concern.
(Policy 5-20)
r. Retain creek beds, riparian corridors, water courses and associated vegetation ,
in their natural state to protect wildlife habitat, recreation potential and assist
ground water percolation. (Policy 5-28)
2. Existine
a. Require rural improvement standards in the residential hillside zoning
ordinance and the hillside subdivision regulations to preserve the rural
character of the hillside. (Policy 2-54)
b. Remove private driveways and building sites as far as possible from properties
located next to public open space preserves and parks to enhance the natural
open space character and protect plants and animals. (Policy 2-55 Strategy 1)
c. County development, particularly if located near the City's urban fringe area,
should consider Cupertino's General Plan. (Policy 2-59)
d. Confine fencing on hillside property to the area around a building, rather than
around an entire site, to allow for migration of wild animals. (Policy 5-17)
e. Limit recreation in natural areas to activities compatible with preserving
natural vegetation, such as hiking, horseback riding and camping. (Policy 5-
18)
f. Provide public access to wildlife observation and fishing sites consistent with
preserving important wildlife habitat. (Policy 5-19)
B. INTRODUCED SPECIES
1. Proposed
a. Encourage public and quasi -public agencies to landscape their city area I
projects near native vegetation with appropriate native plants. (Policy 5-13) �J
b. Emphasize drought tolerant, native plants and ground covers when '
landscaping properties near natural vegetation, particularly for control of
erosion from disturbance to natural terrain. (Policy 5-15)
c. Minimize lawn area and maximize the number of native trees. (Policy 5-16)
d. Be sure natural land forms and significant plants and trees are disturbed as
little as possible during development. All cut and fill shall be rounded to
natural contours and planted with natural landscaping. (Policy 2-57)
2. Existing '
Retain significant specimen trees, especially when they grow in groves or
clusters, and integrate them into the developed site. (Policy 2-54, Strategy 2)
I
tGeneral Plan EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife
Section 10 - 13
1
r
11
i
I
11160b : ►P :� • ►11►
a. Protect and conserve water resources as they are vital to the environmental
and economic health of Cupertino. (Environmental Resources Element, Goal
E)
b. Strive to minimize the quantity and improve the quality of storm water runoff
consistent with the protection of groundwater quality and groundwater
recharge areas. (Environmental Resources Element, Goal F)
c. Continue to participate in the Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution
Control Program in order to cooperatively reduce nonpoint source pollution
with other cities that discharge storm waters into San Francisco Bay. (Policy
5-35)
d. Encourage the reduction of impervious surface areas and investigate
opportunities to retain or detain storm runoff on new development. (Policy 5-
36)
e. Do not permit urban development to occur in areas not served by a sanitary
sewer system, except the previously approved Regnart Canyon Development.
(Policy 5-37)
f. Encourage residential, commercial and industrial contributors to the hazardous
waste stream to use non -hazardous alternative products and processes and
recycle materials in order to retard growth of the waste stream and thus reduce
demad for treatment capacity. (Policy 6-51)
None.
IV. MITIGATION MEASURES NOT A PART OF THE PROJECT
e The U.S. Endangered Species Act, (ESA) California Endangered Species Act (CESA)
and the California Native Plant Protection Act provide federal and state protection to
listed endangered and threatened species of plants and animals. The federal law in
particular generally prohibits the destruction of habitat for the listed species. 1982
amendments to the Act allow "incidental taking" with prior federal approval of a
habitat conservation plan.
• The California Environmental Quality Act protects species of special concern that are
not officially listed but meet the criteria of ESA or CESA.
General Plan EIR - Vegetation and Wildlife
'
Section 10 - 14
Sources
1.
Brady and Associates, Rancho San Antonio Park Master Plan Initial
Study. 8/15/91.
2.
CH2MHill, Habitat Conservation Planning and Biodiversity: South
Bay Persngctive,
'
12/16/92.
3.
City of Cupertino, General Plan, February 1990.
4.
Dillingham and Associates, Stevens Creek Counjy Park Master Plan
(Draft), 6/9/92.
5.
Earth Metrics, Biologicalrvey for the EI Camino HogpiL ContinuingCarre
Proiect. July
1985.
6.
Earth Metrics, Analysis of Regulatory ReQuir mems and Preliminary
Initial Study -
Projer-L June 1982.
,
Scenado II Bryan Canyon Refuse - Derived Fuel Waste to Energy
7.
Harvey and Stanley Associates, Natural Resource Sensitivity Areas
Base Mans of Sanja
Clara Countv,1979.
8.
Jamison, Deborah, Species in Danger in our Own Backyard, Vol.
1. 1992.
Permanente Site,
9.
KF Inc. (Impell Corp.), Fatal Flaw Analysis for BryanCanyon/Kaiser
3/83.
10.
Ornduff, Robert, Introduction to California Plant Life, 1974.
11.
Preservation 2020 Task Force, Qpen Space Preservatione A ProgMM
County, April 1987.
for Santa Clara
12.
Santa Clara County, General Plan, adopted 1981, reprinted 1990.
Creek PlanningStudy,
September 1989.
13.
Santa Clara Valley Water District, Calabazas
14.
State of California, Dept. of Fish and Game (by Robert F.
Holland), Preliminary
Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California.
October 1986.
e
15.
State of California, Dept. of Fish and Game, Natural Heritage Division, Designated
Endangered. Threatened or Rare Plants and Candidates with Official
Listing Dates, January
rnn)
16. State of California, Dept. of Fish and Game, State and Federal Endangered and Threatened
Animals of California. rev. October 1991.
17. State of California, Dept. of Fish and Game, Natural Diversity Data Base: Scecial Animals,
August 1991.
18. State of California, Dept. of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base: Special Plants,
August 1991.
,1,
I
it
r
1
SECTION 11
II
HISTORICAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL
AND
CULTURAL RESOURCES
I
Table Of Contents
Page
I. Environmental Setting............................................................ 11-1
II
A.
Existing Development and Conditions.....................................11-1
1. Proposed..................................................................11-6
1. Regional...................................................................11-1
B. Historical Resources.........................................................11-6
2. Local....................................................................11-1
1. Proposed..................................................................11-6
B.
Consistency with Other Plans ...............................................
11-3
C. Heritage Trees................................................................11-6
1. City General Plan ........................................................11-3
1. Proposed..................................................................11-6
2. Other Cities and the County ............................................
11-3
3. Regional Plan...; .........................................................
11-3
Impacts.............................................................................
11-3
A.
Significance Criteria..........................................................
11-3
B.
Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated..............................11-4
1. Archaeological Resources...............................................I1-4
2. Historic Resources.......................................................11-4
3. Heritage Trees............................................................
l 1-5
C.
Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated ..........................
11-5
D.
Alternatives Analysis.........................................................
11-5
1. No Project................................................................11-5
2. Existing General Plan (Modified) ................................... ...11-5
E.
Local Short Term vs. Long Term Productivity ...........................11-5
F.
Growth Inducing Effects....................................................11-5
G.
Economic and Social Effects ................................................
11-5
H.
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
Should the Plan Be Implemented ..........................................
11-5
III. Mitigation Measures..............................................................11-6
A. Archaeological Resources....................................................11-6
1. Proposed..................................................................11-6
2. Existing...................................................................11-6
B. Historical Resources.........................................................11-6
1. Proposed..................................................................11-6
2. Existing...................................................................11-6
C. Heritage Trees................................................................11-6
1. Proposed..................................................................11-6
2. Existing...................................................................11-6,
Sources................................................................................. 11-7
Figures
Page t
11-A Commuity Landmarks and Historic Sites.................................11-2
II
401
�J
•� SECTION 11
HISTORICAL, ARCHAELOGICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A. EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND CONDITIONS
1. Real
Despite its present image as the center of high technology, the Santa Clara Valley
has had a long and eventful history spanning many development eras and involving
numerous cultural and ethnic groups and individuals. They have left their marks
through the many significant historic landmarks and archaeological sites in the
valley, which are recognized as part of a unique history that is worthy of
�r preservation.
Before European settlement, the area was occupied by Native Americans who
settled along the many streams and creeks, particularly the Guadalupe River and
Coyote Creek. The moderate climate, the rich vegetation and wildlife resources of
the bay, marshlands, streams and oak groves provided a favorable environment for
these early residents.
Spanish settlement of the area occurred in the mid -18th Century and the valley
continued to be transformed into a rich agricultural economy by successive waves
of European migration.
Today, the valley has been transformed again and is now considered to be the
leading high technology center in the country, attracting people and industry from
all over the world. The creation of the silicon chip in the 1970's gave the valley a
new name, "Silicon Valley."
2. Local
The history of Cupertino parallels that of Santa Clara Valley. It is believed that the
area was more thinly settled by Native Americans than the other areas of the valley.
The other waves of change, the agricultural economy, post -World War II
suburbanization and the emergence of the high technology economy, all occurred in
the Cupertino area as well. Much of the history of the area predates the City's
incorporation in 1955. Much of the known history of the Cupertino area involves
the pioneering agricultural families who first settled this area. This local history has
been chronicled by the California History Center at De Anza College and the
Cupertino Historical Society. Figure 11-A identifies the general location of the
City's community landmarks and historic sites within and surrounding Cupertino.
I`r
I
General Plan EIR Historical, Archaelogical and Cultural Resources
Section 11- 2
The City o/ Cupertino
■Community Landmarks:
A. De Anza Industrial Park
B. Vallco Industrial Park
C. Kaiser Permanente
D. Downtown Monla Vista
E. Memorial Park,
Community Center,
Sports Complex
F. Cupertino Historical Museum
G. Vallco Fashion Park
H. De Anza College
I. Cupertino Civic Center
I
• Historic Sites:
1. Mary Knoll Seminary
2. Cupertino De Oro Club
3. Gazebo, Memorial Park
4. SI. Joseph's Church
5. Louis Slocklmeir Ranch
6. Le Petit Trianon
7. Union Church of Cupertino
8. Replica Baer Blacksmith Shop
9. Doyle Site '
10. De La Veaga Tack House
11. Ridge Vineyards
12. Picchetli Brothers Winery and Ranch
13. Monte Bello School, 1892
14. Malt Jujum House, 1900
15. Elisha P. Stephens home, 1852
16. Enoch J. Parrish Tank House
COMMUNITY LANDMARKS
AND HISTORIC SITES
Figure
11-A
General Plan EIR Historical, Archaelogical and Cultural
Section 11- 3
B. CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS
1. City General Plan
The proposed General Plan Amendment expands the depth of historical,
archaeological and cultural resources subject to review when development is
proposed on sensitive sites. While state law mandates such review when
significant resources are affected, the Existing General Plan policies do not reflect
these mandates.
2. Other Cities and the County
,
The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the plans of Sunnyvale,
Santa Clara and Santa Clara County, in that archaeological investigation is required
prior to development in sensitive areas and historical structures should be evaluated
and preserved if possible when new development is proposed.
3. Regional Plan
None.
II. IMPACTS
A. Significance Criteria
The following portion of this report was partially excerpted from the City of Santa
Clara General Plan Update: Program Environmental Impact Report (Draft May 1, 1992)
For purposes of this analysis, potentially significant impacts on historic resources are
considered to be present when the historic character and integrity of a resource may be
diminished as a result of development policies included in the proposed General Plan .
The historic character and integrity of a resource is considered to be inclusive of all the
visual qualities that establish its links to its historic associations, including architectural
style and the historic uses of the land, structures and setting. On a parcel -specific
basis, potentially significant environmental impacts are considered to be present when
the proposed plan policies and land use designations:
Represent a change from the historic use of a structure or property; or,
Encourage an increase in development densities; or,
Permit alterations to the historic character of land uses or structures.
According to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G
6) states that a project "will normally have a significant effect on the environment if it
will disrupt or adversely affect a prehistoric or historic archaeological site or property of
historic or cultural significance to a community or ethnic group or social group, or a
paleontological site except as part of a scientific study"
Disruption or adverse affect to an archaeological site is defined in Appendix I of the
CEQA Guidelines as alteration or destruction of the site including both physical and
aesthetic effects. The significance or importance of archaeological and other cultural
resources is determined according to criteria defined in CEQA.
General Plan EIR Historical, Archaelogical and Cultural Resources
Section 11- 4
The above criteria have been incorporated in CEQA as amended, by Public Resources
Code (PRC) Section 21083.2(g). This law requires a lead agency to make a
determination of whether 1) a project will have a significant effect on archaeological
resources and 2) such resources are "unique" under the law. A unique archaeological
resource is defined as:
An archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated
that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge there is a high probability
that it meets any of the following criteria:
1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions
and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information;
2) Has a special and particular quality such as oldest of its type or best available
example of its type; and,
3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or
historic event or person
Guidance for the interpretation and implementation of CEQA is provided in Appendix
K of the CEQA Guidelines. An important archaeological resource is defined in
Appendix K as one which:
1) Is associated with an event or person of recognized significance in California
or Amercian history, or recognized scientific importance in prehistory;
2) Can provide information which is both of demonstrable public interest and
useful in addressing scientifically consequential and reasonable or
archaeological research questions;
3) Has a special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest or last
surviving example of its kind;
4) Is at least 100 years old and possesses substantial stratigraphic integrity; or,
5) Involves important research questions that historical research has shown can
be answered only with archaeological methods.
B. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED
1. Archaeological Resources
Development consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment will result in
surface and subsurface ground disturbance that could disturb important
archaeological deposits and destroy unique feature and artifacts.
Mitigation: Modify review process to require archaeological review when
development process is located next to stream beds or oak
groves. Refer to Mitigation III Al (a -c).
Historic Resources
Implementation of the proposed General Plan Amendment will increase the intensity
of development and could result in the alteration of historic structures.
Mitigation: Continuing policy of encouraging private property owners to
incorporate historical elements into development proposals.
Refer to Mitigation III B2 (a).
General Plan EIR Historical, Archaelogical and Cultural
Section 11- 5
3. Heritage Trees
Development proposed under the General Plan Amendment could negatively affect
trees of importance to the community. Projects may propose the removal of such
trees to facilitate development or such trees may be damaged during construction
activities.
Mitigation: Continue Heritage Tree Protection Policy. Refer to
Mitigation III C1 (a).
C. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE MITIGATED
None.
D. ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
1. No Proiect Alternative
Under the "No Project" Alterative, archaeological resources and historic structures
would be least affected since new development activity is not contemplated.
2. Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative
Under this Alternative, potential archaeological resources could be affected by
surface and subsurface ground disturbance. Historical structures may be less
affected by new development because of the generally lesser level of development
in comparison to the proposed General Plan Amendment.
E. SHORT TERM VS. LONG TERM PRODUCTIVITY
Further disturbance and destruction of archaeological resources and historic structures
may deteriorate the long-term educational value of these resources as links to past
cultures and events.
F. GROWTH INDUCING EFFECTS
None.
G. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECT
See item "E" above.
Some archaeological and historical sites may be disturbed or destroyed by development
activity.
General Plan EIR Historical, Archaelogical and Cultural Resources
Section 11- 6
III. MITIGATION MEASURES
A. Archaeological Resources
1. Proposed
a. Preserve historically and archaeologically significant structures, sites and
artifacts to instill a greater sense of historical and cultural awareness and
community identity. (Land Use/Community Character Element, Goal F)
b. For development sites in areas likely to be archaeologically sensitive, such as
along stream courses and in oak groves, the City development review process
should require a specific investigation to determine if significant archaeological
resources may be affected by the project, and should also require appropriate
mitigation measures in the project design. (Policy 2-75)
c. Recognize that Native American burials may be uncovered in unexpected
locations and that State law prescribes the appropriate actions to take upon
discovery of such burials during construction, including stoppage of work in
surrounding area, notification of appropriate authorities, and reburial of remains
in an appropriate manner. (Policy 2-76)
2. Existing
None.
B. Historical Resources
1. Proposed
None.
2. Existin
a. Undertake an active partnership with private owners of landmark structures to
rehabilitate the buildings for public or semi -private occupancy and retain their
historic character. (Policy 2-74)
C. HERITAGE TREES
1. Proposed
a. Protect and maintain heritage trees in a healthy state. A heritage tree list shall be
established and periodically revised to include trees of importance to the
community. (Policy 2-77)
2. Existing
None.
General Plan EIR Historical, Archaelogical and Cultural
Section 11- 7
Sources
1. City of Cupertino, General Plan, February 1990.
2. California History Center - DeAnza College, Cupertino Chronicle, Local History Studies -
Volume 19. 1975.
