The URL can be used to link to this page

RA 2000DRAFT MINUTES CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting CUPERTnSJO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Regular Meeting Monday, June 19, 2000 ROLL CALL At 7:00 p,m. Mayor Statton called the meeting to order in the Council Chmnbers, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, Califomia. City Council members present: Mayor John Station, Vice-Mayor Sandra James, and Council members Don Bunnett, Michael Chang, and Richard Lowenthal. Council members absent: None. Redevelopment Agency members present: Chairman John Statton, Vice-Chair Sandra James, and Agency members Don Bumett, Michael Chang, and Richard Lowenthal. Redevelopment Agency members absent: None. Staff present: Caml Atwood, Acting City Mmiager, City Admiistrative Services Director and Finance Director of the Agency; Charles Kilian, City Attomey and General Counsel to the Agency, Community Development Director Steve Piasecki, City Planner Ciddy Wordell, Public Information Officer Donna Krey, Public Works Director Bert Viskovich, and Kimberly Smith, (Tity (:1erk and Secretary tn the,%ency, RedevelopmentAttomeyfortheCityandAgency: NicoleMuyhy. Representatives of Keyser Marston: Debbie Kem and Paul Andersen. JOINT PUBLIC HEARING A. Joint public hearing of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency on the proposed redevelopment plan for the Cupeo Vallco Redevelopment Pmject. Statton opened the public heamg. Atwood reviewed the istory of the Vallco Shopping Center and discussed the intent of the redevelopment project. Nicole Murphy, Redevelopment Attomey, entered into the record the following: Exhibit 1, affidavit of publication; Exhibit 2, certificate of mailing to property owners and business owners mid operators; Exhibit 3, certificate of mailing to the governing bodies of each taxing agency; and Exhibit 4, cmfication of legal actions taken by the City Council, Planing Commission, and Agency, Murphy summarized the pmposed redevelopment plan, and it was entered into the record as Exhibit 5. She reviewed the major evidentiary findings, which are as follows: A finding that the project qms is a blighted area, meeting the legal qualifications KA -='?-/ June 19, 2000 Cupertino City Council & Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Page 2 prescribed by the Legislature, and that redevelopment of the project area is necessary to effectuate the public purposes described in the community redevelopment law; a finding that the adoption and caring out of the redevelopment plan is economically sound and feasible; a finding that the redevelopment plan conforms to the general plan of the City of Cupertino; and a finding that the condemnation of said property as provided for in the redevelopment plan is necessary to the execution of the redevelopment plan and that adequate provisions have been made for the payment of properties to be acquired as provided by law. She said the evidence supporting these and other findings is contained principally in the Agency's report to the City Council. Mr. Paul Anderson, Kaiser Marsten Associates, summarized parts of the report of the agency to the City Council that included the basic supporting documentation for the redevelopment plan and the ordinance that will adopt a redevelopment plan. He summarized the blight findings, the implementation plan, the supplement, and a report to City Council. Debbie Kern, Kaiser Marsten, reviewed the projects and progs and the financial feasibility component of the report to Council. The Report of the Agency to the City Council was entered into the record as Exhibit 6, and the Supplement to the Report of the Agency to the City Council was entered into the record as Exhibit 7. City Planner Wordell summarized the environmental impact report, which was entered into the record a submitted as part of the report to City Council, identified as Exhibit 8 The ndes goveming property owner participation were entered into the record as Exhibit 9. Wordell said that some written comments had been received and were already a part of the record. One was a letter received May 31st from Public Economics, Inc., which is a consulting firm representing Foothill-De Anza College District and Fremont Union High School District. The letter states that it is not a written objection, but represents an ongoing dialogue that they would like to have. She said a second letter was submitted this evening and which was distributed to City Council. It will also be made part of the record and is again part of the continuing dialogue hoping that there would be some provision made for an affordable housing program to specifically address school district employees. She noted that two other letters that also been received today and would be included as part of the record, as Exhibit 10. (This exhibit is comprised of (1) A letter from Public Economics, Inc., dated June 19; (2) A letter from Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority dated June 16); (3) A letter from Bay Area Legal Aid dated June 19; and (4) Two letters from Bryant, Clohan, Eller, Maines & Bamh, dated June 19). Statton asked for oral testimony in favor or opposed to the redevelopment plan. Mr, William Litt said he was an attomey with Bay Area Legal Aid which represents low income residents of Cupertino. He said he was submitting for the record a letter containing their objections. He also submitted a videotape of the proposed project area F/!-A-1- June 19, 2000 Cupertino City Council & Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Page 3 which he would like to have included in the official record. His pary objection on behalf of his client was that there is not substantial evidence supporting the findings of physical blight or economic blight. They also objected to the fact that the project area is entirely commercial and does not now and will not have any affordable housing on it. Also, it appears that the primary purpose of this project is to subsidize private development and private improvement of the shopping center. The Supreme Court in Court of Appeal have consistently spoken out against that kind of use of the power of redevelopment, including taking property by eminent domain and reselling to private parties. In addition, the Califomia Legislature has declared the fundamental purpose of redevelopment is to extend a supply of low to moderate income housing, and this proposed project does not do that. Mr. Don Favorito said he was the owner of Penguin's Frozen Yogurt. He said about two years ago he heard of the possibility that the lower level of the mall would be removed and replaced by parking. He thought that was the wrong thing to do, and now it seems like it will come to pass. In 1988 the lower level was constmcted because Valley Fair expanded and Vallco was afraid of losing business, so they put the lower level was constructed at great cost. Now it is going to be done away and tumed into parking, and that doesn't seem the right way to go. He asked when the constnuction of the parking structure will begin and when will Vallco be put into the redevelopment agency plan. Wordell said a specific development has not yet been applied for, so there is no approval date in site and therefore no constnuction schedule of which the city is aware, She explainerl that the Vallco redevelopment area is tm Vsllco shopping center, There was a motion and gecond to close the public heming, and motion carried unanimously Murphy said written objections have been received, but it is not clear whether the written objections are from affected property owners in the project area. Bay Area Legal Aid represents citizens of Cupertino, and is not clear whether those are property owners, Also there are two other letters from a law firm representing an un-named client. She recorended that the City Council act on these letters as though they were written objections requiring a response, and she will prepare a response for City Council consideration. Council concurred to continue this item until the next regular meeting of the City Council and Redevelopment Agency on July 17. APPROVAL OF MINUTF,S B. Minutes of the May 15, 2000, Redevelopment Agency meeting. Burnett moved to adopt the minutes as presented. Chang seconded and the motion carried 5-0. 7(B-p-3 June 19, 2000 Cupertino City Council & Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Page 4 I, NEW BUSINESS C. Agency certifies and makes findings based upon consideration of the Final Environmental Impact Report, Resolution No. RA-00-06. Continued to July 17, 2000. D. Agency finds that the use of taxes allocated from the Project for the purpose of improving and increasing the community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing outside the Project Area will be of benefit to the Project, Resolution No. RA-00-07. Continued to July 17, 2000. ADJOUflNT At 7:30 p.m., the Redevelopment Agency adjourned. Kimberly Smith, City Clerk 7;;s-A-9 CITY OF CUPEJINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 Telephom: (408) 777-3308 FAX- (408)777-3333 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Agenda No. k H Agenda Date: July 17, 2000 Application Summary: Joint Public Hearing on the Adoption of the Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project RECOMMENDA"nON: Cupertino RedevelopmentAgency: * Certifying and making findings based upon consideration of the Final Environtnental Impact Report. Resolution No. RA-00-06. * Finding that the use of taxes allocated from the Project for the purpose of improving and increasing the community's supply of low- and moderate- incomc housing outside tlie Piuj:cl Area wrrl-beut'the Project. Resolution No. RA-00-07. Cupertino City Council: * Certifying and making findings based upon consideration of the Final EnvironmentalImpactReport. ResolutionNo.00:187. * Adopting findings in response to written objections on adoption of the Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project. Resolution No. 00-197 * Finding that the use of taxes allocated from the Project for the purpose of improving and increasing the community's supply of low- and moderate- income housing outside the Project Area will be of benefit to the Project. ResolutionNo. 00-188. * Approval and adoption of Redevelopment Plan (first reading). Ordinance No. 1850, BACKGROUND: The Redevelopment Agency and the City Council convened a joint meeting of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency on June 19, 2000. Staff and consultants presented the proposed Redevelopment Plan, the Final Environmental Impact Report and other background information in support of the Redevelopment Plan. Oral and written testimony was received from William Litt, attorney for Bay Area Legal Aid. Written testimony was received from Daniel S. Gonzales, attomey with Bryant, Clohan, Eller, Maines and Baruh, LLP. Vhco- i 2 The joint public hearing was closed, after which the City's legal consultant, Nicole Murphy, recommended that the Council act on the testimony as written objections. Written responses are required, resulting in the Agency and Council continuing the item to this meeting. DISCUSSION: The purpose of this continued hearing is to take action on the items outlined in the recommendation section. There are two new areas of information in this packet: 1) The written responses to the written objections, and the accompanying resolution to adopt them. 2) The mitigation monitomg program, Exhibit B of Resolutions RA-00-06 and 00-187. This program was not available for the June 19 meeting. It would have been submitted at a subsequent meeting, had not the June 19" meeting been continued. Nicole Murphy, the City's legal consultant to the Vallco Redevelopment Area, w'll attend the meeting to present die agenda item and respond to questions. Enclosures: Cupertino RedevelopmentAgency: Resolution No. RA-00-06. Resolution No. RA-00-07. Cuperliyiu Cily Couricil. ResolutionNo, 00-187. ResolutioriNo. 00-197 ResolutionNo. 00-188. OrdinanceNo. 1850. City Council staff report of June 19, 2000 [Please note that the spiral-bound Exhibits 5 and 8 are not resubmitted] Prepared by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner Approved by: Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development x David Knapp City Manager G:planning/pdreport/cdmievel71700 oA RESOLUTION NO. RA-00-06 RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CERTIFYING THE COMPLETION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CUPERTINO VAI.,LCo REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT'; ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF FINDINGS, FACT8, AND OVF,RRIDING CONSIDERATIONS; AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN WHEREAS, as the Lead Agency, the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (the "EIR") on the proposed Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project") pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., hereinafter referred to as "CEQA"), the Guidelines for Implementation of the Califomia Enviroental Quality Act (14 California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq., hereinafter referred to as the "State CEQA Guidelines') and procedures adopted by the Agency relating to environmental evaluation; and WHEREAS, the Agency transmitted for filing a Notice of Completion of the Draft EIR and thereafter in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines fonvarded the Draft EIR to the State Cleamghouse for distribution to those state agencies that have discretionary approval or jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the Redevelopment Plan, to the affected taxing agencies, anrl to ntbpr interhsted I,,=rsnnq snd agencies, and sought the comments of such persons and agencies; and WHEREAS, notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting comments on the Draft EIR was published in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Draft El was thereafter revised and supplemented to adopt changes suggested, to incorporate comments received during the public review period pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, and to incorporate the Agency's responses to said comments, and as so revised and supplemented, a Final EIR was prepared by the Agency; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR, as revised and supplemented to incorporate all comments received and the responses of the Agency thereto, and is part of the Agency's Report to the City Council on the Redevelopment Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Agency hereby certifies that the Final EIR for the Project is adequate and has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and local procedures adopted by the Agency pursuant thereto and that the Agency has reviewed and Resolution RA-00-06 Page2ofl9 considered the information contairied in the Final EIR prior to adopting this resolution. The Agency hereby finds that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgnnent of the Agency. Section 2. The Agency hereby adopts the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations relating to the environmental impact of the Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (including, without limitation, the mitigation measures set forth therein). Based upon such Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations, the Agency hereby finds that all significant environmental effects have been eliminated or substaritially lessened except the following unavoidable adverse impacts: Cumulative impacts On the Wolfe Road/Prunendge Avenue intersection. With the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area and other reasonably foreseeable development, the operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E+ dutig the PM peak hour. There are no feasible physical improvements that could be constnucted at this intersection that would mitigate this impact to a less than significant level. Regional emissions. Additional traffic generated by shopping center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's ("BAAQAa)") thresholds of significance. BAAQA4D gtndance provtdes that pro3ects that would individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality mpact. The proposed project therefore would also have a significant cwiulative impact on regional air quality. Mitigation measures are set forth in the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A). Those mitigation measures will assist in reducing project and cumulative impacts on regional air quality, but would not reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level. Based upon the foregoing, the Agency finds and determines that the Redevelopment Plan will have a significant effect upon the environtnent but that the benefits of the Redevelopment Plan outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts for the reasons set forth in the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations, in pmticular, Part V thereof. Section 3. The Agency hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitomg Plan set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, Section4. Upon approval and adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City Council, the Agency Secretary is hereby directed to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk of the County of Santa Clara pursuant to the provisions of Section 21152 of CEQA and Section 15094 of the State CEQA Guidelines, along with hvo copies of the Certificate of Fee Exemption as required pursuant to Title 14, Califomia Code of Regulations, Section 753,5(c). PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency this 17th day of July 2000, by the following vote: Resolution RA-00-06 Page 3 of 19 Vote AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAJN: ATTEST: Secretary Members of the Redevelopment Agency APPROVED: Chaimnan, Redevelopment Agency 5 EXHIBIT A STATEMBNT OF FINDINGS, FACTS, AND OVERRIDING CONS[)ERATIONS RELATING TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT INTRODUCTION The Califomia Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., "CEQA") provides, in Section 21081, that: "[N]o public agency shall approve or carg out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or caied out unless both of the following occur: "(a) The public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect: "(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the envtromnent. "(2) Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. "(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or altematives identified in the environmental impact report. "(b) With respect to significmit effects which were subject to a finding under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), the public agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, tecmological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment." As defined in CEQA, "'significant effect on the environment' means a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the enviromnent." (Public Resources Code Section 21068.) Exhibit A Resolution RA-00-06 Page 5 0f 19 II. DESCRTPTION OF THE PROJECT PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL For purposes of CEQA, the "project" addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report (the "Final EIR") is the adoption and phased implementation of the Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redeveilopment Project (the "Project"). As more particularly identified in the Final EIR, The Project Area is more particularly identified in the Final EIR. Under the Redevelopment Plan, the Project would be developed in accordmice with the land uses designated and permitted by the General Plan for the City of Cupertino. The Redevelopment Plan also specifically recognizes the development rights vested under that cert ain Development Agreement dated August 15, 1991, adopted by the City Council of the City of Cupertino by Ordinance No. 1540 on July 15, 1991. The Final EIR describes the environmental impacts that may occur as a result of the adoption and phased implementation of the Redevelopment Plan and identifies, where applicable, measures which would mitigate significant effects on the environment to a level of insignificance. Findings regarding the significant effects of the Project are set forth below. III. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT; FINDINGS REGARDIN(J SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT This Part nI identifies the potentially significant and unavoidably significant effects of the Project as detemnined by the Agency and the City Council, including the findings and facts supporting the findings in connection Uherewith. A. Lm'id Use and Planning 1. Environmental Impact a.Land Use Incompatibilities Between Proposed Modifications and Ad,iacent Areas: The proposed location of the new 168-room Hotel #2, west of Wolfe Road, could result in potentially significant adverse land use compatibility effects on adjacent existing residential areas to the west of the project site. These potential adverse effects could include: height and scale incongities, introduction of night-time light impacts from the hotel and hotel parking area lighting features, constmction period emissions (air), and increased noise associated with mechanical equipment and project constnuction. b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environmerit. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measures are incotporated into the Redevelopment Plan: Exhibit A 1 Resolution RA-00-06 Page60fl9 1 1 In conducting the design review process for Hotel #2, particular emphasis will be placed on the need to incorporate building design, setback, lighting controls, and other measures to ensure against adverse impacts on the nearest residential neighborhood to the west. The constnuction period air quality (dust) mitigation measures identified in Section 9.3 of the Final EIR will be implemented. Visual Factors Environmental Impact a. b. C. Visual Impacts of Wolfe Road Tree Removal: The proposed new department store and to a lesser extent, the proposed expansion of the retail bridge across Wolfe Road, could displace existing Wolfe Road street trees, resulting in the loss of visually important mature street trees and the conspicuous disnuption of the existing Wolfe Road visual character at this location. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, t% Redevelopment Planwhich mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) To the extent possible, the layout for the proposed new depmtment store mid retail bridge will retain mid protect some of the existing street trees and/or a street tree replacement plmi will be implemented which, to the satisfaction of the City, will be sufficient to offset project- related losses and restore visual continuity on fl'ie affected segment of Wolfe Road. Transportation and Parking Environmental Impact a.Prqject Impact on Westbound Left-Turn Storage at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road Intersection: The estimated maximum vehicular queue in the westbound left-tum lanes at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road intersection is estimated to exceed the available storage under existing conditions by six vehicles. With Exhibit A Resolution RA-00-06 Page 7 0fl9 the addition of traffic associated with other approved developments and the proposed project, the queue is estimated to exceed the available storage by 10 vehicles. b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the sigtffficant effects on the environment. C.Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, the westbound left-turn pocket at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road intersection will be lengthened by modifying the striping on the Homestead Road approach to provide two 320-foot left- tum lanes. Bnvironmental Impact a.Prqject Impact on Eastbound Left-Turn Storage at the Wolfe Road/Stevens Creek Boulevard Intersection: With the addition of traffic associated with the proposed project, the maximum queue in the eastbound left-!im pocket at the Wolfe Road/Stevens (}eek Boulevard intersection is projected to exceed the available storage length by one vehicle during the AM peak hour, b. %: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, the eastbound left-turn pocket at the Wolfe Rload/Stevens Creek Boulevard intersection will be lengthened by modifying the striping and median on the Stevens Creek Boulevard approach to provide one 170-foot and one 430-foot-long left-tum lane, 3.Environmental mpact a.%,ject Impact on Westbound Left-Tum Storage at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard Intersection: The maximum queue projected in the westbound left-turn pocket at the Steven Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard intersection is 18 vehicles Extfflbit k Resolution RA-00-06 Pagegong under existing conditions and 20 vehicles under project conditions. The existing tum pocket storage is approximately 16 vehicles in two 190-foot-long lanes. The estimated maximum queue under project conditions would exceed the available storage length by four. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, the eastbound left-tum pocket at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard intersection will be lengthened by modifying the striping and median on the Stevens Creek Boulevard approach to provide two 250-foot-long left-tum lanes. Environmental Impact Potential Operational Impact at the Vallco Parkway (Realigned) Parking Structure Driveways:The desip of relocated Va11cri Parkway and 'the msociated new adjacent parking stnicture driveways has not been finalized. If sepmzte left-tum lanes for inbound traffic at the parking stnucture driveways on Vallco Parkway are not provided, a potentially significant impact would occur at these locations. b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environtnent- Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, the provision of separate left-tum lanes for inbound traffic at the Vallco ParJcway driveways will be required. 5. Enviroental hnpact Potential Increased Demand for Bicycle Access: The project has the potential to increase demand for bicycle access to the site. There are no existing bicycle facilities serving the site. Exhibit A Resolution RA-00-06 Page 9 or 19 $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on Une environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (l) The project design shall incorporate support facilities for bicycles (e.g., bike racks for patrons and bicycle lockers and showers for employees). 6, Enviromnental Impact Potential Parking Impacts: The project has the potential to substantially increase the demands for convenient on-site parking which may result in locational and overall shortages in parking supply. b. %: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the enviroent. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Parking will be required to be constnucted at the retail parking ratio specified in the Development Agreement (August 15, 1991) and/or at the parking ratios specified in the City's zoning ordinance. In addition, to the extent necessary and feasible, off-site employee parking and/or a valet pmgram during the peak holiday season shall be implemented. Environmental hnpact Cumulative Impacts on the Homestead Road/Wolfe Road Intersection: With the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, operation of the intersection of Homestead Road and Wolfe Road is projected to deteriorate from LOS D- to LOS E during the PM peakhour. Exhibit A Resolution RA-00-06 Page 10 0fl9 b. F: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: 1 Implementation of the City's planned Homestead Arterial Management Program would improve operations at this intersection. PM peak-hour operations with improved signal progression along Homestead Road are estimated to be at LOS D- Environtnental Impact Cumulative Impacts to the Wolfe Road/Pruneridge Avenue hitersection: With the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E+ duig the PM peak hour. $: This is an unavoidahle significant effect. Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project make the altematives infeasible and outweigh this significant effect. Facts in Support of the Finding: The specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project are more particularly described in the Statement of Overriding Considerahons contained in Part V of this Statement of Findings, Facts and Overriding Considerations. Public Services Environmental Impact Increase in Demand for Fire Protection and Emergen6y Medical Services: The proposed project would attract new patrons to the proposed new peripheral retail store, restaurant, two hotels, department store(s), and other retail space increases, increasing the demand for fire protection and emergency medical services. In addition, traffic generated by the proposed project and other development in the area may create greater traffic congestion, potentially increasing emergency response times. The Central Fire Exhibit A B:v Resolution RA-00-06 Page 110f 19 District may require additional staffing and/or equipment to provide an adequate level of service to the project. b, %: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measures are incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: 1 As pmt of the project development, compliance with all applicable codes will be required, including the 1994 Unifomi Fire Code, current Unifomi Building Code, Electrical Code, Mechanical Code and Municipal Code, to ensure adequate installation of sprinkler systems, water delivery systems, mid oUher provisions. (2) As part of the project development, compliance with detailed project design features identified by the Central Fire District will be required during the City's plan review and permitting process. 2. ,.Enviromnental Impact Increase in Demand for Police Services: The proposed project would attract new patrons to the proposed new peripheral retail store, restaurant, two hotels, department store(s), 'and other retail space increases, increasing the demand for fire protection and emergency medical senrices. In addition, traffic generated by the proposed project and other development in the area may create greater traffic congestion, potentially increasing emergency response times. The Santa Clara County Sheriff's Department may require additional staffing to provide an adequate level of service to the project. %: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, coordination with the City and the County Sheriff's Department will be required to quantify potential impacts on police services and develop Exhibit A )13 Resolution RA-00-06 Page 12 of 19 an appropriate mitigation strategy, including adequate site lighting.for security. d.Additional Facts: The City of Cupertino has approved an agreement with the County of Santa Clara whereby the City has agreed to pay the cost of one additional sheriff's deputy for a certain period of time. 3.Environmental Impact a.Potential for Delays in Emergency Response: The numerous access points to the project site may create confusion to emergency responders, possibly adding to response times. b.$: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c.Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Coordination with the Sheriff's Depmtment mid Central Fire Districi will be a as necessary and yynpriatp to assign specific access point designations. Environmental Impact a.Prqiect Sanitary Sewer System mpacts: The sewer collection demands associated with the proposed project could exceed the capacity of the existing sewer main under I-280 currently serving the project site. b.$: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significmit effects on the environment. C.Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (l) As part of the project development, wastewater generation increases shall be compared by a civil engineer to determine whether existing capacity is sufficient and, if not, collection capacity improvements shall be required. Exhibit A i4 Resolution RA-00-06 Page 13 0f 19 E. Environmental Impact Constnuction Emissions: Project construction activities such as building demolition, excavation and grading operations, constnuction vehicle traffic and wind blowing over exposed earth would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive particulate matter emissions that would affect local air quality. b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Firiding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Fugitive dust control measures will be required to be implemented during project demolition and constmction activities. Environmental Impact Regional Emissions: Additional traffic generated by shopping center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's ("BAAQMD") thresholds of significance. BAAQMD guidance provides that projects that would individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project therefore would also have a significant cumulative impact on regional air quality. $: This is an unavoidable significant effect. Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project make the alternatives infeasible and outweigh this significant effect. Facts' in Support of the Finding: The specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project are more particularly described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations contained in Part V of this Statement of Findings, Facts and Overriding Considerations. Exhibit A i'::> Resolution RA-00-06 Page 14 0f 19 Geology and Soils Environmental Impact Expansive Soils and Soil Settlement: New development on the project site may be subject to foundation and infrastructure (i.e., utility pipe) damage from expansive soils or settlement of soils. Although it is likely that any such soils on the site were treated or removed prior to the constnuction of the existing stnuctures, it is possible that some hazards remain or that remediation standards have increased. b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation meanure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1)In accordance with standard City procedures, a soils report will be required in comiection with project development, which shall be based on a sufficient analysis of soils conducted by a qualificd cnginccr or gcologist and iixclutlt;i appropriate soils, foundation and stnuctural engineeffig to adequately account for any expansive soil underlying the mte. Environmental Impact Seismic Shaking Hazards: The project would be subject to strong to very strong seismic shaking in the event of a major earthquake on the Hayward, Smi Andreas, or Calaveras fault systems. This shaking could, in tum, result in ground failure from liquefaction or differential settlement. Shaking or resulting ground failure could damage or destroy improperly designed or constmcted new sttuctures and infrastmcture and result in hazards of injury or death to new building occupants. Potential damage to the proposed cinema would be of particular concenn due to the likely high concentration of occupants. b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Exhibit A Resolution RA-00-06 Page 15 0fl9 Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measures are incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Submission of a detailjed site-specific geotechnical investigation for the project, and commitment to compliance with all recommendations, will be required prior to project development. (2) The use of flexible connections for all water and sewer lines and, as appropriate, underground power and telecommunications lines will be required. Cultural Resources 1. Environmental hnpact Disturbance of Historic Archaeological Resources: Although the potential for the project site to contain archaeological resources is currently considered low, constnuction of the proposed new store, cinema, restaurant, and parking facilities could disturb sensitive,, as-yet unknown historic archaeological resources.. b. $: ' Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelop-vliicli uiiligaLe or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: ' I In the event that subsurface cultural resources ore encountered duting ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate vicinity shall be stopped and a qualified archaeologist retained to evaluate the finds. The discovery or disturbance of any cultural resources shall also be reported to the Califomia Historic Resources hifomiation System and, if Native American artifacts are found, to the Native Americmi Heritage Commission. Identified cultural resources should be recorded on fomi DPR 523 (historic properties). Mitigation measures prescribed by these groups and required by the City will be undertaken prior to resumption of constnuction activities. If hummi remains are found during project grading, work shall be halted and the County Coroner shall be infomied immediately. If disturbance of a cultural resource cannot be avoided, a mitigation program, including measures set forth in Section Exhibit A Il Resolution RA-00-06 Page 26 0fl9 15126.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines, shall be implemented. 2. Environmental Impact a.Disturbance of On-site Culturally Significant Trees: Project construction could disturb culturally significmt trees at the project site, especially those located near the proposed new department store, parking stnucture, md peripheral retail store. b.$: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the enviromnent. C.Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) A survey of existing trees on the project site shall be conducted. In connection with any tree defined as a "heritage tree" or a "specimen tree" by the Cupertino Municipal Code (chapter 14.18), complimice with City policies and ordinance requirements for tree protection and maintenance shall be required. IV. FINDINGS REGARDmG ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the Project or to the location of the Project which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the Project and to evaluate the comparative merits of the altematives. Section 15126(d)(1) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that the "discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or to its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attauunent of the project objectives, or would be more costly." As more pmticularly set forth in the Final EIR, the Project was compared to the following alternatives: (1) no project; (2) altemative land use mix-2,984-seat cinema in place of 95,000- square-foot retail store; (3) mitigated project alternative; (4) modified redevelopment area boundaries; (5) alternative project location. The analysis in the Final EIR concludes that the Mitigated Project is the enviromnentally. superior alternative. The Mitigated Project is the proposed project incorporating all of the mitigation measures recommended by the Final EIR. Based on the information contained in the Final EIR and the foregoing, the Agency and the City Council find that none of the other alternatives (those altematives other than the Mitigated Exhibit A Resolution RA-00-06 Page 17 0f 19 Project) are feasible in that none of the other altematives will accomplish the basic objectives of the PrOjeCt tO eliminate blight in the Project Area. As a result,, none Ofthe other altematives are acceptable when compared to the project as proposed and modified by the mitigation measures adopted by the Agency and City Council, i,e., the Mitigated Project. V.STATEMBNT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS CEQA requires a public agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. As set forth in Part III hereof, the Agency and the City Council have detennined that the only unavoidable environtnental consequences of the Project are the following: A.Transportation and Plag: Cumulative impacts on the Wolfe Road/Pruneridge Avenue intersection, With the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, the operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E+ during the PM peak hour. There are no feasible physical improvements that could be constmcted at this intersection that would mitigate this impact to a less than significant level. B.Air Quality: Regional emissions. Additional traffic generated by shopping center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Managcmcnt Distict's ("nAAQiviD") tluebliuklb u[ sigiffjicaixce. BAAQMD guidance proyides that projects that would individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project therefore would also have a significant cumulative impact on regional air quality. Mitigation measures are set forth in the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A). Those mitigation measures will assist in reducing project and cumulative impacts on regional air quality, but would not reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level, The Agency and the City Council find that the above-referenced unavoidable environmental consequences of the Project are acceptable when balanced against its benefits. This finding is based on the following facts: 1.The Project will serve a critical need, that being the elimination and prevention of the spread of blight and deterioration in the Project Area and the conservation, rehabilitation and redevelopment of ffie proposed Project Area in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan, the General Plan for the City of Cupertino and local codes and ordinances. 2.The promotion of new and continuing private sector investment within the Project Area will prevent the loss of and facilitate the capture of commercial sales activity, Exhibit A l') Resolution RA-00-06 Page 18 0fl9 The Project will allow for the elimination of blight through rehabilitation and reconstnuction, new development, and the assembly of parcels into more developable sites for more desirable uses. 4. The Project will result in the elimination or amelioration of certain environmental deficiencies, including substandard vehicular circulation systems. New constniction within the Project Area will result in an environment reflecting a high level of concern for architectural, landscape, and urban design and land use principles appropriate for attainment of the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan. Project implementation would result in the retention and expansion of businesses by means of redevelopment and rehabilitation activities and by encouraging and assisting in the cooperation and participation of owners, businesses, mid public agencies in the revitalization of the Project Area. Revitalized commercial development will result in the creation and development of local job opportunities and the preservation of the area's existing employment base. Project implementation will strengthen the economic base of the Project Area and the City by installing nccdcd sitc iinprtm:iucuts auJ sLiiuulaliiig cuuuueicial development. 9. Project implementation will expand and improve the City's supply of affordable housing. Exhibit A Cupertino Valk,o Redevelopment Plan Cupertino Fledevelopment Agency July 13, 2000 EXHIBIT B Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Checklist Page 1 MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLlgT FOR THE CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVEL,OPMENT PLAN ST ATE MITIGATION MONlTOFtlNG REQUIFIEMENTS CEQA Section 21 081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires all public agencies to adopt report'ing Or monitoring PROGRAMS when they approve projects subject tO environmentat impact reports or mitigated negative declarations. The mitigation monitoring program must be implemented by the Lead Agency (in thiS Cafe, the Cupertino Redevelopment AgenCy) subsequent to certification of the EIR. The following mitigation monitoring and reporting checklist has been formulated for implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Plan, May 2oOO (the Final EIR incorporates the November 1999 Draft EIR). wnibouury xtmiiufflNb chtt.:xust The fol!owing mitigation monitoring and reporting checklist identifies: (1) each significant impact identified in the EIR, (2) each mitigation measure included in the EIR, (3) the party or parties responsible for implementing that mitigation measure, (4) the type of implementation required, (5) the timing of implementation, (6) the party responsible for performing the mitigation monitoring, and (7) the mitigation verification signature and date. These checklist items are discussed in more detail below. Identified Impact. This checklist column includes each significan'3adverse impact identified in the Final EIFI (Draft EIR section 2, except as revised in Final EIR sedion 3'). Identified Mitigation Measures. This column includes each mitigation measure identified in the Final EIFi (Draft EIR section 2, except as revised in Final EIR section 31). Monitoring. This column describes (l)the "implementation entity" responsible for carrying Out eaCh mitigation meaSLlre-e.g., future shopping center and/or hotel development applicants ' From the yellow Summary table in sectiori2 of the Draft EIR (pages 2-4 through 2-1 5), except as superseded by section 3 of the Final EIR. WP5l'L96lFEIRlMITMON.598 ,,L( Cupertino Vallco Fledevelopment Plan Cupertino Fledevelopment Agency July j3, 2000 Final EIR MiUgation Monitoring Checklist Page 2 ("appl.") and/or the City and/or the County Fire Department (CFD);' (2) the "type of monitoring action" required (e.g., revisions to the overall development plan, or conditions of project approval); (3) specific implementation timing requirements (e.g., implement during design review of prior to project approval); and (4) the "monitoring and verification entity" responsible for performing the monitoring and verification of each mitigation, which for every mitigation is the City/Agency's Department Of Community Development (DCD). Verification. The verification co(umn provides a space for the DCD staff signature and date when a monitoring milestone is completed. 