3. Environmental Science Associates, City of Santa Clara General Plan Update: Program
Environmental Impact Report (Draft), May 1, 1992.
f
I SECTION 12
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
b
1
I
It
I ,I.
it
11.
Table of Contents
Page
I. Environmental Setting............................................................ 12-1
A. Existing Conditions..........................................................
12-1
1. Regional...................................................................12-2
Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated..............................12-4
2. Local.......................................................................12-2
B. Consistencies with other Plans.............................................12-3
1. City General Plan ........................................................
12-3
2. Other Cities and County Plans.........................................12-3
3. Regional Plan.............................................................
12-4
II. Impacts............................................................................. 12-4
A.
Significance Criteria.......................................................... 12-4
B.
Significant Effects Which Can Be Mitigated..............................12-4
1. Availability of Treatment, Transfer and Disposal Capacity .........12-4
2. Soil and Water Contamination from SQG's and Households ......
12-5
3. New Development in Existing Industrial Areas ......................
12-5
C.
Significant Effects Which Cannot Be Mitigated ..........................12-5
D.
Alternatives Analysis.........................................................
12-5
1. No Project Alternative...................................................12-5
2. Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative ........................
12-6
E.
Growth Inducing Effects....................................................12-6
F.
Economic and Social Effects................................................12-6
G.
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
Should The Plan Be Implemented..........................................12-6
III.
Mitigation Measures..........................................................12-6
A.
Availability of Treatment, Transfer and Disposal Capacity ..............
12-6
1. Proposed..................................................................12-6
2. Existing...................................................................12-7
B.
Soil and Water Contamination From SQG's and Households ..........
12-7
1. Proposed..................................................................12-7
2. Existing...................................................................12-7
C.
New Development In Existing Industrial Areas ..........................12-7
1. Proposed Mitigation.....................................................
12-7
2. Existing Mitigation.......................................................12-7
D.
Significant Effects of the Mitigation Measures ............................
12-7
IV. Mitigation Measures Not A Part Of The Project ..........................12-8
A. Availability of Treatment, Transfer and Disposal Capacity .............. 12-8'
B. Soil and Water Contamination from Small Quantity ..................... 12-8
Generators and Households ................................................. 12-8
C. New Development in Existing Industrial Areas ........................... 12-8
Sources.................................................................................12-9
Tables
1
l
all
I I
I
II
til
Page
12-A Cupertino Manifested Hazardous Waste ...................................
12-2
12-B 1989 Cupertino Hazardous Waste Generation............................12-3
12-C Comparison of Estimated Hazardous Waste Tonnage ...................12-4
1
l
all
I I
I
II
til
SECTION 12
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
I. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
In 1989, about 372,000 tons of hazardous wastes were reportedly shipped off-site
by generators in the nine county San Francisco Bay Area. Santa Clara County's
contribution was about 81,000 tons or 21% of the total. By the year 2000, 389,000
1 tons of shipped wastes is projected with Santa Clara County contributing 127,500
tons.
Past hazardous material storage practices in Cupertino as well as the rest of Santa
Clara County have led to soil and groundwater contamination that first, became
evident in San Jose in 1979. Since then hundreds of sites throughout the County
have been identified where soil and/or groundwater contamination has occurred.
Numerous government agencies are overseeing the cleanup of these sites.
The most seriously contaminated sites that pose the greatest potential threat to
human health and the environment are on the National Priorities List (NPL). Sites
on the NPL must be cleaned up in accordance with federal regulations and are
eligible for Superfund monies for investigation and cleanup. There are twenty-eight
sites in Santa Clara County with groundwater contamination that are on or proposed
for the federal Superfund program's NPL.
A. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The use of hazardous materials is recognized as an integral part of society. Hazardous
materials are used to produce manufactured goods which contribute to our economic
well-being and quality of life.
The Environmental Protection Agency has established four characteristics that can be
tested to determine which substances are hazardous. The characteristics are:
• Ignitability —The ability to catch fire.
'
• Corrosivity The ability to wear away or destroy other materials, including
human tissue.
• Reactivity —The ability to enter a violent chemical reaction, which may involve
explosion or fumes.
• Toxicity —The ability to release certain toxic constituents when leached with a
mild acid.
1. Regional
in
These characteristics cover a broad range of substances commonly used
industrial processes, not only in Cupertino, but all over the state. Numerous
household chemicals are also considered hazardous and are used worldwide.
'
Household chemicals include motor oil, pesticides, household cleaners and paint.
Radioactive products are not included in this discussion because their use, storage,
and disposal are regulated exclusively by the Federal Government.
There is no reliable data on the total amount of hazardous materials utilized.
However, the amount of hazardous waste can be estimated from data ("manifest
data") provided by the California Health and Welfare Agency which requires
reports for all hazardous waste shipped off-site.
In 1989, about 372,000 tons of hazardous wastes were reportedly shipped off-site
by generators in the nine county San Francisco Bay Area. Santa Clara County's
contribution was about 81,000 tons or 21% of the total. By the year 2000, 389,000
1 tons of shipped wastes is projected with Santa Clara County contributing 127,500
tons.
Past hazardous material storage practices in Cupertino as well as the rest of Santa
Clara County have led to soil and groundwater contamination that first, became
evident in San Jose in 1979. Since then hundreds of sites throughout the County
have been identified where soil and/or groundwater contamination has occurred.
Numerous government agencies are overseeing the cleanup of these sites.
The most seriously contaminated sites that pose the greatest potential threat to
human health and the environment are on the National Priorities List (NPL). Sites
on the NPL must be cleaned up in accordance with federal regulations and are
eligible for Superfund monies for investigation and cleanup. There are twenty-eight
sites in Santa Clara County with groundwater contamination that are on or proposed
for the federal Superfund program's NPL.
General Plan EIR Hazardous Materials
Section 12-2
As in most areas, storing gasoline in underground tanks is common in Santa Clara
County. The Santa Clara Valley Water District, under contract from the Regional
Water Quality Board, has instituted a Fuel Leak Program to evaluate the severity of
reported fuel leaks and to provide guidance to the responsible parties on their
cleanup. Currently, there are about 1,500 reported fuel leaks counrywide.
2. Local
Every Cupertino household and business uses products that can be considered
hazardous. Since 1983, the City has required every business that uses hazardous
materials to obtain a storage permit. As of 1992, there were 126 businesses in
Cupertino that required such hazardous materials storage permits, which is a
reduction of more than 150 businesses that required such permits in 1988. Most of
these businesses were located in Cupertino's three major industrial areas as
described below:
1) East of Wolfe Road between Homestead Road and Stevens Creek
Boulevard.
2) West of Stelling Road between Stevens Creek Boulevard and McClellan
Road.
3) West of De Anza Boulevard between Highway 280 and Stevens Creek
Boulevard.
The amount of manifested hazardous wastes from Cupertino generators is described
below for three select years. The amounts are compared to County totals in the
final column.
Table12-A
CUPERTINO MAr; IFESTED HAZARDOUS WASTE
Year Tons of Hazardous Waste Shinned* % of County
1985 808 0.8
1987 1,149 1.8
1989** 1,295 1.6
* Includes one-time generated wastes, such as contaminated soils.
** 1989 is the last year complete data is available.
Source: State of California -Health and Welfare Agency Uniform Hazardous Waste
Manifest Summary Reports.
These manifested wastes are reported by the larger firms in the City and smaller
businesses that generate relatively large amounts of waste. Small quantity
generators (SQG), generators producing one ton or less per month, are often
unaware of the reporting requirement, and households, which have no reporting
requirement, are not represented in the totals above. The estimated total hazardous
waste generation in Cupertino is described in Table 12-B.
General Plan EIR Hazardous Materials
Section 12-3
Table 12-B
1989 CUPERTINO HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATION
Source Estimated Tonnaee
Manifested Sources 1,295
Small Quantity Generators 764*
Households 191**
Estimated Total Tonnage 2,250
* Estimate based on 1986 estimated percentage of Countywide SQG-generated
waste to total manifested waste (59%) in County Hazardous Waste Management
Plan.
** Estimate based on an average waste generation of 25 pounds of household
hazardous waste per household and 15,300 Cupertino households in 1989.
Of the 28 existing and proposed Superfund sites in the County, Cupertino has one
Superfund site, the Intersil/Siemens site at Forge Drive and N. Tantau Avenue.
The site was contaminated by volatile organic compounds from leaking
underground tanks and spills. Cleanup is being overseen by the San Francisco
Regional Water Quality Board and has been in progress since 1988.
There have been 40 cases of fuel leaks in Cupertino as reported by the Santa Clara
Valley Water District; 13 of the cases have been closed by the District or Regional
Water Quality Control Board. Most of the fuel leaks involve gasoline service
stations.
B. CONSISTENCIES WITH OTHER PLANS
1. City General Plan
The proposed hazardous materials goal and policies are consistent with the
proposed General Plan Amendment and the adopted hazardous waste management
plan in that they strive to provide a reasonably safe environment for the residents
and workers in Cupertino. One policy proposal encourages working with other
cities and the County to develop a management and disposal program for household
hazardous wastes. This is consistent with existing policy to avoid duplication of
effort in implementing hazardous waste management programs.
2. Others Cities and County Plans
The City of Cupertino, as well as the other cities in the County, have adopted the
County Hazardous Waste Management Plan, so all of the plans are consistent, with
the exception of the siting criteria for hazardous waste management, treatment,
disposal or transportation facilities. State law allows cities to adopt their own siting
criteria which take precedence over criteria in the County plan when City criteria are
more stringent.
General Plan EIR Hazardous Materials
Section 12-4
3. Recional Plan
Most legislation regulating hazardous material activities is promulgated at the state
and federal levels, not regional. The proposed General Plan Amendment is
consistent with the California Regional Water Quality Board, San Francisco Bay
Region, Water Quality Control Plan. The City continues to participate in the Santa
Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program which was established to
study and develop measures to reduce nonpoint source pollution and thus improve ,
bay water quality.
II. IMPACTS
A. SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
According to the California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G(g) and (v), a
project "will normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will contaminate
a public water supply; or create a potential public health hazard or involve the use,
production or disposal of materials which pose a hazard to people or animal or plant
populations in the area affected."
B. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED
1. Availability of Treatment, Transfer and Disposal Capacity
The proposed General Plan Amendment is expected to lead to the generation of
additional hazardous wastes because the proposal accommodates additional growth
in the number of businesses and households above the existing built environment ,
and the Existing General Plan (Modified). As provided in the County Hazardous
Waste Management Plan, the increase may be somewhat muted over the long term
if countywide efforts at source reduction, reuse and recycling of hazardous
materials are successful. The net increase in hazardous waste tonnage above
existing levels and the existing General Plan is estimated as follows:
Table 12-C
COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED HAZARDOUS WASTE TONNAGE '
Existing Proposed G.P. Proposed G.P.
Existing G.P. (Mod) w/ Amend w/. Amend. w/.
Source(1989) No Reduction No Reduction 25% Reduction
Manifested Sources 1,295 1,591 1,984 1,488
Small Quantity
Generators 764 939 1,171 878
Households 191 232 251 188
Est. Total Tonnage 2,250 2,762 3,406 2,554
F
General Plan EIR Hazardous Materials
Section 12-5
The increases in hazardous wastes will increase the demand for treatment, transfer
and disposal facilities which are in inadequate supply in the County. Since existing
State law (AB 2948 Tanner) requires counties to plan for the management of all
hazardous wastes generated within each county, future exportation of hazardous
wastes outside of Santa Clara County may be limited. Existing County hazardous
material facilities may need to be expanded and new ones built to accommodate
Countywide hazardous waste generation. Increases in hazardous waste generation
constitutes a significant impact because State law requires planning for the treatment
and disposal of all such wastes in the County and the County lacks such facilities.
Mitigation: Continue to educate public regarding hazardous materials and
continue regulation of hazardous material storage. Refer to
mitigation measure III Al (a -c) and A2 (a).
2. Soil and Water Contamination from SOG's and Households
Growth under the project is expected to increase the number of small quantity
generators and households, which will increase the volume of hazardous wastes
being disposed in landfills, in the sewer system, on the ground, and in streams,
thus potentially contaminating the soil and San Francisco Bay.
Mitigation: Continue to use County Hazardous Waste Management Plan
to manage hazardous material. Refer to mitigation measures
III BIand 2.
3. New Development in Existing Industrial Areas
Additional development may increase the exposure of residents and workers to
hazardous materials not only from the increased volume and usage of such
materials, but also the closer proximity of residents to hazardous materials if
residential development is allowed in existing industrial areas.
Mitigation: Incorporate hazardous materials review in application review
process. Refer to Mitigation III C 1.
C. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE MITIGATED
None.
D. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Estimates of hazardous waste tonnage are based on levels of development activity and
population instead of economic activity. The estimates do not take into account
technological innovations or governmental regulations that may reduce hazardous waste
production. No changes in the types and levels of mitigation are anticipated for the
impacts of the alternatives because the amount of hazardous waste generated is
relatively small in comparison to the amount generated countywide.
1. No Proiect Alternative
The "No Project" Alternative is the continuation of the existing built environment of
the City. This Alternative is expected to produce less hazardous waste than the
proposed General Plan Amendment (2,250 tons vs. 3,406 tons).
General Plan EIR Hazardous Materials
Section 12-6
2. Existing General Plan (Modified) Alternative
The Existing General Plan (Modified) provides for 20% less office/industrial
development, 7% more commercial development and 7% less residential
development than the Proposed General Plan Amendment. Less hazardous waste
production is expected under this Alternative because of the lower level of
office/industrial developments which are the primary hazardous waste generators
(2,762 tons vs. 3,406 tons).
E. GROWTH INDUCING EFFECTS
See Land Use Compatibility and Visual Character section of this report. Population
and economic activity accommodated by this project and the resulting secondary growth
inducement would be expected to lead to increased hazardous waste generation over
existing levels. Also see EIR Summary in Chapter III.
F. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS
G.
If state regulations prohibit local industries from exporting hazardous wastes outside of
the County for treatment and disposal, then facilities to treat and dispose of such wastes
will be developed in the County or industries will be forced to relocate outside of the
County to find areas that have adequate treatment/disposal facilities or areas that do not
prohibit exportation of hazardous wastes. Jobs from those industries will be lost
resulting in severe economic and social impacts on County residents.
None.
III. MITIGATION MEASURES
A. AVAILABILITY OF TREATMENT, TRANSFER AND DISPOSAL CAPACITY
1. Proposed
a. Protect City residents and employees from the inherent risks in the
transportation, use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials, while
recognizing that the use of these materials is integral to many aspects of society.
(Public Health and Safety Element, Goal E)
b. Continue to require the proper storage and disposal of hazardous materials to
prevent leakage, potential explosions, fire or the release of harmful fumes.
(Policy 6-49)
c. Encourage residential and commercial and industrial contributors to the
hazardous waste stream to use non -hazardous alternative products and
processes and to recycle materials in order to retard growth of the waste stream
and thus reduce demand for treatment capacity. (Policy 6-52)
General Plan EIR Hazardous Materials
Section 12-7
e
2. Existing
a. Continue to endorse the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan..
(Policy 6-51)
B. SOIL AND WATER CONTAMINATION FROM SOG'S AND HOUSEHOLDS
li
L�
1. Proposed Mitigation
a. When new residential development is proposed in existing industrial areas, an
assessment of the future residents' risk of exposure to hazardous materials
should be completed. (Policy 6-50)
2. Existing Mitigation
None.
D. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF THE MITIGATION MEASURES
General Plan Policy No. 6-35 endorses the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan
which provides for the management of all anticipated hazardous wastes that will be
generated in the County. Key concepts in the County Plan include:
1) The reduction in usage and recycling of hazardous materials to reduce demand for
treatment and disposal facilities.
2) Intercounty agreements as a means of utilizing needed and available hazardous
waste management capacity in other jurisdictions.
1. Proposed
a. Continue to work with the County, other cities and interested groups to develop
a program for the proper management and disposal of household hazardous
wastes that is effective and convenient for residents. (Policy 6-53)
b. Continue to participate in the Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution
Control Program in order to cooperatively reduce nonpoint source pollution
with other cities that discharge storm waters into San Francisco Bay.
(Policy 35)
1
2. Existing
a. Continue to endorse the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan.
(Policy 651)
To address the hazardous waste disposal needs of SQG's and households, the
County Plan provides for educational outreach and technical assistance to
identify the problems and educate individuals and small businesses on proper
disposal methods. The County plan also addresses the need for a more
effective program to deal with household hazardous wastes in order to curb the
dumping of such wastes.
C. NEW DEVELOPMENT IN EXISTING INDUSTRIAL AREAS
li
L�
1. Proposed Mitigation
a. When new residential development is proposed in existing industrial areas, an
assessment of the future residents' risk of exposure to hazardous materials
should be completed. (Policy 6-50)
2. Existing Mitigation
None.
D. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF THE MITIGATION MEASURES
General Plan Policy No. 6-35 endorses the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan
which provides for the management of all anticipated hazardous wastes that will be
generated in the County. Key concepts in the County Plan include:
1) The reduction in usage and recycling of hazardous materials to reduce demand for
treatment and disposal facilities.
2) Intercounty agreements as a means of utilizing needed and available hazardous
waste management capacity in other jurisdictions.
General Plan EIR Hazardous Materials
Section 12-8
3. Siting facilities within the County based on specific criteria oriented toward the
protection of public health and safety. Policy No. 6-36 requires the City to adopt
local siting criteria for off-site hazardous waste facilities which the City
accomplished in 1991.
In accordance with State law, the locally adopted County Plan must be approved by the
State Department of Health Services. That State Agency has not approved the plan yet
because of the Agency's resistance to the concept of intercounty agreements to share
hazardous waste treatment capacity. If the intercounty agreement concept is not
accepted by the State, then the County will have to treat all of its own hazardous
wastes—for which it lacks adequate facilities. The lack of adequate local treatment
capacity will represent a significant impact if the intercounty agreement concept is not
approved. It should be noted that other San Francisco Bay Area county hazardous
waste management plans also rely on the intercounty agreements to help address
management of hazardous wastes.
The siting of additional off-site hazardous waste treatment facilities in the County will
itself have environmental impacts. Program mitigation has been addressed in the Santa
Clara County Hazardous Waste Management Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
Separate project -related environmental review will be addressed once an application is
received for an off-site hazardous waste facility.
IV. MITIGATION MEASURES NOT A PART OF THE PROJECT
A. AVAILABILITY OF TREATMENT TRANSFER AND DISPOSAL CAPACITY
The City's off-site Hazardous Waste Facilities Ordinance establishes a permit review
process and local siting criteria in the event that an off-site hazardous waste facility is
proposed in the City.
B. SOIL AND WATER CONTAMINATION FROM SOG'S AND HOUSEHOLDS
The City's Watercourse Protection Ordinance prohibits the dumping of hazardous
materials and other substances in the City's watercourses. The Ordinance provides for
penalties for violations and fees to fund enforcement and related program activities.
C. NEW DEVELOPMENT IN EXISTING INDUSTRIAL AREAS
The City's Hazardous Materials Storage and Toxic Gas Ordinances regulate the storage
and handling of hazardous materials to protect public health and safety. These
ordinances provide for the identification of substances, standards for handling, storage
and leakage monitoring, the preparation of emergency response plans, and inspection
of facilities and records by the City. The ordinances are administered by the Central
Fire Protection District which also maintains a Hazardous Materials Incident Team
which responds to accidental spills and releases of hazardous substances.
General Plan EIR Hazardous Materials
Section 12-9
01 Sources
1 1. Association of Bay Area Governments, Staff Report to the San Francisco Bay Area
Hazardous Waste Management Capacity Allocation Committee: Final Report, August 28,
1991.
r2. Central Fire District, Area Plan for Emergency Response to Hazardous Materials Incidents,
1988.
i3. City of Cupertino, Draft Household Hazardous Waste Element, October 1, 1991.
4. City of Cupertino, General Plan, February 1990.
e5. City of Cupertino, Municipal Code Section 9.12.
6. City of Cupertino, Municipal Code Section 16.42.
7. City of San Jose, Supplement to North San Jose Housing General Plan Amendments
Environmental Impact Report: Renaissance Project. July 1990.
8. City of San Jose, Final Supplement to the North San Jose Housing General Plan
Amendments Final Environmental Impact Report for the Renaissance Project, October
1990.
9. Kobashi, Isao, Toxics/Solid Waste Management Division, Santa Clara County Department
of Planning and Development, verbal communications on 6/4/92 Re: County hazardous
waste management plan.
' 10. Santa Clara County, Hazardous Waste Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact
Report Addendum, June 1989.
11. Santa Clara Valley Water District, Fuel Leak Site Activity Report: Second Quarter 1992,
July 15, 1992.
12. Simpkinson, Gordon, Central Fire District, written and verbal communications on
11/26/91 Re: hazardous materials.
13. State of California, Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest Summary Reports. 1985, 1987,
and 1989.
14. State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region,
Water Ouality Control Plan. December 1986
15. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, Groundwater Contamination
Cleanups at South Bay Superfund Sites: Progress Report, April 1989.
SECTION 13
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Table of Contents
Page
I. Environmental Setting..........................................................13-1
A. Goals........................................................................ 13-1
B. Existing Conditions........................................................ 13-1
1.Public Costs and Revenues ............................................. 13-1
2.Economic Base........................................................... 13-2
C. Future Projections of Economic Growth................................13-5
1. Public Costs and Revenues...........................................13-5
2. Market Feasibility......................................................13-5
3. Needs of Major Companies ........................................ 13-10
4. Retail Market......................................................... 13-12
D. Consistency with Other Plans .......................................... 13-12
II. Impacts — Effects............................................................. 13-12
A. Significant Effects........................................................ 13-12
B. Cost/Revenue Analysis of Project ...................................... 13-12
C. Alternatives............................................................... 13-18
1. Results of Alternatives Analysis ................................... 13-18
2. Consequences of Alternatives ...................................... 13-18
3. Growth Inducing Effects ........................................... 13-19
III. Mitigation Measures .......................................................... 13-19
A. Proposed.................................................................. 13-19
B. Existing.................................................................... 13-20
Sources............................................................................... 13-21
Figures
Page
13-A Cupertino General Fund
—5 Year Trend Expenditures and Revenues ..........:.................... 13-1
13-B
General Fund Revenues, 1992-1993 ......................................13-2
13-11
13-C
General Fund Taxes,1992-1993...........................................
13-2
13-D
Sales Tax Composition, 1992 ..............................................
13-2
13-E
Cupertino General Fund —5 Year Forecast................................13-5
13-F
Job Growth...................................................................
13-6
13-G
Total Jobs in Santa Clara County (1980-2010) ...........................13-7
13-H
Type of Jobs in Santa Clara County (1980-2010) ........................
13-8
13-I
Total Jobs in Cupertino (1980-2010) ......................................13-9
13-16.
13-J Type of Jobs in Cupertino (1980-2010) ................................. 13-10
Tables
13-A Comparison of Cupertino and Santa Clara County,
Per Capita Sales.............................................................. 13-4
13-B
Potential New Retail Development in Cupertino ........................
13-11
13-C
Comparison of Existing General Plan Commercial
Build -out and Capture Rate ...............................................
13-12
13-D
Cost/Revenue Analysis
—Annual Costs in Current Dollars ........................................
13-13
13-E
Assumption-Costs..........................................................13-14
13-F
Annual Revenue in Current Dollars ......................................
13-15
13-G
Assumptions - Revenue ...................................................
13-16.
13-H
One Time Revenues, and Grand Totals ..................................
13-17
If
Ir
I*
II
it
I
SECTION 13
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A. GOALS
The "Vision Statement" found in the Introduction to the General Plan Amendment calls
for the City to "foster the development of new markets and a diversity of economic
growth which will provide long term economic stability for the city. The City should
allow reasonable growth and expansion within identified areas." Among the program
objectives is the "promotion of economic development."The proposed General Plan
Amendment establishes two programs for development in excess of the existing
General Plan allocations.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Although economic development analysis is not a required General Plan element, the
impact of future development on City revenues and expenditures is important to address
because choices about growth may be partially determined by this information.
Whether or not certain types of development are a fiscal cost or benefit to the
community may influence what is eventually approved for the General Plan.
1. Public Costs and Revenues
Historically, Cupertino revenues have exceeded costs, except in 1992, as shown on
Figure 13-A.
CUPERTINO GENERAL FUND
—5 YEAR TREND EXPENDITURES & REVENUES
of Cupertino Budget 1992-93
3V0nUB
Figure
13-A
The Cupertino budget for 1992-1993 indicates that General Fund revenues exceed
costs by a net amount of $312,000. The largest source of revenues is taxes (62%)
and the largest source of taxes is sales tax (60.1%). (See Figures 13-B and C.)
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-2
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
Service Charges 7.03% Fines .72% Miscellaneous 7.39%
Inter -Governmental 13.86%
Franchises 6.32% Taxes 62.72%
GENERAL FUND REVENUES,
1992-1993
Source: City of Cupertino, June, 1992
GENERAL FUND TAXES
Utility 14.06% Business License .91
Transient 5.26% Property 17.19q>
Construction .88% L
Transfer 1.55%
Sales 60.14%
GENERAL FUND TAXES,
1992-1993
Source: City of Cupertino, June, 1992
Figure
13-B
Figure
13-C
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-3
Department store sales tax is the highest generator of sales tax, as shown in Figure 13-D.
City of Cupertino
Sales Tax Composition By Business Segment (7o/$000)
ELECTRONIC ECP 17.1%
1008
FURNITURE/ADPL 2.6%
152
ALL O'rHER 12.4%
732
DRUG STORES 2.8%
167
RESTAURANTS 12.1%
710
FOOD MARKETS 3.0%
178
SALES TAX COMPOSITION,
1992
Source: Sales Tax Analysis &
2. Economic Base
BUSINESS SVCS 2.5Y.
148
DEPT STORES 20.2%
1188
SVC STATIONS 5.8 Y.
342
APPAREL STORES 7.4%
436
RECREATION PROD 4.6%
270
MISC RETAIL 9.4%
553
Figure
13-D
An economic overview of Cupertino was completed in June 1990 by Sedway and
Associates, and the remaining information found in this sub -section is from that
report. Economic conditions have changed since that report was written, so some
projections may be affected by the current down -turn in the economy.
The private sector in Cupertino is dominated by high-tech electronics/computer
corporations. The City serves as a corporate headquarters and center for research
and development. Virtually no traditional manufacturing takes place in the City,
because land and living costs are too high. The three largest employers are
Hewlett-Packard (4,900 employees), Apple Computer (4,200 employees) and
Tandem Computers (3,300 employees). Employment levels at Apple and Tandem
increased about 62% between 1986 and 1989. With the exception of the past few
years, Hewlett-Packard has also experienced growth.
Representatives of corporate companies indicate that the companies enjoy a
competitive advantage by having facilities in Cupertino. This is because highly
skilled, highly sought after employees prefer working and living in the Cupertino
area, with its moderate size and unique, balanced mix of high technology firms,
retail centers, open space, quality schools and residential areas.
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-4
Research and Development/Office
The research and development (R&D)' and office real estate markets are very strong in
Cupertino. Vacancy rates are reported to be the lowest of any city in the Silicon Valley.
The R&D and office vacancy rates are reported to be about 1.6 and 1.3 percent,
respectively, in spite of the fact that Cupertino rents are higher than for all other Silicon
Valley communities except Palo Alto. [Low vacancy rates can be partially attributed to
several large companies occupying extensive space. Since the Sedway report was written,
some of these spaces have been vacated due to relocation and consolidation. Cupertino's
office vacancy rate has increased since publication of the Sedway report to 9.1%.
(October, 1992)]
The amount of the industrial/R&D space increased about 29 percent between 1985 and
1989, while the office sector grew only two percent between 1986 and 1990. The
distinction between the office and industrial markets can be unclear, because R&D is
generally recognized as industrial use, but sometimes R&D is counted in the office
category. Overall in Cupertino, industrial/R&D and office square footage grew about 17
percent during the second half of the 1980s.
Retail
Cupertino's per capita retail sales compare very favorably with retail sales throughout Santa
Clara County, although the gap narrowed between 1985 and 1988, as shown in Table 13-
A.
Table 13-A
COMPARISON OF CUPERTINO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTY
PER CAPITA SALES
(1988 DOLLARS)
1985 1988
County $ 8,000 $ 7,700'
Cupertino 14,600 11,400
The 1988 sales figures suggest that the Cupertino retail sector is performing very well,
although City retail sales have been impacted by improvements in nearby malls, most
notably the Valley Fair Shopping Center. Reported occupancy rates for different types of
centers in Cupertino suggest that the Vallco Fashion Mall and community shopping centers
are doing particularly well. There has been a higher vacancy rate of about nine percent in
neighborhood centers, but this rate is somewhat lower than typical for centers of this type.
Hotel
A cursory survey of the hotel market in the greater Cupertino area suggests that most
existing hotels are doing very well. The average occupancy rate is about 80 percent, with
the occupancy rate Monday through Thursday being about 95 percent.
The data suggest that at least one new hotel will be viable in Cupertino. Presently, the City
has only 277 hotel rooms, although many rooms are available in nearby cities. The
Doubletree hotel planned in the Town Center area will provide 250 additional rooms.
11
II
II
11
I1
II
'M
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-5
C. FUTURE PROJECTIONS OF ECONOMIC GROWTH
1. Public Costs and Revenues
In the future, a declining general fund balance is projected, as shown in Figure
13-E. This is due primarily to declining sales tax revenues and decreasing State
subventions. Measures have been taken to mitigate the projected imbalance,
consisting of new or increased revenues, expenditure reductions, and reductions or
delays in the capital improvement program.
2. Market Feasibility
Several sources were consulted to gauge the demand for various development
' sectors: office, industrial, and commercial.
Regional trends and markets, both Bay Area and County, affect the Cupertino
market. ABAG's Projection's '90 report states that "locational advantages,
outstanding educational facilities, and a labor force skilled in the occupations of the
future all suggest that the San Francisco Bay Area has considerable competitive
advantage over other metropolitan areas in the United States." However, it cautions
that serious structural problems such as insufficient housing production,
transportation capacity, and water and sewer capacity must be addressed.
I�
11
Recent data on job growth underscores concerns raised by ABAG. The Bay Area
has started losing jobs, on a year-to-year comparison (Figure 13-F). The Bay Area
employment change from July 1990 to July 1991 was -0.31% and Santa Clara
County change was -1.92%. ABAG's Projections '92 reports that "the current
employment forecast is 40,000 jobs lower than in Projections '90."
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-6
4
3
2
3.36
1
0.31
10 16
0
AMR
-0.31
-0.67
0.99
-1.35
1
1.92
_2
vi u u
o
U
0
U
0
U
U a
8
vi a, r
0
o
Lp pq
Cd
Cn
Percent change in
m
non-agricultural
.9
employment July
7
1990 to July 1991.
K
Premliminary
figures, not
C1
1!
seasonally adjusted.
a
T
Cha
JOB GROWTH
Figure
13-F
Source: San Francisco Chronicle, September 1, 1991
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-7
Santa Clara County's Alternative Futures report states that the County's economy is
the strongest in the Bay Area and one of the strongest in the nation. This is
attributed to the presence of prestigious universities which provide highly -trained
workers, and to the existence of several research and development -oriented
industries. The report did not reflect the subsequent down -turn in the economy.
Santa Clara County and the surrounding region is described in a recent study,
"Joint Venture: Silicon Valley," as having "a number of significant warnings signs
[which] indicate a region out of balance. These include slower employment
growth, weaker enterprise formation, a decline in venture capital financing, slow
growth in pre -competitive R&D, a growing skills mismatch, rising cost of
regulations, high housing costs, transportation congestion, and a perceived decline
in quality of life." In a special report, the Association of Bay Area Governments
describes retail and wholesale trades in the 1990's as a "time of shakedown and
lean markets, partly attributable to falling disposable incomes and a weakening
California and Bay Area competitive position. These observations lead to the
conclusions that economic growth is cyclical and that past economic strengths are
not guaranteed for the future.
Job growth in Santa Clara County is projected to increase in 1990's at a slower rate
than the 1980's. Average annual employment growth is expected to be
approximately 12,200 jobs between 1990 and 2010. (Figure 13-G)
1980 1990 7095 2000 zwo zuw
TOTAL JOBS IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY
(1980-2010)
Bay Area Governments
Figure
13-G
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-8
The services sector is projected to grow faster than most other employment sectors,
but manufacturing is expected to continue to employ the greatest percentage of
workers. (Figure 13-H)
7960 1990 7885 2000 2VU0 "IV
Manufacturing
0
Retail
Service
EB
Other
TYPE OF JOBS IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY
(1980-2010)
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments Projections '92
Figure
13-H
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-9
Focusing on the Cupertino market, the Association of Bay Area Governments' data
on Cupertino jobs demonstrates that overall job growth has slightly diminished
between 1980 and 1990. Manufacturing and wholesale jobs decreased, while retail
and service jobs increased, resulting in nearly static job growth overall. Projections
indicate increases in the 90's and beyond. (Figure 13-I)
1980 1990 1995 2000 2005 Lulu
TOTAL JOBS IN CUPERTINO Figure
(1980-2010) 13-I
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments Projections '92
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-10
The Cupertino trends for types of jobs are similar to the County's; the service sector
is the fastest growing, but manufacturing is the largest sector, as shown in Figure
13-J.