'The County Fire Department (CFD) is incorrectly referred to as the Central Fire District in the EIR document. WP5l'J596lFEJRWITMON.5M MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST-CUPERT€NO YALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PLAN The environmental mitigation measures listed in column two below have been inmrporated Into the Cupert j signed chart will indleate that each mfflgatlon requirement has been complied mtb, and that City and slate lno Vallco Redevelopment Plan in order to nJgate identified enumnmental ' Imoniloring requirements have been fuffllled mth respect to Public Resources'mC'odce'SecAtCioonm2pl'eOl8"1.6.and IDENTIFIED IMPACT BELATED MITIGATION MEASURE (CONDfflON OF APPROVAL) MONITORING VEFllFtCATION tmpt. Entltj' type of Implementation Amana Timing Flequlrements' Monltorlng and Verlflcauon Entlty"Slgnature Data LAND USE AND PLAN/41/NO Impact LU-t: land Llse Incompatibilities Between Proposed Modifications and Adiamnt Areas. The proposed kcatlon ofthe new 168-room Hotel #2, west of Woffe Road, oould resutt in patenUally signtfit adverse lam use patibility effeds on adjacent existing residential areas to the west of the ' pmlxt slte. These potential adverse sffeds could include: height and saile Inmngruities, Introdudon of night-time Ilght Inipacts from the hote1 and tiotel parking area lighting features, structim period emissions (air), am increased noise assmiated mffli medianim equipment and project zstnicUon. Mltlgation LU-f : In oonduding the design review pro>ss for Hotel #2, place parUailar emphasis on the need to inoorporate building deslgn, setback, lighting oontrols, and other measures to ensure against adverse Impacts on the nearest residential neighbo to the west. Implement the ' conatrudion period air quamy (dust) mtligatlon measures klentified In section 9.3 of this EIR (Mnlgatk>n AQ-T). Cit} and appl. Inoorporate into the project Implement during design review DCD VISUAL FACTORS Impact V-1: Vlsual Impacts of Wotfe Road Tree Removal. The proposed new department store (Dillams) and to a lesser extent, the proposed expansion of the retail bridge across Wolfe Road, muld displace existing Wolfs Road street trees, resulting in the loss of visua(ly impormnt mature street trees and Die ' conspicuous disruption of the exisUng Wolfe Road vlsual charader at this )oaiUon. Mitigation V-1: To the extent possible, formulate a layout for the proposed new depattment store and retail brklge that rstalns and protetjs some of the existing street trees, and/or incorponate a street tree rep(acement plan into the projem whidi, to the satisfadion of the City, is suffldent to offset projed-related losses and restore visual oontinuity on the affected segment of Wolfs Road. fl Appl.Inwrporate Into the project Implement during deslgn review DCD WP5ll596lFEIRlMMCHT.596 IDENnFIED IfUPACT TRANSPORTAnON AND PARKING knpact T-1 : Project Impact on Westbound Left-turn Storage at the Wolfs Road/ Homestead Road Intersectlon. The estimated maximum vehicular queue in the westbound left- tum lanes at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road inlersedion is estimated to exceed the available storage under existing conditions by six vehides. With the addition of traffic assoaated mlh other approvm developments and the proposed Valloo redevelopment plan pmject, the queue Is estimated to exceed the avaltable storage by 10 vehicles. Impact T-2: Project Impad on Eastbound Left-turn Storage at the Wolfs Road/Stevens Creek Boulevam IntarsacUon. With the addition of traffic associated with the pmposed project, the maximum queue in the eastbound left-tum pocket ai the Wolfs Road/Stevens Creek Boulevam intersection is projeded to exceed the ardlable storage length by one vehicle during the AM peak hour. Impact T-3: Project Impact on Westbound Left-turn Storage at Stevens Creak Boulevard/Do Anza Boulavard Intersection. The maximum queue projeded in the westbound lefi-turn pocket at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevanj intersection is 18 vehides under existlng oonditions and 20 vehicles under pr$ct conditions. The exisUng tum pocket storage is approximately i B vehicles in mo 1 90-foot-long lanes. The estimated maximum queue under Project Conditions would exceed the avallable storage length by four. RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE (CONDfflON OF APPROVAL) MONITOFIING VERIFICATION Impl. Type of Implemantatlon Timing Monltorlng and Entity' Actlon' Requlmmsnts' Vertflcatlon Entlty" Slgnatum Mltlgatlon T-1. Requlre the applicant to lengthen City the westbound mfi-lum pocket at the Wolfe and Road/Homestead Road intersection by modifying appl. ffie striping on the Homestead Road appmadi to provide mo 320-foot lefl-tum lanes. Inaorporats into the Prior to project project approval DCD Mitlgatlon T-2. Require the appliaant to lengthen' City the eastbound lefi-tum pocket at the Wolfe and Road/8tevens Creek Boulevard Road Intsrsection appl. by modifying the striping and median on the Stevens Creek Boulevard approadi to provide one 1 70-fool and one 430-foot-long left-tum lane. Mltlgatlon T-3. Require the appliaant to lengthen City the eastbound lafl-tum pocknt at the Stevens and Creek Boulevard/Do Anza Boutevam intersedon appl. 5y modifying the striping and median on the Stevens Creek Boulevard approach to provide two 250-foot-long lefi-tum lanes. Inoorporate Into the project Incorporate into the project Prior to project approval Prior to project approval DCD DCD Data Paga 2 WP5l696lFEIRlMMCH7:598 IDENnFIED IMPACT I RELATED MITIGATION MEA8uRE (CONDfflON OFAPPROVAL) , MONm)RING VEFIIFICATION Impl. Emlt}' Typa of Impbmermtim Adona Tlming Requlmmanls' uonltorlng and Verincatlon Enfity"Slgnalum Date Impact T-4: Potentlal Operational Impact at the Vallco Parkway (Reallgned) Parking Strueture Dmeways. The design of relocated Vallm Parkway am the associalm new adjacent parking strudure driveways has not been'flnalized. If separate leff-tum lanes for Inbound traffic at the parking atrumre driveways on Valloo Parkway are not provided, a polenfialiy signiflmt Impact would oagr at these locations. ' I Mitigation T-4. ProJde separate left-tum lanes for inbound traffc at the Vallco Parkway i drrveways. I I i MT)I- I I Incorporate into the project Prior to project approval DCD Impact T-5: Potentlal Increased Demand for Bicycle Access. The projad has the potential to increase demand for binds amss to the slte. 'n'iere are no exisUng b+gde faalibs servlng the slte. The pnC)j AS pmpC+8ed d(X-'3 not Indude support fadllties for bicycles (e.g., bike racks, bike lodters, etc.). MtUgatlon T-5. Inoorporate support faaliUes for bicycles (e.g_, bike racks for patrons and biqcle lockers and showers for employees) Into the pmposed project design. Appl.moorporate into the prded Prior to project approml DCD Impact T-6: Potential Parking Impacts. The proJect has the potential to substantially {ncrease the demands tar mnvenient onstle parking whch may resutt in Iocatlonal and overall shorlages In parking supply. Mitigation T-6. As dimiued under subaectlon 7.2.2 abova, the 1991 Development Agreement requires that new parking for added ratail space be pmvided at a mtio of one parking space for every 248 square feet of groas leasable area of retail space. The agreement does not address hotel parking. Even with the provlslon of this retail parking ratio, a parking shortage may owr during the peak holiday shopping season. Additional retail parking mn be provldm during peak holiday periods by requlring employees to park offsite and to use shuttle buses to free-up onstte spacas for mall patrons during peak mnditions. Another opUon is to use valet parking where patrons drop off thelr vehicle at a valet booth and a parking attemant then parks the vehL(es. Under the valqt option, vehicles are parked doser together than in a typiml lot, by ,' Appl Inoorporate into the project Prtor to project approva! DCD I Paga 3 WP5fl5961FEIRWMCHT:596 IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE (CONDmON OF APPROV AL) MONITI )RING VERIFICATION Impl. Entity' Type of Impbmentatlon Actlorf Tlmlng Requlrements' Monltorlng and Verlflcatlon Entity'Slgnatum Date disregarding the space delineations and by parking vehicles In the circulation aisles, thus Increasing the effective parking supply. Provide parking at the retail parking ratio spedfied In the Development Agreement, implement offsite employee parking and/or a valet pmgram during the peak holiday season, and pmvide hotel parking mtlos as specified in the City's zonlng ominance. Impact T-7: Cumulatlve Impacts on the jJyzad Oxsdlllllxllx Dxyd js#alxx Mttlgatlon T-7. Implementation of the City of l'iiyzidli'iiai'e zlaririz LL-umeieAaod Adad-il Clt7 Implement the 01siixyii Alll%l%ll - * - C§ Imple-DCD Illllllaifflau nllauljflllle rlllall IIIICI@I%lllTll. %Vith tm tmffic associated mth the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, operation of the intersaction of Homestead Road and Wolfe Road Is pmJected tq deterlorate from LOS D- to LOS E during the PM peak hour. !-ill )101 Ill Ill Th plal II II;ill I 1171 I laa IDau /'II ltal lal Management Program would improve operaffons at this intersection. PM peak-hour operations with improvm signal progression along Homestead Road are estimated to be at LO8 D-. Dla71 lt.7 tufel tilt. ill Tantau Avenue synchmnizsd signal mmponant of the Homestead Arterial Management Pmgrarn II Itfl 11d kl(JI I expeded to be oomplete by Fall 2001 (DEIR page 7-18). Implement prfor to bulldout of cumulative development (e.g., Compaq campus, etc.)I Impact T-8: Cumulative Impacts to the Wolfs Road/Prunerldge Avenue Intersedlon. With the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, the operation of the interssdion of Wolfe Raad and Pruneridge Avenue is projected to detertorate fmm LOS D to LOS E+ during the PM peak hour. Mltlgation T4. There are no feasible physim Improvements that could be constnuded at this Intersedlon; i.e., this is a signifimnt una<idabie cumulative impact. %W4 WPsll5961FEIRlMMCHT.5gs IDENTIFIED IMPACT BELATED MITIGATION MEASURE (CONDmON OF APPROVAL) . MONITORING VERIFICATION Impl. Entlty' Typa ol Impkimentatlon Actlona Tlmlng Raqulrements' Monitorlng and Veriflcatlon Entlty"Signature Date PUBLIC SERVI(,ES Impact PG-1: Increase In Demand for Flre Proteetlon and Emergency Medical Servlaes. The pmposed project would afiract new patrons to the proposed new peripheral retail store, restaurant, me hotels, department store(s), and other retail spam ingaases, increasing the demand for fire pmtedon and emergency medim sem.as. In addtuon, traffic generated by the proposed projsd and other development irr 4hb ymia miiiiii a-ra_ia*aa yrasslzr *i-ill!y zz Mltlgatlon Pg-1 : Require ths applimnt to comply with all appllmble es, Including the 1994 Uniform Fire Code, cunent Unifomi Buildtng Code, Electrical Code, Mechanical Code, and Municipal Code, to ensure adequate installation of sprinkler systems, water delivery systems, and other pmvlsions. Also require appfft oomplianoe mth detailed proud design features idanUfied by the Central Fire Distrid (CFD) during I kas f'tk l+ # # * a!**** % *j -s-*-}as - -*- -# -# j # City, CFD, and app(. Incorporate into the pro}et,t Prlar to project approval DCD jll lj jg j)kl tea jl 71al a()110 gj all:{j u 51 1110 jgllllj jl *zu-stla* ! - - - -! -# * - - --- --- utti ytry (i plelll I(jVltlW allll pVllllllllllg prlXat!l$H- In puraiuall7 111UlUillNl% tfflltffgt!+lli7 it!5pgiise times. The Central Flre Distnd may require additkinal staffing and/or equipment to provide an adequate level of semce to The project. aO(11110ni allnng ute appmVal process Tar anj partlcu(ar porUon of the projed described In the Redevek@rnent Plan, the Applit shoukl negotiate with the CFD to Identify mtugationg that mll enable the District to maintain adequate fire protecUon levels of sevke to the podion of the project for which the appmval is belng sought. Eiuch mlUgaUon may entail addffional property tax ntu.a_thrnnnha %asn the gadavolnrimonl Aniinpv +nQ-tu - - - %l - J - - - II u II- u - g I- - - - - - Idl-l II & - II rlll I-Ill- 7 Ill the CFD beyond those that will already be included with Plan appmval. Alternatively, they may enmil applicant assistance to the CFD in procurfng additional firefightlng equipment. Impact Pg-2: Increase in Damand for Pollw Servlces. The proposed proied would attract new patmns to the ped peripheral retail store, restaurant, two hotels, two department store(s) and other retail space, increasing the ' demand for police services. In addition, traffic generated by the proposed projed and other development in the downtown area may create greater traffic mngestion, potentially increasing emergent.y response times. Mitigation Pg-2: Prior to approval of final development plans for the mail modifimtions, requke the appllt to axirdinate with the C$ and the County Sheriffs Department to address associated additional pollm senrit.e needs and dove(op an approprlate publiJprivate security strategy (i.e., adequate so>nty lighting, a coordinated security program invMng the private onsite securFty force and City polio, ek..). Condition final development plan azeptance on Ctt5/, apm. ar,d CSD Inaorporate Into the project Par to projd approval DCD J %?5 WP5ll5961FEIRlMMCHT.596 IDENTIFIED luPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE (CONDITION OF APPROVAL) MONITOFIING VERIFICAnON Impl. Entity' Type of 11Tlpkimantatlon Actlon' nmlng Raqulmments' Monltorlng and Vamlcation Entity'81gnatum Date City approval of the applicant proposed sgurtty strategy and implementation pmgram. Impact Pg-3: Potentlal for Delays Jn Emergency Response. The numemus aocess poims to the project site may create oonfusion to emergency responders, posslbly adding to response Umes. Mitlgatlan Pg-3: The mall operator should assign alphanumeric designations to the different azess points to the Valloo Fashion Mall and should provide the Sheriffs Deparlment and Cenkal Fire Dlstrlct mth site plans showing these aocess polnt designations. Appl.Inoorp@rate into the project Prior to projd approval DCD Impact Pg-4: Project Sanltary Sewer System Impacts. Table 3.1 indimtes that the proposed redevelopmenf plan muld fa#litate expansion of the Valkz Fashion Park shopping centsr retail spam by 348,870 square feet, as weu as the additkxt of a 10,000-square-foot restaurant and two new hotels (318 rooms). The CuperUno Sanitary District has indicated that the Increase in sewer mllection demands associated mth this expansion muld exceed Uie capady of the existing sewer main umer 1-280 mrrently serving the proved site. Mltlgatlon PS4: As a condition of future onsite developtnent approvals, the Applimnt's mvil engineer shall pare the wastewater generatior increment associated mth The redevelopment pmgram with the design aipaclty of the existing sewer main(s), and based on the standard specifimtims of the Cupsrtino 8anltary Dlstrid, shall either: (1) vertfy to Uie satisfadon of the City that exlstlr+g oolledion capacny is suffldent to serve the projed; or (2) design and implement, or participate in on a fair share basis, to City satisfadion, the collect)on mpadfy improvements necessary to serve pmjecl buildout. Appl Inoorporate into the project Prior to project approval DCD AIR QUAUTY Impact AQ-1: Constructlon Emissions. Project oonstrudion activities such as building demolition, excavation and grading operations, mnstruction vehide traffic and wind Uowing over exposed earth would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive parUculate maffer emissions that would affect loail air quality. Mitlgatlon AQ-1. Dust emissions from demolition and oonstniction activities can be greatly reduced by implementing fugiUve dust mnlrol measures. . The significance of constniction impacts is, azordlng to BAAQMD guidance, determined by whether or not appropriate dust control measures are Implemented. Appl Inmrporate into the project Prior to project aPf)mval DCD Page 8 WP5ll596lFEIRWMCHT59B IDENTIFIED IMPACT BELATED MITIGATION MEASURE (CONDITION OF APPROVAL) MONITOFIING VERIFICATION Impl. Enllty' Typs of Implemantdon Action' Tlmlng Raqukemanffl Monitoring and Verifleatlon Entity'5ilgnatum Date Impact AQ-2: Rag)ona) Emlssloni Additional traffic generated by 'shopping center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the BAAQMD thresholds of significance. BAAQMD guidance provides that pmjects that would Individually have a dgnlfimnt air quality impaci woukl also be oonsidered to have a slgnifiaint cumulative air quaflty impad. The proposed project therefore would also have a s/gnff/canf cumulaffvs Impacton regional air qua!ity. Mltlgatlon AQ-2: The shopping center redevelopment plan should implement the following strategies to redum vehicle usage: ii Indude physkJ }mprovements, such as sidewalk Improvements, landsmping and the installation of bus shelters and blcycle parking that would ad as incentives for pedestrian, bicyde and transit modes of havel. a . Develop a transit use IncenUve program for employees and patrons, sudi as on-site distributlon of passes am/or subsidized a transit paSSeS for loml transit system. s Provide transit mformation klosks. a Locate new buikling entrances near transit stops. lass measures would asslst In raduang pmject and cumulative impads on regional air qualtty, but would not reduce the impads to a less-than- signifiaint level. Since no other feasible measures are available, the proved and aimulaUve effect on regional air quall would therefore represent a slgnlfiaant unavoidable Impact Appl.Inoorporate into the , proiect Prior t(i proiect approval , DCD GEOLOGY AND SOILS Impact GS-1: Expanslve Rolls and Sole Settlement. New devekpment on the project site may be subject to foundation and infrastructure (i.e., utility pipe) damage from expansive soils or settlement of soils. Although il is likely that any such soils on the site were Mltlgatlon (IS-1. In aocardance wlth standatd Clty procedures, require the Appliznt to submlt a soirs mport for City review. The soils reporl shall be msed on a suffident analysis of soils mnduded by a qualifim engineer or geologlst, and shall to City satisfadian indude appropriate APPI. I Inoorporate into the pmJect Prior to project approyl DCD WP51l596lFEIRlMMCHT: 598 IDENTIFIED IMPACT REuTED MITIGATION MEASURE (CONDmON OF APPROVAL) MONff €)RING VERIFICATION Impl. Entity' Type of Impkmentallon Aatlorf Timing Requlremantsa Monllorlng and Varlflcatlon Entlty'Slgnatum Data treated or removed prior to the constnicUon of the existing Valloo Fashlon Park structures, it is possible that some hazams remain or that remediation standards have Increased. soils, foundation, and stnictural engineering to adequately aunt for any expansive soil underlying the site. Impact OS-2: Selsmk: Shaklng Huards. Although no known active faults pass through or immediately adjamnt to the project site, the proiecl like all urban development in the region, would m subject to strong to very strong selsmk, sha)dng In the event of a major Mlt)gatlon OS-2, Require the Applit to submit a detailed site-specific geotechnid investigation for the project and require implementation of its remendations to City satisfadion as oondiUons of project appmval. Require the to oonform to the policies of the City of Cupenino M)f)1.Inmrporate into the project Prior to project Bpproval DCD earthquake on the Haywam, Sun Andreas, or a Calaveras fault systems. This shaking ld, in tum, result in ground failure from liquefacUon or differential settlement. Shaking or resulUng ground failure could damage or destroy impmperly designed or mnstruded new structures and infrastrudura and result In hazards of Injury or death to new building oocupants. Potential damage to the propased dnema would be of pamcular ooncem due to the Ilkely high ooncentratlon of ozupants. ______GeneralPlan Publk. Heaflh and Safety Element, ' am oomply mth all standard City ditions of approval regarding geotechnla4 issues. Requine that flexible connedions be used for all water and sewer lines, and as appropriate, underground power and telecommunications lines. CULTURAL RESOUR(:,E9 Jmpact CR-1 : Disturbance of Hlstorlc Archaeological Resoura=s. Although the potential for the project site to contain archaeologiui resources is currently considered low, construction of the proposed new store, ainema, restaumnt, and parking facilities could disturb sensitive, as-yet unknown historic archaeological resources. MltJgatlon CR-1 : In the event that subsurfaw cultural resources are enoountered during approved ground-disturbing actMtles, work In the immediate vicinity shall be stopped and a qualified archaeologist retained to evaluate the finds. The disoovary or disturbance of any cultural resources shall also be reported to the Califamia Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS) and, if NaUve Arneriean arlifacts are found, to the Native American Heritage Commission. Identified cultural resources should be recorded on fomi Appl.Incorporate into the project Prior to prolect approval DCD f%gal WP51!59(AFEIHlMMCHT.596 IDENTIFIED IMPACT Impact CR-2: Disturbance of Onslta Culturally Signiflmnt Trees. Pled stniction oould disturb cutturally significant trees at the project site, espeaally those lomted near the proposed new deparlment store, parklng structure, and periphem) retail store. BELATED MITIGATION MEASURE (G:ONDmON OF APPROVAL) MONm)RING VERIFICATION Impl. Typs ul liiiplviiiiiiila!lcn Tlriiliig Monltorlng and Entity' Action' Raqulmmenls' Verlfleauan Entlty' Slgnatum DPR 523 (historic properties). Mitigation measures prescribed by these groups and required by the City of Cupertlno should be undemken prior to resumption of constnidion actMUes. If human remains are found during project grading, wodt shall hatled and the County Comner shall be infomied immediately. If the Coroner determlnes that no invesligalion of the cause of death is requlred, and If the remains are of Native American origin, the Native American Heritage Commisson should be mntacted and further adons should be taken in oonsullation with them. If dighirbance of a projed area cullural resource cannot be avlded, a miUgatlon pmgram, induding measures set forth In Section 15128.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, shall be Implemented. Mltlgatlon CR-2: Require the Applimnt to Appl. mnduct a surwy of existing trees on the proved site, and consult mth the City of Cupertino regaming the City's Herbge Tree list before any change or demolition oaws In the area of potentially slgnlfimnl onsite trees. For any tree definm as a 'heritage tree' r>r a 'spacimen tree' by Cuperfino Municipal Code chapter 14.18, require mmpllance with City polides and ordinance requirements for tree protection and maintenance. Inmrporate into the Prior to pmiect project approql DCD Date Page 9 WP5ll5!;NAFEIRlMMCHT.5fM RESOLUTION NO. RA-GO-07 RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FINDING THAT THE USE OF TAXES ALLOCATED FROM THE CUPERTINO VALLCO REDF,VELOPMENT PROJECT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCREASmG5 IhIPROVlfSiU, AND PRESERVING THE CpMMUNITY'S SUPPLY OF LOW- AND MODERATE-INCOME HOUSIN(, OUTSmE THE PROJECT AREA WILL BE OF BENEFff TO THE PROJECT WHEREAS, the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") has prepared a proposed Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project") which would result in the allocation of taxes from the Project Area to the Agency for the purposes of redevelopment; and WHEREAS, Section 33334.2 of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) requires that not less than twenty percent (20%) of all taxes so allocated be used by the Agency for the purpose of ingeasing, improving, and preserving the community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing available at affordable housing cost; and WHEREAS, Section 33334.2(g) of the Community Redevelopment Law provides that the Agency may use such funds outside the Project Area if a finding is made by resolution of the Agency and the City Counci1thatsuchusewillbeofbenefittathePmj a NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY that the use of taxes allocated from the Pmject Area for the purpose of increasing, improving, and preserving the community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing available at affordable housing cost outside the Project Area will be of benefit to the Project. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency this 17th day of July, 2000, by the following vote: Vote AYF,S: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAJN: Members of the Redevelopment Agency ATTEST:APPROVED: Secretary Chairman, Redevelopment Agency RF,SOLUTION 00-187 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO CONSmERING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN \OR THE Cuff,RTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT; ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF FINDINGS, FACTS, AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS; AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN WHEREAS, as the Lead Agency, the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") has prepared an Enviroental Impact Report (the "EIR") on the proposed Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project") pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., hereinafter referred to as "CEQA"), the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Enviromnental Quality Act (14 Califomia Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq., hereinder referred to as the "State CEQA Guidelines"), mid procedures adopted by the Agency relating to environmental evaluation; and WHEREAS, the Agency transmitted for filing a Notice of Completion of the Draft EIR and thereafter in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Giiidelines forwarded the Draft EIR to the State Clearinghouse for distribution to those state agencies which have discretionary approval or jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the Redevelopment Plan, to the affected taxing agencies, and tO other interested persons and agencieS and SOught the comments of such persons and agencies; and WHEREAS, notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting comments on the Draff EIR was published in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHBREAS, the Draft EIR was thereafter revised and supplemented to adopt changes suggested, to incorporate comments received during the public review period pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, and to incorporate the Agency's responses to said comments, and as so revised and supplemented, a Final EIR was prepared by the Agency; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR, as revised and supplemented to incorporate all comments received and the responses of the Agency thereto, and is pmt of the Agency's Report to the City Council on the Redevelopment Plan; and Resolution 00-287 Page20f3 WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino is a Responsible Agency, as defined in Section 21069 of the Public Resources Code, with respect to the Redevelopment Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTnSJO AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council has duly reviewed and considered the Final EIR prepared and certified by the Agency prior to adopting this resolution and acting on the Redevelopment Plan. Section 2. The City Council hereby adopts the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations relating to the enviromnental impact of the Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (including, without limitation, the mitigation measures therein set forth). Based upon such Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations, the Agency hereby finds that all significant environmental effects have been eliminated or substantially lessened except the following unavoidable adverse impacts: Cumulative impacts on the Wolfe Road/Prunendge Avenue intersection. With the traffic associatcd with thc proposed projcct, approved developme area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, the operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E+ during the PM peak hour. There are no feasible physical improvements that could be constnucted at this intersection that would mitigate this impact to a less than significant level. Regional emissions. Additional tc generated by shopping center- expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's ("BAAQMD") thresholds of significance. BAAQMD guidance provides that projects that would individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project therefore would also have a significant cumulative impact on regional air quality. Mitigation measures are set forth in the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A). Those mitigation measures will assist in reducing project and cumulative impacts on regional air quality, but would not reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council finds and determines that the Redevelopment Plan will have a significant effect upon the environment but that the benefits of the Redevelopment Plan outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts for Resolution 00-187 Page 3 0f3 the reasons Set forth in the Statement Of Findings, FaCtS, and Overriding Considerations, in particular, Part V thereof. Section3. The City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Plan set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Section4. Upon approval and adoption of the Redevelopment Plmi by the City Council, the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk of the County of Santa Clara pursuant to the provisions of Section21l52 of CEQA and Section 1 5096(i) of the State CEQA Guidelines. PASSED AND ADOPTBD at a regular meeting of the City Councif of the City of Cupertino tbis 17th day of July 2000, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: .tTTEST:AI'I'ROVnD: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino EXHIBIT A STATEMENT OF FmDINGS, FACTS, AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS RELATING TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT INTRODUCTION The Califomia Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., "CEQA") provides, in Section 21081, that: "[N]o public agency shall approve or card out a project for which an envjronmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out unless both of the following occur: "(a) The public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect: "(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. "(2) Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. "(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. "(b) With respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), the public agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the enviromnent." As defnned in CEQA, "'significant effect on the environment' means a substantial, or potentially substantial adverse change in the environment." (Public Resources Code Section 21068.) Exhibit A Resolution RA-00-06 Page 5 0f t9 n.DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL For purposes of CEQA, the "project" addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report (the "Final EIR") is the adoption and phased implementation of the Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project"). As more particularly identified in the Final BIR, The Project Area is more particularly identified in the Final EIR. Under the Redevelopment Plan, the Project would be developed in accordance with the land uses designated and permitted by the General Plan for the City of Cupertino. The Redevelopment Plan also specifically recognizes the development rights vested under that certain Development Agreement dated August 15, 1991, adopted by the City Council of the City of Cupertino by Ordinance No. 1540 on July 15, 1991. The Final EIR describes the enviroental impacts that may occur as a result of the adoption and phased implementation of the Redevelopment Plan and identifies, where applicable, measures which would mitigate significant effects on the enviromnent to a level of insignificance. Findings regarding the significant effects of the Project are set forth below. na. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT; FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT This Part In identifies the potentially significant and unavoidably significant effects of the Project as determined by the Agency md the City Council, including the findings and facts supporting the findings in connection therewith. A. Land Use md Planning 1.Environmental hnpact a.Land Use Incompatibilities Between Proposed Modifications and Adjacent Areas: The proposed location of the new 168-room Hotel #2, west of Wolfe Road, could result in potentially significant adverse land use compatibility effects on adjacent existing residential areas to the west of the project site. These potential adverse effects could include: height and scale incongnuities, introduction of night-time light impacts from the hotel mid hotel parking area lighting features, construction period emissions (air), and increased noise associated with mechanical equipment and project constuction. b.$: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. C.Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measures are incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: Exhibit A Resolution RA-00-06 Page 6 0fl9 1 1 hi conducting the design review process for Hotel #2, particular emphasis will be placed on the need to incorporate building design, setback, lighting controls, and other measures to ensure against adverse impacts on the nearest residential neighborhood to the west. The constnuction period air quality (dust) mitigation measures identified in Section 9.3 of the Final EIR will be implemenfed Visual Factors Environmental Impact Visual hnpacts of Wolfe Road Tree Removal: The proposed new department store and to a lesser extent, the proposed expansion of the retail bridge across Wolfe Road, could displace existing Wolfe Road street trees, resulting in the loss of visually important mature street trees and the conspicuous disruption of the existing Wolfe Road visual character at this location, b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incnrpnrated into, tiih Rrilevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. C.Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) To the extent possible, the layout for the proposed new department store and retail bridge will retain and protect 'some of the existing street trees and/or a street tree replacement plan will be implemented which, to the satisfaction of the City, will be sufficient to offset project- related losses and restore visual continuity on the affected segment of Wolfe Road. Transportation and Parking 1. Envimnmental Impact a.Project Impact on Westbound Left-Tum Storage at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road Intersection: The estimated maximum vehicular queue in the westbound left-turn lanes at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road intersection is estimated to exceed the available storage under existing conditions by six vehicles, With Extfflbit A 3Y Resolution RA-00-06 Page 7 0f 19 the addition of traffic associated with other approved developments and the proposed project, the queue is estimated to exceed the available storage by 10 vehicles. b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, the westbound left-turn pocket at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road intersection will be lengthened by modifying the stiping on the Homestead Road approach to provide two 320-foot left- tum lanes. 2, Environmental Impact a.Prq,iect Impact on Eastbound Left-Tum Storage at the Wolfe Road/Stevens Creek Boulevard hitersection: With the addition of traffic associated with the proposed project, the maximum queue in the eastbound left ium pocket at the Wolfc Road/Stcvcns Boulevard intersection is projected to exceed the available storage length by one vehicle during the AM peak hour. b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. C.Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: ' (l) As part of the project development, the eastbound left-tunn pocket at the Wolfe Rload/Stevens Creek Boulevard intersection will be lengthened by modifying the striping and medimi on the Stevens Creek Boulevard approach to provide one 170-foot and one 430-foot-long left-tum lane. Enviromnental hnpact a.Proiect hnpact on Westbound Left-Turn Storage at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard hitersection: The maximum queue projected in the westbound left-turn pocket at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard intersection is 18 vehicles Exhibit A 3R Resolution KA-00-06 Page8ofl9 under existing conditions and 20 vehicles under project conditions. The existing tum pocket astorage is approximately 16 vehicles in two 190-foot-long lanes. The estimated maximum queue under project conditions would exceed the available storage length by four. b. %: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the enviroent. Facts in 'Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plmi: (l) As part of the project development, the eastbound left-turn pocket at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard intersection will be lengthened by modifying the striping and median on the Stevens Creek Boulevard approach to provide two 250-foot-long left-tum lanes. Enviromnental Impact Potential Operational Impact at the Vallco Parkway (Realigned) Parking Stmcture l)riveway;. The design of relocatcd Vallco Parkway and the associated new adjacent parking stnucture driveways has not been finalized. If separate left-turn lanes for inbound traffic at the parking shucture driveways on Vallco Parkway are not provided, a potentially significant impact would occur at these locations. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (l) As part of the project development, the provision of separate left-tum lanes for inbound traffic at the Vallco Parkway driveways will be required. Enviromnental Impact Potential Increased Demand for Bicycle Access: The project has the potential to increase demand for bicycle access to the site. There are no existing bicycle facilities senring the site. Exhibit A 4L) Resolution RA-00-06 Page 9 0f 19 b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (l) The project design shall incorporate support facilities for bicycles (e.g., bike racks for patrons and bicycle lockers and showers for employees). Environmental Impact Potential Parking Impacts: The project has the potential to substantially increase the demands for convenient on-site parking which may result in locational and overall shortages in parking supply. b. $: Chmiges or alterations have been required in, or incorporated irito, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Parking will be required to be constmcted at the retail parking ratio specified in the Development Agreement (August 15, 1991) and/or at the parking ratios specified in the City's zoning ordinance. ![n addition, to the extent necessary and feasible, off-site employee parking and/or a valet program duig the peak holiday season shall be implemented. Environmental hnpact Cumulative Impacts on the Homestead Road/Wolfe Road Intersection: With the traffic associated with Uhe proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, operation of the intersection of Homestead Road and Wolfe Road is projected to deteriorate from LOS D- to LOS E during the PM peak hour. Exhibit A Resolution RA-00-06 Page 10 0fl9 b. C. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: 1 Implementation of the City's planned Homestead Aaterial Management Program would improve operations at this intersection. PM peak-hour operations with improved signal progression along Homestead Road are estimated to be at LOS D-. 8.Environmental hnpact a, C. Cumulative Impacts to the Wolfe Road/Prunendge Avenue Intersection: With the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and Peridge Avenue is pmjected to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E+ duig the PM peak hour. $: This is qn nnavnirlqhlp qi@ifir.ant pffvct. Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project make the alternatives infeasible and outweigh this si@ificmit effect. Facts in Support of the Finding: The specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project are more particularly described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations contained in Part V of tis Statement of Findings, Facts and Overriding Considerations. D.Public Services 1. Enviroental :[mpact l a.Increase in Demand for Fire Protection and Emergency Medical :: The proposed project would attract new patrons to the proposed new peripheral retail store, restaurant, two hotels, deparhnent store(s), and other retail space increases, increasing the demmid for fire protection and emergency medical services. In addition, tc generated by the proposed project and other development in the area may create greater traffic congestion, potentially increasing emergency response times. The Central Fire Exhibit A d(:z Resolution RA-00-06 Page llOfl9 District may require additional staffing and/or equipment to provide an adequate level of semce to the project. b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan wmch mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measures are incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: 1 As part of the project development, compliance with all applicable codes will be required, including the 1994 Uniform Fire Code, current Uniform Building Code, Electrical Code, Mechanical Code and Municipal Code, to ensure adequate installation of sper systems, water delivery systems, and other provisions. (2) As part of the project development, compliance with detailed project design features identified by the Central Fire District will be required during the City's plan review and pemiitting process. 2. Enviroental hnpact Increase in Demand for Police Senrices: The proposed project would attract new patrons to the proposed new peripheral retail store, restaurant, two hotels, deparhnent store(s), and other retail space increases, increasing the demand for fire protection and emergency medical services. In addition, traffic generated by the proposed project and other development in the area may create greater 'uaffic congestion, potentially increasing emergency response times, The Sarita Clara County Sheriffs Department may require additional staffing to provide an adequate level of service to the project. %: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, coordination with the City and the County Sheriff's Department will be required to quantify potential impacts on police services mid develop Exhibit A Resolution RA-00-06 Page 12 of 19 an appropriate mitigation strategy, including adequate site lighting'for security. Additional Facts: The City of Cupertino has approved an agreement with the County of Santa Clara whereby the City has agreed to pay the cost of one additional sheriff's deputy for a certain period of time, Environmental Impact Potential for Delays in Emergency Response: The numerous access points to the project site may create confusion to emergency responders, possibly adding to response times. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the enviromnent. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Coordination with the Sheri:rf's Department and Central Fire Distrigt w'ill be iequired, as-necessary and appmpriate, to assign specific access point designations. Environmental Impact Prqiect Sanitary Sewer System hnpacts: The sewer collection demands associated with the proposed project could exceed the capacity of the existing sewer main under I-280 currently serving the project site, $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (l) As part of the project development, wastewater generation increases shall be compared by a civil engineer to determine whether existing capacity is sufficient and, if not, collection capacity improvements shall be required. Exhibit A Resolution RA-00-06 Page 13 0fl9 E. Environmental Impact Construction Emissions: Project conmuction activities such as building demolition, excavation and grading operations, constmction vehicle traffic and wind blowing over exposed earth would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive particulate matter emissions that would affect local air quality. b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the enviroent. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Fugitive dust control measures will be required to be implemented duting prqiect demolition and consttuction activities. Environmental hnpact Regional Emissions: Additional traffic generated by shopping center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's ("BAAQMD") thresholds of significance. BAAQMD guidance provides that projects that would individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project therefore would also have a significant cwiulative impact on regional air quality. %: This is an unavoidable significant effect. Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project make the altematives infeasible and outweigh this sigificant effect. Facts in Support of the Finding: The specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project are more particularly described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations contained in Part V of this Statement of Findings, Facts and Overriding Considerations, Exhibit A )15 ResolutionRA-00-06 Page 14 0fl9 F.Geology and Soils 1,Environmental Impact a. b. e. Expansive Soils and Soil Settlement: New development on the project site may be subject to foundation and infrastnicture (i.e,, utility pipe) damage from expansive soils or settlement of soils. Although it is likely that any such soils on the site were treated or removed prior to the constniction of the existing stnuctures, it is possible that some hazards remain or that remediation standards have increased. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) In accordance with standard City procedures, a soils report will be required in connection with project development, which shall be based on a sufficient analysis of soils conducted by a qualificd cnginccr or gcologist mid iiicluJe appropriate soils, foundation and stmctural engineeig to adequately account for any expansive soil underlying the site. 2.Environmental Impact a.Seismic Shaking Hazards: The project would be subject to strong to very strong seismic shaking in the event of a major earthquake on the Hayward, San Andreas, or Calaveras fault systems. This shaking could, in tunn, result in ground failure from liquefaction or differential settlement. Shaking or resulting ground failure could damage or destroy improperly designed or constnucted new sttuctures and infrashucture and result in hazards of injury or death to new building occupants, Potential damage to the proposed cinema would be of particular concern due to the likely high concentration of occupants. b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Exhibit A 4-& Resolution RA-00-06 Page 15 of 19 Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measures are incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Submission of a detailed site-specific geotechnical investigation for the project, and commitment to compliance with all recommendations, will be required prior to project development. (2) The use of flexible connections for all water and sewer lines and, as appropriate, underground power and telecommunications lines will be required. Cultural Resources Environtnental Impact Disturbance of Historic Archaeological Resources: Although the potential for the project site to contain archaeological resources is currently considered low, constnuction of the proposed new store, cinema, restaurant, and parking facilities could disturb sensitive,, as-yet uown historic archaeological resources., b, $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporatcd into, thc Redevelopment Plaiieh mitigate or avoid the si:ficant effects on the enviroent. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: 1 In the event that subsurface cultural resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate vicinity shall be stopped and a qualified archaeologist retained to evaluate the finds. The discovery or disturbance of any cultural resources shall also be reported to the Califomia Historic Resources Information System and, if Native American artifacts are found, to the Native American Heritage Commission. Identified cultural resources should be recorded on form DPR 523 (historic properties), Mitigation measures prescribed by these groups and required by the City will be undertaken prior to resumption of constnuction activities. If human remains are found during project grading, work shall be halted and the County Coroner shall be informed immediately. If disturbance of a cultural resource cannot be avoided, a mitigation program, including measures set forth in Section Exhibit A Resolution RA-00-06 Page 16 0fl9 15126.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines, shall be implemented. 2. Environmental Impact a.Disturbance of On-site Culturally Significant Trees: Project constnuction could disturb culturally significant trees at the project site, especially those located near the proposed new department store, parking sttucture, and peripheral retail store. b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significmit effects on the environment. C.Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) A survey of existing trees on the project site shall be conducted. In connection with any tree defined as a "heritage tree" or a "specimen tree" by the Cupertino Municipal Code (chapter 14.18), compliance with City policies and ordinance requirements for tree protection and maintenance shall be required. IV. FINDmGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the Project or to the location of the Project which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the Project and to evaluate the comparative merits of the altematives. Section 15126(d)(1) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that the "discussion of altematives shall focus on altematives to the project or to its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly," As more particularly set forth in the Final EIR, the Project was compared to the following alternatives: (1) no project; (2) altemative land use mix-2,984-seat cinema in place of 95,000- square-foot retail store; (3) mitigated project altemative; (4) modified redevelopment area boundaries; (5) altemative project location. The analysis in the Final EIR concludes that the Mitigated Project is the environrnentally superior alternative. The Mitigated Project is the proposed project incorporating all of the mitigation measures recommended by the Final EIR. Based on the information contained in the Final EIR and the foregoing, the Agency and the City Council find that norre of the other altematives (those altematives other than the Mitigated Exhibit A Resolution RA-00-06 Page 17 0f 19 Project) are feasible in that none of the other altematives will accomplish the basic objectives of the Project to eliminate blight in the Project Area. As a result, none of the other altematives are acceptable when compared to the project as proposed and modified by the mitigation measures adopted by the Agency and City Council, i.e., the Mitigated Project. V.STATBMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS CEQA requires a public agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in detemnining whether to approve the project. As set forth in Part m hereof, the Agency and the City Council have detemiined that the only unavoidable environmental consequences of the Project are the following: A.Transportation and Plang: Cumulative impacts on the Wolfe Road/Pruneridge Avenue, intersection. With the tmfic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, the operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and Pnineridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E+ during the PM peak hour. There are no feasible physical improvements that could be constnicted at this intersection that would mitigate this impact to a less than significant level. B.Air Quality: Regional emissions. Additional traffic generated by shopping center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Managcmcnt DisLiict'b ("BAAQMD") lliieiiulab. ur sigiu&;aii=. BAAQ:MD guidance provides that projects that would individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project therefore would also have a significant cumulative impact on regional air quality. Mitigation measures are set forth in the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A). Those mitigation measures will assist in reducing project and cumulative impacts on regional air quality, but would not reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level. The Agency and the City Council find that the above-referenced unavoidable environmental consequences of the Project are acceptable when balanced against its benefits. This finding is based on the following facts: 1.The Project will serve a critical need, that being the elimination and prevention of the spread of blight and deterioration in the Project Area and the conservation, rehabilitation and redevelopment of the proposed Project Area in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan, the General Plan for the City of Cupertino and local codes and ordinances. 2.The promotion of new and continuing private sector investment within the Project Area will prevent the loss of and facilitate the capture of commercial sales activity. Exhibit A =4-(1 Resolution RA-00-06 Page 18ofl9 The Project will allow for the elimination of blight through rehabilitation and reconstnuction, new development, and the assembly of parcels into more developable sites formore desirable uses. 4. The Project will result in the elimination or amelioration of certain environmental deficiencies, including substandard vehicular circulation systems, 5. . New construction within the Project Area will result in an envirOent reflecting a high level of concern for architectural, landscape, and urban design and land use piciples appropriate for attainment of the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan. Project implementation would result in the retention and expansion of businesses by means of redevelopment and rehabilitation activities and by encouraging and assisting in the cooperation and participation of owners, businesses, and public agencies in the revitalization of the Project Area, Revitalized commercial development will result in the creation and development of local job opportunities and the preservation of the area's existing employment base. Project implementation will strengthen the economic base of the Project Area and the (:ity by insta11inz neederl site impmvements and stimulating commercial development. Projec,t im1ilementqtinn wi11 expand and improve the City's supply of affordable housing, Exhibit A Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Plan Cupertino Redevelopment Agency July 13, 2000 EXHIBIT B Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Checklist Page 1 MlTiGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR THE CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PLAN STATE MITIGATION MONITORING REQUIREMENTS CEQA Section 21 081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires all pub(ic agencies to adopt reporting or monitoring programs when they approve projects subject to environmental impact reports or mitigated negative declarations. The mitigation monitoring program must be implemented by the Lead Agency (in this case, the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency) subsequent to certification of the EIR. The following mitigation monitoring and reporting checklist has been formulated for implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Plan, May 2000 (the Final EIR incorporates the November 5 999 Draft EIFI). MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST The following mitigation monitoring and reporting checklist identifies: (1) each significant impact identified in the EIR, (2) each mitigation measure included in the EIR, (3) the party or parties responsible for implementing that mitigation measure, (4) the type of implementation required, (5) the timing of implementation, (6) the party responsible for performing the mitigation monitoring, and (7) the mitigation verification signature and date. These checklist items are discussed in more detait below. Identified Impact. 'This checklist column includes each significant adverse impact identified in the Final EIR (Draft EIR section 2, except as revised in Final EIR section 31). Identified Mitigaflon Measures. This column includes each mitigation measure identified in the Fina( EIR (Draff EIR section 2, except as revised in Final EIR section 31). IFrom the yellow Summary table in section 2 of the Draft EIR (pages 2-4 through 2-15), except as superseded by section 3 of the Final EIR. 51 Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Plan Cupertino Redevelopment Agency July 13, 2000 Final EIFI Mitigation Monitoring Checklist Page 2 ("appl.") and/or the City and/or the County Fire Department (CFD);' (2) the "type of monitoring action" required (e.g., revisions to the overall development plan, or conditions of project approval); (3) specific implementation timing requirements (e.g., implement during design review of prior to project approval); and (4) the "monitoring and verification entity" responsible for performing the monitoring and verification of each mitigation, which for every mitigation is the City/Agency's Department of Community Development (DCD). Verification. The verification column provides a space for the DCD staff signature and date when a monitoring milestone is completed. vThe County Fire Department (CFD) is incorrectly referred to as the Central Fire District in the EIR document. WP5?b98V-EIR!MITMON.598 6L- MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST-CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PLAN The environmental mitigation measures listed in column two below have been inoorporated into the Cupertii signed chan will indimte that each mfflgation requirement has been complied wlth, and that City and state v ro Vallco Redevelopmsnt Plan in ordg to mitigate identified env'ronmental impads. A completed and tonitoring requirements have been furfilled mth respd to Public Resources Code Sedion 21081.6. IDENTtFIED IMPACT REIATED MmGATION MEASIIRE (CONDfflON OF APPROV AL) MONITOFIING VERIFICATION Impl. Emlty' rype o1 lmpkiman Actlon' Timing Requlramantsa Monltorlng and Verlfleatlon Entlty'Slgnatum Date LAND USE AND PLANNING Impact LU-1: Land lJm Inoompatlbllttm ' Between Proposed Modlflcatlons and Adjat Areas. The pmposed kxation of the new 168-mom Hotel #2, west of Wolfs Road, ld result in potentially slgnifit adverse land use patibility effeds on adjacent existing residential areas to ffie west of the projed site. These potential adverse effects mad include: height and smle incongruities, , introdudon of night-time light impacts from b hotel and hotel pamng area lighting feahires, strud'm per'gx3 emissions (air), and increased noise associated mth medianical equipment and pmject a:instruction. Mltlgatlon LU-1: In mnducting ths design review promss for Hotel #2, place particular emphasis m Ute need to inmrporate building design, setback, lighting trols, and other measures to ensure against adverse Impam on the nearest residential ne%)hborhood to the west. fmp(ement the a mnshudkn period air quality (dust) mtUgatton measures klentlfied In sectlon 9.3 of this EIR (pitjgakn AO-'Q. Cjty and appl. I Inoorporate Into the project Implgnent during design revtew DCD VISUAL FACTORS Impact V-1: Visual Impacts of Wolfs Road Tree %moval. The pmposed new depaent store (Dillards) and to a lesser extent, the proposed expansion of the retail bridge acmss Wolfe Road, axild displace exisiing Wolfs Road street trees, resulfing in the loss of msua}§ i important mature street trees and the oonspimous disniption of the existing Wolfe Road visual charader at this lomlion. Mltlgatlon V-1: To the extent possible, fomiulate a layout for the pmposed new deparhnent store and retail bndge that retains and proteds some of the existing streel trees, and/or inmrporate a street tree repiacement plan Into the projed which, to the satisfadion of the City, Is aufflcisnt to offset pmject-related kisses and restore visual oontinuity on the affected segment of Wolfs Road. fl Inmrporate into the projeat Implement durtng design review DCD WP5l15961FEIRlMMCHr596 IDENTIFIED IMPACT TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING Impact T-1 : Project Impad on Westbound Lefi-turn Storage at the Wolfs Road/ Homestead Road Intersedion. The estimated maximum vehicular queue in the westbound lefi- tum lanes at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road intersection is estimated to excem the ovailoble storage under existing oonditions by six vehides. With the additmn of traffic associated mth other approved developments and the proposed Valloo redevelopment plan projed, the queue Is estimated to excem the available storage by 10 vehk,les. Impact Th2: Project Impad on Eastbound Left-turn Storage m the Wolfs Road/Staying Creek Boulevard Intersection. With the additkxz of tra& associated with the pmposed pmjem, the maximum queue in the eastbound left-him pod<et at the Wolfs Road/Stevens Creek Boulevard intersdon Is projeded to exceed the available storage length by one vehide during the AM peak hour. Impact T-3: Project Impact on Westbound Laft-hirn Storage at Stevans Creek Boulevard/De Anui Boulevard Intersection. The maximum queue pmjected in the westbound left-tum pocket at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevam Intersection is 18 vehlcles under existing oonditions and 20 vehides under project conditions. The exlsUng tum pocket storage is approximately 16 vehides in two 1 90-foot-long lanes. The estimated maximum queue under Project Conditions would exceed the avat!able storage length by four. BELATED MITIGATION MEASuFlE (CONDmON OF APPROVAL} MONITI)RING VERIFICATION Impl. Type of Implemamat}m Tlmlng Monltorlng and Entity' actton' Requlmnmntss Vertfk:ation Entlty' Slgnatum Mltlgatlon T-1. Require the applicant to lengthen City the westbound lefi-tum pocket at the Wolfs and Road/Homestead Road intersection by modifying appl. the striping on the Homestead Road appmach to provide two 320-foot lefi-tum lanes. Inoorporate into the Prior to project PrOleCt approm DCD Mttlgatlon T-2. Requlre the appll>nt to lengthen 'Jty the eastbound lefi-tum podtet at the Woffe ind Road/Stevens Creek Boulevard Road IntersecUon ippl. by modifying Uie striping and median on the Stevens Creek Boulevard approach to pmvide one 170-foot and one 430-foot-long lefl-him lane. Inoorporate into the Prior to project project approval DCD Mitlgatlon T-3. Require the appli>nt to lengthen :ity the eastbound leff-tum pocket at the Stevens and Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard intersection appl. by modifying the striping and median on the Stevens Creek Boulevam approach to provide mo 250-foot-long lefi-tum lanes. Inoorporate into the Prior to projet.t project approval DCD Data l Page 2 WP5l1596lFEJRWMCHT.596 IDE?mFlED IMPACT FIELATED MmaATION MEASURE (CONDfTION OF APPROVAI) MONffl )FIING VEFIIFICATION Impl. Entlty' Typa of Im$mentaUm Aellon' Tlmlng Requlremants' Monltorlng and Varffleatlon Entity'Slgnature Data Impact T-4: Potantlal Operational Impact at the Vallco Parkway (Realigned) Parking ' Strudura Driveways. Ths design of relocated Vallco Parkway am the aseociated ngw adjacent parking stnictura driveways has not been finalized. If sepamts left-him lanes for inbound traffic at the pamng strudure driveways on Valloo Parkway are not pmvxled, a potentially signifit impact would oa=ur at these lomtlona. Mttlgatlon T-4. ProJde separate left-tum lanes for inbound traffic at the Vallco Par)cway driveways. Appl.Inmrporate into flie project Prior to project approval DCD Impact T-5: Potentlal Increased Demand for Bleycm Access. The projed has the potential to Increase demand for bieyde azess to the site. There are m existing bade fa#)ities serving The slte. The projad as propoaed does not indude support faaliUes for biles (e.g., bike mdai, bike lockers, etc.). M)tlgatlon T-5. Inmrpomte support fadliUes for bicydes (g.g., bike rab for patrms and binds kxkera and showers for employees) into the pmposed projed design. Appl.Inoorporate into Uie proled Prior to project approval DCD Impact T-6: Potemlal Parking Imp The pmjed has the potential to substantially )ncrease the demands for oomzaiient onsite parking whk,h may rasuit In locatlonal and overall shortages in parking supply. Mitigation T-6. As dismssed under subsedion 72.2 above, the 1991 Development Agreement requires that new parking for added retail space be provided at a tatio of one pamng sparxi for ettery 248 square feet of gross leasable araa of retail space. The agreement does not address hotel parktng. Ewn with the promsion of this retail parking ratio, a pading shortage may oaxr during the peak holiday shopping season. Additional retail parking mn be provided during peak holiday periods by requiring employees to park offslte and to use shutlle buses to free-up onstle spaces for mall patmns during peak conditions. Another option is to use mlet parking where patrons drop off their vehicle at a valet booth am a parking atlendant then parks the vehldes. Under the valet option, vehldes are parked doser together than in a typim lol by Inoorporate into the projm:t Prior to proled approml DCD %a3 WP5l1596lFEIRlMMCHT.596 IDENTIFIED IMPACT Impad T-7: Cumulative Impgat* on the Iliiiiii iiliiiiil niiiiiului,,07,, n,iaJ liiliialluii. With the traffic assodatm mth the proposed pro%t, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development. operation of the intersedion of Homestead Road and Wolfs Road is projected to deterlorate from LOS D- to LOS E during the PM peak hour. Impact T4: Cumulmlve Impacts to the Wolfs RoadPrunerldge Avenue Intarsectlon. With the traffk, associated with the proposed projee,t, ' approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, ths operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is pmiected to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E+ durlng the PM peak hour. BELATED MITIGATION MEASURE (CONDmON OF APPflOVAL) disregarding the space de!ineations and by pamng vehides in the circulation ai81e8i thus increasing the effective parking supply. Pmvide pamng at the retail parking ratio spe6fied in the Development Agreement, implement offsite employee parking and/or a valet pmgrarn during the peak holiday season, and pmvide hotel parking ratios as specified in the City's zonlng ordinance. Mltlgatlon T-7. Implementation of the City of Cupertino's planned Homestead Arteml Management Program would Improve operatiqns at this intersedion. PM peak-hour operaUons mth improved signal pmgression along Homestead Road are estimated to be at Lag D- R4jtlgdon T4 There are no feasible physiail improvements that muld be constructed at this intersedlon; i.e., this is a signtfimnt unavoidable cumulative impact. IMONiTORlNG Impl. Type of Impbmentatlon Tlmlng ., Entity' Actlon' Requlnarnentria I Implement the Blayney Avenue to Tantau Avenue syndimnized signal mmponent of the Homestead Arterial Management Program City imple- mentation expected to m mmplete by Fall 2001 (DEIR page 7-18). Implement prior to buildaut of zmulative development (e-g., Compaq mmpus, etc.) VERIFICATiON Monitoring and Verlflcauon Entity' Signatum DCD Data %ga4 WP5l1596}FEJRWiMCHT.596 IDENTIFIED IMPACT BELATED MIT1 €3AT10N MEASURE (CONDITION OF APPROV AL) IMONITORING VEFIIFICATION l'Emnpti'ty' Type of Impmvntatlm Actlon' 'nmlng Raqulnemanta' Monltorlng and VerHlcaUan EnUty'Slgnatum Date PUBLIC SERVICES Irnpam Pg-1: Increase In Denmnd for Fire Protectlon and Emergency Medlcal 8ervlces. The pmposed project would attrad new patrons to the proposm new peripheral retail store, restauranl, mo hotels, department store(s), and other retail space increases, Increastng fiie demar+d for fire protecUon and emergenq medim semoes. In addition, traffic generated by the proposed projed arid other development in the area may create greater traffic oongestion, potentially ingeasing emergenty response times. The Central Flre Distrk,t may require addlUonal staffing and/or equipment to pmvide an adequate level of semce to the projed. Mttlgatlon PS4: Require the appliaint to a:imply mth all applicable oodes, including lhe 1994 Uniform Fire Code, current Uniform Building Code, Eleatriail Code, Mechanical Code, and Municipal Code, to ensure adequate installation of sprtnkler systems, water delLery systems, and other ptovislons. Also require appliaint pllanoe mth debilled projed design features identified by the Central Fire Distrid (CFD) during the City's plan review and pemiitting process. In addition, during the approm proeass for any parUcular portion of the projed described in the Redevelopment Plan, the Appltcant should negotiate wtffi fie CFD to identify mitigatlons that will enable the Distrid to maintain adeqtmte fire protection levels of senk,e to the porUon of the projed for which flie approval is being sought. Such miUgatlon may enbill addfflonal properJ tax ## ## 4&##0 **kaa J Ak # 19 * J-- --j* - - --a & - - - -- - ii- C$, CFD, lnmrporate into ths project Prtor to projed approwl DCD pali)i-llu()11)J118 lrOm UIEI neaeverOpment RgBnG7 TO the CFD beyond those that will already be induded with Plan approval. Altematively, they may entail applicant assistance to the CFD in nroeurinn additiorml fimfinhtlnn muinmonf_I Impact Pa-2: Increase In Demand for Polloe Senr}aas. The proposed pmjei would attract new patrons to the pmposed perfpheral remil store, restauranl two hotels, two deparhnent store(s) and other retail space, Int.reasing the ' demand mr police semces. In addition, traffic generated by the proposed pmject and other development in the downtown area may create greater traffl: oongestion, potentially lncreasing emergency response Umes. uRlgatkin Pg-2: Prior to approval of final devekipment plans for the niall modifiaitions, requlre the appliaint to aximinate with the City and the County Sheriff's Deparhent to address associated addiUonal police semce needs and deye)op an appropnaie publidpnvate security strategy (i.e., adequate 'sezrity lighting, a mirdinated seairdy program invlving the prtvate onsite seairity force and Ct§ police, etc.). Conditkin final development plan aoceplance on Inmrporate into the pmjed Prior to project approval DCD Page 6 WP5l15961FEIRlMMCHT.596 IDENTIFIFD IMPACT BELATED MITIGATION MEASURE (CONDmON OF APPROVAL) City appmval of the applimnt proposed securtty strategy and implementation program. MON1T4)RING VERIFICATION Impl. Typa of Implemenbdlm Tlmlng Monltorlng am Entity' Actlon' Requimmantaa Vedflmtlon Entlty' Slgnaturs Data Impact Pa-3: Potential for Delays In Emergency Response. The numemus azess points to the proved site may create oonfuslon to emergency responders, possibly adding to response times. Impad Pg-4: Proleeit Sanitary Sewer System Impacts. Table 3.1 Indicates that the proposed redeveloprnent plan oould fadlitate expansion of the Valloo Fashion Park shoppang center retail space by 348,870 square feel, as well as the addition of a 10,000-square-foot restaurant and mo new hotels (318 rooms). The Cuperuno Sanitary Dlstrid has Imlmted that the increase in sewer mlection demands assocmted with this expansion ld exceed the capacity of the existing sewer main under 1-280 cunently serving the project site. AIR QUALITY Impact AQ-1: Construdlan Emissions. Project oonstrudion actmties such as building demolition, excamtion and grading operations, oonstnidon vehide traffic and wind blowing over exposed earlh would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive particulate matter emissions that would affed local air quali%i. Mttlgatlon Pa-3: The mall operator should Appl. assign alphanumeric designations to the different azess points to the Valk.o Fashion Mall and should provide the Sheriffs Deparlment and Central Fire District with site plans shomng these azess point designations. Mitigation Pg-4: As a condition of future onsite Appl. development appmmls, the Applimnt's 6vfl engineer shall mmpare the wastewater generation ingement asso6ated mth the redevelopment program with the design capacity of the existing sewer maln(s), and based on Uie standard spelimtions of the CuperUno Sanitary District, shall either: (1) verify to the safisfadion of the City that existing ool)edon capacity is sufficient to serve the projed; or (2) design and Implement, or participate in on a fair share basis, to City satidaction, the collection capacity improvements necessary to serve pmJect buildout. Mitigation AO-1. Dust emissions fmm demolition Appl. and a:instnidion activities can be greatly reduced by Implemenfing fugitive dust oontrol measures. The signifimnce of construction impads Is, azording to BAAQMD guidance, determined by whether or not appropriate dust control measures are implerriented. Inmrporate into the Pnor to project pmject approval Ina:irporate into the Prior to pmJed project approml Inmrporate into the Prior to project projet,t approval DCD DCD DCD Page 0 WP5l1596lFEIRWMCHT598 IDENTIFIED IMPACT Impact AQ-2: Reglonal Emissions. AddRional traffic generated by shopping snter expansion would generate regil emissions exceeding the BAAQMD thresholds of signifiw. BAAQMD guidance pmvklm that projeds that 1'70L1!d ""i'ii""'%' h"":' a signffiaant alr quality Impad would also be ldered to have a signifit cumulative air qual§ impact. The proposed projed therefore would also have a signiflwnt wmulative riped on regtonal air quality. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Impact 08-1: Expanslve Soils and Sail Settlement. New development on the project site may be subjed to foumalion am . infraslrua[ure (l.s., utility pipe) damage from expansive soils or settlement of soils. Although it Is likely that any such soils on the site were RELATED MmGAnON MEASURE (CONDfflON OF APPROV AL) MONITOFIING VERiFlCATION 'mpl. Typu ul liiiH)iiiiiiiiillU!)ii Tliiiling Monltorlng and Entltyt Ation' RaqulmmenW Verfflcatlon Eritlty' Slgnatum Mttlgatlon AQ-2: The shopping cenmr redeve!opment plan should implement the follomng strategies to reduce vehicle usage: Indude physical improvements, sudi as sidewalk improvements, landscajng and the installation of bus shelters and biqcle parking that would act as Incentives for pedesman, blcycle and transit modes of travel. Develop a tranait use inoentive program for employees am patrom, sudi as on4a distribution of passes am/or subsJzed . transit passes for kxal hansR system. Pmdde tmnsit infomiaUon kiosks. Loaite nav buikflng entmn near tmnsit stops- These measures woukl assist in rmuang project am aimulative impam on regional air quality, but would not reduce the impacts to a less-than- r+igniticant level. 8ince no other feasibte measures are available, the projed and aimulatlve effect on regional air quality would therefore represent a slgnlficant unasmldable itnpact Appl. Inaorporate into the Prior to project proiect approval DCD Mitlgatlon OS-t In azordance dh standard i%ip.l. City procedures, require the ApplAcant to submit a so//s report for City review. The soils report shall be hasm on a suffident analysis of soils mnduded by a qualified engineer or geologist, and shall to City saUsfacUm include appmpriate Inoorporate into the Prior to project project approva( DCD Data %p7 WP5115961FEIRWMCHT:596 IDENTIFIED IMPACT treated or removed prtor to the construdion of the existing Valloo Fashion Park stnictures, n Is possible that some hazards remain or that remediation standards have increased. Impact OS-2: Selsmlc Shaklng Hazards. Although no known active faults pass through or immediately adjacent to the projgt site, the project, like all urban development in the region, would m subjed to strong to very shong selsrnlc shaking In the event of a major earthquake on the Hayward, San Andreas, or Calaveras fault systems. This shaking could, tn tum, result In gmund fallure from llquefactlon or differential settlement. Sha)dng or resultlng ground failure could damage or destroy improperly deslgned or oonstnictm new structures and Infrastructure and result in hazands of Injury or death to new building oocupants. Potential damage to the propoaed cinema would be of parUailar concem due to the 11kely high azcentratlon of oa;upants. CULTIIRAL RESOURCES Impact CR-1: Disturbance of Hlstorlc Archaeologlcal Resoura=s. Although the potential for the project site to oontain archaeologiml resources is currentty oonsidered low, wnstrudion of the pmposed new store, cinema, restaurant, and parking faThlities could disturb sensitive, as-yet unknown histortc archaeological resources. BELATED MITIGATION MEASURE (C:ONDmON OF APPROV AL) MufaTuHIN(i Impl. Type of Implamantmlm Tlmlng Entlty' Actlon" Requlmmants' soils, foundation, and stnickiral engineering to adequately aunt for any expansive soil underlying the site. Mltlgatlon GS-2. Require the Applicant to submit Appl. a detailed site-specik geotedrnical investigaUon for the pmject and require implementation of its reoommendaUons to City satisfaction as oonditions of project approval. Require the project to oonform to the poliThes of the City of Cupertino General Plan Public Heaflh am Safety Element, and mmply mth all standard City mndRlons of appmml regarding geotechnical issues. Require that flexible connections be used for all water and sewer lines, arxl as appropriate, undergmund power and teleoommunimtions lines. Inoorporate into the Prior to project project approval Mttlgatlon CR-1: In the event that subsurface Appl. ailtural resources are enntered during approved gmund-disturbing activities, work in the immediate vicinity shall be stopped and a qualifim ardiaeologlst retained to evaluate the finds. The disoovery or disturbance of any ailtural resources shall also be reported to the Califomia Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS) and, if Native Ameriun artifacts are found, to the Native American Heritage Commission. Identified ailtural resources should m recorded on form Inmrpomte Into the Prior to projed projed approval VERIFICATION Monitoring and VertflcaUon Entlty' Slgnatum DCD DCD Date FJal WP511596FE1RWMCHT.596 IDENnFtEO IMPACT BELATED MfTIGATION MEASURE (CONDFTION OF APPROV AL) #AONITt)RING VERIFICATION mpl. inuty' Type of Impfamsntatlm ActlonF Tlmlng Requlmmsntaa Monltorlng and Vsrtfleallon Entlty'Slgnahi*Date I I DPR 523 (hlstoric pmpeffles). Mitigation measures prestribed by these groups and rsqulred by the City of CuperUno should be undertaken prior to resumption of construdion addties. If human remains are found during project grading, work shall halted and the County Comner shall be infomied immediately. if the Coroner determines that no investigation of the xuse of deaUi ks required, am if the remakis ge of Native Amerimn ongin, the Nativa Amerimn Heritage Commissm diould be mntaded and Turther adms shoukl be taken in mnsullation mUi them. If disturbance of a project area cultural resouroe mnnot be awided, a mitigation program, including measures set forth in Section 15128.4 of the CEQA Guldellnes, shall be Implemented. Impact CR-2: Disturbance of Onalta Culturally Slgnlflmnt Trma Piojed , oonstrudion oould disturb culhirally slgnifimnt tnses at the proj4!at site, espe6ally those kxxted i near fie proposed new department store, ' parking structure, and peripheral retail store. I Mttlgation CR-2: Require the Applimnt to . dud a survey of existing trees on the projed site, and msuR mth the City of Cuperttno ragamlng the City's Heritage Treie list before any change or demolition oocurs in the araa of potentially slgnifiznt onsita trees. For any tree defined as a 'heritage tree' or a 'specimen treea by CupeThno Municipal Code ctppter 14.18, require mmplianoe with City polides and. ordlnance requirements for tree pmtedion and maintenantx. !)PI.Inoorpomte into the project Prior to project appmval DCD RESOLUTION 00-197 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL, OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ADOPTmG FINDINGS IN RESPONSE TO WRITTEN OBJECTIONS ON ADOPTION OF THER REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety' Code Section 33000 et seq.), the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") prepared and submitted to the City Council of the City of Cupertino (the "City Council") a proposed Redevelopment Plan 9the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco redevelopment Project (the "Project"): and WHEREAS, on June 19, 2000, the City Council and the Agency held a joint public hearing to consider adoption of the Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has provided an opportunity for all persons to be heard and has considered all written comments received and all evidence and testimony presented for or against any and all aspects of the Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, Section 33363 of the Community Redevelopment Law provides that, before adopting the Redeyelopment Plan, the City Council shall make written findings in response to each written objection received from an affected taxing entity or propeay owner received before or at the noticed public hearing; and WHEREAS, at the joint public hearing on adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the City Council and Agency received three (3) written objections to the Redevelopment Plan and, although none of the written objections were from an affected taxing entity gr property owner, the City Council eiected to adopt written findings in response to the written objections prior to acting on adoption of the Redevelopment Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE C[TY OF CUPERTINO AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the "Written Findings in Response to Written Objections received," as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this l7' day of July 2000 by the following vote: Y9!!Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABST Am: ATTEST:APPROVED: ' City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino EXHIBIT A RAMON .AR1AS PRESfDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR June 19, 2000 John Statton, Mayor City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 LAW OFFICES BAY AREA LEGAL AID Santa Clara County Office P. 0. Box 1840 2 West Santa Clara Street, 8'h Floor San Jose, CA 95109-1840 PH: (408) zsj-'syoo F AX: (408) 283-3750 E" )%"'i \' aaj:l "';O' " "')" ct-/ M had =m* plos vvaez5 Re: Objections to Adoption of the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, Agenda item G. at June 19, 2000 Joint City Council & Redevelopment Agency Hearing. Dear Mayor Statton: Area Aid a legalassistanceto low-incomeindividualsinC and throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. On behalf of our clients, very low-income residents of Cupertino, we submit the following objections to the City of Cupertino and Cupertino Redevelopment Agency's adoption of the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, We also are submitting a videotape of the proposed Project Area. Please include this letter and the videotape as part of the record of the public hearing(s) on the adoption of the Cupenino Vallco Redevelopment Project. Pursuant to California Health & Safety Code § 33363, please provide us with written findings in response to this letter and the videotape of the proposed Project Area. The proposed Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") is coextensive with the existing Vallco Fashion Park shopping center. The purpose of redevelopment law is to revitalize urban centers that have deteriorated into slums. Vallco Fashion Park is a modem, attractive, and completely viable shopping mall. Like the golf course National City attempted to redevelop in SweetyVater Valley C iViC ASSOCiatiOn V. C ity Of National City,' the proposed PrOjeCt kea iS net "blighted." lMtAl *i To the extent that Vallco Fashion Park lags behind nearby shopping centers in terms of sales revenue and vacancy rate, these discrepancies can be corrected through-private sector development. There is no need to bring the vast powers of redevelopment to bear, and no need to deprive Santa Clara County and local schools of much needed property tax revenues. In the words of the California Supreme Court, redevelopment law cannot be invoked "just because the yublic agency considers that it can make a better use or planning of an area than its present use or plan. A recent Court of Appeal (AMMetJ ' 18 Cat. 3d 270 (1976). Z ld. at 278. Sersring the Cminties of Alameda Contra Costa San Francisco Santa Clara 2 case addressing the definition of bligiit asserted, "the concededly desirable goal of improving an area is 'insufficient by itself to justify use of the extraordinary powers of community redevelopment. If' it were, tax increment financing at public expense would become commonplace as a subsidy to private enterprise.""' The attempt to declare Vallco Fashion Park a "blighted" project area suitable for redevelopment is a thinly disguised attempt to subsidize private shopping center developers in their desire to upgrade a perfectly adequate mail. It is the position of Bay Area Legal Aid and our clients that the Vallco Redevelopment Project should not be adopted. We contend that the Vallco Project is contrary to Califomia law for the following reasons: i) a) The Project Area is not physically blighted. The Cupenino Redevelopment , ,,E,r #3 Agency ("the Agency") contends that factors are present that prevent or substantially ' hinder the economically viable use of buildings or lots- The Agency cites such things as mall design that is "functionally obsolete," as well as the lack of "a theme" and "connection to other retailing in the community." (Preliminary Report at 14 [all subsequent page references are to the Preliminary Reportl). While conceding that Vallco is attractively landscaped, the Agency mentions factors such as the "fortress-like image," and "confusing circulation system" with "no visual connection with its surroundings." According to the Agency, Vallco's "generic building envelope is uninspiring." (15) Contrary to the statutory requirement of Health & Safety Code § 33031 that the blighting factors "prevent or substantially hinder" economically viable use, the factors asserted by the Agency largely are esoteric and subjective. The Agency employs precisely the type of "jargon"-such as "functional obsolescence" (1, 14) - denigrated by the Courts of Appeal in Beach-Courchesne v. City ofDiamond Bar and County ofRiverside v. City of i'vfurrieta.' The Agency also cites "small and obscured signs" and "ingress and egress points" that "are difficult to find." (16) No doubt these are tangible problems, but they hardly necessitate redeveloping the entire mall. In short, the record is devoid of factual support for the conclusory findings of blight asserted by the Agency. b) The Agency asserts as its second category of physical blight, lots "of irregular fomi, shape and size under multiple ownership." (16) However, all ofthe lots CtDMMEAY comprisingVallco Fashion Parkare owned by one ofthree large, c6rporate entities: 0 Sears Roebuck, The Jacobs Group, or J.C. Penney. According to the Agency, "[a]dequate parcel size and dimension are necessary if land is to be effectively utilized... . The additional land and reconfigured parcels must be large enough to accommodate the new retail/entertainment anchors, setback areas, and parking and circulation space." (16- 17) The Agency further asserts that "[tlhe diversity of ownership complicates land assembly efforts and the ability to expand the shopping center without agreement.by all parties." (17) The existing parcels are more than adequate for use as a shopping center. They simply do not conform to the Agency and The Jacobs Group's conception of the ideal shopping center. The intent of the Agency to subsidize The Jacobs Group's upgrade of 3 Beach-Courchesne v. Ciry ofDiamond Bar, 80 Cal. App. 4" 986 (2000) (quoting Re5nrs v. City ofBald*vin Park, 70 Cal. App. 3d 968, 979 (1977)). 4 65 Cal. App. 4" 616 (!998). Serving the Counties of Alameda Contra Costa San Francisco Santa Clara tA Vallco becomes even inore evident when one considers that the "diversity of ownership" refers to just three corporate owners; the difficulty for the Agency and The Jacobs Group arises because they want to concentrate ownership in the hands of one party. According to the preliminary report, in order to attract a fourth anchor store, it is "critical" that J.C. Penney be willing to seal its land. (9) The desire to attract a founh anchor store does not constitute physical blight. As a whole, these considerations do not rise to the level of physical blight as contemplated by California law. The properties within the Project Area are included for the purpose of obtaining the allocation of ta,y increment revenue, without other substantial justification. TheProjectAreaisnoteconomicallyblighted. TheAgencycitesfactorssuchasa (p34H(B4)7- decline in retail sales, high vacancy levels, a decline in assessed value of the mall, a lack 4-5of strong national and regional retailers, and an inability of the mall shop space to "attract a significant fashion or higher image retail component to be competitive with Stanford and Valley Fair Shopping Centers." (17-18) However, the market analysis upon which the Preliminary Repon is based is flawed by conflict of interest. The-Agency and its consultants rely on data supplied by The Jacobs Group. However, The Jacobs Group is a major landowner in the Project Area and would be the entity that actually develops the proposed shopping center. The Jacobs Group therefore stands to benefit economicaily if the City Council votes to redevelop Vallco Fashion Park. ,I In the Preliminary Report, the Agency frequently contrasts Vallco Fashion Park with the ' successes enjoyed by Valley Fair Mail and Stanford Shopping Center. However, the a Agency neBier.ts tri mention that neither Valley Fair nor Stanford Shopping Centet was aided by redevelopment. In fact, the City of Palo Alto - where Stanford Shopping Center is located - does not even have a redevelopment agency. They also failed to conduct meaningful comparisons of Vallco with other shopping mails on the Peninsula. This underscores the bias of the market analysis performed by the Agency, its consultants, and The Jacobs Group They failed to eyaluate why Valley Fair and Stanford Shopping Center are successful. Instead, they jumped directly to the conclusion that Vallco Fashion Park's sal'vation lies in redevelopment. The refrain of the Agency is that Vallco lacks "high-end" retail establishments and national chains. (20-21) However, considering the proximity of the "high-end" Valley Fair Mail and the "very-high-end" Stanford Shopping Center, it is quite plausible that the South Bay "high-end" shopping mail market already is saturated. Perhaps Vallco's niche should be as a shopping center featuring less exclusive stores and attracting the entire economic spectrum of shoppers. 3) TheVallcoRedevelopmentProjecthasasitsmainpurposethecapturingoftaxincrement revenues for encouraging commercial deveiopment and subsidizing the upgrade b} private parties of a viable shopping center in an area in which blight does not predominate. Health & Safety Code § 33321 states: (staeDr -A-(,, A project area need not be restricted to buildings, improvements. or lands which are detrimental or inimical to the public health, safety, or welfare, but may consist of an area in which such conditions 5ervirrg the Counties of Alameda Contra Costa San Francisco Santa Clara 4 predominate and n,)uriously affect the entire area. A project area may include lands, buildings, or improvements which are not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, but whose inclusion is found necessary for the effective redevelopment of the area of which they are a part. Each such area included under this section shall be necessary for effectiye redevelopment and shall not be included for the purpose of obtaining the allocation of tax increment revenue firom such area pursuant to Section 33670 without other substantial justification for its inclusion. The proposed Project therefore violates Health & Safety Code 83 33321. 4) TheProjectAreadoesnotconstituteaseriousphysicalandeconomicburdenontheCityZ§45J7 of Cupertino that cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed 6r alleviated by private 41 enterprise, governmental action, or both. a) The California Legislature has declared that, "a fundamental purpose of redevelopment is to expand the supply of low- and moderate-income housing.") The C.DAAM5m Agency's selection of the Vallco Project Area undermines this fundamental purpose. The 49 Preliminary Report is silent about housing. The Agency acknowledges its legal obligation to set aside 20oA of the gross tax increment in a low- and moderate-income housing fund, but the Report does not contain any specific proposals concerning creation of affordable housing. Considering the extreme shortage of low- and moderate-income housing in Santa Clara County and the central role the creation of affordable housing plays in redevelopment, the failure to include adequate affordable housing in a project area c;qn prrivirie the hpieiiq '(@r thp rp-(1@5igHBli@q @f tap v@7 game project area as "blighted" at the end of the original redevelopment plan. Moreover, the proposed Vallco Project likely will worsen the affordable housing shortage in Cupertino and increase traffic congestion. Many jobs created within the Vallco Project Area will be low wage, service industry positions. Employers may be reluctant to locate businesses in the Project Area if the supply of affordable housing is inadequate tp house their workers. Creating affordable housing in the Project Area addresses this issue, while at the same time creating a larger customer base for businesses locating in the Project Area and reducing the amount of commuter traffic on the streets of Cupertino. b) Health&SafetyCode§33352requiresthattheredevelopmentplancontain (,,4E,) detailed findings concerning the reasons for selecting the project area in question. The Agencymustconsiderallpossibleprojectareasbeforeselectingtheareatheywishto kq redevelop. Other areas within Cupertino suffer from "blight" to a greater degree than the proposed Vallco Project Area (assuming, for the sake of argument, that any blight exists within the proposed Project Area). The Agency likewise ignored the opportunity to create more affordable housing by establishing a project area encompassing existing residentially zoned property. Compounding this problem is a strong argument based on the State Constitution that ta,y increment money may not be used outside a project area, even for the creation of low- and moderate-income housing. The Agency apparently failed to consider the possibility of establishing a "mixed use" project area in which housing and commerciaf enterprises occupy the same buildings. s Cal. Health & Safety Code Fg 33071. Serving the Counties of Alameda Contra Costa San Foancisco Santa Clara 5 c) Health & Saf'ety Code 8) 33385 requires that redevelopment agencies form project area committees consisting of residents and community groups if either a substantial number of low- or moderate-income people reside in the proposed project area, or a substantial number of low- or moderaie-income people will be displaced by a public project within the project area. By designating a project area in a commercially zoned area with no housing and no prospects for future residential use, the Agency is excluding low-income residents of Cupertino from the decision-making process and limiting Cupenino's ability to develop affordable housing in the future. The deprivation of the right to vote on issues involving the Project Area may implicate constitutional rights as well. CWvtesr *}D The Preliminary Report is silent as to whether the Agency formed a Project Area Committee or consulted with residents and community organizations, as required.by Health & Safety Code § 33385(f) for project areas that do not contain a substantial number of low- or moderate-income residents. p,oMMeAl * II The project area is not "predominantly urbanized," as defined in Health & Safety COde § 33320.1. Eighty percent of the land in the proposed project area has not been "developed for urban uses," does not contain "subdivided lots of irregular form and shape and inadequate size for proper usefulness and development that are in multiple ownership," and is not "an integral part of one or more areas developed for urban uses which are surrounded or substantially surrounded by parcels which have been or are developed for urban uses." A shopping mall is not an "urban use." It is merely a privately owned conglomeration OfStOreS, restaurants, and parking faCilitieS; furthermore, it stretches the definition of "urban use" to apply the phrase tri pn area which, by definition. has no permanent residents. 