Manufacturing
Retail
i \\\
R Service
Other
1980 1990 1995 2000 2W5 2010
� _ ♦n_—\ \n_—\ ♦ice--\ \n
TYPE OF JOBS'
(1980-2010)
3. Needs of Maior Companies
The major companies in Cupertino presented their long term development needs
during the General Plan Amendment discussions. These companies - - Tandem
Computer, Apple Computer, Hewlett Packard, Measurex, Symantek and Westfield
(Vallco Fashion Park) - - requested over 3 million square feet of new construction
above their existing General Plan allocations. Since these companies play a
significant role in Cupertino's economic development, their needs are relevant to the
General Plan Amendment decisions regarding allocation of additional growth
potential.
4. Retail market
Sedway and Associates prepared a retail study for Cupertino (January, 1991).
Analysis of potential for new retail indicated that approximately 900,000 to
1,300,000 square feet of new retail could be supported in Cupertino by 1995, with
the lower portion of the range being more likely (Table 13-B).
II
t
II
II
II
II
II
Ib
I1
II
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-11
Table 13-B
POTENTION NEW RETAIL DEVELOPMENT IN CUPERTINO
Merchandise Category
Convenience Goods
Potential New Square
Footage
1990-1995, Based on
50% Capture Rao
Potential New
Square Footage
1990-1995. Based on
75% Capture Rate
Drug Stores
8,000
11,000
Food Storrs
82,000
122,000
Eating and Drinking Plam
60,000
90,000
Service Stations
16,000
27,000
Other Retail Stores
57,000
86,000
General Merchandise
8,000
11,000
Servico (20% or Other Convenience Categories)
46,000
69,000
Sub(otal: Conccnlence Goods
277,000
412,000
Merchandise Category
Comparison Goods
'
Potential New Square
Footage
1990-1995, Based on
50% Capture Rate
Potential New
Square Footage
1990-1995, Based
on 75% Capture
Rale
Apparel Stores
58,000
87,000
General Merchandise
80,000
120,000
Home Furnishings & Applianm
169,000
254,000
Building and Home Materiais
60,000
89,000
Other Reail Stores
43,000
64.000
Auto Dulerships and Supplies
209,000
314,000
Subtotal: Comparison Goods
619,000
928,000
TOTAL
896,000
1,340,000
Sources: Sedway & Assocista, Urban Decision -Symms.
The categories with the most expansion potential are food stores, home furnishings
and appliances, eating and drinking places, automotive dealerships and supplies,
and other retail stores.
The report states that the lower end of the range is more likely for the comparison
goods market area. Local employment expansion is projected to play an important
role in creating consumer demand. Upgrading existing Vallco Fashion Park and
Stevens Creek Boulevard area retail is assumed. Expansion of neighboring malls
and a possible increase in market share by existing malls, such as Valley Fair, could
lower the capture rates. Therefore, these rates are considered optimistic.
The study of the retail market potential in Cupertino concluded that the Existing
General Plan allowed for more commercial expansion than the market would
support. The General Plan Amendment assumes a 10 year plan (2000), but even so
it appears there would not be much demand beyond existing General Plan
allocations. These conclusions support the need to consolidate retail growth on the
Grand Boulevard, should that concept be implemented, since there might not be
enough demand for retail growth there and elsewhere.
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-12
Table 13-C
COMPARISON OF EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
COMMERCIAL BUILD -OUT AND CAPTURE RATE
General Plan buildout: 5,261,567 sq. ft.
Existing commercial: 3,494,473 sq. ft.
Difference 1,767,094 sq. ft.
Sedway and Associates Projection:
896,000 sq. ft. additional by 1995
(50% capture rate)
1,340,000 sq. ft. additional by 1995
(75% capture rate)
It appears that the Existing General Plan allowed for enough commercial space to
accommodate double the 50% capture rate and 427,000 sq. ft. more than the 75% rate
(over a 5 year time span). Since these capture rates are optimistic, the square footage
allowed in the Existing General Plan is expected to be more than adequate for a ten year
period.
D. CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS
The fiscal policies are consistent with other policies in the proposed General Plan
Amendment and are generally consistant with those of nearby cities.
II. IMPACTS — EFFECTS
A. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
The California Environmental Quality Act states that economic effects of a project shall
not be treated as significant effects on the environment. Therefore, no economic
policies are "significant" under the requirements of CEQA. However, the proposed
General Plan Amendment does contain statements and policies which affect Cupertino's
economic health, since the economic effects of the project are of vital concern to the
community. For this reason, the cost/revenue impacts discussed below are included in
this section for information purposes only.
B. COST/REVENUE ANALYSIS OF PROJECT
A cost/revenue analysis was performed for the project analysis. As shown in Tables
13-D, E, F, G,and H, proposed development is projected to be a fiscal benefit to the
City. Annual revenues are projected to exceed costs by $1.9 million.
Non -Residential
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-13
Table 13-D
COST/REVENUE ANALYSIS
—Annual Cost in Current Dollars
DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES
COST
GP MODIFIED
PROPOSED
AMEND.
Law Enforcement
$298,583
$519,218
Public Works
$ 3,300
$ 7,752
Street Maintenance
$192,%8
$335,560
Traffic Engineering
$ 24,303
$ 42,262
Code Enforcement
$ 12,152
$ 21,131
Residential
DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES
COST
GP MODIFIED
PROPOSED
AMEND.
General Gov't
Cupertino Scene
$ 3,300
$ 7,752
Elections
$ 718
$ 1,686
Law Enforcement
$152,163
$ 357,432
Public Works
Street Maintenance
$ 79,785
$ 187,416
Street Lights Mnt.
$ 17,600
$ 41,344
Traffic Engineering
$ 10,049
$ 23,604
Grounds
$ 56,520
$ 132,765
Recreation
$ 57,075
$ 134,071
Code Enforcement
$ 5,742
$ 13,488
WOL,7
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS $910,958 $1,817,729
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-14
Table 13-E
ASSUMPTIONS—COSTS
Non -Residential
Law Enforcement
$43 per capita (1) employee population
Public Works
Street Maintenance
$27.79 per capita employee population
Traffic Engineering
$3.50 per capita employee population
Code Enforcement
$1.75 per capita employee population
General Gov't
Cupertino Scene
Elections
Law Enforcement
Public Works
Street Maintenance
Street Lights Mnt.
Traffic Engineering
Grounds
Recreation
Code Enforcement
(1) Non -Residential
Reside
$3 per housing unit
$0.5 per registration voter (registered voters
-50% of population
$53 per capita resident population
$27.79 per capita resident population
$96 per street light 0 per 6 housing units)
$3.50 per capita resident population
$6,562.14 per park acre
$19.88 per capita resident population
$2 per capita resident population
- 4 of employees X .83
Construction Tai
Commercial/ Industrial
Residential
Park Dedication Tax
Property Transfer Tax
Time Revenue Ass
$1.43 per sq. ft.
$344 per unit
$1.500.000 ' Average Acreage Requirement/DU''
Factor ' ° of residential units
$0.75 per $1000 sale price/unit
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-15
Table 13-F
ANNUAL REVENUE IN CURRENT DOLLARS
Non -Residential
DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES
REVENUE
GPMOD=
PROPOSED AMEND.
Property Tax
$
498,300
$ 819,750
Sales Tax
$
209,150
$ 363,700
Use Tax
$
664,400
$1,093,000
Franchise Fees
Residential
Non -Residential
$
222,574
$ 366,155
Residential
TOTAL $1,594,424
$2,642,605
DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES
REVENUE
GP MODIFIED
PROPOSED AMEND.
Property Tax (1)
$
123,003
$
288,945
Sales Tax (2)
$
132,066
$
310,224
Franchise Fees
Residential
$
52,800
$
124,032
Gas Tax
$
50,759
$
119,234
Motor Vehicle In-
$
108,466
$
254,788
Lieu
• ' : /*z1►I
$ 467,094 $ 1,097,223
$2,061,518 $3,739,828
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-16
Table 13-G
ASSUMPTIONS—REVENUE
Non-Resioential
Property Tax non -res. bldg. sq. ft. X $.15
Sales Tax
Retail -Non -Residential $25 per employee
Use $0.20 per bldg. sq. ft. non -res.
Franchise Tax; cable, water, solid waste, PG&E
Non -Residential $0.067 per bldg. sq. ft.
aentiai
Property Tax
Residential housing units X $372,736 X 0.00030
Sales Tax
Retail - Residential $46 per capita resident population
Franchise Tax; cable, water, solid waste, PG & E
Residential $48 per housing unit
Gas Tax $17.68 per capita resident population
Motor Vehicle In -Lieu $37.78 per capita resident population
Existing G.P. Modifed
Proposed Amend
Existing (built)
v.....:..., n..:,. Dnn..In inn Emnlovees
., v .. .. ...... .......
3.322,000
I.I00
2,871
8,366
5,465,000
2,584
6,744
14.548
11,029,440
.16,048'
40,304
36,331
'City Limits
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-17
Table 13-H
ONE TIME REVENUES,
GRAND TOTALS
r)pwi_OPMENT ALTERNATIVES
REVENUE
GP MODIFIED
PROPOSED
AMEND.
Construction Tax
$2,061518
$3,739,828
Commercial/Industrial
$ 4,750,460
$ 7,814,950
Residential
$ 378AM
$ 888,896
Park Dedication Tax
$ 12,578,850
$24,944,850
Property Transfer Tax*
$ 307,507
$ 722,362
*Includes only single family units
GRAND TOTALS
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS
DUTERENCE OF REVENUES LESS COSTS
$ 1tt,UlS,Ll"J 13413/1,Uaa
DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES
GP MODIFIED
PROPOSED
AMEND.
$2,061518
$3,739,828
$ 910,958
$1,817,729
$1,150,560 $1,922,UY9
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-18
The analysis which follows is based on the existing tax and fee structures. It should be
noted that the project includes consideration of a redevelopment district, raising of
development fees, taxes or other fees, as additional means to assure that development is
an economic benefit to the City. The cost/revenue analysis would change if any of
these programs were implemented, or if State funding allocations were changed.
C. ALTERNATIVES
1. Results of Three Alternatives Analysis
Table 13-D projects the costs and revenues of the two Aternatives; the Existing
General Plan (Modified), and the proposed General Plan Amendment. One time
revenues and the relationship between costs and revenues for each alternative are
shown.
In summary, the additional annual costs or benefits for each Alternative are:
No Proiect
A cost/benefit analysis is not performed for the "No Project" Alternative. This
Alternative assumes no additional development and therefore the costs and revenues
attributed to new development would be negligible.
Existine General Plan (Modified)
Revenues $2.1 million
Costs $ .9 million
Difference $1.2 million
Proposed General Plan Amendment
Revenues $3.7 million
Costs $1.8 million
Difference $1.9 million
The analysis also indicated that both separately and together, non-residential and
residential development provide fiscal benefits to the City. These conclusions were
expected, even though some other cost/benefit studies indicate that residential
development is not a fiscal benefit. In Cupertino's case, the additional units and
population are not significant enough to require significant changes in city services.
2. Consequences of Alternatives
a. Impacts on physical development.
The impacts on physical development are described in the Land Use Compatibility
and Visual Character, Housing, Transportation and Circulation, and Vegetation
and Wildlife Sections.
b. Impacts on economic and social objectives.
No Proiect: There would be no new development. The economic effects would
be loss of additional retail sales tax, office users tax, possible loss of local
companies who need to grow in Cupertino, and lack of affordable housing.
The social effects would be the loss of new jobs and additional housing units.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i�
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-19
Existinr_ General Plan (Modified): There would not be significant new
office/industrial and housing development. The economic effects would be
possible loss of local companies who need to grow in Cupertino and lack of
affordable housing. The social effects would be the loss of new jobs for
people seeking employment and additional housing units to help meet
demand.
Proposed General Plan Amendment: There would be significant
office/industrial and housing development. The economic effects would
be increased sales and user taxes, retention of local companies who need to
grow in Cupertino, and provision of affordable housing. The social effects
would be new jobs for people seeking employment and additional housing
units to help meet demand.
c. Impacts on Costs/Revenues
No Project: The impacts are that City expenditures may exceed revenues if
additional sales and user taxes are not generated.
Existine General Plan (Modified): Revenues exceed expenditures by $1.2
million.
Proposed General Plan Amendment: Revenues exceed expenditures by
$1.9 million.
3. Growth Inducing Effects
See Chapter III, EIR Summary—Project, Impacts and Mitigation Measures.
III. MITIGATION MEASURES
Since economic effects are not considered significant environmental effects, no mitigation
measures are proposed. However, other Sections of the EIR, such as Land Use
Compatibility and Visual Character, and Public Utilities/Services, propose mitigation for
the economic effects of development. In addition, the following policies help assure that
new development will be a fiscal benefit to the City.
A. PROPOSED:
Development activity should be controlled so that the City street system is not
overwhelmed with traffic and the desired transportation level of service 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 in the Transportation and Circulation Section. Socially
beneficial development may be considered in addition to these allocations,
providing that traffic, housing and other impacts are evaluated and mitigated if
necessary. (Policy 2-3)
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-20
(While this policy refers mostly to transportation, the reallocation relates to
economic conditions as well, since the development caps are based on market
feasibility of new office/industrial and commercial growth. This policy also
allows for hotel and "power retailer" square footage in recognition of their
contributions to sales tax revenues.)
2. Such excess development is capped at a maximum of 2,000,000 square feet
above the General Plan level. The overall objectives of this policy are the
protection of the community from excessive automotive traffic and the noise and
air pollution that traffic generates; the creation of additional housing to alleviate
housing demand; as well as promotion of economic development. The policy
states that development which exceeds the stated development allocations may
be permitted if the development: 1) conforms to the transportation and housing
goals; 2) promotes a positive civic image and 3) provides sufficient economic
benefits to the City. Such excess development should provide a land use mix
which results in sufficient financial return to the City so that the amenities offset
the negative aspects of increased growth. The economic benefits would be
expected to come from increased retail sales taxes, development fees, new taxes
and fees, and possible redevelopment activites.
B. EXISTING:
1. Continue to monitor development activity, fiscal effects, and development rates
to avoid short-term over -saturation of the market. (Policy 2-23)
General Plan EIR Economic Development
Section 13-21
Sources
1. Alternative Futures Santa Clara County, October 1990
2. City of Cupertino
3. City of Cupertino Budget 1991-92
4. Sedway & Associates, June 1990, January 1991.
5. Joint Venture: Silicon Valley. Center for Economic Competitiveness, SRI International,
August, 1992.
6. Projections '90, Association of Bay Area Governments
7. Projections '92, Association of Bay Area Governments
8. Sales Tax Analysis and Reporting System, Quarter 4, 1990
9. "Understanding the Dynamics: Retail Trade, Wholesale Trade and Services in the San
Francisco Bay Region," Association of Bay Area Governments, September 26, 1991
CHAPTER VI
IMPACT SUMMARY
AND
OTHER CEQA ISSUES
11
A
Chapter VI
IMPACT SUMMARY AND OTHER CEQA ISSUES
UNAVOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The proposed General Plan Amendment, if approved, would result in significant adverse
and unavoidable impacts. Although mitigation techniques are, in general, included in the
Amendment and in this report, the following impacts would remain significant:
1. The visual character of the City will change from lower profile, suburban to a more
intense and dense urban setting.
2. One arterial street intersection (De Anza Blvd. and Bollinger Road) is reduced from
- Level of Service (IAS) "D" to "E+".
3. There will be loss of some natural areas and habitat due to the construction of needed
housing.
4. Air Quality impacts from solid waste disposal activities will be greater.
5. There will be requirements for additional domestic and non domestic water supply.
6. While the adoption of the proposed Amendment would ultimately reduce air quality
contaminants, this reduction remains insufficient to benefit persons with sensitive and
related medical problems.
7. Truck noise from on-going sand and gravel extraction activities will increase.
8. There are impacts due to flooding within the 100 -year flood plain zone.
9. There will be a loss of potential park and open space resources in the western hillside
areas and other neighborhoods due to new residential development.
See individual sections of this report for additional analysis of significant unavoidable
impacts.
B . SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE CHANGES
The implementation of the Proposed General Plan Amendment would require an
irreversible loss of non renewable natural resources as follows:
1. Commitment of energy and water supply to support increased development
2. Loss of natural resources such as wood, metals, sand and gravel, petroleum, etc. for
the construction of new buildings and related improvements.
3. Loss of approximately 500 acres of open space resources, particularly in the hillside
areas.
4. Permanent alteration of natural topography typically associated with building
development
General Plan EIR Impact Summary and Other CEQA Issues
Page 2
5. Loss or displacement of natural habitat (see A3 above).
6. Waterways may be re-routed or realigned due to the need for flood control mitigation
for new development.
7. Soil resources necessary for replenishment of ground water will be lost
See individual sections for additional analysis of significant irreversible changes.
C. GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS
The implementation of the Plan Amendment would foster the construction of additional
housing and commercial office and retail space due to the creation of the additional
employment base promulgated within the Plan Amendment. This would result in both
primary population and economic growth within the City.,
The growth in employment would not always necessitate the construction of new housing
or related commercial facilities, as some of the newly created jobs will be filled by existing
City residents.
Secondary growth inducing impacts will occur as a result of the construction of ancillary
retail and commercial service activities since these will also serve to attract some new
residents to the City and surrounding areas.
As of 1990 there were approximately 17,400 dwelling units in the City. The Proposed
Plan Amendment would permit the construction of 2,584 additional units. This would
result in a theoretical ultimate increasing City population of approximately 6,300 persons;
an increase of approximately 15%. In addition to increased housing demand, the Plan
Amendment allows 1,072,000 sq. ft. of additional retail services (This represents a
reduction of 290,000 sq. ft. from the existing General Plan policies) and 3,835,000 sq. ft.
of office/industrial uses (an increase of 2,261,000 sq. ft. over the existing Plan). These
policies may result in pressures to expand the boundaries of the City. However, much of
the increased housing and support facilities demand associated with the proposed
expansion will most likely occur outside of the City.
This projected growth will also result in increased demand for the extension of utilities and
public services into previously unserved hillside areas. Police, fire, schools and library
services as well as a full range of public utilities, would be increased and extended to the
western hills.
See individual sections of this report for additional analysis.
General Plan EIR Impact Summary and Other CEQA Issues
Page 3
D. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
This Section of the EIR discusses the significant cumulative impacts as required by Section
15130 of the CEQA Guidelines. CEQA defines cumulative impacts as two or more
individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound
or increase other environmental impacts. In the context of the General Plan time frame,
cumulative impacts should take into account not only the incremental effects of past and
present projects, but also the effects of reasonably foreseeable future projects and projects
outside of the control of the City. All of the proposed General Plan Amendments are
addressed in this EIR in terms of: 1) the incremental impacts related to the amendments,
and 2) the cumulative impacts associated with the buildout of development consistent with
the Proposed Plan Amendments. The significant, cumulative impacts are summarized
below.
In accordance with the Proposed General Plan Amendments, Cupertino, at buildout,
will add the following numbers of households, population and jobs.
Table VI - A
CUPERTINO BUILDOUT SCENARIO
Year 1990 BuildoutChange
Households 17,460 20.044 +14.8
Population* 45,396 52,114 +14.8
Jobs 35,647** 51,799 +45.3
*Projection assumes a constant average household size of 2.6 at buildout.
** Revised ABAG jobs estimate
Source: Cupertino Community Development Department
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
Not all of the planned growth will be realized during the 10 -year time frame of the
General Plan. Actual growth will be dictated by the national, state and regional
economic environments, local market conditions, as well as City land use and
development policies. Average housing production is expected to be around 140 units
per year and the major companies in the City have stated their intentions to expand over
a longer time frame - 15 to 20 years.
Economic development in Cupertino is expected to induce housing demand outside of
the City. This housing growth inducement is part of a larger cumulative impact
contributed by other nearby cities where overall job growth outpaces housing growth.
A portion of the residential growth will occur in the hillsides, where the introduction of
numerous structures, grading and vegetation removal associated with residential
development may have a significant, cumulative aesthetic impact on the hillside
environment. New policies are proposed to mitigate this impact.
General Plan EIR Impact Summary and Other CEQA Issues
Page 4
Future cumulative traffic impacts are discussed in the Transportation and Circulation
Section of this EIR. Projected local and regional traffic growth are expected to cause
significant peak hour traffic congestion at certain intersections and facilities which
include:
• De Anza Boulevard and Bollinger Road
• U.S. 280
• Future S. R. 85
U.S. 280 is already experiencing significant peak hour congestion. Proposed General
Plan policies rely on TDM measures, development of nearby housing and the
preparation of a Deficiency Plan to partially mitigate traffic.
3. Public Services and Utilities
Future development consistent with the Proposed Plan Amendments will result in
cumulative increases in the demand for public services and utilities provided by
Cupertino, Santa Clara County, school districts and special districts. Services and
utilities that may be significantly affected include: police protection, fire suppression,
schools, parks, library services, wastewater treatment and solid waste disposal.
Mitigation measures are discussed under the Public Services and Utilities, and Open
Space and Parks sections of this EIR.
Future development contemplated under the Proposed Plan Amendments would add to
the cumulative impact on air quality in the San Francisco Bay Area Basin which is
already in violation of State ozone and carbon monoxide standards. The mitigation
measures of developing housing close by jobs and reducing peak hour trips through
TDM treasures will help offset the impacts.
Development consistent with the Proposed Plan Amendments will add incrementally to
the area covered by impervious surfaces and have a cumulative effect on drainage and
flooding. Vacant land planned for more urban uses (residential, commercial and
office/indusaial) constitute only 1.7% of the City's total acreage. The remaining vacant
land, comprising 6% of the City's acreage, is planned for hillside residential
development. Proposed policies will reduce overall residential densities and preserve
areas in open space which will mitigate drainage and flooding impacts.
6. Veeetation and Wildlife
Hillside residential development will incrementally contribute to the cumulative loss of
habitat in the hillsides. Proposed policies for hillside development are designed to
mitigate habitat loss by reducing overall densities, not expanding the urban service area
boundary, clustering development, as well as other measures.
r
r
II
II
FJ
M
to
11
1e
Ul
General Plan EIR Impact Summary and Other CEQA Issues .
Page 5.
E. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-
TERM PRODUCTIVITY
Since it is possible that relatively short-term uses or benefits may eventually result in
negative, long-term effects and, correspondingly, long-term benefits may occur at the
expense of short-term effects, it is necessary to view these two phenomenon in a
perspective of balance. As an example, in comparing short and long-term impacts we
sometimes balance the contemporary social and economic issues against environmental
impacts.
The long-term implications of the Proposed General Plan Amendment are that the proposed
increase in urbanization of the City would result in an increase in urban pollutants,
additional storm water runoff, modifications to traffic patterns, land use compatibility
issues (evolving from mixed land use and employee housing proposals) and irreversible
changes to the visual character of the community.
The significant short-term uses may be considered to be the development of vacant parcels
or changes of use on existing developed properties. These are considered short-term
effects since the useful life of the imposed structures is historically insignificant (40-60
years).
The City of Cupertino wishes to proceed with the Proposed General Plan Amendment in
the present for the following reasons:
1. To provide for the continuing fiscal health of the City by permitting mitigated
expansion of the major companies headquartered here.
2. To provide expanded housing opportunities with the emphasis on affordable
housing for those both living and working in the City.
3. To provide a "Heart of the City" in order to foster a community identity.
4. To preserve hillside resources through the reduction of densities and building
intensity.
5. To provide additional measures to protect existing neighborhoods from
development incompatibilities. . L.. _
F. EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT
Each section of this report contains an identification of potential environmental effects
which are considered not to be significant. In summary these are:, ;
1. Development in accordance with the proposed General Plan Policies"willcontribute a
slight increase to local and subregional air contaminants.
2. Slight increase in traffic noise
' 3. Marginal increases in energy demand and consumption. r
See each Section for additional discussion of Effects Found Not to Be Srgnificant.
I
1
1 CHAPTER VII
1
I
1 LIST OF PREPARERS
l
1
1
Q
Chapter VII
LIST OF PREPARERS
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
Lead agency responsible for this EIR
Key personnel include:
Robert S. Cowan, AICP
Ciddy Wordell
Colin Jung
Michele Bjurman
Thomas Robillard
Vera Gil
Bert Viskovich, P.E.
Glenn Grigg, P. E.
Steve Dowling
Blaine Snyder
Donald Brown
Barbara K. Brown
Charles Kilian
Director of Community Development
City Planner
Associate Planner
Planner II
Planner Il
Planner II
Public Works Department
Public Works Department, Traffic Engineer
Parks and Recreation Department
Finance Department
City Manager
Assistant to the City Manager
City Attorney
Consultants to the City of Cupertino on specific aspects of the EIR include:
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. Traffic Consultants
H. Stanton Shelly Air Quality and Noise Impacts Consultant
CONSULTANTS
Responsible for overall EIR preparation, CEQA technical format, management coordination,
editing and consulting.
PLANNING RESOURCE ASSOCIATES, Los Altos and Redwood City, California
Key personnel include:
Donald A. Woolfe, AICP, AIA Principal and Project Manager
Leon C. Pirofalo, AICP Principal and Assistant Project Manager
Donald J. Skinner, AICP Principal
Robert L. Harrison Principal
Charmion Woolfe Word Processing
Marilyn Pirofalo Word Processing
CHAPTER VIII
SOURCES
AND
REFERENCES
CHAPTER VIII
SOURCES, REFERENCES, AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS
AND INDIVIDUALS CONTACTED
A Guide to Air Ouality Elements for Local General Plans prepared by Henry Hilken, May, 1988.
A (;nine to Airhnme Tmnnrt and Stntrture-home Noise Control in Multi -Family Dwellings, U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D.C., September 1967.
Affordable Housing Policies, Affordable Housing Committee, City of Cupertino, June 14, .1991.
1992.
Air Ouality Impact and Mitigation Study, General Plan Update, City of Cupertino, July, 1991, H.
Stanton Shelly.
"Alternative Futures: Trends and Choices," Santa Clara County Department of Planning and
Development, October 1990.
Antonucci, Joe, City of Cupertino
Association of Bay Area Governments, "Projections '90," December, 1989.
Association of Bay Area Governments, "Projections '92," July 1992.
Association of Bay Area Governments, Staff Report to the San Francisco Bay Area Hazardous
Waste Management CapacityAllocation Committee: Final Report, August 28, 1991.
Association of Bay Area Governments, "Understanding the Dynamics: Retail Trade, Wholesale
Trade and Services in the San Francisco Bay Region," September 26, 1991.
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. and City of Cupertino, Input and Output Data for Traffic Model
Runs.
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc., Traffic Model Documentation, December 1991.
"Bay Area'91 Clean Air Plan," Bay Area Air Quality Management District, October, 1991.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Bay Area
1991. Clean Air Plan, July 1991.
California Cities, Towns and Counties, 1990.
California History Center De Anza College, Cupertino Chronicle: Local History Studies -Volume
19, 1975.
California Water Service Company, Letters of July 20, July 21, May 22, April 29, 1992.
Central Fire Protection District Letters of December 21, March 27, 1992.
General Plan EIR Sources and References
Page 2
Central Fire Protection District, Area Plan:for(Emergency Response to Hazardous.M_aterials
Incidents, 1988. r : `
December
16, 1992.
City of Cupertino Budget, 1990-1993. Adopted July 2,1990 and July 1992 respectively.
City of Cupertino Budget, 1991-92.
City of Cupertino, Draft Household Hazardous Waste Element, October 1, 19.9 1.1 „-
City of Cupertino, General Plan Amendment Background Report 3 -GPA -90: Transportation,
November 1991.
City of Cupertino, General Plan Amendment, Technical Appendix - D. Air Quality Impact and
Mitigation Measures, May 23, 1983, H. Stanton Shelly. _
City of Cupertino, General' Plan Environmental Impact Room 1990., ..:.
City of Cupertino, General Plan, February 1990.
City of Cupertino, General Plan, July 1979.
City of Cupertino, Municipal Code, Sections 9.1.2, 16.04,.16.08-,,- 16:12,-15':42;_ 16.5.2., ;16.44,
:16.60.
Jose,
October •l
City of San,Jose, Horizon 2000 General Plan , revised December 1, 1987
City of Santa Clara, General Plan Update• Program Environmental ImpactR'eport,•May, ],,:1992.
City of Santa Clara, General Plan,',March:15;.1991';.:
City, of Saratoga, General PlanAir Quality Section, June 1987.
City of Sunnyvale Sanitary District, Public Works letter of May 22, and June 19, 1992.
City of Sunnyvale, Transportation Element of iliaGeneral Plan, 1981.
Coninufiitd. Noise; U.S.' Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Noise Abatement and
Control, Washington, D.C., December 1971.
"C6 hgestidd'Management Program foFSantd Clara County,." Santa Clara County Congestion
Management Agency, October 30; 1991.D7 _.
Cotton, William, Geotet:hnical BacKg'rou6-d Report for the Seismic Safety.Element of the City of
c�`
General Plan EIR Sources and References.
Page 3,
County oftatafa`.Clara Library Departmentletter;nf April 12, 1990, April 26 and October 21, 1991
and June 24, December 22, and March 25, 1992.
County of Sarita Cl&a.SfiedfEsDepartment°letter of'December 23, 1992, October 24, 1991.;
Cupertino Library Commission Annual Report 1991.
Cupertino Sanitary` District letters of June 11, November 4, and February 18, 1992.
Cupertino Union School District letters of October 23, 1991, December 18, November 11, August
31, March 3, 1992'
Davis, Jim, City of Cupertino.
Dillingham and Associates, Stevens Creek County Park Master Plan (Draft), June 9, 1992.
Disposed Waste Characterization Study forthe City of Cupertino. CalRecovery, September 1991.
Documentation of the Need for Development Impact; Fees,- Cupertino Union School District, Recht
Hausrath & Associates, September 12, 1991. °
Dreste, Dennis, Santa Clara Valley Water District.
Earth Metrics, Analysis of Regulatory Requirements and Preliminary Initial Ntuov - bcenano ti
Brvari:Cahvon Refuse.- Derived Fuel Waste tor Energy Project: June 1982.. . 1.1. .F.
Earth Metrics, Biological Survey for the El Camino Hospital Continuing Care Project, July 1985.
Effects of Noise Barriers on- istant'Beeeptors, California Department of Fransportation;
Sacramento, CA, Revised, March 2, 1992.
Enrollment Projections 1991-2001 Cupertino Union School District, Moigan Woollett &
Associates; 'April'1'992.
Environmental Science Associates, City of SantalClara;General Plan Update: Proeram
Environmental Impact Report (Draft), May 1, 1992.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Nafional Floodlnrisuraace' Program; FPood'Insurance
Rate Maps, various dates. �; ' z::m'•f . j!^.,u' J :;rj .I i:.. .1
Final EIR - Route 85, Volume 1, Caltrans Jul 1987 !,I,:; - - , I ; , , I_—
Fremont Union High School District letters of Oetober,,25;an¢ May-a1Q;1991,an¢,December,.l.b,
May 19, April 29, and April 24, 1992.
Grigg, Glenn, City of Cupertino PubliciWorks Depzrtment, Verbal CornTnicattions,January
1993, and Written Communications, February 3 and+4,.1993.
�raaration and Content of Noise Elements of the General Plan. Galiforxia
Control, Berkeley, Feb. 1976.
Harvey and Stanley Associates, Natural Resource Sensitivity Areas Base Maps of Santa Clara
County, 1979.
General P1anrEIR Sources and References
Page'4
Research Program Report
se —A rU
Research
"Housing Needs Determination," Association of Bay_ Area Governments, January j989;,i;.
way
1973
an Adequate Margin of Safety, U.S. Environmental Prptection -Agency, Office,of Noise
Abatement and Control, Washington, D.C., March 1974.
Institute of Transportation Engineers; aTransoortation and Traffic Engireering_Handbook 4th
Edition, 1991.
Jamison, Deborah, Species in Danger in our Own Backyard. Vol. 1. 1992.
Joint Venture: Silicon Valley. Center for Economic Competitiveness, SRI International, August,
1992.
Kelley, Fred, Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc., Verbal Communications, February 22, 1993.
KF Inc. (Impell Corp.), Fatal Flaw Analysis for Bryan Canyon/Kaiser Permanenie Site,
Kobashi, Isao, Toxics/Solid Waste, Management Division,.Santa Clara,C.oun¢,y>Department of
Planning and Development, verbal communications on June 4, 1992, Re: County Hazardous
Waste Mariagement:Plan. k:
Long Range Facility Master Plan, Cupertino Union School District, Apri1.,198q;,;March,1983 .