8) The Vallco Redevelopment Project will cause a significant financial burden or detriment C.H,M,,)7to other ta,ting agencies deriving revenues from the Project Area, including Santa Clara County,bydecreasingitstaxrevenuesforthenext30to44years(dependingupon a3 whether tax increment will be diverted during the final fifteen years of the plan to repay bonded indebtedness of the agency). This diversion of tax increment will impair the ability of Santa Clara County to provide public and social services, particularly to very low-income individuals and families. The Vallco Redevelopment Plan authorizes the issuance of bonds to be repaid by tax increment funds and SetS an indebtedness limit orsos.oo million, purSuant tO Health & Safety Code § 33334.1. However, the Plan does not adequately explain the basis for the limit on bonded debt and why this amount is necessary. For instance, the Plan states that, at the Agency's discretion, "other funding sources... may also represent viable funding alternatives." (32) The Agency concedes that its economic feasibility analysis "was created to represent one scenario of economic feasibility." (32) The Agency's projections about indebtedness are speculative, contingent, and not based on substantial evidence. 10) AdoptionofanordinanceapprovingtheVallcoRedevelopmentPlanwouldviolate %%fli§3jl)7 Health & Safety Code § 33367 because substantial evidence does not support the -k-15 Serving the Counties of Alameda Contra Costa San Frgncisco Santa Clara il 6 requisite findings anv ,ietemiinations of the legislative body. 'lhe deficiencies include, but are not limited to, findings that: a, the project area is blighted; b. redevelopment of the area would 6e in conformity with the interests of the public peace, health, safety, and welfare; , c, the redevelopment plan is economically sound and feasible; d. thecondemnationofrealpropertyisnecessarytotheexecutionoftheredeVelopment plan; e. any area included is necessary for effective redevelopment and is not included for the purpose of obtaining ta,y increment revenues without other substantial justification; f. the elimination of (alleged) blight and redevelopment of the project area could not be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone; and g. the project area is predominantly urbanized. 11) TheVallcoRedevelopmentPlanisnotconsistentwiththeCityofCupertinoGeneralPlan and Housing Element, in yiolation of Health & Safety Code § 33367(d)(4). Cupertino (5M ,,y,-does not have a valid Housing Element because the amount of affordable housing in *liCupertino is inadequate and the City has not taken appropriate action to alleviate the shortage, such as zoning a sufficient amount of land high density residential to accommodate the constnuction of affordable housing. Because the Vallco Redevelopment Plan does not increase the supply of affordable housing or the quantity of land zoned to accommodate affordable housing - and, in fact, excludes low- and moderate-income housing from the Project Area - the Plan is inconsistent with Cupertino's General Plan. For the above reasons, the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project is legally defective and contrary to state law. ' illiam Staff Attorney CC:City Clerk City Council/Redevelopment Agency City Attomey City Manager f Serving the Counties of Alameda Contra Costa San Francisco Santa Clara l,p'[ BRYANT, CLOHAN, ELLER, MAINES &' BARUH, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LANV 303 ALMADEN BOULEV/JID, 5TH FLOOR SAN JOSE, CAIJFORNIA 95110-2721 TELEPHONE (408) 299-0180 FACSIMILE (408) 271-0754 jelleresq@aol.com f'ALO ALTO, CALIPORNIA 9430t TEL (650) 324-1606 PAUO AtTO OFFICE: June 19, 2000 HAND DELIVERED Cupertino City Council Cupertino Redevelopment Agency 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Re: Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project ("Plan") Dear Members of the City Council: This office has been asked to advise you of the objections of our clientwith regard to the Plan. The Plan should not be approved tbis evening and should be modified for the following reasons: 1. The Plan is currently inadequate due to its vagueness. While the Project Area is identified, the Plan contains no discussion as to how or why the redevelopment of the Project Areawould accomplish the goals and purposes set forthin Section 100 of the Plan or the elimination of blight as described in Section 300 of the Plan. 2. AS dedCrlbea in ffie Plall, ffie DcvclopmentAglaeemerlt aattd Atlg'aSt 15> 1991 ("DA") iS currentlY in existence. The DA Was entered intO by the City ofCupertino to accomplish the purposes and goals currently set forth in the Plan. The DA specificall7 impactsasignificantportionoftheProjectArea. Aredevelopmentplanisnottoprovide a taxpayer based funding mechanism for a preexisting City Ordinance. We believe the DA conflicts with provisions of the Plan and the DA must be rescinded prior to the adoption ofthe Plan. 3. Because the Plan provides no specific details such as how its @oals might be accomplished or what specific conditions of the Project Area constitute blight, there is no basis for any rational connection between the amount setforthin Section 502, $42,610,000.00, and the actual amount needed to accomplish the goals of the Plan. It is a violation of the fiduciary duties of each council member to allow for the possibility of Cupertino City Councix Cupertino Redevelopment Agency June 19, 2000 Page 2 expenditure of funds fm in excess of funds actually needed to achieve even appropriate goals. Greater specificity and some finding of a reasonable relationship between the expenditures and the anticipated benefit of the Plan should be included in the Plan. The Plan should be modified to address the issues set forth herein before it should be approved by the Council. )rOllrS, el S Gonzales DSG:cb 10906 TO BRYANT, CLOHAN, ELLER, MAINES & BARUH, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 303 ALMADEN BOULEVARD, 5TH FLOOR PALO ALTO OFFICE: SAN JOSE, CALiFORNIA 95110-2721 5% HAhAILTON AVENUE, iuo TEL9HoNE (408) 299-0180 PAlO AlTO, CALIFORNIA 94301 FACSIMIIE (408) 271-0754 ara ((150) 3241606 jelleraiq@aol,com June 19, 2000 HAND DEL!VERED Cupertino City Council Cupertino Redevelopment Agency 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Re: Objections to the Environmental Impact Report for the Cupertino Vallco Rcdcvclopmt,ntPlan (SCHNo. 99082086) Dear Members of the City Comcil and Redevelopment Agency: We have beenauthorized and directed to submitto youfor consideration and review at tonight's Joint Meeting of the City Council and Redevelopment Agency the following objections to the above-referenced Enviroental Impact Report ("EIR"): 1. The requiremerits for the approval of an enviroental impact report under Public Resources Code §§ 21000 e5l, have not been met; 2. TheEIRdoesnotadequatelyidentifyallofthepotentiallysignificant environmental effects of the proposed redevelopment of Vallco Fashion Park (the "Project"); 3. The EIR does not adequately identify ways to mirize or avoid all of the significant environmental effects of the Project; 4. The scope of the Project described in the EIR is too vague and speculative to allowproper considerationand approval ofthe EIR. s. The E,IR does net adequately address the potentiat traffic effects of the Project; l( Cupertino City Council Cupertino Redevelopment Agency June 19, 2000 Page 2 6. The EIR does not adequately mitigate the effects of the potenial density of the Project. Based on the foregoing, we respectfully request that the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency witMold their approval of the EIR until such time that all of the above considerations have been adequately addressed. }OurS, el S DSG:cb 10904 '7,2,- EXHIBITA WRITTEN FINDINGS IN RESPONSE TO WRITTEN OBJECTIONS RECEIVED Section 33363 of the Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) imposes upon a legislative body contemplating the adoption of a redevelopment plan the obligation to consider and respond in writing to any written objections received from an affected taxing entity or property owner before or at the noticed public hearing on said plan and to adopt written findings in response to each such written objection. At the noticed joint public hearing held on June 19, 2000, the City Council and Agency received three letters objecting to the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project. While none of the letters were from an affected taxing entity or property owner within the Project Area, the City Council elected to respond to the letters of objection prior to acting on the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan. The following provides a summary of each of those written objections, together with the findings of the City Council in response thereto. A. WrittenObjectioiisfromBayAreaLegalAid: Letter dated June 19, 2000, from \/Villiam Litt, Staff Attorney, Bay Area Legal Aid, representing very low-income residents of Cupertino, objecting to the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan (the letter is attached hereto as Attachment No. 1). The following "comment" numbers are marked on Attachment No. 4 to show the correlation between the summary of objections set forth below and the specific paragraphs of the letter. Summary of Comment #1. The proposed Project Area is not blighted. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #1 : The commentor attempts to narrowly define the purpose of redevelopment by stating that "the purpose of redevelopment law is to revitalize urban centers that have deteriorated into slums." The Community Redevelopment Law, however, does not contain such a narrow definition. The Legislature has determined what conditions affecting an area justify redevelopment, and they are set forth in Sections 33030 and 33031 of the Community Redevelopment Law. The proposed Project Area is blighted under the criteria of Sections 33030 and 330:31, as documented in the Agency's CUP/CCResoFndgsObjec Exhibit A Page 3 of 15 7/13/00 "t> Report to the City Council on the Redevelopment Plan (hereinafter referred to as the "Agency's Report"). Contrary to the claim by the commentor, the Vallco Fashion Park shopping center is not a modern, attractive and completely viable shopping mall. The Agency's Report documents in detail the blighting conditions that exist in the proposed Project Area, both physical and economic. These conditions include: (1) substandard design (Report, pp. 20-2'l); (2) buildings of inadequate size (Report, pp. 21-22); (3) inadequate circulation and access (Report, p. 22); (4) lots of irregular form, shape and size under multiple ownership (Report, pp. 22-23); (5) decline in retail sales (Report, pp. 24-25); (6) decline in assessed value (Report, p. 26); (7) high vacancy levels and lack of strong national and regional retailers (Report, pp. 26-27); and (8) low lease rates and monthly rents (Report, p. 28). The Vallco Fashion Park shopping center is not like the golf course that was the subject of dispute in Sweetwater Valiey Civic Association v, City of National City (1976) 18 Cal.3d 270. In that case, National City proposed a Redevelopment Plan to replace an existing golf course with a 70-building shopping center, a completely altemative use. The only evidence of blight affecting the golf course was sporadic drainage problems, sporadic soil problems and the fact that the golf course had a lower assessed value than the average for other National City properties (which the court noted was typical for an open space, recreational use). Summary of Comment #2. The private sector can remedy the problems at Vallco Fashion Park without the need for redevelopment, and declaring Vallco Fashion Park a blighted project area suitable for redevelopment is an attempt to subsidize private shopping center developers in their desire to upgrade a perfectly adequate maH. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #2: The commentor states "to the extent that Vallco Fashion Park lags behind nearby shopping centers in terms of sales revenue and vacancy rate, these discrepancies can be corrected through private sector development." However, the Agency's Report contains substantial evidence to the contrary. Over the 24 years since its opening in 1976, the only capital improvements to the mall (improvements other than tenant improvements) have been limited to the expansion of the lower mail in 5 998 and the addition of a food court. The lower mall space is now being considered for removal as part of the renovation proposal because there is more small retail mall space than can be supported. Also, the food court was closed by Sears in 1998 due to a lack of rent payment. Contrary to the commentor's assertion that the private CUP/CCResoFndgsObjec Exhibit A Page 4 of 15 7/13/OCI -y4- sector can correct the decline of the mall, which began over ten years ago, there have been several unsuccessful attempts at renovation and two sales due to foreclosure or threat of foreclosure: r Decemberl991-Cityapprovesplanstoexpandtheshoppingcenterbut plans were put on hold after a change in ownership (Heitman/JMB Advisory of Chicago). s September 1993 - City approves a movie theater and parking garage. The plans were thereafter abandoned s Winter'l995-Vallcoissoldtoaninvestmentgroup. i December 1997 - Teacher's Insurance and Annuity Association forecloses debts on Vallco, assumes ownership of the mail and hires The Richard E. Jacobs Group, Inc., (hereinafter referred to as 'The Jacobs Group") to operate the mail. 1 0ctober 1998 - The Jacobs Group purchases the shopping center improvements in an atypical sale/financing transaction As described in the Response to Comment #1, Vallco Fashion Park is not "a perfectly adequate mall," as claimp.d by the commentor, but suffers from the numerous blighting conditions detailed in the Agency's Report, For at least the past 10 years, the private sector has been unable or unwilling (due to the high costs and risks involved) to remedy Vallco's problems, and without redevelopment, it is reasonable to expect that Vallco will continue to decline. Summary of Comment #3. The factors identified as preventing or substantially hindering the economically viable use of buildings or lots are esoteric and subjective, the findings of blight asserted by the Agency are conclusory, and conclusory findings have been denigrated by the courts in Beach-Courchesne v. City of Diamond Bar (2000) 80 Cal.App.4th 986, and County of Riverside v. Mumeta (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 616. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #3: Health and Safety Code Section 33031(a)(2) provides that factors that prevent or substantially hinder the economica11y viable use or capacity of buildings or lots "can be caused by a substandard design, inadequate size given present standards and market conditions, lack of parking, or other similar factors." The Agency's Report documents the existence of such blighting factors as they particularly affect the Project Area, e.g.: CUP/CCResoFndgsObjet, Exhibit A Page 5 of 15 7/1 3/DO -r6= Substandard Design "The design of the Vallco center is dated, with three anchors, a limited number of eating establishments, and an arcade and ice rink as its primary entertaining offerings." (Report, p. 20.) "The design of the Vallco Fashion Park Shopping Center lacks two components that are key to most successful contemporary centers: (1 ) a theme, and (2) a connection to other retailing in the community." (Report, p. 20.) The Agency's Report then compares Vallco to two successful competing centers. "The mall's confusing circulation system of tunnels and ramps reinforces the fortress image, which provides no visual connection with its surroundings." (Report, p. 20.) b. Buildings of Inadequate Size "Vallco Fashion Park Shopping Center's existing structure cannot accommodate these plans [for another retail anchor or major entertainment component]. The existing building envelope is dominated by small retail spaces that average approximately 25' x 100' in dimension." (Report, p. 21.) The Agency's Report then refers to photos of the small retail spaces. "The retail bridge which crosses Wolfe Road and connects the east and west sections of the center is too narrow in terms of leasable space for most retailers." (Report, p. 21.) c. Inadequate Circulation and Access "Store locations, their parking and access are not clearly identified and confuse users." (Report, p. 22.) The Agency's Report then refers to a map showing vehicular circulation at the mail and photos of the mail showing these problems. "Ingress and egress points are difficult to find.' (Report, p. 22.) Even the commentor acknowledged that these were 'no doubt tangible problems." 'Entry points into the mail have deep setbacks, are not clearly marked and are obscured by buildings or parking structures." (Report, p. 22.) The Agency's Report then refers to a map showing pedestrian circulation at the mail and photos of the mall showing these problems. CUP/CCResoFndgsOblec Exhibit A Page 6 of 15 7/13/00 -ilo Contrary to the commentor's claim, these conditions are not esoteric and subjective. The conditions pertain to defects in substantial structural elements of the Vallco shopping center and can most certainly be objectively yiewed and evaluated Unlike the evidence of blight relied on in the Diamond Bar and Mumeta cases cited by the commentor, the Agency's Report factually documents the incidences of blight as they exist in the Vallco Project Area. The project areas in Diamond Bar and Mumeta were, respectively, 1300 acres and 3588."l9 acres, each containing numerous and varied properties. In the Mumeta case, the court stated as follows: "An example of the kind of jargon used in the report is the following: 'Functional obsolescence is a condition resulting from changes in modern building practices and the manner in which buaildings are utilized. As the building stock ages, its structural components and configurations become unable to meet the expectation and needs of users. This suppresses value and rental income which in turn produces a lower level of physical maintenance at a time when the structures are literally wearing out.' In other words, buildings age and become less valuable. But the foregoing does not show the existence of b1ight in the City of Murrieta." (Mumeta, 65 Cal.App.4th at p. fl27.) \/Vith respect to the Vallco Project Area, the blighting conditions identified in the Agency's Report are not definitions of blight or blighting conditions, but concrete factors showing conditions existing at the Vallco Fashion Park shopping center. Summary of Comment #4. The blight identified as lots of irregular form, shape and size under multiple ownership is not physical blight as contemplated by California law because the existing parcels are more than adequate for use as a shopping center; the desire to attrad a fourth anchor store does not constitute physical blight; and the properties within the Project Area are included for the purpose of obtaining tax increment revenue, without other substantial justification. Findings of the City Council iri Response to Comment #4: The logic of the commentor's assertions is flawed because it is based upon the assertion that the mall is a "modern, attractive, and completely viable shopping center." This assertion dismisses all the evidence to the contrary. The Jacobs Group, a national retailer, has extensive knowledge and experience in what is required to make a shopping center competitive including determining what is an appropriate mix of mall and anchor space. CUP/C:CReaoFndgsObjec Exhibit A Page 7 of 'l 5 7/13/00 11 Additionally, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. ("KMA"), the Agency's redevelopment consultant, has 25 years of experience in building and repositioning regional shopping centers throughout the State, KMA's analysis of the inadequacy of the existing parcelization and ownership is based on information supplied by The Jacobs Group, comparison of other successful shopping centers and KMA's extensive experience The existing parcels controlled by The Jacobs Group alone are inadequate to expand the mall and reconfigure the tenant space to achieve a viable shopping center. Cooperation between all owners in the expansion and revitalization of the shopping center is necessary. Summary of Comment #5. The Project Area is not economically blighted. Findings of the City Council Response to Comment #5: Contrary to the commentor's claim, the Agency's Report amply documents the existence of economic blight in the Project Area, including: s A decline in retail sales of 23% (Report, p. 24); 1 Annual sales per square foot that average less than 40% of the national average (according to the International Council of Shopping Centers Monthly Retail Index, December 199E) (Report, p. 25); 1 Vallcosalespersquarefootfallconsiderablyshortofthecompetingmalls, attaining only 24% of Stanford and 21o/o of Valley Fair sales per square foot (Report, p. 25); s The assessed value of the shopping center has declined by 30% (Report, p. 26); s The vacancy rate is at 26% (as of November 1998) (Report, p, 26); of the tenants that have leff, 57o/o were national tenants (Report, p. 27); l Approximately 22% of the mall space is leased to national tenants (Report, p. 27); 60% is typically required by lenders to underwrite a loan (Report, p. 27); s 29% of the space is leased on a month-to-month basis or to tenants paying on a percentage rent basis only (Report, p. 28). The commentor contends that the economic blight analysis is flawed because The Jacobs Group supplied the data. However, The Jacobs Group was not the sole source for the conditions of economic blight identified in the Agency's Report. Other sources included published reports by the International CUP/CCResoFndgsObjec Exhibit A Page 8 of 15 7/13/00 1? Council of Shopping Centers, City of Cupertino retail sales tax data and the California State Board of Equaiization, The analysis of economic blighting conditions by KMA is based upon 25 years of the firm's experience in building and repositioning regional shopping centers throughout the State. The performance information for the mail shops provided by The Jacobs Group, including retail sales, the vacancy rate and tenant composition is not subjective or conclusory, but is factual information. The data reported by The Jacobs Group is consistent with site inspections made by KMA, historical information on declining retail sales tax reported by the City and the history of failed attempts at expanding the shopping center, the foreclosure in 1997 and multiple changes in ownership. The Vallco shopping center is clearly in a state of decline. The commentor further states that the Agency failed to mention that the Stanford Stiopping Center and Valley Fair haVe net been aSSiSted by redevelopment, that the Agency failed to compare Vallco to other shopping centers in the Peninsula, and that the Agency failed to evaluate why the Valley Fair and Stanford Shopping Centers are successful. The Agency's Report does not suggest that every successful shopping center is assisted by redevelopment, quite the contrary. Redevelopment is needed because of the unique circumstances of Vallco (blighting conditions) and the inability of the private sector on its own to revitalize the mall. The Agency's Heport notes that competing shopping has remained stagnant in its abirity to attract new retailers. (Report, p. 14.) Valley Fair and Stanford are used for more specific comparison because they are the closest shopping centers to Vallco and represent Vallco's closest competing market. As appropriate to an evaluation of blight affecting Vallco, the Agency's Report does describe reasons why Valley Fair and Stanford are thought to be successful, including modern design, high-end anchors, cafes and themes (Report, p. 20). Lastly, the commentor suggests that 'Vallco's niche should be as a shopping center featuring less exclusive stores and attracting the entire economic spectrum of shoppers." It is anticipated with the renovation of Vallco that it will recapture only a portion of the retail sales lost to Valey Fair and Stanford. The Agency is not anticipating the creation of another high-end shopping center. Vallco is already "featuring less exclusive stores,," yet is not attracting the patronage necessary to maintain the center's viability. Physical changes and a more diverse composition of tenants, including more national tenants and entertainment uses, are needed to make the shopping center viable. A different mix of tenants is not going to be attracted to the center as currently CUP/CCResoFndgriObjec Exhibit A Page 9 of 15 7/13/00 lg configured. This is evidenced by the departure of and inability to attract national retail tenants. Summary of Comment #6. The Project has as its main purpose the capturing of tax increment revenue in an area in which blight does not predominate and therefore violates Health and Safety Code Section 33321. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #6: Health and Safety Code Section 33321 authorizes the inclusion in a project area of buildings, improvements or lands that may not individually be blighted, so long as they are necessary for effective redevelopment and not included solely for the purpose of obtaining tax increments. The Cupertino Vallco Project Area is a relatively small project area, consisting exclusively of the Vallco Fashion Park shopping center, and the purpose of the Project is the redevelopment and revitalization of that center. Again, contrary to the commentor's claim, Vallco is not a viable shopping center. As described and amply documented in the Agency's Report, the Project Area is affected by both physical and economic conditions and these conditions predominate, affecting the entire shopping center, not just a portion of it. Redevelopment is proposed for Vallco because it is blighted under the criteria of the Community Redevelopmen+ Law, and the raroject Area includes only those buildings, improvements and lands that are blighted and necessary for effective redevelopment. Summary of Comment #7. The Project Area does not constitute a serious physical and economic burden on the City of Cupertino that cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise, governmental action, or both. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #7: The Agency's Report documents the burden on the City (Report, pp. 12-14) and the need for redevelopment assistance (Report, pp. 14-17). In sum, the decline in sales tax from Vallco significantly impacts the fiscal resources of the City, and the center does not adequately serve the shopping needs of the City's residents. Further, because Vallco is in a state of decline and the costs and risks associated with renovation, including a new retail parking garage, are so high, the private sector cannot reasonably be expected to make the investment required - the return on that investment would be inadequate to justify the investment. That fact is compounded by the multiple ownerships in the Project Area, mutual contractual easements and the need for approval from all the owners before major renovation and new improvements could occur. Based on the history of the center, the investment that would be CLJP/CCResoFndgsObjec Exhibit A Page 10 of 15 7/13/00 required to make it financially successful and the anticipated return, the more reasonable expectation is that the shopping center will continue as currently configured and Vallco will continue in its decline. Summary of Comment #8. The Vallco Project Area undermines the fundamental purpose of redevelopment to expand the suppiy of low- and moderate-income housing because the Preliminary Report does not contain any specific proposals concerning the creation of affordable housing in the Project Area and the proposed Project wiil worsen the affordable housing shortage in Cupertino and thereby increase traffic congestion, Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #8: As the commentor acknowledges, the Agency has an obligation to use 20% of its tax increment revenues to increase, improve and preserve the supply of low- and moderate-income housing. The Agency's Report documents this obligation in the financial feasibility section and describes the programs contemplated by the Agency for the use of these funds in the Implementation Plan (Report, Section Vll, pp. 45-47). It is anticipated that $19.5 million will be available for affordable housing programs in the City of Cupertino over the life of the Redevelopment Plan (Report, p. 37). The Preliminarj Report is not silent about housing - it contains a reference to the Agency's affordable housing obligation on page 29; !he Preliminary Report (which preceded preparation of the Agency's Report) is a report prepared exclusively for affected taxing entities for use in evaluating the fiscal impacts of the Project on those entities and contained information adequate for that purpose. Further, the Redevelopment Plan for the Project provides for land uses in accordance with the City of Cupertino General Plan, and the General Plan authorizes residential use in the Project Area, although none currently exists. As the Agency implements the Redevelopment Plan, it is entirely possible that a future use could include affordable housing. In any event, affordable housing will be created or preserved in the City of Cupertino through the use of 20% of the Agency's tax increment revenues, Summary of Comment #9. The Agency failed to consider all possible project areas, ignored the opportunity to create more affordabe housing by establishing a project area encompassing existing residentially zoned property, and failed to consider the possibility of establishing a mixed-use project area in which housing and commercial enterprises occupy the same buildings. CUP/CCResoFndgaObjea Exhibit A Page ji of 15 7/13/00 =gl Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #9: Nothing in the Community Redevelopment Law requires the Agency to consider all possible project areas before selecting an area for redevelopment, Further, the Community Redevelopment Law does not require that every project area include land for residential use. In fact, the law recognizes that not every project area will include residential land. Consequently, Section 33334.2(g) of the Health and Safety Code authorizes redevelopment agencies to use tax increments both inside and outside a project area, and that provision has existed in the law since 1977 without Constitutional challenge. The Agency did not ignore the opportunity to create more affordable housing by establishing a project area encompassing existing residentia)ly zoned property. The Agency cannot simply add property to the Project Area because it is residentially zoned; as previously stated by the commentor, an area proposed for redevelopment must be blighted. In any event, as described in the Response to Comment #8, residential use in the Project Area is currently permitted, and as the Agency implements the Redevelopment Plan, it is entirely possible that a future use could include housing. Summary of Comment #10. The Agency excluded low-income residents of Cupertino from the decision-making process and is limiting Cupertino's ability to develop affordable housing by designating a Project Area with no housing and no prospects for future residential use; the deprivation of the right to vote on issues involving the Project Area may implicate constitutional rights. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #40: The Agency did not exclude low-income residents of Cupertino from the decision-making process. Those residents, like any other resident of Cupertino, were entitled to appear and be heard at the joint public hearing of the Agency and City Council held on June 19, 2000. In fact, the commentor did appear at the hearing and spoke on behalf of those low-income residents he claims to represent (the objecting residents have not been identified) Further, the Agency has not limited the City's ability to develop affordable housing in the future. The City does not currently have any ability to develop affordable housing; it can only encourage the private sector to do so. With the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, however, the Agency and City can act affirmatively to cause the construction or improvement of affordable housing because it provides a dedicated source of funds for that purpose, a CUP/C:CResoFndgsOblec Exhibit A Page 12 of 15 7/13/00 source of funds that would not otherwise exist. Additionally, as described in the Response to Comments #8 and #9, the Agency may use tax increment monies anywhere in the City for the purpose of increasing, improving and preserving the City's supply of low- and moderate-income housing, and implementation of the Redevelopment Plan could possibly include housing. Summary of Comment #1 1. The Preliminary Report is silent as to whether the Agency formed a Project Area Committee or consulted with residents and community organizations Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #"l 4 : The contents of the Preliminary Report are not required to include this information. As described in the Response to Comment #8, it is a report that is prepared for use by the affected taxing entities in evaluating the proposed Project and its fiscal impacts on those entities. The Agency's Report does contain such information in Section X, on page 52. Summary of Comment #12. The Project Area is not predominantly urbanized. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #12: The commentor is incorrect that p shopping mall such as Vallco is not an urban use. For purposes of redevelopment and the predominantly urbanized requirement, the courts have looked at whether an area is typically characteristic of a city (the common definition of urban) or whether it is rural. (County of Riverside v. City of Mumeta (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 616.) In the Mumeta case, for example, the court found that of the land in the Project Area, including 457.05 acres in commercial use, the "rural-residenttal" and "equestrian-residential' properties (land on which horses, livestock and other agricultural uses were allowed) were not urban uses. The urban nature of the commercial uses was not questioned, A shopping center like Vallco most certainly is characteristic of a city and an urban use. Summary of Comment #'l 3. The Project will cause a significant financial burden or detriment to other taxing agencies deriving revenues from the Project Area. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #13: The Vallco Project will not cause a significant financial burden or detriment to other taxing agencies. The Community Redevelopment Law contains a mechanism to alleviate any financial burden or detriment to other taxing agencies in Health and Safety Code Sections 33607.5 and 33676. These statutory pass-through payments have been determined by the Legislature to remedy any perceived financial burden or detriment to the other taxing CUP/CCResoFndgsObjec Exhibit A Page 13 of 15 7/13/00 \3 agencies and will be paid by the Agency. The Agency's Report documents these payments in the section pertaining to financial feasibility. In any event, the taxing agencies can speak and have spoken for themselves. The Agency's Report describes the consultations held by the Agency and the affected taxing agencies in Section Xll. No affected taxing agency has objected to the adoption of the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project. Summary of Comment #14. The Plan does not adequately explain the basis for the $43.04 million limit on bonded debt and why this amount is necessary Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #14: The $43.04 million limit on bonded debt referred to by the commentor was the amount determined from the analysis in the February 2000 Preliminary Report. The analysis in the Agency's Report (May 2000) included a bonded debt limit of $38.87 million. The bonded debt limit actually contained in Section 502 of the Redevelopment Plan is $42.6'l million. The bonded debt limit is based on a projection of the tax increment to be generated by the project and the amount of debt that the tax increment will support given current underwriting criteria. The actual amount of debt that could be supported by the tax increment might be either more or less than the projection, depending upon the actual tax increment flow and actual applicable underwriting criteria. The Agency's Report contains a proposed program of redevelopment activities and an analysis of the estimated costs of those activities in Section V and Vl. Section Vl further includes a projection of the tax increments to be generated in the Project Area, as modified by the Supplement to the Agency's Report. The bonded debt limit of $42.61 million is a reasonable limit for the Project Area as it is within 10% of the magnitude that is currently being projected for the Project Area given program/administration costs, valuation estimates and underwriting criteria. The 10% cushion allows for uncertainties related to the determination of the actual base year value, actual tax increment cash flow, and changes in future underwriting conditions. In any event, the bonded debt limit represents a maximum which may not be exceeded without amendment of the Redevelopment Plan. It does not commit the Agency to expending or incurring debt in that amount, and if tax increment revenues are less than projected, the actual amount of bonded debt will be less. Similarly, the specific redevelopment activities to be undertaken and their estimated costs may change. The fact that one scenario of economic feasibility was presented in the Agency's Report is not unusual or uncommon A redevelopment plan is a long-term planning document. As CUP/CCResoFndgsObjec Exhibit A Page 14 of 15 7713/00 d- stated by the court in County of Santa Cmz v. City of Watsonville (1985) 177 Cal.App.3d 831, 841: "By exercising certain of its powers to implement redevelopment, a redevelopment agency may induce private investment in an area. The success of any redevelopment project is dependent upon whether private lenders, developers, owners, and tenants can be persuaded to participate in the process. Thus, a redevelopment agency is unique among public entities since in order to achieve its objective of eliminating blight it must rely upon cooperation with the private sector. Redevelopment is also a process which occurs over a period of years. These realities dictate that a redevelopment plan be written in terms that enhance a redevelopment agency's ability to respond to market conditions, development opportunitres and the desires and abilities of owners and tenants. Such a plan then cannot always outline in detail each project that a redevelopment agency will undertake during the life of the plan." Again, the bonded debt limitation is a maximum only and does not commit the Agency to incurring that precise amount of bonded debt or any debt; it is properly based on estimates of what may reasonably be needed by the Agency to carry out its redevelopment activities. Summary of Comment ffl5. Substantial evidence doca not support thc findings required to be made by the legislative body. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #1 5: The factual evidence to support the requisite findings of the City Council have been adequately documented in the Agency's Report as described in the Responses to Comments #1-14. Summary of Comment #16. The Redevelopment Plan is not consistent with the City of Cupertino General Plan and Housing Element because the Housing Element is inadequate and because the Redevelopment Plan does not increase the supply of affordable housing. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #16: The City of Cupertino General Plan and its Housing Element are adequate. The Housing Element is in compliance with State housing element law, as determined by the State Department of Housing and Community Development on September 28, 1994. The Housing Element provided adequate sites for 1,484 higher density housing units at the time of its adoption in 1993. Since then, 1,073 of these units have either been built or CUP/CCRssoFndgsOblec Exhibit A Page 15 of 15 7/13/00 '[5 are approved to be built. There are 97 housing units remaining in the Heart of the City planning district, which includes the Vallco Redevelopment Area. Any property owner in that planning district may apply for a use permit to utilize those remaining units. The General Plan also requires that 10o/o of all residential developments be affordable (developments with nine or less units may pay an in-lieu fee). Since adoption of the General Plan, 161 affordable units have been constructed. In addition to residential mitigation, office/industrial developers are required to pay a $l.OO/square foot affordable housing mitigation fee. The Redevelopment Plan will increase the supply of affordable housing because it creates an obligation on the part of the Agency to spend 20o/o of its tax increment revenues for that purpose. Further, the law contains specific provisions to ensure the fulfillment of that obligation B. Written Objections from Bryant, Clohan, Eller, Maines & Baruh, LLP: Letter dated June 19, 2000, from Daniel S. Gonzales, Bryant, Clohan, Eller, Maines & Baruh, LLP, representing an unidentified client or clients, objecting to the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan (the letter is attached hereto as Attachment No. 2). The following "comment" numbers refer to the paragraphs of the same number in Attachment No. 2. Summary of Comment #1. I'he proposed Redevelopment Plan is inadequate due to its vagueness. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #1 : The Redevelopment Plan is not required to explain how or why the redevelopment of the Project Area would accomplish the goals and purposes set forth in Section 100 or the elimination of blight. The Agency's Report contains the evidence in support of the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, including the facts establishing that the Project Area is blighted, that redevelopment is necessary to eliminate the blighting conditions, and that the actions proposed to be undertaken by the Agency will aid in the elimination of the blighting conditions Summary of Comment #2. The Development Agreement dated August 15, 1991, conflicts with the Redevelopment Plan and must be rescinded prior to the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #2: The commentor does not indicate how he believes the Development Agreement conflicts with the Redevelopment Plan. The Development CUP/CCResoFndgsObjec Exhibit A Page 16 of 15 7/13/00 Agreement provides essentially an entitlement for a certain level of development in the Vallco area that cannot be affected by conflicting future action of the City. The Redevelopment Plan acknowledges the existence of the Development Agreement, and its vested entitlements, but does not depend on it and does not conflict with it. Both the Development Agreement and the Redevelopment Plan can be implemented in harmony. Summary of Comment #3. There is no rational connection between the amount set forth in Section 502 of the Plan and the actual amount needed to accomplish the goals of the Plan. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #3: The Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #14 of Attachment No. 1 contained above, are incorporated herein by reference as the Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #3 of Attachment No. 2. C. Written Objections from Bryant, Clohan, Eller, Maines & Baruh, LLP: Letter dated June '19, 2000, from Daniel S. Gonzales, Bryant, Clohan, Eller, Maines & Baruh, LLP, representing an unidentified client or clients, objecting to the certification of the Environmental Impact Report ('EIR") on the Redevelopment Plan (the letter is attached hereto as Attachment No. 3). The following "comment" numbers refer to the paragraphs of the same number in AttachmentNo.3. - 8ummary of Comment #'l: The requirements for approval of the EIR have not been met. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #1 : The commentor has not indicated which requirements he claims have not been met and, therefore, the City Council is unable to provide a more specific response than that all of the requirements for approval of the EIR have been met. Summary of Comment #2: The EIR does not adequately identify all of the potentially significant environmental effects of the proposed redevelopment of Vallco. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #2: The commentor has not indicated what potentially significant environmentaf effects he claims have not been identified and evaluated. Therefore, the City Council is unable to provide a more specific response than that the EIR CUP/CCResoFndgsOblec Exhibit A Page 17 of 15 7/13/00 does identify and evaluate all of the potentia11y significant environmental effects of the proposed Redevelopment Plan, Summary of Comment #3: The EIR does not adequately identify ways to minimize or avoid all of the significant environmental effects of the Project. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #3: The commentor has not indicated what mitigation measures should have been, but were not, included in the EIR and, therefore, the City Council is unable to provide a more specific response than that the EIR includes a11 mitigation measures that would minimize or avoid the significant environmental effects of the adoption and implementation of the Redevelopment Plan. Summary of Comment #4: The scope of the Project described in the EIR is too vague and speculative to allow proper consideration of the EIR. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #4: The commentor has not indicated in what manner the Project description is too vague and speculative and, therefore, the City Council is unab,le to provide a more specific rcsporsc than that-the-P-reject description is adequate for purposes of the review of the environmental effects of adoption and implementation of the Redevelopment Plan. The project description in the EIR is comprehensive, containing a detailed list of anticipated redevelopment actions, including the private renovation and improvements proposed for Vallco, the public improvements proposed to serve Vallco and related programs and activities (Draft EIR, pp. 3-1 to 3-15). Summary of Comment #5: The EIR does not adequately address the potential traffic effects of the Project. Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #5: The commentor has not indicated how the traffic analysis contained in the EIR is inadequate and, therefore, the City Council is unable to provide a more specific response than that the EIR adequately addresses the potential traffic effects of the adoption and implementation of the Redevelopment Plan. Summary of Comment #6: The EIR does not adequately mitigate the effects of the potential density of the Project. CUP/CCResoFndgsObjec Exhibit A Page 18 of j5 7/13/00 Findings of the City Council in Response to Comment #6: The commentor has not indicated what environmental effects arise from the potential density of the Project that are not adequately mitigated. Therefore, the City Council is unable to provide a more specific response than that the EIR adequately evaluates and, as appropriate, mitigates the environmenta1 effects caused by the potential density of the Project. l CUP/CCResoFndgsObjec Exhibit A Page 19 of 15 7/13/00 RESOLUTION DO-188 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL,OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO FINDING THAT THE USE OF TAXES ALLOCATF,D FROM fflK CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCREASING, IAIFROVulG, AND PRESERVING THE COMMUNITY'S SUPPLY OF LOW- AND MODF,RATE-INCOME HOUSING OUTSu)E THE PROJECT AREA WILL BE OF BENEFIT TO THE PROJECT WHEREAS, the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") has prepared a proposed Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project") which would result in the allocation of taxes from the Project Area to the Agency for the purposes of redevelopment; and WHEREAS, Section 33334.2 of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) requires that not less than twenty percent (20%) of all taxes so allocated be used by the Agency for the purpose of increasing, improving, and preserving the community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing available at affordable housing cost; and WHEREAS, Section 33334.2(g) of the Community Redevelopment Law provides that the Agency may use such funds outside the Project Area if a finding is made by resolution of the Agency and the City Council that such use will be of benefit to the Project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO that the use of taxes allocated from the Project Area for the purpose of increasing, improving, and preserving the qomrnunity's supply of low- and moderate-income housing available at affordable housing cost outside the Project Area will be of benefit to the Project. PASSED AND AJ)OPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 17th day of July, 2000, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABST AIN: ATTEST:APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino qD ORDINANCE N0. 1850 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO, c.yIFORNih, APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE C:UPERTI1%IU VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino (the "City Council") has received from the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") the proposed Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project"), a copy of which is on file at the office of Une Agency at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, and at the office of the City Clerk at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, together with the Report of the Agency to the City Council on the proposed Redevelopment Plan, including: (1) the reasons for selection of the Project Area; (2) a description of the physical and economic conditions existing in the Project Area; (3) a description of specific projects proposed by the Agency in the Project Area and an explanation of how the proposed projects will alleviate the conditions existing in the Project Area; (4) the proposed method of financing redevelopment of the Project Area, including an assessment of the economic feasibility of the Project and an explanation of why the elimination of blight and redevelopmant of the Project Area cannot be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone or by the City Council's use of financing alternatives other than tax increment finmicing; (5) an analysis of the Preliminary Plan for the Project; (6) the Report and Recommendations of the Plantmg Commission of the City of (:upertmo (the "Plmuung (:ommission"); (7) the Final Environmental mpact Report; (8) a summary of consultations with affected taxing agencies; and (9) an Implementation Plan; and WHERBAS, the Planing Commission has reported that the Redevelopment Plan conforms to the General Plan of the City of Cupertino and has recommended approval of the Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, the Agency prepared and circulated a Draft Environmental Impact Report (the "Draft EIR") on the Redevelopment Plan in accordance with the Califomia Enviromnental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the Guidelines for hnplementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (14 Cal. Code Regs. Section 15000 et seq.), and environmental procedures adopted by the Agency pursuant thereto, and the Draft EIR was thereafter revised and supplemented to incorporate comments received and responses thereto, and, as so revised mid supplemented, a Final Bnviroental Impact Report (the "Final EIR") was prepared and certified by the Agency; and WHEREAS, the Agency and the City Council have reviewed and considered the Final EIR on the Redevelopment Plan and have determined that, for certain significant effects identified by the Final EIR, mitigation measures and a monitoring program therefore have been required in or incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan which avoid or substantially lessen such effects; and Clt Ordinance No, 1850 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Agency and the City Council have each adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the remaining significant effects identified by the Final EIR which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Agency held a joint public hearing in the City Council Chambers, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, Califomia, on June 19, 2000, to consider adoption of the Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, a notice of said heaig was duly and regularly published in The (;uperz4n0 (;Ou,4e, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Cupertino, once a week for five successive weeks prior to the date of said hearing, and a copy of said notice and affidavit of publication are on file with the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, copies of the notice of joint public hearing and a statement concerning acquisition of property by the Agency were mailed by first-class mail to the last known address of each assessee of each parcel of land in the proposed Project Area as shown on the last equalized assessment roll of the County of Santa Clara; and WHEREAS, copies of the notice of joint public heming were mailed by first-class mail to all business owners or operators within the proposed Project Area; and WHEREAS, copies of the notice of joint public heming were mailed by certified mail with retum receipt requested to the goveming body of each taxing entity which receives taxes from property in the Project Area; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Report of the Agency, the Report and Recommendations of the Planning Commission, the Redevelopment Plan, and the Final EIR; has provided an opportunity for all persons to be heard and has received and considered all evidence and testimony presented for or against any and all aspects of the Redevelopment Plan; WHEREAS, written objections to the Redevelopment Plan were received at the noticed public hearing and, although none of the written objections were from an affected taxing entity or property owner in the Project Area, the City Council elected to adopt written findings in response to the written objections received; and WHEREAS, all actions required by law have been taken by all appropriate public bodies; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CrI'Y OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the purpose and intent of the City Council with respect to the Project Area isplish the following: (a) the establishment, by effective use of the redevelopment process, of a planning andaimplementation framework that will ensure the proper, long-temi development of the Project Area; (b) the elimination and prevention of the spread of blight and deterioration, and the conservation and rehabilitation of the Project Area in accordance with the Cl,9- Ordinance No. 1850 Page 3 City's General Plan, specific plans, and local codes and ordinances; (c) the replanning, redesign, and redevelopment of underdeveloped'or poorly developed areas that are underutilized or improperly utilized; (d) the strengthening of the economic base of the Project Area by the redevelopment and rehabilitation of stnictures and the installation of needed site improvements; (e) the promotion Of new private sector investment wit the Project Area to facilitate the revitalization of an important commercial center; (f) the elimination or amelioration of certain environmental deficiencies, such as insufficient off- and on-street parking, and other public improvements, facilities and utilities deficiencies adversely affecting the Project Area; (g) the creation and development of local job opportunities and the preservation of the existing employment base; and (h) the provision, by rehabilitation or new consttuction, of improved housing for individuals and/or families of low or moderate income witin the City limits. Section 2. The City Council hereby finds and detemines that: . (a) The Project Area is a blighted area, the redevelopment of which is necessary to effectuate the public purposes declared in the Califomia Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.). This finding is based upon the following facts, as more particularly set forth in the Report of the Agencyto the City Council: (1) TheProjectAreaispredominantlyurbanized; (2) The Project Area is characterized by and suffers from a combination of blighting physical and economic conditions, including, among others: buildings which are substandard in design and are fiinctionally obsolescent; buildings of inadequate size; buildings with inadequate access and circulation; lots of irregular form and shape and of inadequate size for proper usefulness which are under multiple ownership; depreciated or stagnant property values and impaired investments, evidenced by a decline in retail sales, decline in assessed property values, high vacancy Levels, and an inability to attract significant retail tenants; and (3) The combination of the conditions referred to in paragraph (2) above is so prevalent and so substantial that it causes a reduction of, or lack of, proper utilization of the Project Area to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the City which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise or govemmental action, or both, without redevelopment. (b) The Redevelopment Plan will redevelop the Project Area in conformity with the Community Redevelopment Law and in the interests of the public peace, health, safety, and welfare. This finding is based upon the fact that redevelopment of the Project Area will implement the objectives of the Community Redevelopment Law by aiding in the elimination and correction of the conditions of blight; providing for planning, development, redesign, clearance, reconstmction, or rehabilitation of properties which need improvement; improving, increasing, and preserving the supply of low- and moderate-income housing within the community; providing additional employment opportunities; and providing for higher economic utilization of potentially useful land. C?3 Ordinance No. 1850 Page 4 (c) The adoption and catg out of the Redevelopment Plan is economically sound and feasible. This finding is based on the facts, as more particularly set forth in the Report of the Agency to the City Council, that under the Redevelopment Plan the Agencywill be authorized to seek and utilize a variety of potential financing resources, including tax increments; that the nature and timing of public redevelopment assistance will depend on the amount and availability of such financing resources, including tax increments generated by new investment in the Project Area; and that no public redevelopment activity will be undertaken unless the Agency can demonstrate athat it has adequate revenue to finance the activity. (d) The Redevelopment Plan iS consistent With the General Plan Of the City Of Cupertino, including, but not limited to, the housing element, which substantially complies with state housing law. This finding is based upon the finding of the Planning Commission that the Redevelopment Plan is consistent with the General Plmi of the City of Cupertino. (e) The cng out of the Redevelopment Plan would promote the public peace, health, safety, and welfare of the City of Cupertino and will effectuate the purposes and policy of the Community Redevelopment Law. This finding is based upon the fact that redevelopment, as contemplated by the Redevelopment Plan, will benefit die Project Area by correcting conditions of blight and by coordinating public and private actions to stimulate development and improve the physical and economic conditions of the Project Area. (f) The condemnation of real property, as provided for in the Redevelopment Plan, is necessary to the execution of the Redevelopment Plan, and adequate provisions have been made ior the payment for property to be acquired as provided by law, This finding is based upon the need to ensure that the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan will be cmried out and to prevent the recurrence of blight, and the fact that noaproperty will be acquired unless the Agency cmi demonstrate that it has adequate revenue for the acquisition. (g) The Redevelopment Plan will not result in the temporary or permmient displacement of any occupants of housing facilities in the Project Area and, therefore, will not result in the need to relocate occupants of housing facilities or to ensure the availability of comparable replacement dwellings. This finding is based on the fact that there are no housing facilities currently located in the Project Area. (h) There are no noncontiguous areas of the Project Area. (i) Inclusion of any lands, buildings, or improvements in the Project Area which are not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare is necessary for the effective redevelopment of the entire area of which they are a part; and any area included is necessary for effective redevelopment and is not included for the puyose of obtaining the allocation of tax increment revenues from such area pursuant to Section 33670 of the Community Redevelopment Law without other substantial justification for its inclusion. This finding is based upon the fact that the boundaries of the Project Area were chosen as a unified and consistent whole to include all properties contributing to or affected by the blighting conditions characterizing the Project Area. Ordinance No. 1850 Page 5 (j) The elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the Project Area could not reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone without the aid and assistarice of the Agency. This finding is based upon the facts, as more particularly set forth in the Report of the Agency to the City Council, that because of the higher costs and more significant risks associated with development of blighted areas, individual developers are unable and unwilling to invest in blighted areas without substantial public assistance and that fiinds of other public sources and progrmns are insufficient to eliminate the blighting conditions, (k) The Project Area is a predominantly urbanized area as defined by subdivision (b) of Section 33320.1. This finding is based upon the facts, as more particularly set forth in the Report of the Agency to the City Council, that all of the properties within the Project Area have been or are developed for urban uses and are an integral part of an area developed for urban uses. (1) The time limitations in the Redevelopment Plan, which are the maximum time limitations authorized under the Community Redevelopment Law, are reasonably related to the proposed projects.to be implemented in the Project Area and the ability of the Agency to eliminate blight within the Project Area. This finding is based upon the facts that t'edevelopment depends, in large part, upon private market forces beyond the control of the Agency and shorter time limitations would impair the Agency's ability to be flexible and respond to market conditions as and when appropriate and would impair the Agency's ability to maintain development standards and controls over a period of time sufficient to assure area stabilization. hi addition, shorter time limitations would limit the revenue soarces and financing capacity necessary to cary out proposed projects in the Project Area. Section 3. hx order to implement and facilitate the effectuation of the Redevelopment Plan, certain official actions must be taken by the City Council; accordingly, the City Council hereby: (a) pledges its cooperation in helping to caq out the Redevelopment Plan; (b) directs the various officials, departments, boards, and agencies of the City of Cupertino having administrative responsibilities in the Project Area likewise to cooperate to such end mid to exercise their respective functions and powers in a manner consistent with the Redevelopment Plan; (c) stands ready to consider mid take appropriate action on proposals and measures designed to effectuate the Redevelopment Plan; and (d) declares its intention to undertake and complete any proceeding, including the expendihire of moneys, necessary to be carried out by the City under the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan. Section 4. The City Council is satisfied that written findings have been adopted m response to Uhe written objections received at the noticed public hearing. Having considered all evidence and testimony presented for or against any aspect of the Redevelopment Plan, the Council hereby overnules all written and oral objections to the Redevelopment Plan. Section 5. The mitigation measures, as identified in Council Resolution No. 00-187, adopted on July 17, 2000, and Agency Resolution No. RA-00-06, adopted on July 17, 2000, making findings based upon consideration of the Final EIR on the Redevelopment Plan, are incorporated and made part of the proposed Redevelopment Plan. C(5 OrdinanceNo, 1850 Page 6 Section 6. That certain document entitled "Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redeve5Project," a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk and attached hereto, is hereby incorporated by reference herein and designated as the official "Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project," Section 7. The City of Cupertino Building Department is hereby directed for a period of at least years after the effective date of this Ordinance to advise all applicants for building permits within the Project Area that the site for which a building permit is sought for the construction of buildings or for other improvements is within a redevelopment project area. Section 8. The City Clerk is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Agency, and the Agency is hereby vested with the responsibility for carg out the Redevelopment Plan. Section 9. The City Clerk is hereby directed to record with the County Recorder of Santa Clara County a notice of the approval and adoption of the Redevelopment Plan pursumit to this Ordinance, containing a description of the land within the Project Area and a statement that proceedings for the redevelopment of the Project Area have been instituted under the Community Redevelopment Law. Section 10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a copy of the description and statement recorded pursuant to Section 9 of this Ordirxance, a copy of this Ordinance, and a map or plat indicating the boundaries of the Project Area, to the auditor and assessor of the County of Santa Clara, to the goveming body of each of the taxing entities which receives taxes from property in the Project Area, and to the State Board of Equalization within thirty (30) days following adoption of this Ordinance. Section 11. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to certify to the passage of this Ordinance and to cause the same to be published once in The (;uperl4nO (;ouHe, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Cupertino. Section 12. If any part of this Ordinance or the Redevelopment Plan which it approves is held to be invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance or of the Redevelopment Plan, and this City Council hereby declares that it would have passed the remainder of this Ordinance or approved the remainder of the Redevelopment Plan if such irivalid portion thereof had been deleted. Section 13. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. Ordinance No. 1850 Page 7 INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the 17th day of July, 2000, and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino on the day of , 2000, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAJN: ATTEST:APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino 'i'7 CITY OF CUPERJINO 20300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 Telephone: (408) 777-3308 FAX: (408) 777-3333 COMMUNffY DEVELOPMF.NT SUMMARY Agenda No.Agenda Date: June 19, 2000 Appfication Summary: Joint Public Heamg on the Adoption of the Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project RECOMMENDATtON: Cupertino RedevelopmentAgency: * Certifying and making findings based upon consideration of the Final Environmental Impact Report. Resolution No. RA-00-06, s FindingthattheuseoftaxesallocatedfromtheProjectforthepurposeof improvingandincreasingthe a 's oilow-andmoderate- income housing outside the Project Areawill be of benefit to the Project. Resolution No. RA-00-07. Cupertino City Council: * Certifying and making findings based upon consideration of the Final EnvirontnentalImpactReport. ResolutionNo.00-187. * Finding that the use of taxes allocated from the Project for the purpose of improving and increasing the community's supply of low- and moderate- income housing outside the Project Area will be of benefit to the Project. ResolutionNo. 00-188. * Approval and adoption of Redevelopment Plan (first reading). Ordinance No. 1850. BACKGROUND: The adoption of the Redevelopment Plan is the final action of Une City Council in the approval of the Vallco Redevelopment Project. The Final Enviromnental Impact Report (FEIR) and the Redevelopment Plan were recommended. for approval by the Planning Commission on March 27, 2000 and were forwarded to the Agency and City Council on May 15. The Agency received the Redevelopment Plan and submitted it to the City Council on that date, and the public heming was set for June 19. On March 27'h, the Planning Commission also trammitted a Minute Order regarding conformity of the Redevelopment Plan with the General Plan, recommending that the City Council evaluate Prrnted on Recycled Paper 2 traffic, air quality, height and setbacks pertaining to conformity (#6019). A response to the minute order is found in the FEIR, pages 2-36 to 2-39. Representatives of the City's economic consultants for the Redevelopment Agency, Keyser Marston Associates, and the City's legal consultant, Nicole Murphy, will attend the meeting to direct the actions required and answer questions. DISCUSSION: The outline for the meeting is: General Background Comments Reasons for and benefits of the redevelopment process. Entering four documents into the public record: Exhibits 1-4 Summary of the Redevelopment Plan Enter the proposed Redevelopment Plan as part of the record: Exhibit 5. Summary of the Agency's Report to the City Council Summary of contents of the report, blight, proposed redevelopment activities, financial feasibility, and implementation plan; description ofthe supplement to the report: Exhibits 6 and 7. t Final Environmental Impact Report Review of Final EIR, summary of comments received and responses: Exhibit 8 (Draff EIR previously received by the City Council, not enclosed) Rules Governing Participation by Property Owners and the Extension of Reasonable Preferences to Business occupants in the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project. These rules were previously adopted by the Agency. Will be made a part of the record: Exhibit 9 Written Comments Placed into the record: Exhibit 10 Oral Testimony Closing of Hearing Consider and Act on Redevelopment Plan See recommendation on page 1. Adjourn qq 3 Enclosures: Cupertino RedevelopmentAgency: ResolutionNo. RA-00-06. Resolution No. RA-00-07. Cupertino City Council: ResolutionNo. 00-187. ResolutionNo. 00-188. OrdinanceNo. 1850. Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Affadavit of Publication Certificate of Mailing (to each assessee of land and business owner or operator) Certificate of Mailing (each taxing entity) Certification of Certain Official Actions Redevelopment Plan Report of the Agency to the City Council Supplementto the Report of the Agency to the City Council Final Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR previously received by City Council, not enclosed) Owner Participation Rules Written Comments on Redevelopment Plan L Planning Commission Minute Order Prepared by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner Submitted by:Approved by: City Manager G:planning/pdreport/cc/redevel61900 /O-O RESOLUTION NO. RA-00-06 RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CERTIFYING THE COMPLETION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT; ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF FINDINGS, FACTS, AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS WHEREAS, as the Lead Agency, the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (the "EIR") on the proposed Redevelopment Plan (the 'Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project") pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., hereinafter referred to as "CEQA'), the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (14 California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq., hereinafter referred to as the "State CEQA Guidelines") and procedures adopted by the Agency relating to environmental evaluation; and WHEREAS, the Agency transmitted for filing a Notice of Completion of the Draft EIR and thereafter in accordance with CF:QA and the State CEQA Guidelines forwarded the Draffl E:.IH to the State Clearinghouse for distribution to those state agencies that have discretionary approval or jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the Redevelopment Plan, to the affected taxing agencies, and to other interested persons and agencies, and sought the comments of such persons and agencies; and WHEREAS, notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting comments on the Draft EIR was published rn accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, !he Drafi EIR was thereafter revised and supplemented to adopt changes suggested, to incorporate comments received during the public review period pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, and to incorporate the Agency's responses to said comments, and as so revised and supplemented, a Final EIR was prepared by the Agency; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR consists of the Draffl EIR, as revised and supplemented to incorporate all comments received and the responses of the Agency thereto, and is part of the Agency's Report to the City Council on the Redevelopment Plan; CUP/AgReaoCertEIR 6/15/DO (ol NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Agency hereby certifies that the Final EIR for the Project is adequate and has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and local procedures adopted by the Agency pursuant thereto and that the Agency has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Finat EIR prior to adopting this resolution. The Agency hereby finds that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the Agency. Section 2. The Agency hereby adopts the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations relating to the environmental impact of the Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (including, without limitation, the mitigation measures set forth therein). Based upon such Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations, the Agency hereby finds that all significant environmental effects have been eliminated or substantially lessened except the following unavoidable adverse impacts: Cumulative impacts on the Wolfe Road/Prunendge Avenue intersection With the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, the operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS L) to LUS b+ during the PM peak hour. l here are no feasible physical improvements that could be constructed at this intersection that would mitigate this impact to a less than significant level. Regional emissions. Additional traffic generated by shopping center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's ("BAAQMD") thresholds of significance. BAAQMD guidance provides that projects that would individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project therefore would also have a significant cumulative impact on regional air quality. Mitigation measures are set forth in the Statement of Findings, Fagts, and Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A). Those mitigation measures will assaist in reducing project and cumulative impacts on regional air quality, but would not reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level. Based upon the foregoing, the Agency finds and determines that the Redevelopment Plan will have a significant effect upon the environment but that the benefits of the Redevelopment Plan outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts for the reasons set forth in the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerattons, in particular, Part V thereof. l0! Section 3. Upon approval and adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City Council, the Agency Secretary is hereby directed to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk of the County of Santa Clara pursuant to the provisions of Section ;)1152 of CEQA and Section 15094 of the State CEQA Guidelines, along with two copies of the Certificate of Fee Exemption as required pursuant to Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Section 753.5(c), PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency this day of 2000, by the following vote: Vote Members of the Redevelopment Agency AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST:APPROVED: Secretary Chairman, Redevelopment Agency 103 EXHIBIT A STATEMENT OF FINDINGS, FACTS, AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS RELATING TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT INTRODUCTION The California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., "CEQA") provides, in Section :)1081, that: "[N]o public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out un(ess both of the following occur: "(a) The public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect: "(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. "(2) Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. "(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. "(b) \Nith respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), the public agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the projed outweigh the significant effeds on the environment." As defined in CEQA, "'significant effect on the environment' means a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment." (Public Resources Code Section 21068.) Exhibit A Page t of 16 (o( It.DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL For purposes of CEQA, the "project" addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report (the "Final EIR") is the adoption and phased implementation of the Redevelopment Plan (the 'Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project"). As more particularly identified in the Final EIR, The Project Area is more particularly identified in the Final EIR. Under the Redevelopment Plan, the Project would be developed in accordance with the land uses designated and permitted by the General Plan for the City of Cupertino. The Redevelopment Plan also specifically recognizes the development rights vested under that certain Development Agreement dated August 15, 1991, adopted by the City Council of the City of Cupertino by Ordinance No. 1540 on July 15, 1991. The Final EIR describes the environmental impacts that may occur as a result of the adoption and phased implementation of the Redevelopment Plan and identifies, where applicable, measures which would mitigate significant effects on the environment to a level of insignificance. Findings regarding the significant effects of the Project are set forth below. Ill. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT; FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT This Part Ill identifies the potentially significant and unavoidably significant effects of the Project as determined by the Agency and t!-.e City Council, including the findings and facts supporting the findings in connection therewith. A. Land Use and Planning 1.Environmental Impact a.Land Use Incompatibilities Between Proposed Modifications and Adjacent Areas: The proposed location of the new 168- room Hotel #2, west of Wolfe Road, could result in potentially significant adverse land use compatibility effects on adjacent existing residential areas to the west of the project site. These potential adverse effects could include: height and scale incongruities, introduction of night-time light impacts from the hotel and hotel parking area lighting features, construction period emissions (air), and increased noise associated with mechanical equipment and project construdion b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effeds on the environment. Exhibit A Page 2 0fl6 )05 C.Facts in Support of the Finding: The fo(lowing mitigation measures are incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: 1 1 In conducting the design review process for Hotel #2, particular emphasis will be placed on the need to incorporate building design, setback, lighting controls, and other measures to ensure against adverse impacts on the nearest residential neighborhood to the west. The construction period air quality (dust) mitigation measures identified in Section 9.3 of the Final EIR will be implemented B.Visual Fadors 4, EnvironmentaJ Impact a.Visual Impacts of Wolfe Road Tree Removal: The proposed new department store and to a lesser extent, the proposed expansion of the retail bridge across Wolfe Road, could displace existing Wolfe Road street trees, resulting in the loss of visuaortant mature street trees and conspicuous disruption of the existing Wolfe Road visual character at this location. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The fol(owing mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) To the extent possible, the layout for the proposed new department store and retail bridge will retain and protect some of the existing street trees and/or a street tree replacement plan will be implemented which, to the satisfaction of the City, will be sufficient to offset project-related )osses and restore visual continuity on the affected segment of Wolfe Road. Exhibit A Page 3 of 16 Transportation and Parking i 1.Environmental Impact a.Project Impact on Westbound Left-Turn Storage at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road Intersection: The estimated maximum vehicular queue in the westbound leff-turn lanes at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road intersection is estimated to exceed the available storage under existing conditions by six vehicles. \/Vith the addition of traffic associated with other approved developments and the proposed project, the queue is estimated to exceed the available storage by 10 vehicles. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, the westbound left-turn at the Wolfe R intersection will be lengthened by modifying the striping on the Homestead Road approach to provide two 320-foot leff-tum lanes. 2. Environmental Impact a.Project Impact on Eastbound Left-Turn Storage at the Wolfe Road/Stevens Creek Boulevard Intersection: \/\/ith the addition of traffic associated with the proposed project, the maximum queue in the eastbound left-turn pocket at the Wolfe Road/Stevens Creek Boulevard intersection is projected to exceed the available storage length by one vehicle during the AM peak hour. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: Exhibit A Page 4 of 16 /07 (1) As part of the project development, the eastbound left-turn pocket at the Wolfe Rload/Stevens Creek Boulevard intersection will be lengthened by modifying the striping and median on the Stevens Creek Boulevard approach to provide one 170-foot and one 430-foot-long left-turn lane. 3, Environmental Impact a.Project Impact on Westbound Left-Turn Storage at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard Intersection: The maximum queue projected in the westbound left-turn pocket at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard intersection is 18 vehicles under existing conditions and 20 vehicles under project conditions. The existing turn pocket storage is approximately 16 vehicles in two 190-foot-long lanes. The estimated maximum queue under project conditions would exceed the available storage length by four. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significa:it effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redeve(opment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, the eastbound leffl-turn pocket at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard intersection will be lengthened by modifying the striping and median on the Stevens Creek Boulevard approach to provide two 250-foot- long left-tum lanes. Environmental Impact a.Potential Operational Impact at the Vallco Parkway (Realigned) Parking Structure Driveways: The design of relocated Vallco Parkway and the associated new adjacent parking structure driveways has not been finalized. (f separate left-turn lanes for inbound traffic at the parking structure driveways on Vallco Parkway are not provided, a potentially significant impact would occur at these locations. Exhibit A Page s of 16 /O\ b,: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, the provision of separate left-tum lanes for inbound traffic at the Valk,o Parkway driveways will be required. 5, Environmental Impact Potential Increased Demand for Bicycle Access: The project has the potential to increase demand for bicycle access to the site. There are no existing bicycle facilities serving the site. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorparated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) The project design shall incorporate support facilities for bicycles (e.g., bike racks for patrons and bicycle lockers and showers for employees). 6, Environmental Impact Potential Parking Impacts: The project has the potential to substantially increase the demands for convenient on-site parking which may result in locational and overall shortages in parking supply. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Parking will be required to be constructed at the retail parking ratio specified in the Development Agreement (August 15, 1991) and/or at the parking ratios Exhibit A Page 6 of 16 10(? specified in the City's zoning ordinance. In addition, to the extent necessary and feasible, off-site employee parking and/or a valet program during the peak holiday season shall be implemented 7. Environmental Impact Cumulative Impacts on the Homestead Road/Wolfe Road Intersection. With the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, operation of the intersection of Homestead Road and Wolfe Road is projected to deteriorate from LOS D- to LOS E during the PM peak hour. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: 1 Implementption of the City's planned Homestead Arterial Management Program would improve operations at this intersection PM peak-hour operations with improved signal progression along Homestead Road are estimated to be at LOS D-. Environmental Impact Cumulative Impacts to the Wolfe Road/Pruneridge Avenue Intersection. \/Vith the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and Pnineridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E+ during the PM peak hour. Facts in Support of the Finding: The specific economic, legal social, technological or other benefits of the Project Exhibit A Pagetorib 110 are more particularly described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations contained in Part V of this Statement of Findings, Facts and Overriding Considerations Public Services Environmental Impact Increase in Demand for Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services: The proposed project would attract new patrons to the proposed new peripheral retail store, restaurant, two hotels, department store(s), and other retail space increases, increasing the demand for fire protection and emergency medical services. In addition, traffic generated by the proposed project and other development in the area may create greater traffic congestion, potentially increasing emergency response times. The Central Fire District may require additional staffing and/or equipment to provide an adequate level of service to the project. b. $: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significerit effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measures are incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: 1 As part of the project development, compliance with all applicable codes will be required, including the 1994 Uniform Fire Code, current Uniform Building Code, Electrical Code, Mechanical Code and Municipal Code, to ensure adequate installation of sprinkler systems, water delivery systems, and other prOVISIOnS. (2) As part of the project development, compliance with detailed project design features identified by the Central Fire District will be required during the City's plan review and permitting process. 2. Environmental Impact a. Increase in Demand for Police Services: The proposed project would attract new patrons to the proposed new peripheral retail store, restaurant, two hotels, department Exhibit A Page 80fl6 lU store(s), and other retail space increases, increasing the demand for fire protection and emergency medical services. In addition, traffic generated by the proposed project and other development in the area may create greater traffic congestion, potentially increasing emergency response times. The Santa Clara County Sheriffs Department may require additional staffing to provide an adequate level of service to the project. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, coordination with the City and the County Sheriff's Department will be required to quantify potential impacts on police services and develop an appropriate mitigation strategy, including adequate site lighting for security, Additional Facts: The City of Cupertino has approved an agreement with the County of Santa Clara whereby the City has agreed to pay the cost of one additional sheriffs deputy for a certain period of time. 3. Environmental Impact Potential for Delays in Emergency Response: The numerous access points to the project site may create confusion to emergency responders, possibly adding to response times. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effeds on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Coordination with the Sheriff% Department and Central Fire District will be required, as necessary and appropriate, to assign specific access point designations. Exhibit A Page g of 16 //.,2- Environmental Impact Project Sanitary Sewer System Impacts: The sewer colledion demands associated with the proposed project could exceed the capacity of the existing sewer main under 1-280 currently serving the project site. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, wastewater generation increases shall be compared by a civil engineer to determine whether existing capacity is sufficient and, if not, collection capacity improvements shall be required. E. 1. Environmental Impact Construction Emissions: Project construction activities such as building demolition, excavation and grading operations, construction vehicle traffic and wind blowing over exposed earth would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive particulate matter emissions that would affect local air quality. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Fugitive dust control measures will be required to be implemented during project demolition and construction activities. Exhibit A Page io of sb 2, Environmental Impact Regional Emissions. Additional traffic generated by shopping center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's ("BAAQMD') thresholds of significance. BAAQMD guidance provides that projects that would individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project therefore would also have a significant cumulative impact on regional air quality. Facts in Support of the Finding: The specific economic, mgal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project are more particularly described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations contained in Part V of this Statement of Findings, Facts and Overriding Considerations. F. Geology and Soils 1. Environmental Impact Expansive Soils and Soil Settlement: New development on the project site may be subject to foundation and infrastructure (i.e., utility pipe) damage from expansive soils or settlement of soils. Although it is likely that any such soils on the site were treated or removed prior to the construction of the existing structures, it is possible that some hazards remain or that remediation standards have increased. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) In accordance with standard City procedures, a soils report will be required in connection with project development, which shall be based on a sufficient Exhibit A Page ii ofl6 analysis of soils conducted by a qualified engineer or geologist and include appropriate soils, foundation and structural engineering to adequately account for any expansive soil underlying the site. 2. Environmental Impact a.Seismic Shaking Hazards: The project would be subject to strong to very strong seismic shaking in the event of a major earthquake on the Hayward, San Andreas, or Calaveras fault systems. This shaking could, in turn, result in ground failure from liquefaction or differential settlement. Shaking or resulting ground failure could damage or destroy improperly designed or construded new structures and infrastructure and result in hazards of injury or death to new building occupants. Potential damage to the proposed cinema would be of particular concern due to the likely high concentration of occupants b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: Tahe following mitigation measures are incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Submission of a detailed site-specific geotechnical investigation for the project, and commitment to compliance with al recommendations, will be required prior to project development. (2) The use of flexible connections for all water and sewer lines and, as appropriate, underground power and telecommunications lines will be required. Cultural Resources 1. Environmental Impad a.Disturbance of Historic Archaeological Resources: Although the potential for the project site to contain archaeological resources is currently considered low, construction of the proposed new store, cinema, restaurant, and parking facilities could disturb sensitive,, as-yet unknown historic archaeological resources. Exhibit A Page 12 0fl6 }/5 b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: 1 In the event that subsurface cultural resources ore encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate vicinity shall be stopped and a qualified archaeologist retained to evaluate the finds, The discovery or disturbance of any cultural resources shall also be reported to the California Historic Resources Information System and, if Native American artifacts are found, to the Native American Heritage Commission Identified cultural resources should be recorded on form DPR 523 (historic properties). Mitigation measures prescribed by these groups and required by the City will be undertaken prior to resumption of construction activities. If human remains are found during project grading, work shall !:ie halted and the County Coroner shall be informed immediately. If disturbance of a cultural resource cannot be avoided, a mitigation program, including measures set forth in Section 15126.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines, shall be implemented Environmental Impact Disturbance of On-site Culturally Significant Trees: Project construction could disturb culturally significant trees at the project site, especially those located near the proposed new department store, parking structure, and peripheral retail store. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) A survey of existing trees on the project site shall be conducted In connection with any tree defined as a Exhibit A Page 13 ofl6 i{(p "heritage tree" or a "specimen tree" by the Cupertino Municipal Code (chapter 14.18), compliance with City policies and ordinance requirements for tree protection and maintenance shall be required. IV. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the Project or to the location of the Project which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the Project and to evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. Section 15126(d)(1) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that the "discussion of alternatives shall focus gn alternatives to the project or to its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly." As more particularly set forth in the Final EIR, the Project was compared to the following alternatives: (1) no project; (2) alternative land use mix-2,984-seat cinema in place of 95,000-square-foot retail store; (3) mitigated project alternative; (4) modified redevelopment area boundaries; (5) alternative project location. The analysis in the Final EIR concludes that the Mitigated Project is the environmentally superior alternative. The Mitigated Project is the proposed project incorporating all of the mitigation measures recommended by the Final EIR. Based on the information contained in the Final EIR and the foregoing, the Agency and the City Council find that none of the other alternatives (those alternatives other than the Mitigated Project) are feasible in that none of the other alternatives will accomplish the basic objectives of the Project to eliminate blight in the Project Area. As a result, none of the other alternatives are acceptable when compared to the project as proposed.and modified by the mitigation measures adopted by the Agency and City Council, i.e., the Mitigated Project. V.STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS CEQA requires a public agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. As set forfh in Part Ill hereof, the Agency and the City Council have determined that the only unavoidabe environmental consequences of the Project are the following: A. Transportation and Planning: Cumulative impads on the Wolfe Road/Prunendge Avenue intersection. \/Vith the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonablyforeseeable development, the operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS Exhibit A Page 14ofl6 //"7 D to LOS E+ during the PM peak hour. There are no feasible physical improvements that could be constructed at this intersection that would mitigate this impact to a less than significant level. Air Quality: Regional emissions. Additional traffic generated by shopping center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's ("BAAQMD") thresholds of significance. BAAQMD guidance provides that projects that would individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project therefore would also have a significant cumulative impact on regional air quality. Mitigation measures are set forth in the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A). Those mitigation measures will assist in reducing project and cumulative impacts on regional air quality, but would not reduce the impacts to a less-than- significant level. The Agency and the City Council find that the above-referenced unavoidable environmental consequences of the Project are acceptable when balanced against its benefits. This finding is based on the following facts: The Project will serve a critical need, that being the elimination and prevention of the spread of blight and deterioration in the Project Area and the conservation, rehabilitation and redevelopment of the proposed Project Area in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan, the General Plan for the City of Cupertino and local codes and ordinances 2. The promotion of new and continuing private sector investment within the Project Area will prevent the loss of and facilitate the capture of commercial sales activity. 3. The Project will allow for the elimination of blight through rehabilitatton and reconstruction, new development, and the assembly of parcels into more developable sites for more desirable uses. 4, The Project will result in the elimination or amelioration of certain environmental deficiencies, including substandard vehicular circulation systems. New construction within the Project Area will result in an environment reflecting a high level of concern for architectural, landscape, and urban design and land use principles appropriate for attainment of the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan. Exhibit A Page 15 0fl6 /lFr Project implementation would result in the retention and expansion of businesses by means of redevelopment and rehabilitation activities and by encouraging and assistirig in the cooperation and participation of owners, businesses, and public agencies in the revitalization of the Project Area. 7. Revitalized commercial development will result in the creation and development of local job opportunities and the preservation of the area's existing employment base. 8. Project implementation will strengthen the economic base of the Project Area and the City by installing needed site improvements and stimulating commercial development. Project implementation will expand and improve the City's supply of affordable housing. Exhibit A Page iborsb RESOLUTION NO. RA-00-07 RESOLUTION OF L:UP'EKl'la) REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FINDING THAT THE USE OF TAXES ALLOCATED FROM THE CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCREASING, 11fRO'!"JNG, AND PRESER!/1% 'fHE COMMUNITY'S SUPPLY OF LOW- AND MODERATE-INCOME HOUSING OUTSIDE THE PROJECT AREA WILL BE OF BENEFIT TO THE PROJECT WHEREAS, the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") has prepared a proposed Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project") which would result in the allocation of taxes from the Project Area to the Agency for the purposes of redevelopment; and WHEREAS, Section 33334.2 of the Califomia Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq,) requires that not less than twenty percent (20%) of all taxes so allocated be used by the Agency for the purpose of increasing, improving, mnd preserving the community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing available at affordable housing cost; and WHEREAS, Section 33334.2(g) of the Community Redevelopment Law provides that the Agency may use such funds outside the Project Area if a finding is made by resolution of the Agency and the City Council that such use will be of benefit to the Project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY that the use of taxes allocated from the Project Area for the purpose of increasing, improving, and preserving Uhe community's supply of low- and moderate-income housing available at affordable housing cost outside the Project Area will be of benefit to the Project. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency this 19- day of June, 2000, by the following vote: /,,2A Resolution No. RA-00-07 Page 2 Y!2!! AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Secretary Members of the Redevelopment Agency APPROVED: Chairman, Redevelopment Agency /2,/ RESOLUTION N0. 00-187 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE Cl"iY OF CUPERTINO CONSIDERING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT; ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF FINDINGS, FACTS, AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS \/VHEREAS, as the Lead Agency, the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (the "EIR") on the proposed Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project") pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quaiity Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., hereinafter referred to as "CEQA"), the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (14 California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq., hereinafter referred to as the "State CEQA Guidelines"), and procedures adopted by the Agency relating to environmental evaluation; and WHEREAS, the Agency transmitted for filing a Notice of Completion of the Draft EIR and thereafter in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines forwarded the Draft EIR to the State Clearinghouse for distribution to those state agencies which have discretionary approval or jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the Redevelopment Plan, to the affected taxing agencies, and to other interested persons and agencies and sought the comments of such persons and agencies; and WHEREAS, notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting comments on the Draft EIR was published in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was thereafter revised and supplemented to adopt changes suggested, to incorporate comments received during the public review period pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, and to incorporate the Agency's CUP/CCResoElRFndgs 'S 6/15/00 Dffl MINUTES CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Regular Meeting Monday, June 19, 2000 ROLL CALL At 7:00 p.m. Mayor Statton called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California. City Council members present: Mayor John Statton, Vice-Mayor Sandra James, and Council members Don Burnett, Michael Chang, and Richard Lowenthal. Council members absent: None. Redevelopment Agency members present: Chairman John Statton, Vice-Chair Sandra James, and Agency members Don Burnett, Michael Chang, and Richard Lowenthal. Redevelopment Agency members absent: None. Staff present: Carol Atwood, Acting City Manager, City Administrative Services Director and Finance Director of the Agency; Charles Kilian, City Attomey and General Counsel to the Agency, Community Development Director Steve Piasecki, City Planner Ciddy Wordell, Public Infomation Officer Donna Krey, Public Works Director Bert Viskovich, and Kimberly Smith, City Clerk and Secretary to the Agency. Redevelopment Attorney for the City and Agency: Nicole Murphy. Representattves of Keyser Marston: Debbie Kern and Paul Andersen. JOINT PtTBLI(' H'F,ARTN(, A. Joint public heaig of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency on the proposed redevelopment plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project. StattOn opened the publiC hearing. Atwood reviewed the history Ofthe VallCO Shipping Center and discussed the intent of the redevelopment project. Nicole Murphy, Redevelopment Attorney, entered into the record the following: Exhibit 1, affidavit of publication; Exhibit 2, certificate of mailing to property owners and business owners and operators; Exhibit 3, certificate of mailing to the goveming bodies of each taxing agency; and Exmbit 4, certification of legal actions taken by the City Council, Plamffng Commission, and Agency. Murphy summarized the proposed redevelopment plan, and it was entered into the record as Exhibit 5. She reviewed the major evidentiary findings, which are as follows: A finding that the project area is a blighted area, meeting the legal qualifications KA -')-/ responses to said comments, and as so revised and supplemented, a Final EIR was prepared by the Agency; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR, as revised and supplemented to incorporate all comments received and the responses of the Agency thereto, and is part of the Agency's Report to the City Council on the Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino is a Responsible Agency, as defined in Section 21069 of the Public Resources Code, with respect to the Redevelopment Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council has duly reviewed and considered the Final EIR prepared and certified by the Agency prior to adopting this resolution and acting on the Redevelopment Plan. Section 2. The City Council hereby adopts the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations relating to the environmental impact of the Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (including, without limitation, the mitigation measures therein set forth). Based upon such Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations, the Agency hereby finds that all significant environmental effects have been eliminated or substantially lessened except the following unavoidable adverse impacts: Cumulative impacts on the Wolfe Road/Pruneridge Avenue intersection. \/Vith the traffi: associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, the operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E+ during the PM peak hour. There are no feasible physical improvements that cou(d be oonstructed at this intersection that would mitigate this impact to a less than significant level. CUP/CCResoEIRFndgs 2 6/1 5/00 Regional emissions. Additional traffic generated by shopping center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's ("BAAQMD") thresholds of significance. BAAQMD guidance proyides that projects that would individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project therefore would also have a significant cumulative impact on regional air quality, Mitigation measures are set forth in the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A). Those mitigation measures will assist in reducing project and cumulative impacts on regional air quality, but would not reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council finds and determines that the Redevelopment Plan will have a significant effect upon the environment but that the benefits of the Redevelopment Plan outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts for the reasons set forth in the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations, in particular, Part V thereof. Section 3. Upon approval and adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City Council, the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a Notice of Determinatton with the County Clerk of the County of Santa Clara pursuant to the provisions of Section 21152 of CEQA and Section 1 5096(i) of the State CEQA Guidelines PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of 2000, by the following vote: Vote AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: City Clerk Members of the City Council APPROVED: Mayor, City of Cupertino CUP/CCResoEIRFndgs 3 6/1 5/00 ,l,l# EXHIBIT A STATEMENT OF FINDINGS, FACTS, AND OVERRIDING CONSiDERATIONS RELATING TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT INTRODUCTION The California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 2'1000 et seq., "CEQA") provides, in Section 21081, that: "[N]o public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out unless both of the following occur: "(a) The public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect: "(1) Changes or a1terations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. "(2) Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. "(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, inciuding considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. "(b) With respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), the public agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment." As defined in CEQA, "'significant effect on the environment' means a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment." (Public Resources Code Section 21068.) Exhibit A Page t of 16 !l5 II.DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL For purposes of CEQA, the "project" addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report (the "Final EIR") is the adoption and phased implementation of the Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project"). As more particularly identified in the Final EIR, The Project Area is more particularly identified in the Final EIR. Under the Redeveiopment Plan, the Project would be developed in accordance with the land uses designated and permitted by the General Plan for the City of Cupertino. The Redevelopment Plan alsO specifically recognizes the development rights vested under that certain Development Agreement dated August 15, j99l, adopted by the City Council of the City of Cupertino by Ordinance No. 1540 on July "15, 1991. The Fina) EIR describes the environmental impacts that may occur as a result of the adoption and phased implementation of the Redevelopment Plan and identifies, where applicable, measures which would mitigate significant effects on the environment to a level of insignificance, Findings regarding the significant effects of the Projecf are set forth belpw, Ill.ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT; FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT This Part Ill identifies the potentially significant and unavoidably significant effects of the Project as determined by the Agency and the City Council, including the findings and facts supporting the findings in connection therewith. A. Land lJse and Planning 1.Environmental Impact a.Land Use Incompatibilities Between Proposed Modifications and Adjacent Areas: The proposed location of the new 168- room Hotel #2, west of Wolfe Road, could result in potentially significant adverse land use compatibility effects on adjacent existing residential areas to the west of the project site. These potential adverse effects could include: height and scale incongruities, introduction of night-time light impacts from the hotel and hotel parking area lighting features, construction period emissions (air), and increased noise associated with mechanical equipment and project construction. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Exhibit A Page 2 of 16 c- Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measures are,incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: 1 In conducting the design review process for Hotel #2, particular emphasis will be placed on the need to incorporate building design, setback, lighting controls, and other measures to ensure against adverse impacts on the nearest residential neighborhood to the west. i The construction period air quality (dust) mitigation measures identified in Section 9.3 of the Final EIR wilt be implemented Visual Factors i. Environmental Impact a. Visual Impacts of Wolfe Road Tree Removal: The proposed new department store and to a lesser extent, the proposed expansion of the retail bridge across Wolfe Road, could displace existing Wolfe Road street trees, resulting in the loss of visually important mature street trees and the conspicuous disruption of the existing Wolfe Road visual character at this location. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) To the extent possible, the layout for the proposed new department store and retail bridge will retain and protect some of the existing street trees and/or a street tree replacement plan will be implemented which, to the satisfaction of the City, will be sufficient to offset project-related losses and restore visual continuity on the affected segment of Wolfe Road. Exhibit A Page 3 of 16 Transportation and Parkin9 1, Environmental Impact Project Impact on Westbound Leff-Turn Storage at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road Intersection: The estimated maximum vehicular queue in the westbound left-turn lanes at the Wolfe Road/Homestead Road intersection is estimated to exceed the available storage under existing conditions by six vehicles. With the addition of traffic associated with other approved developments and the proposed project, the queue is estimated to exceed the available storage by 10 vehicles. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, the westbound left-turn pcicket at the Woife Road/Homestead Road intersection will be lengthened by modifying the striping on the Homestead Road approach to provide two 320-foot left-turn lanes. Environmental Impact Project Impact on Eastbound Left-Turn Storage at the Wolfe Road/Stevens Creek Boulevard Intersection: \/Vith the addition of traffic associated with the proposed project, the maximum queue in the eastbound left-turn pocket at the Wolfe Road/Stevens Creek Boulevard intersection is projected to exceed the available storage length by one vehicle during the AM peak hour. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: Exhibit A Page 4 of 16 i.2ff (1) As part of the project development, the eastbound left-turn pocket at the Wolfe Rfoad/Stevens Creek Boulevard intersection will be lengthened by modifying the striping and median on the Stevens Creek Boulevard approach to provide one 170-foot and one 430-foot-long left-turn lane. 3, Environmental Impact a.Project Impact on Westbound Left-Turn Storage at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard Intersection: The maximum queue projected in the westbound leff-turn pocket at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard intersection is '18 vehicles under existing conditions and 20 vehicles under project conditions. The existing turn pocket storage is approximately 18 vehicles in two 190-foot-long lanes. The estimated maximum queue under project conditions would exceed the available storage length by four. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significprit effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, the eastbound left-turn pocket at the Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza Boulevard intersection will be lengthened by modifying the striping and median on the Stevens Creek Boulevard approach to provide two 250-foot- long lefi-turn lanes. Environmental Impact a.Potential Operational Impact at the Vallco Parkway (Realigned) Parking Structure Driveways. The design of relocated Vallco Parkway and the associated new adjacent parking structure driveways has not been finalized. If separate lefi-turn lanes for inbound traffic at the parking structure driveways on Vallco Parkway are not provided, a potentially significant impact would occur at these locations. Exhibit A Page s of 16 I:)-F b.: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment,Plan: (1) As part of the project development, the provision of separate )eft-turn lanes for inbound traffic at the Vallco Parkway driveways will be required. 5, Environmental Impact Potential Increased Demand for Bicycle Access: The project has the potential to increase demand for bicycle access to the site. There are no existing bicycle facilities serving the site. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorprirated into the Ftedevelopment Plan: (1) The project design shall incorporate support facilities for bicycles (e.g., bike racks for patrons and bicycle lockers and showers for employees). 6. Environmental Impact Potential Parking Impacts: The project has the potential to substantially increase the demands for convenient on-site parking which may result in locational and overall shortages in parking supply. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Parking will be required to be constructed at the retail parking ratio specified in the Development Agreement (August 15, 1991) and/or at the parking ratios Exhibit A Page 6 of 16 I<)0 specified in the City's zoning ordinance. In addition, to the extent necessary and feasible, off-site employee parking and/or a valet program during the peak holiday season shall be implemented. 7. Environmental Impact Cumulative Impacts on the Homestead Road/Wolfe Road Intersection: With the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved deve(opments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, operation of the intersection of Homestead Road and Wolfe Road is projected to deteriorate from LOS D- to LOS E during the PM peak hour. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment, c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation .measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: 1 Implementation of the City's planned Homestead Arterial Management Program would improve operations at this intersection. PM peak-hour operations with improved signal progression along Homestead Road are estimated to be at LOS D-. 8, Environmental Impact Cumulative Impacts to the Wolfe Road/Pruneridge Avenue Intersection: \/Vith the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E+ during the PM peak hour. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project Exhibit A Page 7 ofl6 15t are more particularly described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations contained in Part V of this Statement of Findings, Facts and Overriding Considerations. Public Services Environmental Impact Increase in Demand for Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services: The proposed project would attract new patrons to the proposed new peripheral retail store, restaurant, two hotels, department store(s), and other retail space increases, increasing the demand for fire protection and emergency medical services. In addition, traffic generated by the proposed project and other development in the area may create greater traffic congestion, potentially increasing emergency response times. The Central Fire District may require additional staffing and/or equipment to provide an adequate level of service to the project. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measures are incorporated into the Redeveiopment Plan: 1 As part of the project development, compliance with all applicable codes will be required, including the 1994 Uniform Fire Code, current Uniform Building Code, Electrical Code, Mechanical Code and Municipal Code, to ensure adequate installation of sprinkler systems, water delivery systems, and other provisions. (2) As part of the project development, compliance with detailed project design features identified by the Central Fire District will be required during the City's plan review and permitting process. Environmental Impact a. Increase in Demand for Police Services: The proposed project would attract new patrons to the proposed new peripheral retail store, restaurant, two hotels, department Exhibit A Page s of 16 /,!jug, store(s), and other retail space increases, increasing the demand for fire protection and emergency medical services. In addition, traffic generated by the proposed project and other development in the area may create greater traffic congestion, potentially increasing emergency response times. The Santa Clara County Sheriff's Department may require additional staffing to provide an adequate level of service to the project. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, coordination with the City and the County Sheriffs Department will be required to quantify potential impacts on police services and develop an appropriate mitigation strategy, including adequate site lighting for security. Additional Facts: The City of Cupertino has approved an agreement with the County of Santa Clara whereby the City has agreed to pay the cost of one additional sheriffs deputy for a certain period of time. Environmental Impact Potential for Delays in Emergency Response: The numerous access points to the project site may create confusion to emergency responders possibly adding to response times. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Findaing: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Coordination with the Sheriff's Department and Central Fire District will be required, as necessary and appropriate, to assign specific access point designations. Exhibit A Pa9e90fl6 19 Enviroental Impact Project Sanitary Sewer System Impacts: The sewer co!lection demands associated with the proposed project could exceed the capacity of the existing sewer main under 1-280 currently serving the project site. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) As part of the project development, wastewater generation increases shall be compared by a civil engineer to determine whether existing capacity is sufficient and, if not, collection capacity improvements shall be required. E. 4. Environmental Impact Construction Emissions. Project construction activities such as building demolition, excavation and grading operations, construction vehicle traffic and wind blowing over exposed earth would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive particulate matter emissions that would affect local air qualih/. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Fugitive dust control measures will be required to be implemented during project demolition and construction activities. Exhibit A Page to of 16 is4- 2, Environmental Impact Regional Emissions: Additional traffic generated by shopping center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Management DistriCt'S ("BAAQMD") THRESHOLDS Of significance. BAAQMD guidance provides that projects that would individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project therefore would also have a.significant cumulative impact on regional air quality. Facts in Support of the Finding: The specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Project are more particularly described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations contained in Part V of this Statement of Findings, Facts and Overriding Consaiderations F. Geology and Soils Environmental Impact Expansive Soils and Soil Settlement: New development on the project site may be subject to foundation and infrastructure (i.e., utility pipe) damage from expansive soils or settlement of soi(s. Although it is likely that any such soils on the site were treated or removed prior to the construction of the existing structures, it is possible that some hazards remain or that remediation standards have increased. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) In accordance with standard City procedures, a soils report will be required in connection with project development, which shall be based on a sufficient Exhibit A Page n ofl6 156 analysis of soils conducted by a qualified engineer or geologist and include appropriate soils, foundation and structural engineering to adequately account for any expansive soil underlying the site. 2, Environmental Impact a.Seismic Shaking Hazards: The project would be subject to strong to very strong seismic shaking in the event of a major earthquake on the Hayward, San Andreas, or Calaveras fault systems. This shaking could, in turn, result in ground failure from liquefaction or differential settlement. Shaking or resulting ground failure could damage or destroy improperly designed or constructed new structures and infrastructure and result in hazards of injury or death to new building occupants. Potential damage to the proposed cinema would be of particular concern due to the likely high concentration of occupants b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redeveloprnent Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measures are incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) Submission of a detailed site-specific geotechnical investigation for the project, and commitment to compliance with all recommendations, will be required prior to project development. (2) The use of flexible connections for all water and sewer lines and, as appropriate, underground power and telecommunications lines will be required. Cultural Resources 1. Environmental Impact a.Disturbance of Historic Archaeological Resources: Although the potential for the project site to 'contain archaeological resources is currently considered low, construction of the proposed new store, cinema, restaurant, and parking facilities could disturb sensitive,, as-yet unknown historic archaeological resources.. Exhibit A Page 12 of 16 b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or . incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: 1 In the event that subsurface cultural resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate vicinity shall be stopped and a qualified archaeologist retained to evaluate the finds. The discovery or disturbance of any cultural resources shall also be reported to the California Historic Resources information System and, if Native American artifacts are found, to the Native American Heritage Commission. Identified cultural resources should be recorded on form DPR 523 (historic properties). Mitigation measures prescribed by these groups and required by the City will be undertaken prior to resumption of construction activities. If human remains are found during project grading, work shall be halted and ttie County Coroner shall be informed immediately. If disturbance of a cultural resource cannot be avoided, a mitigation program, including measures set forth in Section 4 5'l26.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines, shall be implemented 2, Environmental Impact Disturbance of On-site Culturally Significant Trees: Project construction could disturb culturally significant trees at the project site, especially those located near the proposed new department store, parking structure, and peripheral retail store. b. : Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Redevelopment Plan which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. c. Facts in Support of the Finding: The following mitigation measure is incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan: (1) A survey of existing trees on the project site shall be conducted. In connection with any tree defined as a Exhibit A Page 13 of 16 /5'7 "heritage tree" or a "specimen tree" by the Cupertino Municipal Code (chapter 14.18), compliance with City policies and ordinance requirements for tree protection and maintenance shall be required. IV. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the Project or to the location of the Project which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the Project and to evaluate the comparattve merits of the alternatives. Section 15'l26(d)(1) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that the "discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or to its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly." As more particularly set forth in the Final EIR, the Project was compared to the following alternatives: (1) no project; (2) altemative land use mix-2,984-seat cinema in place of 95,000-square-foot retail store; (3) mitigated project alternative; (4) modified redevelopment area boundaries; (5) alternative project location. The analysis in the Final EIR concludes that the Mitigated Project is the environmentally superior alternative. The Mitigated Project is the proposed project incorporating all of the mitigation measures recommended by the Final EIR. Based on the information contained in the Final EIR and the foregoing, the Agency and the City Council find that none of the other alternatives (those atternatives other than the Mitigated Project) are feasible in that none of the other alternatives will accomplish the basic objectives of the Project to eliminate blight in the Project Area. As a result, none of the other alternatives are acceptable when compared to the project as proposed and modified by the mitigation measures adopted by the Agency and City Council, i.e., the Mitigated Project. V.STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS CEQA requires a public agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. As set forth in Part Ill hereof, the Agency and the City Council have determined that the only unavoidable environmental consequences of the Project are the following: A.Transportation and Planning: Cumulative impacts on the Wolfe Road/Prunendge Avenue intersection. \/Vith the traffic associated with the proposed project, approved developments in the area, and other reasonably foreseeable development, the operation of the intersection of Wolfe Road and Pruneridge Avenue is projected to deteriorate from LOS Exhibit A Page 14 of 16 D to LOS E+ during the PM peak hour. There are no feasible physica1 improvements that could be constructed at this intersection that would mitigate this impact to a less than significant level. Air Quality: Regional emissions, Additional traffic generated by shopping center expansion would generate regional emissions exceeding the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's ("BAAQMD") thresholds of significance. BAAQMD guidance provides that projects that would individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. The proposed project therefore would also have a significant cumulative impact on regional air quality. Mitigation measures are set forth in the Statement of Findings, Facts, and Overriding Considerations (Exhibit A). Those mitigation measures will assist in reducing project and cumulative impacts on regional air quality, but would not reduce the impacts to a less-than- significant level. The Agency and the City Council find that the above-referenced unavoidable environmental consequences of the Project are acceptable when balanced against its benefits. This finding is based on the following facts: The Project will serve a critical need, that being the elimination and prevention of the spread of blight and deterioration in the Project Area and the conservation, rehabilitation and redevelopment of the proposed Project Area in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan, the General Plan for the City of Cupertino and local codes and ordinances 2. The promotion of new and continuing private sector investment within the Project Area will prevent the loss of and facilitate the capture of commercial sales activity. 3. The Project will allow for the elimination of blight through rehabilitatton and reconstruction, new development, and the assembly of parcels into more developable sites for more desirable uses. 4. The Project will result in the elimination or amelioration of certain environmental deficiencies, including substandard vehicular circulation systems. New construction within the Project Area will result in an environment reflecting a high level of concern for architectural, landscape, and urban design and land use principles appropriate for attainment of the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan. Exhibit A Page 15 0f 16 A'3ol Project implementation would resun in the retention and expansion of businesses by means of redevelopment and rehabilitation activities and by encouraging and assisting in the cooperation and participation of owners, businesses, and public agencies in the revitalization of the Project Area. 7. Revitalized commercial development will result in the creation and development of local job opportunities and the preservation of the area's existing employment base. Project implementation will strengthen the economic base of the Project Area and the City by installing needed site improvements and stimulating commercial development. 9. Project implementation will expand and improve the City's supply of affordable housing. Exhibit A Page 16 of 16 i40 Resolution No, 00-188 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of fl'ie City of Cupertino this 19" day of June, 2000, by the following vote:' Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: AJ3STAIN: ATTEST:APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino ht> ORDINANCE N0. 1850 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE (:UPkRTuNO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino (the "City Council") has received from the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") the proposed Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project"), a copy of which is on file at the office of the Agency at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, and at-the office of the City Clerk at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, together with the Report of the Agency to the City Council on the proposed Redevelopment Plan, including: (l) the reasons for selection of the Project Area; (2) a description of the physical and economic conditions existing in the Project Area; (3) a description of specific projects proposed by the Agency in the Project Area and m explanation of how the proposed projects will alleviate the conditions existing in the Project Area; (4) the proposed method of financing redevelopment of the Project Area, including an assessment of the economic feasibility of the Project and an explanation of why the elimination of blight and redevelopment of the Project Area cannot be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone or by the City Council's use of financing alternatives other than tax increment financing; (5) an analysis of the Preliminary Plan for the Project; (6) the Report and Rpcrimmenrlstirins of the Planing Commission of the City of Cupertino (the "Plag Commission"); (7) the Final Enviroental Impact Report; (8) a summary of consultations with affected taxing agencies; and (9) an Implementation Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reported that the Redevelopment Plan conforms to the General Plan of the City of Cupertino and has recommended approval of the Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, the Agency prepared and circulated a Draft Environmental Impact Report (the "Draft EIR") on the Redevelopment Plan in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the Guidelines for Implementation of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (14 Cal. Code Regs. Section 15000 et seq.), and environmental procedures adopted by the Agency pursuant thereto, and the Draft EIR was thereafter revised and supplemented to incorporate comments received and responses thereto, and, as so revised and supplemented, a Final Environtnental Impact Report (the "Final EIR") was prepared and certified by the Agency; and WHEREAS, the Agency and the City Council have reviewed and considered the Final EIR on the Redevelopment Plan and have determined that, for certain significant effects identified by the Final EIR, mitigation measures and a monitoring program therefor have been required in or incorporated into the Redevelopment Plan which avoid or substantially lessen such effects; and i43 OrdinanceNo, 1850 Page 2 WHERBAS, the Agency and the City Council have each adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the remaining significant effects identified by the Final EIR which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance; mid WHEREAS, the City Council and the Agency held a joint public hearing in the City Council Chambers, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, on June 19, 2000, to consider adoption of the Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, a notice of said hearing was duly and regularly published in The Cupertino Courier, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Cupertino, once a week for five successive weeks prior to the date of said hearing, and a copy of said notice and affidavit of publication are on file with the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, copies of the notice of joint public hearing and a statement concerning acquisition of property by the Agency were mailed by first-class mail to the iast known address of each assessee of each parcel of land in Uhe proposed Project Area as shown on the last equalized assessment roll of the County of Santa Clara; and WHEREAS, copies of the notice ofjoint public hearing were mailed by first-class mail to all business owners or operators within the proposed Project Area; and WHEREAS, copies of the notice of joint public hearing were mailed by certified mail with return receipt requested to the governing body of each taxing entity which receives taxes from property in the Project Area; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Report of the Agency, the Report and Recommendations of the Plag Commission, the Redevelopment Plan, and the Final EIR; has provided an opportunity for all persons to be heard and has received and considered all evidence and testimony presented for or against any and all aspects of the Redevelopment Plan; WHEREAS, no written objections to the Redevelopment Plan were received, either before or at the noticed public heating, from an affected taxing entity or property owner; and WHEREAS, all actions required by law have been taken by all appropriate public bodies; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 4. That the purpose and intent of the City Council with respect to the Project Area is to accomplish the following: (a) the establishment, by effective use of the redevelopment process, of a plat'ing and implementation framework that will ensure the proper, long-term development of the Project Area; (b) the elimination and prevention of the spread of blight and deterioration, and the conservation and rehabilitation of the Project Area in accordance with the City's General Plan, specific plans, and local codes and ordinances; (c) the replanning, redesign, and redevelopment of underdeveloped or poorly developed areas that are underutilized or Ordinance No. 1850 Page 3 improperly utilized; (d) the strengthening of the economic base of the Project Area by the redevelopment and rehabilitation of stuctures and the installation of needed site improvements; (e) the promotion of new private sector investment within the Project Area to facilitate the revitalization of an important commercial center; (f) the elimination or amelioration of certain environmental deficiencies, such as insufficient off- and on-street parking, and other public improvements, facilities and utilities deficiencies adversely affecting the Project Area; (g) the creation and development of local job opportunities and the preservation of the existing employment base; and (h) the provision, by rehabilitation or new cons'hction, of improved housing for individuals and/or families of low or moderate income within the City limits. Section 2. The City Council hereby finds and determines that: (a) The Project Area is a blighted area, the redevelopment of which is necessary to effectuate the public puyoses declared in the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq,). This finding is based upon the following facts, as more particularly set forth in the Report of the Agency to the City Council: (1) TheProjectAreaispredominantlyurbanized; (2) The Project Area is characterized by and suffers from a combination of blighting physical and economic conditions, including, among others: buildings which are substandard in design and are functionally obsolescent; buildings of inadequate size; buildings with inadequate access and circulation; lots of irregular form and shape and of inadequate size for proper usefulness which are under multiple ownership; depreciated or stagnant property values mid impaired investments, evidenced by a decline in retail sales, decline in assessed property values, high vacancy levels, and an inability to attract significant retail tenants; and (3) The combination of the conditions referred to in paragraph (2) above is so prevalent and so substantial that it causes a reduction of, or lack of, proper utilization of the Project Area