Metropolitan Transportation Commission';. Draft Regional Transportationdilan,,fomhe San
Francisco Bay Area, April 1991.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Master Plan, April 1978.
Molseed, Roy, Santa Clara County Transportation Agency. Facsimile Communications; -February
18, 1993.
_!U.S. Environment
D.C., December 1
ice of Noise
Control,
Noise Impact and Mitigation Study, H. Stantob:Shelley,-Cupertino, CA, July 1991.
Noise_ Insulation Problems in Buildings. Report_mSanta Clara County Airport Land Use
Commission, Paul Veneklasen and Assoc., Santa Monica, CA, January; 1973.
Noise•Pollutioa P.-ublicrHealth. and..Safety Section of General.Plan,'Planning Department, City of
Cupertino, 1983.
Ornduff, Robert, Introduction to California Plant Life; -1974;,;1: ;,
General Plan EIR Sources and:References
Page 5
Pacific Qas''&,Eleefiic letters of Debember-21,_affdjune 1,`i992,,May 13; Qctober.23, and May
14, 199f.".:, r
Plannmg Reso5 rb Associates, A Studv'to_Examtneahf' Relationship of Land Use -and the Creation
of Additidnallff6sirig Need§, January -1992
Preservatioii�2020�a§k Force; Open Space Preservation A,Program for Santa Clara. rr
Proceed in Conference on Noise -as a Ptt6lic,Health Hazard American Sppech-and Hearing
Assoc?,'Washington;,D:CS;7iine`1958i
ry r
• xt�'. ,. ..: �. 7.71 i, ,r 1'C'; "
' Rancho San Antonio Master Plan Initial Study; and Rancho San Antonio Master Plan, Santa Clara
County -.Parks -and Recreation Department; ProgFarri Phase; April "1990: : s
Reglin Mutual Water Company letter of May 14, 1991_ and• May 20, 1992.
Roess, Roger and McShane, William, The 1985 Highway Capacity Manual: An Executive
Overview!'1986.; )-- )n
Sales Tax Analysis and Reporting System, Quarter 4, 1990.
7 el
San Francescoronicle `Bay Area Air Board Declares Way on Autos" by Dan Levy October 31,
1992. g:cCh
_
San FrahcisbbZClironiole aiticte oiiJob Growth, Septembev 1, 1991..
San Jose Business Journal, "Hot Spots Extend Into Homes Areas" September 9, 1991 i- ,''
!".'
San Jo 44 e�t'E�iater$oard.
San Jo9e9lafer_C!dtnpMy�letter of December 11, 1992, January 27;1992 and.May 8",,-1991,.:;
1• _ r .fir y,
Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency, 1991 Congestion Management Proeram for
Santa Clara County adopted 10/30/91.r. srd ." _ - (.•(:;1.;
Santa C1ata(CbunYy General Plan," 1981; Reprinted 1990...
Santa Clara County Trails and Pathways Master Plan, May 1978.
.•.e.. ::'. ,.. :':_! 2'_ rr ^J?fir 9Q( 4t'{� ' � 1C:_ '3 3_ ' .. RQ; - `
Santa Clara County Transportation Ageficy Santa Clara Countv"Transportateon.Plan T2010:
Summary of Final Plan, March 1992. ^. l
Santa Clara County Transportation Plan,>Qct`obd ,29;.e1991.' 1, _..:_''_'._ . "_< al r.:.'_•
' Santa Clara County, Hazardous Waste' Managetnenr_Plan/Final, Env iron mental Impact Report
Addendum. June, T9-89'- 7' i a, 1 :,,n r?: ,. ig2r ` r
Santa Clara ValleyNonpoint'Sbbice-Couti,,oLProgfam Loads Assessment'ReP,ort::Volume I,
February 1991. '= .•sri L'..
Santa Clara Valley Water District letter'of Mliy, 23,E-] 991t, , -- : :, . i
General PlanEIR Sources and References `
Page 6
Santa ClaraValleyWiter'District"-Cafabazas Creek Pldrmine Study,' Guadalu
Santa Clara Valley Water District, Flood Cori'lfol Haridtiook'for the'Flood'Coriiibl'-ones Advisory
Committees, y,eptember 1991.
Santa Clara Valley Water District, Fuel Leak Site Activity Report: Second Quarter 1992, July 15,
1992.
. .. _. _... ...C3c. •. ='. h''':'8'., _-'. -_ '��.. ;r::. .. ,.-.6f: .'.Alii
Santa Clara Valley Water District, Planning Study consisting of the Engineer's R ort and Draft
Negative Declaration for the-Stevens=Creek-DariulC 68ificatioas`;Aarcii 1985': ti6
Santa Clara Valley Water District,
View to Stevens Creek Dam), Northwest Zone Project No. 1029, August 1974.
]r.; 7, .. !LVIi.::
Santa Clara Valley Water District,'Repoi- `ori'-F16Fdiiigarid Flood' Relate&-&ama e's Saida
County, January 1 to April 30, 1983, Oct. 11, 1983.
Santa Clara Valley Water DistrictStevens Creek: A Plan for Flood Warning�d Pre tiredness
Vol. 1 Sept. 1978. r s _, <<y
Santa Clara Valley Water District, Summary of District Activities. February 1992.
Sedway & Associates, Retail Study for Cupertino, January 1991.
Simpkinson, Gordon, Central Fire Protection District, written and verbal communications on
November 26, 1991, Re: hazardous materials.
Soil Foundation Systems, Inc., Stability Study Report for Existing Dam Alcalde Knolls
Cupertino, California. March 1976.
Source Reduction and Recycling Element, City of Cupertino, April 1992.
State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region, Water
Quality Control Plan, December 1986
State of California, Department of Conservation, Farmland Manning Program Maps, 1991.
State of California, Department of Finance.
State of California, Dept. of Fish and Game (by Robert F. Holland), Preliminary Descriptions of
the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California,October 1986.
State of California, Dept. of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base: Special Plants August
1991.
State of California, Dept. of Fish and Game, Natural Diversity Data Base: Special Animals, August
1991.
State of California, Dept. of Fish and Game, Natural Heritage Division, Designated Endangered,
Threatened or Rare Plants and Candidates with Official Listing Dates, January 1992.
General Plan EIR Sources and, References, i)
Page 7,,-.
State of (;a*fiqrOa,6cPep.tt, of Fis4:,and Game; State and. Federal, Endangered and.ThreateneQ,,�
Aniffiffi=66i�ti�i-e �50=15er 1,99Z,-
State of Califopm u c;R
esour5qs qgde,.T14 14;Aft
iclefi.
- ---------
State of California, Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest Summary Reports, 1185, 1987, and
1989..t ru,!,;
Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual Special Report (2091, 1985.
U.S. Geolol-gh-c--WR rveyyire Lomg,PQUA4quake of 66 198?.
U.S. Soil,�ppqseyyat gq,§ervice,,Soils-of 5pta Clara County, June 1968 1
United States Environmental Protection Ageiic"y-,-RdRi(-�-n--IX,-Grd-utidWAt6"C6ntaihinatibn
Cleanups at South Bay Superfund Sites: 4ggres q.gport,,,April,l989.
Verbal Communications, May 1992 and October 1992. - ------
A
Water S14;pWMA9,ier Plan Overview; Santa Clan Valley Wker District, 19§1.
V
3 TI 3
11L K
n, � -�f. , '-1
The City of Cupertino
APPENDIX
Housing..Mitigati, -'-Flan.
.
City Council lkesblul
City of Cupertino
Procedural Manual for Housing Mitigation Programs'
iIntroduction:
The City of Cupertino commissioned a study ("A Study to Examine the Relationship of Land Use and the Creation
of Additional Housing Needs", Planning Resource and Associates, January 1992) to evaluate the relationship
between land use and affordable housing. The "nexus" study showed that new developments did create additional
housing needs and placed additional strain on the City's Affordable Housing programs. Although all developments
create housing needs, the City of Cupertino has chosen to have market rate housing and office & industrial
developers mitigate the need for additional housing units.
This document establishes the procedures to implement housing mitigation as required by the General Plan
Housing Element.
This procedural manual consists of two major components, Section' One addressing the office and industrial
mitigation and Section Two addressing residential housing mitigation.
SECTION I:
Office and Industrial Mitigation
1.1: Objective:
The purpose of Cupertino's Office and Industrial Housing Mitigation Program is to provide the Ciy with a supply
of affordable housing for families and individuals who work in Cupertino but live elsewhere. This policy will help
alleviate regional traffic congestion by reducing distances between residence and workplace. As such, the order of
priority for selection of buyers and renters will be employees of the sponsoring company, Cupertino employee who
• live elsewhere, and Cupertino residents.
For the purposes of this manual, the terms "developer", "company", and "owner" are synonymous.
1.2: Program Requirements:
1.1.1: Application of Program:
Housing mitigation shall apply to new development, of office and industrial space. Office and industrial
development, which has a valid use permit at the adoption of this procedural manual, shall be exempt.
1.2.1: Mitigation Requirement:
Developers of new officelindustrial development shall cause to be built 28 housing units per 100,000 square
feet of development. Twelve of the 28 units shall be deemed affordable, through the application of price caps.
with the remaining being market rate or affordable at the developers option. Of the twelve or more affordable
units, at least two shall be reserved specifically for low or very low income families. It is the developers option
to choose low or very low units to fulfill that requirement. Refer to Section 1.2.6 for a definition of
affordability
The square footage of building area is the total building floor space allowed by the Generat Plan. As provided
by the City of Cupertino's Development Intensity Manual (General Plan Appendix) "Amenity " space is
subtracted from the building space calculations.
When the computed housing mitigation requirement results in a fraction of a unit, the developer's obligation
shall be as follows:
• .1 -.49 of a unit: Round down.
.5 - .99 of a unit: Round up.
•
•
Procedural Manual for Housing Mitigation Programs: Page: 2
Example 1
Canpanv A wants to expand their facility by 875.500 sq. Jt. Since their housing obligation is 28 units per
100, 000 square feet, Company A would be responsible fora total of 245.14 housing units. Using the above table
far fractional units, the distribution of the units could be asfollows:
Market Rate Units 140
Price Capped Units 88
Low Income Units 17 (Or more)
Total. _ 245.
1.
or ...
the developer could opt to pay an in-lieufee in the amount of 8 4,377,500.00.
1.2.3: In -Lieu Fee Option:
Developers shall have the option of paying a fee in -lieu of the creation of the housing units. The in -lieu fee
shall be set at 55.00/sq. ft. office/industrial space and should be adjusted annually using the same housing -cost
index selected to adjust the price of affordable units and incomes.
1.2.4: Conversion of Market Rate Units:
Companies may meet all or a portion of their affordable housing mitigation requirement by buying and
converting existing market rate units within the City or within a two-mile radius of their projects. These units,
which would leave the market -rate arena, would be "replaced" with new market rate units, satisfying overall
mitigation requirements. If these conversion units are proposed to be located outside Cupertino, the
companies, along with the City, shall approach ABAG and or the State of California Office of Housing and
Community Development to propose that the City receive a transfer credit so that such units count towards
meeting the City's fair share housing goals. If granted, Cupertino shall extend the same consideration to
companies developing in adjacent cities. If unable to obtain concurrence from ABAG and/or HCD, such
conversions outside the City would not be credited toward satisfying the mitigation requirement.
1.2.5: Housing Development Bank:
A. Office and industrial developers shall be allowed to "bank" either housing development credit or office
industrial development credit. This bank would allow office and industrial development without
concurrent housing development.
B. The development of the required housing units shall be completed within one year from the issuance of
final occupancy for the office or industrial development.
C. Prior to final occupancy of the ofcelindustrial development the developer will be required to pay the
designated in -lieu fee or a refundable deposit of an equal amount. The refundable deposit may be in the
form of a cash deposit, bond, letter of credit, certificate of deposit or other form of security approved by the
Director of Community Development. The deposit will be released with the development of housing units.
Should the units not be built within one year the deposit will convert to an in -lieu fee.
Appendix "A" discusses how the "bank" works.
•
•
0
Procedural Manual for Rousing Mitigation Programs: Page: 3
Example 3
Company A wants to expand its facility by 875,500 sq. fl. The total housing obligation for this development is 245
housing units. In the (lousing Development Rank, 164 units are available for use by virtue of an agreement with a
local housing developer. Rather than construct the housing units themselves; Company A has opted to utilize 145
of the units in the Mousing Development Rank These units are distributed in the some manner as ordinary
mitigation units and have the same restrictions..
1.1.6: Definition of Affordability:
An affordable unit is one which is affordable to families or individuals earning between 50% and 120% of the
medi,:•i income for the County of Santa Clara as defined by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD). The State of California and HUD definition of "affordability" shall be used to generally
define the parameters for the purposes of this program. Currently, both government entities define
affordability as monthly housing costs which do not exceed 30% of a family or individual's gross monthly
income. To simplify the administration of this program, a priced capped unit will also be considered
affordable. Units that target smaller household size are expected to be priced less than the respective cap.
Price capped units selling at the upper end of the range will be two bedrooms or larger.
1.2.7: Pre -Qualification jor Price Capped Units:
The office/industrial developer shall notify the City three months prior to the sale of the units to the general
public. Within this time frame the City or its agent shall have first right to qualify potential buyers or renters
of the priced capped units using the income and family size guidelines indicated on Table 1. Applications for
buyer's interested in low income housing shall be solicited in accordance with HUD established guidelines for
Section 8 Existing Housing as necessary to maintain an adequate application pool. The order of preference
will be given to qualifying employees of the sponsoring company, qualifying Cupertino employees living
elsewhere and working closest to the housing project, and qualifying Cupertino residents.
U the City or its agent is unable to qualify buyers or renters within the three month time frame the units shall
be made available to any buyer selected by the developer based on the sale prices and rental rates as detailed in
Sections 1.2.9 and 1.2.10.
Table 1
HUD income category limits based on household size.
Number of Persons in Family
Income Category
and Ranee 3 4 8
Very Low:,
0%- 50% .
520,850
$23,800
526,750
S29,750
$32,150
534,500
536,900
539,250
51%.-.80%'::
527,000
$30,900
$34,750
$38,600
$41,700
$44,800
$47,850
$50,950
Median
81%.- 100%
$41,650
$47,600
$53,550
$59,500
564,250
$69,000
$73,800
$78,550
Moderate
101%'- 120%
$50,000
557,100
564,250
.571,400
$77,100
582,800
$88,550
S94,250
EXMP 1 4
A family of four having a household income,of S48,500 will be categorized as Median Income :
1.1.8: Sale Prices jor Low Income Units:
For low income units, the selling price shall not exceed those shown in Table 2 according to bedroom size and
income level.
•
U
•
Procedural I'vtanual for Housing Mitigation Programs: Page: 4
Table 2
Sale Price of Low Income Units by Household Size and Number of Bedrooms
See Appendix "B" for determination of sale prices.
1.2.9: Sale Prices for Price Capped Units:
For price capped units, the selling price shall be as follows:
• 2 at $190,000
• 4 at S 196,000
• 4 at $202,000
1.1.10: Rental Rates for Low Income Units:
Rental rates for the low income units shall not exceed those listed in Table 3 according to bedroom size and
income level.
Table 3
Rental Rates of Low Income Units by Household Size and Number of Bedrooms
Household 1. Number of VeryLow Low income
Size r. Bedrooms Income
1-2
I 1
34Y3.tx1 1
3,047. V1/
24
2
5555.00
5725.00
3-5
3
5620.00
5805.00
4-6
4 1
$720.001
5870.00
See appendix "B" for determination of rental rates
1.2.11: Rental Rates for Price Capped Units:
For price capped units, the rental rates shall be as follows:
• 2 at $825 per month
. 4 at $875 per month
. 4 at 5910 per month
1.1.11: Annual Revision of Sale Prices and Rental Rates:
Both the affordable selling prices and rents for low income units shall be updated on an annual basis in
conformance with the median income levels established for the County of Santa Clara by the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). For priced capped units, sale and rental prices shall
be revised annually to reflect adjustments to an approved housing cost index.
1.2.13: Section 8 Program:
In some cases, the rental rates of the low income units may be raised if the tenant is a Section 8 program
participant through the Housing Authority of the County of Santa Clara.