to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the City which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment. (b) The Redevelopment Plan will redevelop the Project Area in conformity with the Community Redevelopment Law and in the interests of the public peace, health, safety, and welfare. This finding is based upon the fact that redevelopment of the Project Area will implement the objectives of the Community Redevelopment Law by aiding in the elimination and conection of the conditions of blight; providing for planning, development, redesign, clearance, reconstruction, or rehabilitation of properties which need improvement; improving, increasing, and preserving the supply of low- and moderate-income housing within the community; providing additional employment opportunities; and providing for higher economic utilization of potentially useful Iand. (c) The adoption and carrying out of the Redevelopment Plan is economically sound and feasible. This finding is based on the facts, as more particularly set forth in the Report of the 14,:r OrdinanceNo, 1850 Page 4 Agency to the City Council, that under the Redevelopment Plan the Agency will be authorized to Seek and utiliZe a variety of potential financing reSOurCeS, including tax increments; that the mme and timing of public redevelopment assistance will depend on the amount and availability of such financing resources, including tax increments generated by new investment in the Project Area; and that no public redevelopment activity will be undertaken unless the Agency can demonstrate that it has adequate revenue to finance the activity. (d) The Redevelopment Plan is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Cupertino, including, but not limited to, the housing element, which substantially complies with state housing law. This finding is based upon the finding of the Planning Commission that the Redevelopment Plan is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Cupertino. (e) The carrying out of the Redevelopment Plan would promote the public peace, health, safety, and welfare of the City of Cupertino and will effectuate the purposes and policy of the Community Redevelopment Law. This finding is based upon the fact that redevelopment, as contemplated by the Redevelopment Plan, will benefit the Project Area by correcting conditions of blight and by coordinating public and private actions to stimulate development and improve the physical and economic conditions of the Project Area. (f) The condemnation of real property, as provided for in the Redevelopment Plan, is necessary to the execution of the Redevelopment Plan, and adequate provisions have been made for the payment for property to be acquired as provided by law. This finding is based upon the need to ensure that the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan will be carried out and to prevent the recurrence of blight, and the fact that no property will be acquired unless the Agency can demonstrate that it has adequate revenue for the acquisition. (g) The Redevelopment Plan will not result in the temporary or permanent displacement of m'iy occupants of housing facilities in the Project Area and, therefore, will not result in the need to relocate occupants of housing facilities or to ensure the availability of comparable replacement dwellings. This finding is based on the fact that there are no housing facilities currently located in the Project Area. (h) There are no noncontiguous areas of the Project Area. (i) Inclusion of any lands, buildings, or improvements in the Project Area which are not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare is necessary for the effective redevelopment of the entire area of which they are a part; and any area included is necessary for effective redevelopment and is not included for the purpose of obtaining the allocation of tax increment revenues from such area pursuant to Section 33670 of the Community Redevelopment Law without other substantial justification for its inclusion. This finding is based upon the fact that the boundaries of the Project Area were chosen as a unified and consistent whole to include all properties contributing to or affected by the blighting conditions characterizing the Project Area. W(t Ordinance No. 1850 Page 5 (j) The elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the Project Area could not reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone without the aid and assistance of the Agency. This finding is based upon the facts, as more particularly set forth in the Report of the Agency to the City Council, that because of the higher costs and more significant risks associated with development of blighted areas, individual developers are unable m'id unwilling to invest in blighted areas without substantial public assistance and that funds of other public sources and programs are insufficientto eliminate the blighting conditions. (k) The Project Area is a predominantly urbanized area as defined by subdivision (b) of Section 33320.1. This finding is based upon the facts, as more particularly set forth in the Report of the Agency to the City Council, that all of the properties within the Project Area have been or are developed for urban uses and are an integral part of an area developed for urban uses. (i) The time limitations in the Redevelopment Plan, WhiCh are the maximum time limitations authorized under the Community Redevelopment Law, are reasonably related to the proposed projeCts tO be implemented in the PrOjeCt Area and the ability of the Agency tO eliminate blight within the Project Area. This finding is based upon the facts that redevelopment depends, in large part, upon private market forces beyond the control of the Agency and shorter time limitations would impair the Agency's ability to be flexible and respond to market conditions as and when appropriate and would impair tlxe Agency's ability to maintain development standards and controls over a period of time sufficient to assure area stabilization. In addition, shorter time limitations would limit the revenue sources and financing capacity necessary to corry out proposed projects in the Project Area. Section 3. In order to implement and facilitate the effectuation of the Redevelopment Plan, certain official actions must be taken by the City Council; accordingly, the City Council hereby: (a) pledges its cooperation in helping to card out the Redevelopment Plan; (b) directs the various officials, departments, boards, and agencies of the City of Cupertino having administrative responsibilities in the Project Area likewise to cooperate to such end and to exercise their respective functions and powers in a matmer consistent with the Redevelopment Plan; (c) stands ready to consider and take appropriate action on proposals and measures designed to effectuate the Redevelopment Plan; and (d) declares its intention to undertake and complete any proceeding, including the expenditure of moneys, necessary to be carried out by the City under the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan. Section 4. Having received no written objections from an affected taxing entity or property owner either before or at the noticed public hearing, and having considered all evidence and testimony presented for or against any aspect of the Redevelopment Plan, the Council hereby ovemiles all written and oral objections to the Redevelopment Plan. Section 5. The mitigation measures, as identified in Council Resolution No. 00-187! adopted on June 19, 2000, and Agency Resolution No. RA-00-06, adopted on June 19, 2000, making findings based upon consideration of the Final EIR on the Redevelopment Plan, are incorporated and made part of the proposed Redevelopment Plan. if-7 Ordinance No, 1850 Page 6 Section 6. That certain document entitled "Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project," a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk and attached hereto, is hereby incorporated by reference herein and designated as the official "Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project." Section7. The City of Cupertino Building Department is hereby directed for a period of at least two (2) years after the effective date of this Ordinance to advise all applicants for building permits within the Project Area that the site for which a building permit is sought for the constnuction of buildings or for other improvements is within a redevelopment project area. Section 8. The City Clerk is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Agency, and the Agency is hereby vested with the responsibility for carrying out the Redevelopment Plan. Section 9. The City Clerk is hereby directed to record with the County Recorder of Santa Clara County a notice of the approval and adoption of the Redevelopment Plan pursuant to this Ordinance, containing a description of the land within the Project Area and a statement that proceedings for the redevelopment ofthe Project Area have been instituted under the Community Redevelopment Law. Section 10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a copy of the description and statement recorded pursuant to Section 9 of this Ordinance, a copy of this Ordinance, and a map or plat indicating the boundaries of the Project Area, to the auditor and assessor of the County of Santa Clara, to the governing body of each of the taxing entities which receives taxes from property in the Project Area, and to the State Board of Equalization within thirty (30) days following adoption of this Ordinance. Section 11. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to certify to the passage of this Ordinance and to cause the same to be published once in The Cupertino Courier, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Cupertino. Section 12. If any part of this Ordinance or the Redevelopment Plan which it approves is held to be invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance or of the Redevelopment Plan, and this City Council hereby declares that it would have passed the remainder of this Ordinance or approved the remainder of the Redevelopment Plan if such invalid portion thereof had been deleted. Section 13. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the 19'h day of June, 2000, and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino on the day of , 2000, by the following vote: Members of the City Council ifr Vote Ordinance No. 1850 Page 7 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTF,ST:APPROVED: Mayor, City of Cupertino MY City CJerk JLJN-14-2000 15:2B P.';02 PROOF OF PUBLICATION Flling Stamp State of California County (if Santa Clara I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of t8 years, and not partyto or interested in the above entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of the: The Cupertlno Courier, 20465 Sllverado Aye., Cupertino Callfornla, 95014 a newspaper of general circulation, printed every Wednesday in the City of San Jose, State of California, County of Santa Clara, and which newspaper has been adiudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Santa Clara, State of Californla, Case Number CVioo637 that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has beeri published in eath regular and entire issue of said Newspaper and riot In any supplement thereof on the following dates, to wit: May sr. xi. it and lung 7. 14 all in the year of 2000 i certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated: Illne !4.-2!Lm at San Jose, California PROOF OF PuBLICATlON Exhibit 1 Stephanie Thompson TOTEIL P.212 Slewz CreekBlm It'al l' l' f Exhibit 2 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING (Notice to Property Owners and Business Owners/Operators with Statement Regarding Acquisition of Property) 1, mf' whose business address is 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 950"l4, do hereby certify that I mailed a copy of the attached Notice of Joint Public Hearing (the "Notice") and letter containing a statement regarding acquisition of property by the Agency (the "Statement") to each assessee of land in the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project Area, as shown on the last equalized assessment roH, and to each known business owner/operator in the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project Area, according to the lists of such assessees and business owners/operators and their addresses attached to this Certificate, and that I personally mailed such Notice and Statement by depositing a copy of same, addressed to each such listed last known assessee, first-class mail, postage prepaid, in the United States mail at Cupertino, California, on [ /d , 2000, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. DATED:/%7 /<,= Cupertino, California , 2000 ATTACHMENTS Notice of Joint Public Hearing Statement Regarding Acquisition of Property List of Assessees and Addresses List of Business Owners/Operators and Addresses CLIP/CertMailNotJPHOwners 5/8/00 Exhibit 3 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING (Notice to Affected Taxing Entities) 1, clDD:l wo"""'-, whose business address is 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95C)14, do hereby certify that I mailed a copy of the attached Notice of Joint Public Hearing (the "Notice") to the governing body of each taxing entity which receives taxes from property within the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project Area, according to the list of taxing entities attached to this Certificate, and that I personally mailed such Notice by depositing a copy of same, addressed to each such taxing entity, certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, in the lJnited States mai1 at Cu'pertino, California, On /Op y / (,, , 2000, Copies of all returned receipts are on file in the office of the City Clerk. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. DATED:/Vlay , 2000 Cupertino, California AnACHMENTS (1) Notice of Joint Public Hearing (2) List of Affected Taxing Entities and Addresses CUP/CertMailNotJPHTaxAgs 5/8/00 J63 Exhibit 4 CERTIFICATION OF CERTAIN OFFICIAL ACTIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CUPF,RTmO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT I, Donald D. Brown, Executive Director of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency, do hereby certify that pursuant to the provisions of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.), the following official actions have been taken by the City Council of the City Cupertino (the Council), the Plamffng Commission of the City of Cupertino (the Planning Commission) and the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the Agency) in connection with the preparation of the Redevelopment Plan for Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project: 1. CouncilResolutionNo.99-212,adoptedonJulyl9,1999: AResolutionofthe City Council ofthe City of Cupertino Designating aRedevelopment Survey Area. 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5054, adopted on July 19, 1999: Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino Selecting the Boundaries of the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project Within the Redevelopment Survey Area and Approving a Preliminary Plan fop the Redevelopment of the Project Area. 3. AgencyResolutionNo.RA-99-09,adoptedonJulyl9,1999: Resolutionofthe Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Accepting the Preliminary Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project. 4. Agency Resolution No, RA-00-01, adopted on February 22, 2000: Resolution of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Approving and Adopting Rules Governing Participation by Property Owners and the Extension of Reasonable Reenh7 Preferences to Business Occupants in Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project. 5. Agency ResolutionNo. RA-00-02, adopted on February 22, 2000: Resolution of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Approving and Authorizing Transmittal of the Preliminmy Report to Affected Taxing Entities on the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project. CUP/CertOffActs 6/12/00 154 6. Agency Resolution No. RA-00-03, adopted on February 22, 2000: Resolution of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Referring the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project to the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino for Report and Recommendation. 7. Agency Resolution No. RA-00-04, adopted on February 22, 2000: Resolution of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Accepting and Authorizing Circulation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report on the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project. 8. A Notice of Completion of the Draft Environmental Impact Report on the Redevelopment Plan was filed wish the State Office of Planning and Research on February 28, 2000, and a notice inviting comments on the Draft Environtnental Impact Report was published in The Cupertino Courier onFebruary 16, 2000, 9. PlanningCommissionResolutionNo,6011,adciptedonMarch27,2000: Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino Making its Report and Recommendation on Adoption of the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project. 10. Agency Resolution No. RA-00-05, adopted on May 15, 2000: Resolution of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Approving and Adopting the Report to the City Council on the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, Submitting Said Report and Proposed Redevelopment Plan to the City Council, and Consenting to a Joint Public Hearing on Said Redevelopment Plan. 11. CouncilResolutionNo.00-143,adoptedonMayl5,2000: AResolutionofthe City Council of the City of Cupertino Consenting to and Calling a Joint Public Hearing on the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project. The documents reflecting the official actions referred to herein are contained in the official records of the City Council, the Plng Commission and the Agency, and are incorporated herein by reference with the same effect as though set forth in full in this Certification. 2 /65 G:planning/misc/cupcert Dated: June 2000 Donald TI B Executive Director of the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency 3 i& Exhibit 5 [PROPOSED] FOR THE CUPERTINO VALLCe) REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Prepared by the CUPERTTNO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY /5'} TABLE OF CONTENTS I. [§IOO] INTRODUCTION II, [43 UHbCRlFl'lUN UF PROJECT AREA I, [pj Pi<OPOSED REDEVELOPMENT ACTIONS A. [§301] General B, [§302] Parti6pAtion ('pportunities; Extension of Preferences for-Reent7 Within Redeveloped Project Area 1. Business Occupants 2. [p04] RureS far Par&'patxOrt OppOrtllnitieS/0 Priorities, and Prefezences 3, [] Participation Agreements 4, [l Comorming Owners C ffl3D7] Cooperation with Public Bodies D, [p8] Property Acquisition 2. [plO] Personal Property E. [§311] Property Management p, pl2] Payments to Taxing Agen6es G. [313] Relocation of Persons, Business Concerns, and Others Displaced by the Project 1. [pl4] Assistance in Finding Other Locations 2, [pl5] Relocation Payments i5X *ql*@/00 H, [pl6] Demolition, Clearance, and Building and Site Preparation 1. [§317] Demolition and Clearance 2. [§318] Preparation of Building Sites pl9] Property Disposition and Development 1, [p20] Real Property Disposition and Development a. [§321] General b. [§322] Disposition and Development Documents c. [§323] Development by the Agency d. [§324] Development Plans 2. [§325] Personal Property Disposition @26] Rehabiliration, Conservation, and Moving of St!'Llctures 1. [§327] Rehabilitation and Conserva'hon 2. [p281 Moving of S'hctures K, [p29] Low- and Moderate4h'xcome Housing IV. [41 USES PERMITI'ED IN THE PROJECT AREA A, [pl] Redevelopment Land Use Map 1. [] Public Rights-of-Way 2. [] Other Public, Semi-Public, Institutional, mid Nonprofit Uses 3. [!!405] Interim Uses 4. [] Nonconformmg Uses (, [471 General Controls and Limitations 1. [81 Construction 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. [] Rehabilitahon and Retention of Properties [%10] umitation on the Number of Buildings. [§411] Number of Dwening Uits [pl2] Limitation on Type, Size, and Height of Buildings [%13] Open Spaces, Landscapmg, ught, Air, and Privacy 7, [014] Signs 8, [§415] Utilities 9, [%16] Incompatible Uses 10 . [%17] Nondiscmation and Nonsegregation 11 , p0l8] Subdivision of Parcels 12 . [§419] Minor Variations D, [] Design for Development E, [1] Building Permits v, [] METHODS OF FfNANaNG THE PROJECT A, [1] Genmal Desziption of the Proposed Financing Method B, l Tax Increment Funds C [§503] Other Loans and Grants hD VI. [§600] ACTIONS BY THE CITY VII. [§700] ENFORCEMENT VIn. [§800] DURATION OF THIS PLAN D(, [§900] PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT Attachment No. 1 Attachment No. 2 Attachment No. 3 Attachment No. 4 mS Leg'al Description of the Project Area Boundaffes Project Area Map Redevelopment Land Use Map Proposed Public Improvements 11 /29/99 REDEVELOPMENT PIAN FOR THE CUPERTINO V ALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECI' 1. [§100] INTRODUCTION This is. the Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project (the "Project") in the aty of Cupertino (the "City"), County of Santa Clara, State of California; it consists of the text, the Legal Description of the Project Area Boundaries (Attachment No. 1), the Project Area Map (Attchment No. 2), the Redevelopment Land Use Map (Attachment No. 3), and the Proposed Public Improvements (Attachment. No. 4). This Plan was prepared by the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") pursuant to the Community Redevelopment law of the State of'California (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.), the Califoria Constitution, and all applicable local laws and ordinances. The proposed redevelopment of the area within the bour3daries of the.Project (the 'lProject Area") as desibed in this Plan is consistent with the General Plan for the City of Cupertino (the "General Plan"). This Plan also acknowledges the existence of that certain Development Ag:eement dated August 15, 1991, adopted by the City Couni of the aty of Cupertino by Ordice No. 1540 on July 15, 1991. Nothing in this Plan shall be construed to impair or alter any of the rights or obligations of the parties under said Development Agreement nor prevent the Agency from assisting in the implementation of said Development Agreement. This Plan is based upon a Preliminary Plan formulated and aaopted by the . Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino (the "Planning Commission") by Resolution No. 5054, on July 29, 1999. This Plan provides the Agency with powers, duties, and obligations to implement and further the program generally formulated in this Plan for the redevelopment, tehabilitation, and revitalization of the area within the Project Area. Because of the long-term nature of this Plan and the need to retain in the Agency flexibility to respond to market and economic conditions, property owner and developer interests, and oppoties f';om time to time presented for redevelopment, this Plan does not present a precise plan or establish specific projects for the redevelopment, rehabilitation, and revitalization of the Project Area. h"istead, this Plan presents a process and a basic framework within which speffic plans will be presented, specific projects will be established, and speic solutions will be proposed and by which tools are provided to the Agency to fashion, develop, and proceed with such spec plans, projects, and solutions. The purposes of the Community Redevelopment Law will be attained through, and the major goals of this Plan are: A, The establishment, by effective use of the redevelopment process, of a planning and implementation framework that will ensure the proper, long-term redevelopment of the Project Area. B, The elimination and prevention of the spread of blight and deterioration, and the conservation and rehabilitation of the Project Area in accordance with the City's General Plan, specific plans, and local codes and ordinances. C. The replanning, redesign, and redevelopment underdeveloped or .poorly' developed areas that underutilized or improperly utilized. D. The strengthening of the economic base of the Project Area by the redevelopment and rehabilitation of stnuctures and the installation of needed site improvements. E, The promotion of new private sector investment within the Project Area to facilitate the revitalization of an important commercial center. F.The elimination.or amelioration of certain environmental ripfiripnrips, siidi as insufficient off- and on-stree'3 parking, and other public improvements, faities and utilities deficien6es adversely affecting the Project Area. G. The aoeation and development of local job opportunities and the preservation of the existing employment bam. H. The 'provision, by rehabffitation or new constmction, of improved housing for individuals and/or families of low or moderate income within the City limits. I.The provision of assistance to existing building owners in finanmg renovations needed to bmg their buildings up to current codes and standards. n, [4] DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA The boundaries of the Project Area are desai'bed in the "Legal Desciption of the Project Area Boundaries," 'attached hereto as Attachment No. 1 and incorporated herein by reference, and are shown on the "Project Area Map," attached hereto as Attachment No. 2 and incorporated herein by reference. m, [pO] PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT ACTIONS A. [§301} The Agency proposes to eliminate and prevent the spread of blight and deterioration in tbe Project Area by: 1, Permitting participation in the redevelopment process by owners of properties located in the Project Area consistent with this Plan and rules adopted by Agency; 2, The acqition of zeal property; 3. The management of property under the ownership and control of the Agency; 4. Providing relocation assistance to displaced persons and business concerns; The demolition or removal of certain buildings and improvements; 6. Providirig for parti6pation by owners presently located in the Project Area and the extension of preferaices to business occupants desig to remain or reenter into business within the redeveloped Project Azea; 7. The installation, constnucti(in, or reconstruchon of streets, utilities, and other pixblic improvements; 8. The disposition of property for uses in accordance with this Plan; 9. The redevelopment of land by private enterprise or public agencies for uses in accordance with this Plan; 10. The rehabilitation of stmctures and impyovements by present owners, their successors, and the Agency; and 11. Providing for the retention of controls arid the establisent of restrictions or covenants running with the land so that property will continue to be used in accordance with this Plan. a+*l"R'ilCIO In the accomplishment of these purposes and activities and in the implementation and furtherance of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to use all the powers provided in this Plan and all the powers now or hereafter permitted by law. B. [] Paicipation Opporties;,Extension of Preferences forReemrv Withjn Redeveloped Prnjm Area 1- [] Opportties for erB and Business Occupants In accordance with ' Plan and the rules for participation adopted by the Agency pursuant to this Plan and the Community Redevelopment Law, persons who are owners of real property in the Project Area shall be given a reasonable opportunit5r to participate in the redevelopment of the Project Areaconsistent with the objectives of this Plan. The Agency shall extend reasonable preferences to persons who are engaged in business in the Project Area to remain or reenter into business within the redeveloped Project Area if they otherwise. meet the requirements prescribed in this Plan and the rules adopted by the Agency. 2- [!g304] Ries for Parti6pation Opportumties, Priorities. and Preferences h order to provide opportunities to owners to partiapate in the redevelopment of the Project Area and to extend reasonable preferences to businesses to reenter into business within the redeveloped Project Area, the Agency shall promulgate rules for parti6pation by owners and the extension of preferences to business tenants for reentry within the redeveloped Project Area. 3. [3051 Pqmcipation Agreements The Agency may require that, as a condition to participation in redevelopment, each partiapant shall enteir into a binding agreement with the Agency by whidi the participant agrees to rehabilitate, develop, and use and maintain the property in conformance with this Plan and to be subject to the provisions hereof. hi sud'i agreements, participants may be required to join in the recordation of su* documents as may be necessary to ensure the property will be developed and used in accordance with Plan and the participation agreement. Whether or not a partiapant enters mtO a parti6pation agreement with the Agency, the provisions of this Plan are applicable to all public and private property in the Project Area. In the event a participant fails or refuses to rehabilitate, develop, and use and. maintain its real property pur5uant to this Plan and a participation agreement, the real property or any interest therein may be acquired by the Agency and sold or leased for rehabilitation or development in accordance with this Plan. 4. [!3061 Confnming Owners The %ericy may, at its sole and absolute discretion, determine that certain real property within the Project Area presently meets the requizements of this Plan, and the owner of such property will be permitted to remain as a conforming owner without a participation agreement with the Agency provided such owner continues to operate, use, and maintain the real property within the Aregqeuniqremtoenetnsteorf m;to paxpa"arh:.Hclpowaheovnera, graeceom"eonrtmwi"'gthoth"eeAr gshenacyn bm.e re*qeuierevdenbtytthhaet such owner desires to constmct any additional improvements or substantially alter or modify existing stmctures on any of the real property desaibed above as conforming, ' (:, [§3071 Cooperation with Public Bodies Certain public bodies are authorized by state law to aid and cooperate, with or without consideration, in the plang, undertaking, constmction, or operation of this Project. The Agency shall seek the aid and cooperation of such public bodies and shan attempt to coordinate this Plan w'th the activities of such public bodies in order to accomplish the purposes of redevelopment and the highest public good. The Agency, by law, is not authoied to acquire real property owned by public bodies without the consent of such public bodies. The Agency, however, will seek the cooperation of all public bodies whidi own or intend to acquire property in the Project Area. Any public body which owns or leases property in the Project Area will be afforded an the' privileges of owner and tenant partiapation if such public body is willing to enter into a participation agreement with the Agency. All plans for development of property in the Project Area by a public body shall be subject to Agency approval. The Agency may impose on all public bodies the planning and design controls contained in this Plan to insure that present uses and any future development by public bodies will coiorm to the requirements of this Plan. To the extent now or hereafter permitted by law, the Agency is authorized to financially (and otherwise) assist any public entity in the cost of public land, buildings, facilities, structures, or other improvements (within or without the Project Area), which lan<1, buildings, fa61ities, stmctures, or other improvements are or would be of benefit to the Project. D, [§308] Property Acquisition 1. [§309J Real Propety Except as specally exempted herein, the Agency may acquire, but is not required to acquire, any real property located in the Project Area by any means auffiorized by law. It is in the public interest and is necessary in order to eliminate the conditions requiring redevelopment and in order to execute this Plan for the power of eminent domain to be employed by the Agency to acquire real property in the Project Area which camot be acquired by gift, devise, exd"iange, purchase, ot any other lawful method. Eminent domain proceedings, if used, must be commenced within twelve (12) years from the date aof adoption. of this Plan. " The Agency shall not acquire real property to be retained by an owner pursuant to a participation agreement if the owner fully performs under the agreement. The Agency is authorized to acquire stmcttges without acqg the land upon which those stmctures are located- The Ageng is authorized to acquire either the entire fee or any other interest in real property less than a fee. The Agency shan not acquire real property on whidi an existing building is to be continued on its present site and in its present form mid use without the coruent 'of the owner unless: (a) such building requires stmctural alteration, improvement, moderation, or rehabilitation; (b) the site, or lot on which the building is situated, requires modification in size, shape, or use; or (c) it is necessary to impose upon such property any of the controls, limitations, restrictions, and requirements of this Plan and the owner fails or refuses to execute a participation agreement in accordance with the provisions of this Plan, The Agency is not Authorized to acquire real property owned by public bodies which do not consent to such acquisition. The Agency is authorized, however, to acqe public property transferred to private ownership before redevelopment of the Project Area is completed, unaess the Agency and the private owner enter into a participation agreement and the owner completes his responsibffities under the participation agreement. 2, plO] Perscirial Property Generally, personal property shall not be acquired. However, where necessary in the execution of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to acquire personal property in the Project Area by any lawful means, including eminent domain. I(c1 B. [§311] Property Mqnager During such time as property, if any, in the Project Area is owned by the Agency, such property shall be under the management and control of the Agency. Such property may be rented or leased by the Agency pending its disposition for redevelopment, and such rental or lease shan be pursuant to such policies as the Agexrcy may adopt. F. [§312] Paymppts to Taxing ABencips Pursuant to Section 33607.5 of the Community Redevelopment Law, the Agency is required t6 and staff make payments to Ofected taxing entities to alleviate the financial burden and detriment that the affected taxing e'ntities may incur as a result of the adoption of this Plan. The payments made by the Agency shall be calculated and paid in accordance with the requirements of Section 33607.5. In any year during which it 'owns property in the Project Area, the Agency is authorized,' but not required, to pay directly to any :'ff, county, a'ff and county, district, including, but not limited to, a school district, or other public corporation for whose benefit a 'tax would have been levied tlpOn such property had it not been exempt, an amount of money in lieu of taxes. (,. [§313] Relocation of Persons, Business Concems, and Others Displared by the Project 1. [§314] Assistance in Finding Other I.,ocations The Agertcy shan assist all persons, business concerns, and others displaced by the Project in finding other locations and facilities. In order to carry out the Projed with a minimum of hardship to persons, business concerns, and others, U any, displaied by the Project, the Agency shall assist such persons, business concerns and others in finding new locations that are within their respective financial means, in reasonably convenient locations, and otherwise suitable to their respective needs, 2, [pl5] RelocatinnPayments The kgexscy shall make relocation payments to persons, business concerns, and others displaced by the Project for moving expenses and direct losses of personal property and additional relocation payments as may be required by law. Such relocation payments shall be made pursuant to the Califozaia Relocation Assistance Law (Goverent Code Section 7260 et seq.) and Agency mes and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. The Agency may make such other payments . as may be appropriate and for which funds are available. H. [§316] Demolition, Cleprance, and Building and Site Preparation 1. [§3171 Dqr@olition and Clearance The Agency is authorized to demolish and clear buildings, strudures, and other improvements from any real property in the Project Area as necessary to carry out the purposes of this Plan. 2. [pl81 Preparation of Building Sites The Agency is,au$orized to prepare, or cause to be prepared, as building sites any real property in the Project Area owned by the Agency. In connection therewith, the Agency may cause, provide for, or undertake the installation or constniction of streets, utilities, parks, pliygrounds, and other' public improvements necessary to carry out this Plan. The Agency is also authorized to construct foundations, platforms, and other structural forms necessary for the provision or utilization of air rights sites for buildings to be used for residential, commercial, industrial, public, and other uses provided for in this Plan. Prior conserit of the. City Coun61 is required for the Agency to develop sites for commercial or indusMal use by providing streets, sidewalks, utilities, or other improvements which an owner or operator of the site would otherwise be obliged to provide. [§319] Property Disposition and Developmem 1. [§320] Real Property I)isposition and Devek)pment For the purposes of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to sell, lease, exchange, subdivide, transfer, assign, pledge, mcumber by mortgage or deed of 'hst, or othemise dispose of any interest in real property. To the extent permitted by law, the Agency is authorized to dispose of real property by negotiated lease, sale, or transfer without public bidding. Property acquired by the Agency for rehabilitation and resale shall be offered for resale within one ' (1) year after completion of rehabilitation or an annual report concerg sudt property shall be published by the Agency as required by law, Real property acquired by the Agency may be conveyed by the Agency without charge to the aty and, where berieficial to,the Project Area, without diarge to any public body, All real property acquired by the Agency in the Project Area shall be sold or leased to public Or private perSOns Or entities for development for the uses permitted in this Plan. 1&9 All purchasers or lessees of property acquired from the Agency shall be obligated to use the property for the purposes designated in this Plan, to begin and complete development of the property within a period of time whidi the Agency fixes as reasonable, and to comply with other conditions which the Agency deems necessary to 'carry out the purposes of this Plan. b- [!!3221 Disposition and Development Doq,imems To provide adequate safeguards to ensye that the provisions of this Plan will be carried out and to prevent the recurrence of blight, all real property sold, leased, or conveyed by the Ageney, as well as all praperty subject to participation agreements,- is subject to the provisions of this Plan. The Agency shall reserve sudi powers and controls in the disposition and development documents as may be necessary to prevent transfer, retention, or use of property for speculative purposes and to ensure that development is carried out pursuant to this Plan. Leases, deeds, contracts, agreements, and declarations of restrictions of the Agericy may contain restrictions, covenants, covenants running with the land, rights of reverter, conditiozis subsequent, equitable servitudes, or.any other provisions necess4 to carry out this Plan. Where appropriate, as determined by the Agency, su& documents, or portiom thereof, s be recorded in the office of the Recorder of Santa Clara County, - All property in the Project Area is hereby subject to the restriction that there shall be no discination or segregation based upon race, , color, aaeed, areligion, sex, marital status, national origin, or ancestry in the safe, lease,,sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of property in the Project Area. All pr:operl sold, leased, conveyed, or subject to'a participation agreement shall be expressly subject by appropriate documents to the restriction that all deeds, leases, or contracts for the sale, lease, sublease, or other transfer of land in the Project Area shall contain such nondiscrirniffation and normegregation clauses as required by law. C- [ffl231 DevplyBpnt by the Agpn7 To the extent now or hereafter permitted by law, the Agency is authorized to pay for, develop, or constmct any publicly-owned building, facility, stmcture, Or other improvement either within or without the Project Area, for itself or for any public body or entity, wMch buildings, faties, stuctures, or other improvementi are or would be of benefit to the Project Area. Specifically, the Agency may pay for, install, or construct the buildings, facilities, structures, and other improvements identified in Attachment No. 4, attached hereto and /10 incorporated herein by reference, and may acquire or pay for the land required therefor. In addition'to the public improvements authorized under Section 318 and the specific publicly-owned improvements identified in Attad'iment No, 4 of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to instan and constuct, or to cause to be installed and constructed, within or without the Project Area, for itself or for any public body or entity for the benefit of the Project Area, public improvements and public utilities, induding, but not limited tO, the following: (1) ovey- and underpasses; (2) sewers; (3) natural gas distribution systems; (4) water distribution systems; (5) parks, plazas, and pedestrian paths; (6) PLAYGROUNDS; (7) Parkjng fac!l!'bes;' (8) landscaped areas; and (9) street improvements. The . Agency may enter into contracts, leases, and agreements with the City or other public body or entity pursuant to this Section 323, and the obligation of the Agency under such contract, lease, or agreement shall constitute an indebtedness of the Agency which may be made payable out of the taxes levied in the Project Area and allocated to the Agency mder subdivision (b) of Section 33670 of the Community Redevelopment Law arid Section 502 of this Plan or out of any other available funds, d. [p241 Development Plam All development plans (whether public or private) shall be submitted to the Agency for appzoval. All development in the Pzoject Area must conform to City design review standards, 2. iC251 Pemcinql Property Disposition For the purposes of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to lease, Sen/ exchange, transfer, assign, pledge, encumber, or otherwise dispose of personal property which is acquired by the Agency. J, (pal Rehabilitation, Conservation, and Moving of Stnictqr=a 1. [p271 Rehabilij:ation and Conservation The Agency is authorized to rehabilitate and conserve, or to cause to be rehabffitated and corserved, any building or stucture in the Project Area owned by the Agency. The Agency is also authorized and directed to advise, encourage, and assist in the rehabffltation and consenation of property in the Project Area not owned by the Agency. The Agency is also authorized to acquire, lecture/ rehabilitate, mOVe, aTld COnserve BUILDINGS Of histOriC Or arChiteCtural significance. 2. [?28'J Moving of Str-ea As necessary in carg out this Plan, the Agency is authorized to move, or to cause to be moved, any standard structure or building or any structure or building which can be rehabffitated to a location within or outside the Project Area. K, [p3r I,w- and Moderate-Income Houiqinz Pursuant to Section 33334.2 of the Community Redevelopment Law, not less than twenty percent (20%) of all taxes which are anocated to the Agency pursuant to Section 33670' of the Community Redevelopment [aw and Section 502 of this Plan shall be used by the Agency for the pu$oses of inoeasing, improving, and preserving the City's supply of housing for persons and families of very low, low, or moderate income unless certain findings are made as required by that section to lessen or exempt such requirement. In carg out this purpose, the Agency may exercise any or an of its powers. The funds for this purpose shan He he'd in a separate Low and MOderate Income Housing Fund until used. Any interest earned by such Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund shan accue to the Funa. IV, [] USES PED IN THE PROJECT AREA A, [§4011 Redevelopmpm Land Use Map The "Redevelopment Land Use Map," attached hereto as Attachment No, 3 and incorporated herein by reference, illustrates the location of the Project Area boundaries, major streets within the Project Area, and 'the land uses authorized within the Project by the City's current General Plan. The City will from time to time update and revise the General Plan. It is the intention of this Redevelopment Plan that the land uses to be permitted within the Project Area shall be as provided within the City's Gener:m Plan, as it currently exists or as it may from time to time be amended, and as implemented and applied by City ordinances, resolutions and other laws. B. ['l Other Land Uses 1. [i Public Rights- As fflustrated on the Redevelopment Land Use Map (Attachment No. s), the major public streets within the Project Area include Stevens Creek Boulevard, Wolfe Road and Vallco Parkway. Additional public streets, alleys, and easements may 6e created in the Project Area' as needed for proper development. Existing streets, alleys, and [7,;2- easements may be abandoned, dosed, 6r modified as necessary for proper development of the Project. Any changes in the existing interior or exterior street layout shau be in acco'rdance with the General Plan, the objectives of this Plan, and the City's dejign standards, shall be effectuated in the maruqer presibed by state and local law, and shall be guided by the fonowing aiteria: a. The requirements imposed by such factors as topography, traffic safety and aesthetics; and b.The poten'tial need to serve not only the Project Area and new or existing developments but to also serve areas outside the Project by providing convenient and ef&'ent vehicular access and - movement. The public rights-of-way may be used for vehicular and/or pedestrian traffic, as well as for public improvements, public and private utilities, and activities typically found in public rights-of-way. 2. [] Other Public, Semi-Piib1ir Trisfftutional, and Nonpr6fit Uses In my area shown on the Redevelopment Land Use Map (Attachment No. 3)i the Agency is authorized to permit the maintenance, establishment, or enlargement gf public, semi-public, institutional, or n.onprofit uses, including park and recreational facilities, libraries, educational, baternal, ' employee, philanthropic, religious and &aritable institutiors, utilities, railroad rights-of-way, and facilities of other similar associations or organizations. All such uses shall, to the extent possible, confoffi to the provisions of this Plan applicable to the uses in the specific area involved. The Agency may impose such other reasonable requirements and/or restrictions as may be necessary to protect the development and use of the Project Area. 3. [] mte Uses Pending the ultimate development of land by developers and participants, the Agexscy is authorized to use or pe'rmit the use of any land in the Proiect Area for inte uses that are not in conformity with the uses permitted in this Plan, 4. [] Non<onform:irig Uses The Agency may permit an existing use to remain in an existing building in good condition which use does not conform to the provisions of this /73 41 lt'lfi I00 Plan, provided that such use is generany compatible with existing and proposed developments and uses in the Project Area. The owner of such a property must be willing to enter into a participation agreement and agree to the imposition of such reasonable restrictions as may be necessary to protect the development and use of the Project Area. The Agericy may authorize additions, alterations, repairs, or other improvements in the Project Area for mes whidi do not conform to the provisions of this Plan where such improvements are within a portion of the Project where, in the determination of the Agency, sudt improvements would be compatible with surrounding Project uses and development. C. [fl71 Qneral Controls and 'timitations All real property in the Project Area is made subject to the controls and requirements of this Plan. No real property shall be developed, rehabffitated, or otherwise changed after the date of the adoption of ' Plan, except in conformance with the provisiom of ' Plan. 1. [81 Constmction All constmction in the Project Area shall comply with all applicable state and local laws mid codes in effect from time to time. In addition to applicable codes, ordinances, or other requirements governing development = the Project Area, additional spec performance and development standards may be adopted by the Agency to control and direct redevelopment activities in the Project Area. 2. ] Rehabilitation and Retenti(m of Propeies Any existing structure within the Pzoject Area approved. by the Agency for retention and rehabilitation shall be repaired, altered, reconmucted, or tehabilitated in such a maffiler that it will beasafe and sound in all physical RESPECTS and be attractive in appearance and not detrimental to the surrounding uses. 3. [@101 Limitation on the Nimber of Buildings The number of buildings in the' Project Area shall not exceed the number of buildings permitted under the General Plan. 4, [@11] Number of Dwelling Units At the time of adoption of this Plan, there are no dwelling units within the Project Area. The number of dwelling units permitted in the Project nl II l'l(l jCIO Area shall not exceed the number of dwelling units permitted under the General Plan. 5. . [§4121 L,imitation on Type, Size, arid Height of Buildings Except as set forth in other sections of this Plan, the type, sue, and height of buildings shan be as limited by applicable federal, state, and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations, 6. [ul31 0pen Spaces. T,;inrlscppiriB, T,ight, Air, and Privacy The approximate amount of open space to be provided in the Project Area is the total of all areas which will be in the public rights-of-rway, the public ground, the space around buildings, and all other outdoor areas not permitted to be covered by buildings. Landscaping shall be provided to enhance open spaces in the Project Area and create a Ngh-quality aesthetic environment. Landscaping may include, in addition to trees, shrubs and other living plant materials, such materials as paving, landscape ccntainers, plaza fumiture, and landscape and pedestrian lighting. ' Sufficient space shan be maintained between buildings in all areas to provide adequate light, air, and privacy. 