1.2.14: Project Conformance:
To the extent possible, affordable units shall generally reflect the total project mix in terms of bedroom count
and size of unit. The units shall be scattered throughout the site and shall conform to the exterior appearance
of the other units in the project. In providing affordable units, the developer shall have final determination as
to which units are affordable and which fit and finishes will be applied. Buyers should be permitted to
upgrade fit and finishes prior too the close of escrow. Price capped or low/very low income units can be
substituted for market rate units at the developers discretion.
Procedural Manual for Housing Mitigation Programs: Page: 5
• 1.3: City Contribution:
1.3.1: Density Bonus:
To maximize housing opportunity and partially assist the developer by reducing or eliminating the
development cost for the affordable units, a density bonus consistent with Ordinance No. 1569 ("An Ordinance
of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Adopting and Implementing the State Density Bonus Law") may
be permitted. The bonus units shall be permitted providing they can reasonably be accommodated on the site
and meet City standards. Offlce/housing linkage mitigation requirements, or residential housing mitigation
requirements, shall not apply to the density bonus units.
1.3.2: Elimination of Certain Amenities in Affordable Units:
Internally, the affordable units may differ from other units in the project by eliminating certain amenities
and/or lowering the square footage in order to reduce costs. Reduced square footage units must still meet
minimum health and safety codes. The exterior design of the unit shall be, consistent with other units in the
project.
1.3.3: Financial Assistance:
If the project qualifies, the City may choose to utilize the Affordable Housing Fund monies to create a greater
percentage of affordable units at the 50% (very -low income) and 60% (low income) price levels.
1.3.4: Fee Waivers:
The City shall waive park dedication and construction tax fees for affordable units.
1.3.5: Priority Processing:
The City shall, wherever possible, expedite the processing of developments with affordable units.
• 1.3.6: Rezoning of Sites.
The City shall rezone industrial areas at densities appropriate to meet the goals of the General Plan.
The City shall also rezone sufficient sites to fulfill the goals of the General Plan.
1.3.7: Management Agreement:
The City may enter into an agreement with a management agency to administer the buyer application pool,
buyer selection and the sale (or resale) of affordable units. To assist companies in distancing themselves from
the housing market, companies may opt to have their affordable units managed under the City agreement with
the management agency. At the companies' discretion, company employees or contractors, may receive first
priority over other Cupertino workers, as long as they meet the appropriate criteria.
1.3.8: Subordination Restrictions:
The City agrees to subordinate this housing mitigation program to any construction lender and to individual
first deeds of trust to the extent of 90% of the below market rate value. The City shall have the non-exclusive.
right to cure a default to preserve the housing mitigation program.
IA: Applicants Qualifications:
1.4.1: Applicant Qualifications for Price Capped Units:
Price capped units are designed to assist employees with moderate -or -below incomes find affordable housing.
It is based on the simple principle that the price of a unit will attract those able to afford such.a unit, and that
people with higher incomes will be attracted to higher priced units that better reflect their desires and
purchasing power.
•1.4.2: Applicant Qualifications for Low Income Units:
The program is designed to assist low and very low income families which are defined as families with an
income between 51% to 80% of the median for the County of Santa Clara as established by HUD. Applicants
will be eligible according to the family size and income criteria indicated on Table 1.
Procedural Manual for Rousing Mitigation Programs: Page: 6
1.4.3: Solicitation of Applicants:
Applications for buyer's interested in low and very low income units shall be solicited in accordance with HUD
. established guidelines for Section 8 Existing Housing as necessary to maintain an adequate application pool.
The order of priority for selection of buyers and renters will be employees of the sponsoring company,
Cupertino employees who live elsewhere, and Cupertino residents.
1.4.4: Applicant SubmittaLs:
All applicants shall submit proofof:
a. Residency
b. Place of Employment
c. Annual Income
d. Other Assets
e. Applicants shall submit the above information on an annual basis.
1.5: Buyer Selection for Ownership Units:
1.5.1: prioritization of Applications:
Applications shall be prioritized in the order of employees from the sponsoring company, Cupertino employees
who live elsewhere, and Cupertino residents, and income requirements on a first-come, first -serve basis.
Applicants who qualify for a project shall be drawn from the eligible applicant pool as units become available
for sale or rent.
1.5.2: Price Determination:
The income range of the buyers shall determine the unit type as indicated on Table 1 and Sections 1.2.9 and
1.2.11.
• I.5.3: Applicant's Right to Refusal of Unit:
An applicant has two opportunities to refuse a unit before being removed from the current applicant pool.
Applicants who do not qualify for a particular project shall retain their eligibility.
I. S. 4: Lending Institutions:
The prospective buyer, when seeking financing, may choose to contact lending institutions which have been
briefed by the City.
1.5.5: Insurance Requirements:
Prior to the sale of any unit, the City shall require that each purchaser execute a subrogation agreement
whereby the City or Company shall be named the additional insured party to any policy of fire or casually
insurance and will be entitled to any such policy proceeds in excess of the affordable unit purchase price.
1.6: Deed Restrictions (Ownership Units):
1.6.1: Occupancy Conditions.
Units must be owner -occupied.
1.6.1: Lease, Rent, or Sublet of Units:
Owner is not permitted to lease, rent, sublet the unit, or otherwise assign their interests in the.property without
the express written permission from the City, or property management agency. The City or property
management agency shall inform the company of this transaction prior to approval. The lessee must meet the
same requirements imposed on the owner. The lease shall be subject to review by the property management
• agency.
B
•
Procedural Manual for Housing Mitigation Programs: Page: 7
Example 5
The owner of a priced capped unit is being transferred to a different state for a 9 month period. In order to lessen
the burden of the owner from having to pay the mortgage on the price capped unit and rent on the new unit, the
owner may lease the unit with prior written approval from the City or property management agency.
1.6.3: Resale Price :
Sale of a unit is controlled by the original purchase price, plus changes in an approved housing cost index for
the Bay Area as well as the market value of any substantial improvements made by the owner. Value of
improvements, if any, to be established by a property appraisal.
1.6.4: Right of First Refusal:
During the period that a low income or price capped unit is maintained at an affordable price the City has the
right of first refusal on the sale of any of those units under the following criteria. The developer/company has
second right of refusal on first sale of all new units if the City is unable to find a buyer.
A. Low Income Units:
The City must exercise its right of refusal within four months from notice of availability of a unit.
B. Price Capped Units:
Within one month of notice of availability of a unit or units, the City must notify the owner whether the
City will exercise its right of first refusal. Once the City notifies the owner of its intent to purchase the
unit or units, within 15 days the City must submit a three percent (31/6) non-refundable deposit to the
owner, and must close escrow within the following 30 days.
1.6.5: Condition of Units:
Units shall be kept in good repair and resale price shall reflect the condition of the unit.
1.6.6: Terms of Affordability:
The deed restrictions imposed on each low income or price capped unit pursuant to the program shall remain
in effect for a period of 20 and 10 years, respectively, from the date of original sale of that unit and shall
become null and void upon the expiration of that period.
In the event the program is terminated, through formal action by the City Council, prior to the 20 year period
for low income units, and prior to the 10 year period for priced capped units, the deed restrictions shall be null
and void and full ownership rights of the unit shall revert to the owner of the unit at the time of termination.
1.7: Procedure for Resale of Units:
1.7.1: Owner's Responsibility:
If the owner elects to sell his unit, the City, Company, and/or Housing Authority must be notified.
1.7.2: Resale Price Calculation:
During the respective program period the resale price will be established based on the following:
a. Original Purchase Price.
b. Cumulative increases or decreases during the period of ownership, as indicated by an approved housing
cost index.
c. The value of any substantial improvements or damage to the unit.
d. Administrative costs incurred by the property management agency or other selling agent to sell the unit.
• e. For the price capped units, if sold within the 10 year period, but after the seventh year, the new buyer must
hold the unit for three years before it can be sold without the price rap restriction.
Procedural Manual for Housing Mitigation Programs: Page: 8
1.7.3: Purchaser:
The next qualified buyer in the low income application pool is notified.
1.8: Tenant Selection for Low Income Units (Rental) and Rent Capped Units (During 3 month Pre -
Marketing Period):
1.8.1: Prioritization of Applications:
Applications shall be prioritized in the order of employees from the sponsoring company, Cupertino employees
who live elsewhere, and Cupertino residents, and income requirements on a first-come, first -serve basis.
Applicants who qualify for a project shall be drawn from the eligible applicant pool as units become available
for sale.
1.8.2: Rental Rate Determination:
The income range of the tenant shall determine the unit type (and therefore the maximum price of the unit) by
using Table 1.
1.8.3: Applicant's Right to Refusal of Unit:
An applicant has two opportunities to refuse a unit before being removed from the current applicant pool.
Applicants who do not qualify for a particular project shall retain their eligibility
1.9: Leasing an Affordable Unit (Rental)'
1.9.1: Availability of Units:
An affordable unit shall not be available for lease until a public report is filed by the developer.
1.9.1: City Contractor's Role in Lease of the Unit:
If the Companies' elect, the City shall make available the services of its management agency to assist in the
selection of a tenants. The services of this agency shall be funded out of the in -lieu fee account and shall be
monitored by the City.
1.9.3: Previewing of Unit:
It is the tenant's responsibility to contact the management agency to preview the unit.
1.9.4: Occupancy Conditions:
It is the intent of this policy that the original lessee shall occupy the unit during the term of the lease.
However, if special conditions require that the unit be sublet, the applicant/tenant is only permitted to sublet
the unit with the express written permission from the Management Agency and the City of Cupertino.
Should an additional occupant (roommate) move into the unit, they must meet the same requirements imposed
on the original occupant.
1.10: Deed Restrictions (Rental Units):
1.10.1: Right of First Refusal:
Up to termination of the period of affordability, the City has the right of first refusal on the sale of any
affordable rental units. From the notice of availability of the unit/complex, the City must exercise its right of
refusal within 60 days for low income units, and its intent to exercise its right of first refusal within one month
for rent capped units. Once the City notifies the owner of its intent to purchase, within 15 days the City must
submit a five percent (50/6) non-refundable deposit to the owner, and must close escrow within the following 60
days.
1.10.1: Condition of UniWComplex:
The units/complex shall be kept in good repair and the resale price shall reflect the condition of the
uniWcomplex.
Procedural Manual for Housing Mitigation Programs: Page: 9
/.10.3: Terms of Affordability:
Deed restrictions placed on each unit/complex pursuant to the program shall remain in effect for a period of
thirty (30) years from the date of first occupancy of the unit/complex and shall become null and void upon the
expiration of that period, unless it is extended by the company in order to take advantage of incentives
resulting from changes in public policy and programs.
In the event the program is terminated prior to the 30 year period through formal action by the City Council,
deed restrictions shall be null and void.. Full ownership rights of the units/complex shall revert to the owner at
the time of termination.
1.11: Procedure for Resale of Units/Cotnplex:
1. IL]: Resale Price Calculations:
During the respective program period the resale price will be established based on the following:
a. Original appraised value.
b. The value of any substantial improvements or damage to the units/complex.
c. Resale of rental properties will also be determined by a capitalized income approach.
SECTION 2:
Residential Housing Mitigation
(To be inserted at a later date.)
n
0
0
w
r-,
The City of Cupertino
r
r --
APPENDIX E
SLOPE DENSITY
1
CITY COUNCIL. RESOLUTION #8886
,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• Section I Statement of Purpose................................................................................. I
Section II Discussion of Slope.................................................................................. 1-3
Section III Description of Slope-Density................................................................... '4
Section IV How to Conduct a Slope Density Analysis .............................................. 4-7
•
SLOPE DENSITY
Section l: Statement of Pumose
i' This document has been prepared with the intent of acquainting the general reader with the slope -density approach
• to determining the intensity of residential development. The slope -density approach was incorporated in the hillside
plan in order to develop an equitable means of assigning dwelling unit credit to property owners. In addition to
offering die advantage of equal treatment for property owners, the slope -density formula can also be designed to
reflect property owners, the slope -density formula can also be designed to reflect judgments regarding aesthetics and
other factors into a mathematical model which determines the number of units per acre on a given piece of property
based upon the average steepness of the land. Generally speaking, the steeper the average slope of the property, the
fewer the number of units which will be permitted.
Although the slope -density formula can be used as an effective means to control development intensity, the formula
itself cannot determine the ideal development pattern. The formula determines only the total number of dwelling
units, allowable on the property, based upon die average slope; it does not determine the optimum location of those
units on the property. Exogenous factors not regulated by the slope -density formula such as grading, tree removal,
or other environmental factors would be regulated by other means. The slope -density formulas do not represent by
themselves a complete safeguard against development detrimental to the environment; but, together with other
conservation measures, they are considered a valuable planning device.
Section 2: Discussion of "Slope"
Steepness of terrain can be defined in several ways: As the relationship between the sides of the triangle
representing a vertical section of a lull, or as the angle between the terrain and the horizontal plain, to name two.
Unfortunately, the definitions of the terms "slope," "grade," "gradient," "batter," and of the expression "the slope is
1 to..." are not well known or uniformly applied.causing much confusion. For purposes of this section, the concept
of steepness of certain will be defined and discussed as a "percentage of slope".
"Percent of slope" is defined as a measurement of steepness of slope which is the ratio between vertical and
horizontal distances expressed in percent. As illustrated below, a 50% slope is one which rises vertically 5 ft. in a
• 10 ft. horizontal distance.
1W -✓V
-0041
General Plan Slope Appendix E
Page -2-
One of the most common confusions of terminology relative to terrain steepness is the synonymous usage of
percent of grade" and "degree of grade." However, as the illustration below indicates, as percent of grade
• increases, land becomes steeper at a decreasing rate. The present slope -density formulas specified by the City of
Cupertino require more land for development as the rate of percent of grade increases. Thus, the relationship
between percent of grade and degree of grade is inverse rather than corresponding.
•
146
too
us
1.e
Iti
Ito
10.4
1r.
\\\\
U
a•
41
pfiM�d M LH6ii(r�
1 .
To more accurately assess the impact of steepness of terrain on the feasibility of residential development, it might be
helpful to examine some of phenomena commonly associated with increasing percentages of slope steepness.I
1. W Wlam Spenple 6 Auochiles Slope Ikrully Study - Plume 1. (Published October 1) WUUani Spmtple mid
Aasoclata wa retained by County, to mist We effort or Plamdnp Policy Conmdlla relative to Saha Crm
Mounlaln Study and Montebello nWpe Study.
•
•
General Plan Slope Appendix e
Pa ge -3 -
Percent of Slooe
Description of Slope Problems
0-5%
Relative level land. Little or no development problems due to steepness of slope.
5-15%
Minimum slope problems increasing to significant slope problems at 15%. 15% is
the maximum grade often considered desirable on subdivision streets. Above 15%,
roads must run diagonally to, rather than at right angles to contours increasing the
amount of cut and fill. For example, the lower segment of San Juan Road in the
Cupertino foothills averages 20% in grade.
15-30%
Slope becomes a very significant factor in development at this steepness.
Development of level building sites requires extensive cut and fill in this slope
category and the design of individual houses to fit terrain becomes important.
30-50%
Slope is extremely critical in this range. Allowable steepness of cut and fill slopes
approach or coincide with natural slopes resulting in very large cuts and fills under
conventional development. In some cases, fill will not hold on these slopes unless
special retaining devices are used. Because of the grading problems associated with
this category, individual homes should be placed on natural building sites where they
occur, or buildings should be designed to fit the particular site.
50%+ Almost any development can result in extreme disturbances in this slope category.
Except in the most stable native material special retaining devices may be needed.
General Plan Slope Appendix e
Page —i -
Section III: Description of Slope -Density
• 1) The "Foothill Modified" slope density
The "Foothill Modified" slope density is designed for application to those properties in the "Fringe" of the
Hillside study area with average slopes less than 10%. The formula assumes availability of municipal services.
.Beginning at credit of 3.5 dwelling units/gr. acre, the formula follows a cosine curve of decreasing density
credit with increase of slope, achieving a constant above 43% average slope.
2) The "Foothill Modified 1/2 Acre" slope density
This slope density is applied in the Urban Service Area to those properties where a full range of municipal
utility services are available. The formula begins at density of 1/2 acre per dwelling unit which holds constant
at 22% average slope. From 22% to 43% average slope, the formula follows a cosine curve of decreasing
density credit with increasing slope. The density credit above 43% average slope remains constant at 0.20
dwelling units/gr. acre.
3) The "5-20" slope density
This slope density is applied to those properties which lie west of the urban/suburban fringe.
See the following pages for the three slope density curves-
•
•
•
Slope Density Formula: "Foothill Modified"
d = 1.85 + 1.65 cos {(s-5) x 4.81
0<s<44
SLOPE
Density Gr. acres
Average
SLOPE Density
Gr. acres Average
%
D.U. per per D.U.
lot area
% D.U. per
per D.U. lot area
0.286
gross ac.
gr.sq.ft.
gross ac.
gr.sq.ft.
s
d
1/d
43560/d
s
d
1/d
43560/d
5
3.500
0.286
12,446
27
1.406
0.711
30,975
6
3.494
0.286
12,466
28
1.275
0.784
34,169
7
3.477
0.288
12,528
29
1.147
0.871
37,962
8
3.448
0.290
12,633
30
1.025
0.976
42,498
9
3.408
0.293
12,781
31
0.908
1.101
47,957
10
3.357
0.298
12,975
32
0.798
1.253
54,569
11
3.296
0.303
13,216
33
0.696
1.438
62,626
12
3.224
0.310
13,510
34
0.601
1.664
72,484
13
3.143
0.318
13,859
35
0.515
1.941
84,562
14
3.053
0.328
14,269
36
0.439
2.280
99,305
15
2.954
0.339
14,746
37
0.372
2.688
117,073
16
2.848
0.351
15,297
38
0.316
3.166
137,905
17
2.734
0.366
15,932
39
0.270
3.698
161,081
18
2.614
0.382
16,661
40
0.236
4.236
184,532
19
2.489
0.402
17,498
41
0.213
4.695
204,497
20
2.360
0.424
18,459
42
0.201
4.964
216,235
21
2.227
0.449
19,562
43
0.201
4.964
216,235
22
2.091
0.478
20,832
23
1.954
0.512
22,297
24
1.815
0.551
23,994
25
1.678
0.596
25,967
26
1.541
0.649
28,271
by: HB
•
•
0
w
H
r)
O
75J
J_
H
O
O
LL
(l W JNITEIMa H]d) S3HOb
•
5-20 ACRE SLOPE
DENSITY
SLOPE
Density
Gr. acres
Average SLOPE
Density
Gr. acres
Average
%
D.U. per
per D.U.
lot area
%
D.U. per
per D.U.
lot area
gross ac.
gr.sq.ft.
gross ac.
gr.sq.ft.
s
d
1/d
43560/d
s
d
1/d
43560/d
10
0.20
5.00
217,800
31
0.10
9.92
431,964
11
0.20
5.07
220,786
32
0.10
10.32
449,722
12
0.19
5.15
224,518
33
0.09
10.75
468,121
13
0.19
5.26.
228,992
34
0.09
11.18
487,154
14
0.19
5.38
234,204
35
0.09
11.63
506,814
15
0.18
5.51
240,153
36
0.08
12.10
527,093
16
0.18
5.67
246,835
37
0.08
12.58
547,982
17
0.17
5.84
254,245
38
0.08
13.07
569,475
18
0.17
6.02
262,381
39
0.07
13.58
591,563
19
0.16
6.23
271,238
40
0.07
14.10
614,238
20
0.16
6.45
280,811
41
0.07
14.63
637,491
21
0.15
6.68
291,096
42
0.07
15.18
661,313
22
0.14
6.94
302,089
43
0.06
15.74
685,696
23
0.14
7.20
313,784
44
0.06
16.31
710,630
24
0.13
7.49
326,176
45
0.06
16.90
736,106
•
25
0.13
7.79
339,260
46
0.06
17.50
762,115
26
0.12
8.10
353,030
47
0.06
18.10
788,648
27
0.12
8.44
367,481
48
0.05
18.73
815,694
28
0.11
8.78
382,606
49
0.05
19.36
843,244
29
0.11
9.15
398,399
50
0.05
20.00
871,288
30
0.11
9.52
414,854
50>
•
Slope Density Formula: "Foothill Modified 1/2 Acre"
• d = 1.85 + 1.65 cos {(s-5) x 4.81
5<s<44
SLOPE Density Gr. acres Average
% D.U. per per D.U. lot area
gross ac. gr.sq.ft.
s
d
1/d
43560/d
22
2.091
0.478
20,832
23
1.954
b.512
22,297
24
1.815
0.551
23,994
25
1.678
0.596
25,967
26
1.541
0.649
28,271
27
1.406
0.711
30,975
28
1.275
0.784
34,169
29
1.147
0.871
37,962
30
1.025
0.976
42,498
31
0.908
1.101
47,957
32
0.798
1.253
54,569
33
0.696
1.438
62,626
• 34
0.601
1.664
72,484
35
0.515
1.941
84,562
36
0.439
2.280
99,305
37
0.372
2.688
117,073
38
0.316
3.166
137,905
39
0.270
3.698
161,081
40
0.236
4.236
184,532
41
0.213
4.695
204,497
42
0.201
4.964
216,235
43
0.201
4.964
216,235
i
by: HB
0
R
I
ti
UIW JN173MG N]d) S]HOV
D ✓
N
N
a
N
M
(JNMIAMI Hld) SIHOV
M
General Plan Slope Appendix E
Page -5-
Section IV; How to Conduct a Slooe-Densilv Analvsis (Mao Wheel Method)
• The computation of density using a slope -density formula is relatively simple once the basic concepts are
understood. This section of Appendix A describes the basic concepts in order to enable individuals to determine
density. The City Planning staff will provide technical assistance; however, it is the responsibility of the owner or
potential developer to provide accurate map materials used in the slope -density investigation for a specific property.
The City has map material which is accurate enough to provide an approximate slope -density evaluation. Accurate
information needed to evaluate a specific development proposal must be provided by the owner or developer.
Step One: Selection of Map Material
To begin any slope -density investigation, it is important to select the proper mapping material. Maps on which
measurements are made must be no smaller in scale than V = 200'. (1 + 2400) All maps must be of the
topographical type with contour intervals not less than 1011.
If the map wheel method is used for measuring contours, or if a polar planimeter is used for measurement of an
area, maps on which such measurements are made must not be smaller in scale than I" = 50' (1 + 600) ; these maps
may be enlarged from maps in a scale not less than 1" +200'. Enlargement of maps in smaller scale than I" = 200',
or interpolation of contours is not permitted.
Sleep Two: Layout of Standard Grid System
The property for which area and slope are to be measured is divided into a network of "cells" constructed from a
grid system spaced at 200 ft. intervals. In order to ensure a common reference point and to prevent the practice of
"gerrymandering" the grid system to distort the average slope of the property, the grid system must be oriented
parallel to the grid system utilized by Santa Clara County's V = 500' scale map series.
Figure 1 illustrates a hypothetical property divided into cells by a 200 ft. grid network. It is perhaps easiest to
construct the 200' x 200' cells by beginning at an intersection point of perpendicular County grid lines ("Q" in
Figure 1) and then measuring 200 ft. intervals along the two County grid lines until the entire property is covered
with a network. After the grid lines have been laid out, it is helpful to number each 200 ft. square cell or part
thereof Whenever the grid lines divide the property into parts less titan approximately 20,000 sq. ft., such areas
shall be combined with each other or with other areas so that a number of parts are formed with the areas
approximately between 20,000 and 60,000 sq. ft. Cells formed by combining several subareas should be given a
single number and should be shown on the map with "hooks" to indicate grouping (see area 2 on Figure 1). At this
point, the investigator should obtain a copy of the "Slope-Dcnsily Grid Method Worksheet," Figure 2 of this
document. Under Column A (land unit), each line should be numbered down the page to correspond with the total
number of cells on the property. (Figure 2)
•
General Plan Slope Appendix E
Pane -6-
Steil Three: Measurement of Area and Contour Length
With the map material properly prepared in Steps One and Two, we can now begin the actual mechanics of the
slope -density analysis. The first task is to ascertain the acreage of the subject property. This acreage figure is
obtained by measuring the area of each numbered cell divided by the 200 ft. grid, and then summing the results of
the individual measurements. Since the standard grid cell measures 200' x 200,' it is only necessary to measure the
area of any non-standard size cell. Referring once again to the worksheet, as each cell is calculated for area, the
results should be entered in Column B.( and Column C optional). see Figure 2.
Irregularly shaped cells may be measured for area quickly and accurately by means of a polar planimeter. This
device is analog instrument wltich traces the perimeter of an area to be measured and gives the size in actual square
inches. This measurement is then multiplied by the square of the scale of the map being used. For example,. I" -
200', the square of 200 ft. means 1" equals 40,000 sq. ft. The total square footage of each cell can then be converted
to acreage by dividing by 43,560 sq. ft. More detailed instruction in the use of the planimeter may be obtained from
the City Planning Department.
Areas of irregular shape can also be measured by dividing each part into triangles, for which die areas are
determined by the formula A - base x height + 2, if a planimeter is not available.
Having now determined the area of each cell, one must now proceed to measure llte contour lengths of the property.
Contour length and interval are both vital factors in calculating the average slope of the land. Each contour of a
specified interval is measured separately within each standard cell or other numbered zone for which the area has
been calculated. The map wheel (Figure 3) is set at "zero" and is then run along the entire length of a contour
within the boundary of the cell, lilted and placed on the next contour (without resetting the wheel to zero) and so
forth until the total length of contours of the specified interval within the individual cell is determined. Tile map
— wheel will display a figure in linear inches traveled. This figure shown on the dial should Wen be multiplied by the
map scale. (Example: map wheel reads - 14 1/2 inches, map scale is 1" - 50'. Contour length - 14.5 x 50 - 750').
• The results should then be entered on We proper in of Column D (Figure 2).
Step Four Calculation of Average Slope
Knowing the total length of contours, the contour interval, and lite area of each numbered cell, one may now
calculate the average slope of the land. Either of the two formulas below may be used to calculate average slope:
S= 0.0023 1 L
X_
S = average slope of ground in percent
I = contour interval in feel
L - combined length in feet of all contours on parcel
A - area of parcel in acres
The value 0.0023 is 1 sq. ft. expressed as a percent of an acre:
1 so. ft. = 0.0023 ac
•
General Plan Slope Appendix E
Page -7-
S=TIxLx100
J M
S = average slope of ground in percent
1 = contour intervaling feet
L = combined length in feet of all contours on parcel
A = area of parcel and square feet
The results should be entered on the appropriate line of Column E of die worksheet.
Step Five' Determination of Dwelling Unit Credit
With the average slope of the cell now determined, one can calculate the dwelling unit credit per cell by obtaining a
factor from the appropriate slope -density table (Section 3 of this document) then multiplying that factor by the area
of the cell in acres. Refer to Figure 4 to ascertain which formula applies to the property under investigation. The
formula factor is found by first reading the table column "s" (slope) until reaching the figure corresponding to the
average slope of the cell being studied; next, one reads horizontally to the "d" column (density D.U. / gr. ac.). This
factor should be entered in Column F of the worksheet. The factor in Column F is now multiplied by the acreage in
Column B and the result entered under the appropriate slope -density formula title (Column G, H. I or n.
Step Six: Summation of Results
When all cells in the parcel have been analyzed in the manner previously described, total for various components of
the data may be derived and entered into the two bottom rows of the worksheet. Columns B, C (if used), and D
should be summed at the bottom of the sheet. A mathematical average may be calculated for Column E. Columns
G through J should be summed at the bottom of the page. The totals shown at the bottom of columns G through I
represent the total number of dwelling units permitted on that property, based on the average slope. These totals
should be carried out to a minimum of two decimal places.
'Rounding" of Dwelling Unit Credit Results
The City Council, during its meeting of March 7, 1977, adopted the following policy regarding the rounding up of a
numerical dwelling unit yield resulting from application of a slope -density formula:
"The rounding up of the numerical yield resulting from application of a slope -density formula
may be permitted in cases where the incremental increase in density from the actual yield to the
rounded yield will not result in a 10% increase of the actual yield. In no case, shall an actual
yield be rounded up to the next whole number unless the fractional number is .5 or greater."
p:nuNV,Slopc
•
0
•
The City of Cupertino
MAGOPROO roSTM"
APPENDIX F
Tier 2
JUNE 1993
City Council Resolution #8886
APPENDIX F
TIER 2 TRAFFIC REDUCTION PROCEDURE
The Gcneral Plan established a procedure known as the "Tier 2 Trak Reduction Procedure" which
• enables major companies to build Floor space beyond that allowed by base level development
requirements. Major companies are characterized by an employment level of more than 1,500 employees
working in Cupertino, a company headquartered in Cupertino, and having a significant fee ownership
interest in land or a building(s) and demonstrate a long term commitment to remain in the community.
Base leveldevelopment requirements relate to maximum land use intensity for a given parcel based upon
the application of Floor Area Ratios, "bonus" space allocated on a site or to a specific owner via the 1983
General Plan, the former Traffic Intensity Performance Standard (TIP's), and the reallocated space
described in Policy 2-3 of the General Plan.
The Tier 2 procedure permits major companies to exceed general plan base levels if traffic associated with
existing employment is reduced. The procedure identifies the methodology for establishing the existing
base traffic rates, the time periods necessary for data collection and the period of time reduced trips can be
suspended prior to creative development, and the sanctions that will be imposed if the traffic reductions
are not maintained.
Procedure
When a request is made by a major company for development exceeding the General Plan trip allocation,
the following procedure would be undertaken:
1. The city and owner would establish the trip character of existing development obtaining information
such as, volumes during peak hour and peak periods, the AVR (Average Vehicle Ridership),
employee occupancy rates.
Measurements of traffic generation will be made at a "screenline(s)" established at driveway entrances
to public roads.
• A trip rate of 1.7 two-way peak hour trips for each 1,000 sq. ft. of space is established for new
building area allowed by the 'base level" General Plan Land Use regulations. The base level building
area includes space allowed by application of Floor Area Ratios, residual 'bonus" space allocated to
Vallee Park, Ltd. (currently Tandem Computer) via the 1983 General Plan Amendment, TIPS credits,
and reallocated space described in Policy 2-3 of the General Plan.
Major companies considering "2nd Tier" development should immediately establish a base line trip
rate for existing building space. In order to prevent delay in the review of a subsequent development
applications, it is advisable for participants in the 2nd .Tier Program to initiate TDM Programs
immediately following the establishment of the trip rate of existing construction. The effectiveness of
trip reductions for existing building construction as a result of TDM must be evaluated for a
minimum of six months from start date.
2. Following a minimum six-month stabilization period after the owner has implemented a TDM
Program of his/her choice, the city and owner would review the trip generation character and
compare it to pre -TDM condition.
3. If a delay exists between the confirmation period above and a building permit application, an updated
study would be performed to determine actual trip data to compare with baseline just prior to building
permit issuance.
4. Companies will be restricted from developing TDM strategies that directly encourage employees to
shift travel in single -occupant vehicles from the peak period to the partial peak period in order to
positively affect peak period traffic measurements.
• 5. Calculate the. number of trips saved by subtracting the current trip rate from the base line rate
measured after enactment of the General Plan to determine the number of new square footage of
building.
Tier 2 Procedure
Page -2-
4 6. The trip "savings" resulting from application of TDM Programs can be preserved for a period of 10
years (until 2003) from adoption of the General Plan. This means that major companies seeking
development via Tier 2 can make application for development following adoption of the General Plan
and be reasonably assured that growth can be accommodated during the 10 year period if their trip
rates comply. (Trips measured at driveway screenlines comply with established base rates and
approved rates for new development following established TDM Programs).
The City and owner would enter into a development agreement to assure that the new development
building area and the existing building area do not exceed the trip allotment. An annual report would
be required to monitor performance. (One is already required for the Congestion Management
Agency)
7. Adherence to the TDM program will be a condition to any conditional use permit. If results of the
monitoring indicate that the trip allotment is exceeded, modifications may be required, such as the
following:
a. Allow for the company/owner to bring its trip rate into compliance using currently established
TDM strategies; or
b. Implement additional TDM strategies; or
c. Purchase additional development intensity from other owners/companies.
The owners/companies are allowed one year to reach compliance using options A -C above. If the trip
allotment continues to be exceeded, the owners/companies may be requested to pay an annual fee to
• fund citywide transportation related programs. The amount of the fee shall be established by the City
Council in conjunction with a use permit and/or development agreement_ An independent study will
determine the appropriate fee. The amount of the fee shall be of a sufficient amount to encourage
compliance and shall be in force during the period when the trip rate is exceeded.
The fee payment option is contingent upon a finding by the City Council that the company/owner has
made and will continue to maintain the same level of effort to achieve compliance with the trip
reduction program(s) that was used to achieve the initial TDM reduction during the initial 6 month
monitoring period. The level of effort will be indexed for inflation using the U.S. Dept. of Consumer
Price Index for the San Francisco Bay Area.
g:V=Xgmp1=\ ier2
is