7. pl4] All signs shan conform to City sign aordinances and other requirements as they now exist or are hereafter amended. Design of all proposed new signs shall be submitted to the Agency and/or the City prior to installation for a review and approval pursuant to the procedures of this Plan. 8. [ul5] The Agency shall require that all utilities be placed underground whenever physically and economically feasible. 9, [pl6] Incompatible Uses No use or stmcture which by reason of appearance, traffic, smoke, glare, noise, odor, or similar factors, as determined by the Agency, would be incompatible with the surrounding areas or stmctures shall be permitted in any part of the Project Area. 10. [ul7] Nondiscrimination and. Nonqepegqtion There shan be no discation or segregation based upon race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, or ancestry permitted in the /75 11 /29 /99 sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of property in the Project Area. 11. [%181 Subdivisio.n of Parcpls No parcel in the Project Area, including any parcel retained by a participant, shall be subdivided without the approval of the Agency. 12. [!HI91 Minor Vqria Under. exception4 circumstances, the Agency is authorized to p,ermiordte:tv:riPeationt "suochm vthffle;ahOints,, ffireestrAicg:o:, ma"uastcdoent=eols.esetambalisthed by this Plan. a- The application of certain provisions of this Plan would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of this Plan; b. There are exceptional circumstances Or conditions applicable to 'he property or toa the intended development of the property which do not apply generally to other properties having the same standards, restrictions, and controls; c. Permitting a variation will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the area; and d, 'Permitting A variation win not be contrary to the Objectives of this Plan or of the General Plan. . No variation shall be granted which changes a basic land use or whidi permits other than a minor departure from the provisions of this Plan, In permitting any such variation, the Agency shall impose such 'conditions as are necessary to protect the public peace, Health, safety, or welfare and to assure compliance with the purposes of tffi.Plan. Any variation permitted by the Agency hereunder shan not supersede any other approval required under applicable City codes and ordinances. D. [p01 D,esi@ for Development Within the limits, restrictions, and controls established in this Plan, the Agency is authorized to establish heights of buildings, land coverage, setback requirements, design criteria, traffic iculation, traffic access, and other ty(t development and design controls necessary for proper development of both private and public areas within the Project Area. No new improvement shall be ' constructed, and no existing improvement shall be substantially modified, altered, repaired, or rehabilitated except in accordance with this Plan and any such controls and, in the case of property which is the subject of a disposition =d development or participation agreement with the Agency and any other property, in the discretion of the Agency, in accordance with architectural, landscape, and site plans submitted to and approved in writing by the Agency. One of the objectives of this Plan is to create an attractive and pleasant environment in the Project Area. Therefore, such plans shall give consideration to good design, open space, and other amenities to enhance the aesthetic quality of the Project.Area. The Aga'icy shan not approve any plans that do not' comply with this Plan. E, ,[pl1 Building Permits No permit shall be issued for the constmction of any new building or for any constmction on an existing building in the Project Area from the date of adoption of this Plan until the application for such permit has been approved by the Agency as consistent with this Plan and processed in a manner consistent with all City requirements. An application shall be deemed consistent with this Plan U it is consistent with the General Plan, applicable zog ordinances and any adopted design for development. The %e=xscy is authorized to establish permit procedures and approvals in addition to those set forth above where required for the purposes of this Plan, Where such additional procedures and approvals are established, a building permit shall be issued only after the applicant for same has been granted all approvals required by the City and the Agency at the time of application. V. [pO] METHODS OF FINANCING THE PROJECT A. [§501] General Desctiption of the Proposed Financing Method The Agency is authorized to finance this ' Project with financial assistance from the City, the State of CaUfomia, the fedem goverent, tax increment funds, interest income, Agency bonds, donatiorm, loans from private financial institutions, the 'lease or sale of Agency-owned property, or any other available SOuree, public or private. The Agency is also au$orized to obtain advances, borrow funds, and create indebtedness in carg out this Plan. The principal and interest on such advances, funds, and indebtedness may be paid from tax increments or any other funds available to the A@5ency. Advances and loans for survey and planning and for the operating capital for nominal administration of this Projed may be provided by /77 the City until adequate tax increment or other funds are available, or sufficiently assured, to repay the advances and loans and to permit borrowing adequate working capital from sources other than the City. The City, as it is able, may also supply additional assistance through City loans and grants for various public facilities. The City or any aother public agency may expend money to assist the Agency in carg out this Proiect. As available, gas tax funds fzom the state and county may be used for street improvements and public transit facilities. B. [§502] Tax Irycremerit Funds All taxes levied upon taxable property within the Project Area each year, by or for the benefit of the State of California, the County of Santa Clara, the City, any district, or any other public corporation (hereinafter sometimes called "taxing agencies"), after the effective date of the ordinance approving this Plan shall be divided as fonows: 1. That portion of the taxes which would be produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied eadi year by or for each of said taxing agenaes upon the total sum of the assessed value of the taxable property in the Project as shown upon the assessment roll used in connection with the. taxation of su* property by such taxing agency, last equalized prior to the effective date of suffi ordinance, shall be allocated to and when collected shan be paid into the funds of the respective taxing agencies aS taxes by or for said taxing agencies on all other property are paid (for the purpose of allocating taxes levied by or for any taxing agency or agen6es which did not include the territory of the Project on the effective date of such ordinance but to which such territory is annexed or otherwise induded after such effective date, the assessment roll of the County of Santa Clara, last equalized on the effective date of said ordinance, shan be used in determining the assessed valuation of the taxable property in the Project on said dfective date), 2.Except as provided in subdivision 3, below, that portion of said levied taxes each year in excess of such amount shall be allocated to and when collected shall be paid into a special fund of the Agency to pay the principal of and interest on loans, moneys advanced to, or indebtedness (whether funded, refunded, assumed, or otherwise) incurred by the Agency to finance or refinance, in whole or in part, this Project. Uiess and until the total assessed valuation of the taxable property in the Project exceeds the /7! total assessed value of the taxable property in the Pzoject as shown by the last equalized assessment roll referred to in subdivision 1 hereof, all of the taxes levied and collected upon the taxable property in the Project shall be paid into the fmds of the respective taxing agencies. When said loans, advances, and indebtedness, if any, and interest thereon, have been paid, all moneys thereafter received fmm taxes upon the taxable property in the Project shall be paid into the funds of the respective taxing agencies as taxes on all other property are paid. 3.That portion of the taxes iri excess of the amount identified in subdivision 1, above, which are attributable to a tag rate levied by a taxing agency wMdi was approved by the voters of the taxing agency on or after January 1, 1989, for the purpose of pro<lug revenues in a4 amount sufficient eo make amiual repayments of the principal of, and the interest on, any bonded indebtedness for the acquisition or improvement of real property shall be allocated to, and when collected shall be paid into, the d of that taxing agency. The: portion of taxes mentioned ' in subdivision 2, above, are heteby irrevocably pledged for the payment of the picipal of and interest on the advance of moneys, or making of loans or the incurmg of any indebtedness (whether funded, refunded, assumed, or otherwise) by the Agency to finance or refinance the Project, in whole or in part. The Agency is authorized to make sudi pledges as to specific advances, loans, and indebtedness as appropriate in carrying out the Project. The Agency is authorized to issue bonds from time to time, if it deems appropriate to do so, in order to finance all or any part of the Project. Neither the members of the Agency nor any persons executing the 6ondsa are liable personally on the bonds by reason of their issuance. The bonds and other obligations of the Agency are not a debt of the City or the state, nor are any of its political subdivisions liable for them, nor in any event shall the bonds or obligations be payable out of any funds or properties other than those of the %ertcy, and su& bonds and other obligations shan so state on their face, The bonds do not 6onstitute an indebtedness within the mearffig of any constitutional 'or statutory debt limitation or restriction. The amount of bonded indebtedness to be repaid in whole or in part from the anocation of taxes desaThed in subdivision 2 above which can be outstanding at any one time shall not exceed FORTY-TWO MILLION SIX HUNDRED TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($42,610,000.00). i7(:1. 11 /29 /99 The %ency shall not establish or incur loans, advances, or indebtedness to finance in whole or in part the Project beyond twenty (20) years from the date of adoption of this Plan. Loans, advances, or indebtedness may be repaid over a period of time beyond said time limit. This time limit shall not prevent the Agency from irig debt to be paid from the I.,ow and Moderate Income Housing Fund. Further, this time limit shall not prevent the Agency from refinancing, ref'unding, or rest'ucturing indebtedness after the time limit if the indebtedness is not increased and the time dumg which the indebtedness is to be repaid is not extended beyond the tizne limit for 'repaying indebtedness set forth immediately below in this Section 502. The Agency shan not receive, and shan notarepay loans, advances, or offier indebtedness to be paid with the proceeds of property taxes from the Project Area pursuant to Section 33670 of the Community Redevelopffient Law ffid this Section 502 beyond forty-five (45) years from the date of adoption of this Plan. C. [§5031 0ther Loans and Gmnjs An'j Other lOanj3/ gantBi guarantees, or financial assistance from the Uited States, the State of California, or any other public or private source will be utilized if available. VI. [§600] ACTIONS BY.THE CITY The City shan aid and cooperate with the Agency in carrying out this Plan and shall take all actions necessary to ensure the continued fulfillment of the puIpOSeS of this Plan and to prevent the recurrence or spread in the area of conditioris causing . blight. Actions by the City shall include, but not be limited to, the following: A. Institution and completion of proceedings for opening, closing, vacating, wideg, or changing the grades of streets, alleys, and other public rights-of-way and for other necessary modifications of the streets, the street layout, and other public rights-of-way in the Project Area. Such action by the City shall include the requirement of abandoent, removal, and relocation by the public utility comparaes of their operations of public rights-of- way as appropriate to carry out ! Plan provided that nothing in this Plan shall be constmed to require the cost of such abandonment, removal, and relocation to be borne by others than those legally required to bear sudi cost. B.Provision of advances, loans, or grants to the Agency or the expenditure of funds for projects implementing tffi Plan as deemed appropriate by the City and to the extent funds are available therefor. C Institution and completion of proceedings necessary for dianges and improvements in private and publicly owned public utilities within or affecting the Project Area. D, Revision of zoning (if necessary) within the Project Area to permit the land uses and development authorized by tffi Plan. E, Imposition wherever necessary (by conditional use permits or other means) of appropriate controls within the limits of this Plan upon parcels in the Project Area to ensure their proper development and use. F, Provision for administrative enforcement of this Plana by the City after development. The City and the %ency shall develop and provide for enforcement of a program for continued maintenance by owners of all real property, both public and private, within the Project Area throughout the duration of this Plan. G. Preservation of historical sites. H. Performance of the above actions and of all other functions and services relating to public peace, health, safety, and physical development normally rendered in acco'rdance with a schedule which will permit the redevelopment of the Project Area to be commenced and carried to completion without tumecessary delays. I, The undertaking and completing of any other proceedings necessary to carry out the Project. The foregoing actions to be taken by the City d6 not involve or cons'titute any commitment for,financial outlays by the City unless specifically agreed to and authorized by the City. VII. 5700] ENFORCEMHNT The administration and enforcement of this Plan, including the preparation and execution of any documents implementing this Plan, shall be perfomed by the Agency and/or the City. The provisions of this Plan or other documents entered into pursuant to this Plan may also be enforced by court litigation instituted by either the Agency or the City, Such remedies may include, but are not limited to, spe&c performance, damages, reent7, injunctions, or any other remedies appropriate to the purposes of rpio ICICI this Plan, In addition, any recorded provisions which are expressly for the benefit of owners of property in the Project Area may be enforced by such owners. VIn, [§800] DURAnON OF THIS PLAN Except for the nondisatxon and nonsegzegatton ptovisions which shall run in perpeMty, the provisions of this Plan shan be effective, and the provisions of other documents formulated pursuant to this Plan may be made effective, for thirty (30) years :from the date o.f adoption of this Plan by the City Council; provided, however, that subject to the limitations set forth in Section 502 of this Plan, the Agency may issue bonds and incur obligations pursuant to this Plan which extend beyond the termination dite, and in sudt event, this Plan shall continue in effect to the extent necessary to permit the full repayment of sudi bonds or other obligations. After the termination of this Plan, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to this Plan except to pay previously incurred indebte,dness and to enforce existingacovenants or contracts. IX. [§900] PROCHDURE FOR AMENDMENT This Plan may be amended by means of 'the procedure established in Sections 33354.6 and/or 33450 et seq. of the Comuautity Redevelopment Law or by any other procedure hereafter established by law, 11/29/99 ATTACHMENT 'i LEGAL DESCRIPTION Cupertino/Vallco Redevelopment Project Legal Description AlL THAT CERTAIN REALF"ROPERTY SrnJATE IN THE CTTY OF CUPERTINO, COIJNTY OF SANTA CLARAAND STATE OF CALIF-ORNIA OESCRiElED AS FOlLOWS: BEGINNINGATTHEINTEJ'iSECTIONOFTHEJONLjMENTLINEOFSTEVENSCREEKBOtJLEVAROI WHTHE MONUMENTljNE OFWOLFE ROAJ) AS SiHOWN ON'mATCERTAIN PARCaMAJ:' FIECOROED IN BOOK 325 OF MAF'S AT PAGE 12, SAf4TA Ct,AJu C(;)!NTY RECORDS. FEETTO THE sotmie:gcy PROLONGATION OFTHE y ys OF WOLFE Roao; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERlY PROLONGATION SO(JTH 01 '05'l4' EAS!", 75.0al FEET TO THE SOuTHERlY LJNEOFSTEVENS CREEK BCXJLEVAFIO (120 5WlDE)ANDTHETRtJEPOINTaOF- BEGINNING. (1) THENCEALONGTHESOtm-IERLYLINEOFSTEVENSCREEKBC!JLEVARDSOl.m-180o36'QO'WESTl 961.68 FEET: (2) THENCENOFm-t00o42'30'WEST,t384.97FEETALONGTHEEASTERLYLINEOFTRACTNO. 2086 AND rrs sotmsmt-y psocotqaxnos AS SA!D c9uss IS SHOWN IN BOOK i '!2 0F- MAPS AT PAGE 40, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECOROS; (3) THENCENOFmi89'l3'29'EAST,298.99FEET; (4)THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF TRACT NO- 2086, NORTH 00"04'30' WEST, 1207.04 FEETTO THE soummy uss OFTRAC?" No. 2860 RECOR!)ED IN BOOK 138 0F MAPS AT pbaes 22 AND 23, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECOROS; (5) THENCEALONGSAIC)30MYLlNE=NORThl83o47'30'WEST;42.44FEET; (6) THENCEALONGTHE:mYLlNE:OFTRACTN0,2880NOFm-t00*l7"20"WESTl483.60FEET TOTHE SOtJTHERlY LINE OF JljNlF'ERO SERRA FREEWAY, INTERSTATE 280: (7) TsescsSotmi43'49'l6'E,267.07, (8) THENCESOUTH57'0:327'EAST,731.74FEET; (9)THENCESOtffH60'l4'49'EASTI699.GOFEETTOTHEiYLINEOFPARCEli ASSHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN F'ARCEL MAP ycomm IN BOOK 325 0F MAJ:)S OF PAGE 12, SANTA CLARA Coum RECORDS; a (ate) THENCEALONGSAIDljNESOtm-l01'05'14"EAST,1049.61FEETTOT!-ENOFlTHERLYljNEOF- VALLCO PARKWAY (110 FEETWIDE); {ffl THENCEALONGSAIDNOFm-lERLYLINENORTH88"54'46'EAST,79.99FEET;,/g3 (?2) THENCEAL.ONGT)-IEARCOFATANGE:NTCtJRVE,CONCAVETOTHESOtJTHHAViNGARADItlSOF 685.00 FEET, T)-lROuGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 03a50'53' FOR A DIST ANCE OF 46.00 FEET; (13) THENCELEAVINGSAIDNORTHER!YllNESOLJTHO"la05tl4"EAST+414.46FEET; (14) THENCESOUTH88'54'46'WEST,835.00FEETTOT)-IE:WESaTERLYLINEOFWOLFEROAD; (15) THENCEALONGSA[)llNE:SOLJT)-I01'05'l4'EAST,112.12FEET; (16) rsucssours89"36'00'Wsg,ti.oo; (tz) TspuceSoun-<Olaos'tcr,sz.ao<pmromsmuepoiiopsesirqsixa. CONT AINING ATOTA AREA OF 80.14 ACRES'MORE OR LESS. THE BASIS ,OF BEARINGS FOR THIS DESCRIFTION IS THE MONUMENT LINE OF WOLFE ROAD SHOWN AS NORTH 01 "05'l 4' WEST ON THAT CERTAIN PARCa MAP RECORDE!) IN BOOK325 0FMAPS AT PAGE 12, SANTA CLARA COUNTY Reconos. i'd ( ATTACHMENT 3 la , . ; I -si.. - 9 ffl al s zs aaii x a Ico Park X ffl BOUlEVAFIO ffil} Legend Res)den tlal: m qommerdal / Resldential Public Open Space WPrmie Recreational mParb Publlc Fac!llt!as g Fire Station Special Planning Area z s I ATTAe:HMfiNT N0. 4 PROFOSED PUBLIC rMPROVEMENTS The following public improvements are an&'pated to be ptovided in the Project Area: 1, H and Roadways a.The construction, reconstruction, widening or other improvement of streets and roadways within or serving the Project Area; . a b. The installation or modernization of traffic signals on streets and roadways within or serving the Project Area; and c. 'I'he construction, reconstruction or other improvement of curbs, gutters and sidewalks within or serving the Project Area, 2. Water, Sewer and Flood Control a. The installation of new, or repair or replacement of existing, water, sewer and storm drainage systems and lines within or senring the Project Area. 3. Parking Facilities a. ' The constructiort; reconstmction ' or other improvement of pazking facilities within or serving the Project Area. 4. Streetscape and Street [iHhtinB a. The installation of new, or repair or replacement of existing, landscaping and irrigation, street ughtingi gateways and other signage, street furniture, trash receptades, planters, murals and other amenaties within or serving the Project Area. 1Y7 - ! - . . L k T. A 11 /29 /99 Exhibit 7 Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. SUPPLEMENT TO THE REPORT TO COUNCIL on the PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN for the CuPERTINO VALLCo REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PREPARED FOR: THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PREPARED BY: KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC. JuNE 2000 SUPPLEMENT TO THE REPORT TO COUNCIL on the PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN for the CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PREPARED FOR: THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY JUNE 2000 PREPARED BY: KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC 500 South Grand Avenue, Suite 1480 Los Angeles, California 90017 1660 Hotel Circle North, Suite 716 San Diego, Califomia 921 08 Golden Gateway Commons 55 Pacific Avenue Mail San Francisco, Califomia 9411 'l TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ). Introduction A. Reasons far the Preparation Of a Supplement tO the Report tO Council B. Content and Organization of the Supplement 11. Effects of Change of Base Year from 1 999/2000 to 2000/2001 A. Effects on Physical and Economic Conditions B. Effects on the Financial Feasibility of the Project and Method of Financing C. Effects on the County Fiscal Officer's Report, Analysis of the County Fiscal Officer's Report, and Consultations with Affected Taxing Agencies Table 'l - Tax Increment Revenue Projection Table 2 - Feasibility Cash Flow - Project Fund Table 3 - Estimate of Fiscal Officer's Report (Base Year 2000/2001) September 20, 1999 Fiscal Officer's Report Supplement to the Report to Coundl Cupertlno Vallco Redevelopment Project Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page I (X)06o6a.CtlPiCK:gtxl 11413.Oa4.001/aKl# 1. INTRODUCTION A. Reasons for the Preparation of a Supplement to the Report to Council As required by Section 33352 of the Califomia Community Redevelopment Law ("CRL'), the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") prepared a Report to the Cupertino City Council ("Report') for.the proposed Redevelopment Plan ('Plan") for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project ("Project" or the "Project Area'). The Agency on May 15, 2000 approved the Report and authorized transmittal of the Report to the Cupertino City Council ("City Council"). The City Council received the Report on May 1 5", and will consider the information within the Report at the time it considers adoption of the proposed Project. The City Council is tentatively scheduled to hold a public hearing on the Project on June 19, 2000. The Fiscal Officer's Report prepared by the Santa Clara County Auditor-Controller in accordance with CRL Section 33328 and received by the Agency on September 20, 1999, contained a total Project Area assessed valuation of !$141,483,540. However, the Fiscal Officer's Report did not reflect adjustments made in connection with successful assessment appeals, which decreased the total Project Area assessed valuation to approximately $116,135,000. TheadjustmentswerereportedbytheCountyinlettersof"Notificationof Corrected Assessment" to the property owner (Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America) dated October 22nd. The Agency requested and was expqcting to receive a revised Fiscal Officer's Report prior to the adoption of the proposed Project, which would reflect the revised total Project Area assessed valuation of $14 6,135,000. However, the Agency had> not yet received the revised Fiscal Officer's Report. Because the Agency was aware of the decreased assessed valuation, all of the economic and tax increment analysis within the Report to Council is based upon the total Project Area assessed valuation of $116135,000. To ensure that the corrected value is reflected in the base year value for the Project, the Agency is proposing a change in base year from 1999-2000 to 2000-2001. The Agency is proposing to proceed as scheduled with the public hearing on the Plan on June 1 9'h. However, adoption of the ordinance approving and adopting the Plan will be delayed until sometime after August 19, 2000, which is the date the base year changes from 1999-2000 to 2000-200al. CRL Section 33328.5 (c) requires that.... "At least 14 days prior to the public hearing on the redevelopment plan for which the redevelopment agency proposes to use a different equalized assessment roll, the redevelopment agency shall prepare and deliver to each taxing agency a supplementary report analyzing the effect of the use of the different equalized assessment roll which shall include those subjects required by subdivisions (b), (e), and (n) of Section 33352." In lieu of a supplementary report, a redevelopment agency may include in the report required to be prepared, pursuant to Section 33352, the information required to be included in the Supplement to the Report to Council Cupertlno Valloo Redevelopment Project, Cuperkino Redevelopment Agency Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 1 001-00tdoc ll413.004.00lBO2j00 supplementary report. Sections (b), (e) and (n) of 33352 include the "blight analysis", the proposed method of financing the Project and analysis of the Report of the County Fiscal Officer including a summary of consultations with taxing agencies and responses to any written objections submitted by the taxing agencies, This supplement to the Report on the proposed Project ("Supplement") addresses the effects of changing the base year for tax increment allocation purposes from 1999-2000 to 2000-2001. As indicated above, the original repof to the City Councii (Section 33352) included information based on the corrected assessed value for 1999/2000. To ensure full compliance with Health and Safety Code Section 33328.5, the Agency has prepared this Supplement. In addition to the requirement that the Agency prepare a Supplement, CRL Section 33328.5(a) also requires that the Agency notify the taxing agencies, County officials and the State Board of Equalization of the change in base year. upon receipt or the notice of the change in base year the County Fiscal Officer must prepare a new base year report. Alternatively, the Agency may prepare a report containing the same information as contained in the County Fiscal Officer's Report. The Agency has chosen the latter alternative and has prepared a new estimated base year report for fiscal year 2000-2001. The new estimated base year report is included in this Supplement. The followir"ig section discusses the contents of this Supplement. B. Content and ("rganization of the Supplement As identified above, the Supplement must analyze the effects of the change in base year on the physical and economic conditiqns (blight conditions), and financial feasibility of the Project. Also, the Supplement must ana!yze the effects of the change in base year on the analysis of the Report of the County Fiscal Officer and summary of consultations with taxing agencies including responses to written objections. Supplement to the Report to Council Cupertino Valloo Redevelopment Pmlect. Cupertino Redevelopment Agang Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 2 at)l-00tdoc 1 1413.004.001/6/02/00 /9.,2- II, EFFECTS OF CHANGE OF BASE YEAR FROM 1999/2000 TO 2000/2001 A. Effects on Physical and Economic Conditions The change in the base year will have no effect on the physical and economic blight findings. The blight anaiysis in the Report to Council that addresses 'depreciated or stagnant property values" was based on the revised assessed value as stated in the notification of the corrected assessment from the County Auditor dated October 22, 5 999. B. Effects on Financial Feasibility of the Project and the Method of Financing The Project Area's assessed value for the year 2000/2001 has been estimated based on the revised assessment issued on October22, 1999, adjusted for allowable Proposition 13 escalations, and building permit valuations that were not reflected in the revised 1 999/2000 assessment. The revised assessed value for the Proje'ct Area as stated in the October 22, 1999 statement fromtheCountyis$l16.14million. ToestimatetheProjectArea'sassessedvaluefor 2000/2001 the Project Area's real property value has been increased by a 1% Proposition 13 adjustment and $6.5 mi)lion of improvements made to Sears and Macy's. With these adjustments, the Pro3ect Area's assessed value for 2000/2001 is es!imated to be $123.6 million. A revised tax increment projection for the Project Area is presented in Table 1. As shown, the Project Area is projected to generate a total of $51.0 million of gross tax increment over the 30- year life of the Plan. Over the 30-year period, statutory pass-throughs to taxing agencies are estimated to total $17.1 miilion, housing set-aside funds are estimated to total $alO.2 million, and net increment to the Agency is estimated at $23.7 million. These amounts are approximately 3% less than the totals projected in the Report to City Council, which evaluated a base year of 1999/2000. A revised Feasibiiity Cash Flow is presented in Table 2. As shown it is estimated that the Agency's cash flow (exclusive of the housing set-aside) will be sufficient to fund approximateiy $11.2 mi(lion of public improvements to be funded in the years 2003 to 2005. The public improvements contemplated for the Proiect Area are as stated in the Report to City Council and include a parking structure and the construction of a new 'ring" road around the perimeter of the shopping center. In the Report to Council, it was estimated that the tax increment would be sufficient to support approximately $12.2 million of improvements, due to the smaller base year value. Given that the required timing of the improvements precedes the availability of sufficient tax increment, the feasibility projection provides for a third party loan of $5.5 million to advance the funds for the improvements Supplement to the Report to Council Cuperkino Vallco Redevelopment ProjeQ Cupert!no Redevelopment Agency Keyser Marston Associates, Int.. Page 3 (Kil-DO1.dec 1 i41 3.004.OCIV6/02/OC+1'?3 In conclusion, the change in the base year does not have a material impact on the proposed method of financing or the feasibility of the Project Area. It is likely that the Project Area will generate slightly less tax increment and consequently support a smaller magnitude of public improvements. The proposed project and programs will not change. The relatively minor difference in revenues available for project funding ($1 million) will be paid for by the private sector and/or by other public funds that may be available to the City. C. Effects on the County's Fiscai Officer's Report, the Agency's Analysis Thereof, and Consultations with Affected Taxing Agencies Pursuant to Section 33352(n) of the CRL, the Report to City Council included an analysis of the Fiscal Officer's Report and must include a summary of the consultations of the Agency, or attempts to consult by the Agency, with each of the affected taxing agencies. This section of the supplement analyzes the effects of the change in base year on the County Fiscal Officer's Report and summary of consultations with the taxing agencies. C.1. The Report of the County Fiscal Officer and Analysis Thereof SeCtiOn 33328 0f the CRL requires the Count'y OffiCialS charged With the responsibility Of allocating taxes under Section 33670 and 33670.5 to prepare and deliver a report to the Redevelopment Agency (the "Fiscal Officer's Repvrt'). This Report shall include the following: a. The total assessed valuation of all taxable property within the project area as shown on the Base Value assessment roll. b. The identifications of each taxing agency levying taxes in the project area. c, The amount of tax revenue to be derived by each taxing agency from the Base Value assessment roll from the project area, including state subventions for homeowners, business inventory, and similar subventions d. For each taxing agency, its total ad valorem tax revenues from all property within its boundaries, whether inside or outside the project area. e. The estimated first year taxes available to the redevelopment agency, if any, based upon information submitted by the redevelopment agency, broken down by taxing agencies. Supplement to the Report to Council Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, Cuperkino Redevelopment Agency Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 4 001-OOl.doc 1141 3.004.001/al02/CK)ict4 f, The assessed valuation of the project area for the preceding year, or, if requested by the redevelopment agency, for the preceding five years, except for state assessed property on the board roll. C. l.a. Report of the County Fiscal Officer The Fiscal Officer's Report was prepared. on September 20, 1999 by the Santa Clara County Auditor-Controller and is attached to this Supplement. However, the Fiscal Officer's Report contained an inaccurate assessed valuation, which did not reflect adjustments made in connection with appeals from one of the property owners within the Project Area. These successfuJ property assessment appeals decreased the Project Area's assessed valuation from $141,483,540 as shown in the September 20, 1999 Fisca) Officer's Report to approximately $116;135,000. Therevisedassessmentof$l16,135,000didnotref(ecttheinclusionof approximately $6.5 million of improvements made to Sears and Macy's. This amount should have been included in the base year value. The Agency requested, but did not receive a revised Fiscal Officer's Report reflecting the lower assessed value. To ensure that the base year for the Project reflects the lower assessed value, the Agency is proposing a change in base year from 1999-2000 to 2000-2001. Thus, adoption of the ordinance approving and adopting the Plan will be delayed until afterAugust 2000 when the base year value changes from 1999- 2000 to 2000-2001. C. l.b Analysis of Information This section of the Supplement reviews the information provided in the origina! Fiscal Officer's Report (base year 1999-2000), any differences between the original Fiscal Officer's Report and the Agency's approximation of a new Fiscal Officer's Report (base year 2000-2001 ) as presented in Table 3 and the effect of the differences (if any). This information is presented by the required components of the Fiscal Officer's Report as defined in CRL Section 33328. f. The total assessed valuation of all taxable prope% within the project area as shown on the Base Value assessment roll. The 5 999-2000 Fiscal Officer's Report provided the assessed valuation of the Project Area by assessment category for locally assessed secured and unsecured properties. There was no value reported for public utility property by the State Board of Equalization. As previously stated earlier, the total assessed value report by the County Fiscal Officer was $141,483,540 which did notincludetherecentassessmentappeals. Theactualvaluelaterforl999/2000reportedby theCountyandis$l16,135,000. Thischangeinvaluehadnoeffectontheanalysispresented in the Report to Council because it was based upon the revised $116135,000 value. Supplement to the Report to Council Cupat!ano Vallco Redevelopment Projecl Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Keyser Marston Asso6ates, Inc. Page 5 001-OO1.doc 1 1413.004.DOi/&I02/00 1'?5 As discussed in the Financial Feasibility Section of this Supplement, the Agency has prepared an estimate of the Project Area's 2000/2001 assessed value. As presented, it is estimated to be approximately $123.6 million, reflecting the inclusion of the Sears and Macy's improvements and standard allowable annual escalations. 2. The identifications of each taxing agency levying taxes in the project area. The 4 999-2000 Fiscal Officer's Report identified 'I 1 taxing agencies in the Project Area. These same taxing agencies are identified in the new 2000-2001 base year report. A twelfth taxing agency, the "Cupertino Sanitation District', was initially identified by KMA using Metroscan, which is a database program which utilizes County data. KMA asked the County to verify whether or not the Sanitation District is an affected taxing agency in the Project Area. Until this information can be verified it is assumed that the County's Fiscal Officer's Report is correct and that the Cupertino Sanitation DiStriCt iS net an affected taXing agency. The financial feasibility analysis and tax increment projection provided in the Report to Council assumed that the 51 taxing agencies reported in the County Fiscal Officer's Report are the only affected taxing agencies within the Project Area. Therefore, change in base years has no affect on the taxing agencies levying taxes in the Project Area. 3. The amount of tax revenue to be derived by each taxing agency from the Base Value assessment roll from the proiect area, including state subventions for homeowners business inventory, and similar subventions, Table 3 presents the amount of tax revenue to be derived by each taxing agency from the Base Value assessment roll. The allocations are summarized below: Estimated 1999-2000 Base Revenues $289,417 $52,C)12 $27,020 $298,515 $201,596 $76,957 $37,549 182.36i $18,814 $21 ,914 $1,208,389 Estimated 2000-2001 Base Yeor Revenues $308,110 $55,371 $28,765 $317,795 $214,61 6 $8-1,927 $39,974 $194,139 $20,029 $23,330 $1,286,438 As shown, the change in the base year is estimated to increase each taxing agency's revenues from the Base Value assessment roll by approximately 6%. Supplement to the Report to Council Cupertino Vallm Redevelopment Project, Cupertino Redevelopment Agent 001-OOldoc 144i3.004.001/6102/00 Keyser Marston Asso6ates, Inc. Page 6 4. For each taxing agency, its total ad valorem tax revenues from all property within its boundaries, whether inside or outside the project area. The total ad valorem tax revenue from all property within the boundaries of the taxing agencies jurisdictions as presented in the original 1999-2000 base year report is $411,855,528. The value for the year 2000/2001 has been estimated at $422,151,916, which reflects an assumed growth of 2.5%. 5. The estimated first year taxes available to the redevelopment agency, if any, based upon information submitted by the redevelopment agency, broken down by taxing agencies. Based upon the 4 999-2000 base year report the Agency would receive approximately $60,000 in the first year that tax increment would be available to the Agency (2000-2001 ). Based upon the revised 2000-200al base year estimates the Agency would receive approximately $19,000 in the year 2001/2002, The breakdown by'taxing entity is provided in Table 3. 6. The assessed vajuation of the project area for the preceding year, or, if requested by the redevelopment agency, for the preceding five years, except for state assessed property on the board roll. The 5 999-2000 Fiscal Officer's Report did not provide the value for the preceding year. The assessed valuation for 1999-2000 was stated to be $141483,540, however, as indicated above, that valuation did not reflect adjustments for the assessment appeals and did not include the $6.5 million in improvements by Sears and Macy's. This information can only be provided by the County an'd therefore, was not included in the 2000-2001 base year report. C.2 Summary of Consultations with Affected Taxing Agencies Section 33328 of the CRL requires the Agency, prior to the publication of a notice of the joint public hearing on the proposed Redevelopment Plan, to consult with each affected taxing agency with respect to the Project and the allocation of tax increment revenues. The Agency submitted Statements of Preparation of a Redevelopment Plan to all of the affected taxing agencies on July 23, 1999. These notices included an offer to consult with each of the taxing agencies. Agency staff has received telephoned responses to the Statements of Preparation, and has consulted with the agencies that requested meetings (as described below). The discussions with the taxing agencies were based on the lower assessed value ($1 16;135,000). With the change in base year revenues to the taxing agencies will be higher and the tax increment to the Agency will be somewhat less. Supp(ement to the Report to Coun61 CupeThno Vallco Redevelopment Project, Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 7 OCII-00Lloc i 1413.004.001/6/02/00 /91 t Date ContacUAgency Topic of Discussion September 15, 1999 Michael Raffeto Fremont Union High School District Discussed the tax increment revenue projections. The District's consultant will review information and contact the City for further consultations, October 7, 1999 County of Santa e,lara: Richard Wittenberg Frank Lockfeld Jane Decker Deborah Couble Discussed impacts on County's tax revenues. The County Executive expressed the opinion that the County would not support the formation of a redevelopment area, and they would be looking further at the figures provided. January 26, 2000 County of Santa Clara: Richard Wittenberg Frank Lockfeld Jane Decker [)eborah Couble The Discussion centered around the Count5r's interest in sharing in the financial success of the shopping center. The County presented opUons for formulas for receiving financial benefits, and the options were discussed. City representatives agreed to review the options and prepared a response. January 27, 2000 I Fremont Union High School District Mike Raffeto Cupertino Union School District: Chuck Corr County of Santa Clara: Wendy Beadle Public Economics, Inc.: Dante Gumucio Carl Goodwin Foothill-DeAnza Community College: Jim Keller The discussion focused on two issues: 5 ) potential cooperation on using the affordable housing dollars for teacher-supported housing; and 2) the processing of the tax increments. The school district's consultants presented information on a housing program mqdel from Long Beach. Other ideas were discussed, and the schoo! districts agreed to return with some options for teacher-supported housing, in partnership with the City. The school district's consultants had prepared a letter of discussion items regarding processing the tax increments, which was discussed. The City's consultant, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc., will furkher review the letter. ' March 14, 2000 County of Santa Clara: Richard Wittenburg Jane Decker Frank Lockfeld Discussion revolved around the following: 1 ) estimated ' costs associated with serving urban pockets identified for ' possible annexation; 2) 20 year economic benefit analysis: and 3) County share of sales tax revenues. A conceptual agreement was reached on a proposal that the County staff could recommend to the Board of Supervisors and City staff could recommend to the City Council, Supplement to the Report to Counejl Cupertino Valk.o Redevelopment Proiect, Cupertino Redevelopment Agency O(Y-O €ll.dot: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 8 i iai :i.ao<.ootiaio:mo c.s. Responses to Written Objections or Concerns of the Affected Taxing Agencies As of the preparation of this Supplement, only one !etter has been received by the Agency from affected taxing entities. A letter from Public Economics, Inc. (consultant to Fremont Union High School.District, Foothill-De Anza Community College District and Cupertino Union School District; collectively, the 'Districts') was received by the Agency on January 21, 2000. Although this letter is not considered a written objection to the Project, Public Economics, Inc. raised concerns regarding the allocation of taxes and the overall implementation of the AB 1290 payment process as it affects the Districts. As previously stated in the prior section, the Agency has held consultation meetings with the Districts and their consultant to address the District concerns. Furthermore, the Agency has prepared a written response to Public Economics, Inc.'s January 2al, 2000 letter, which addresses the District's concerns regarding the Project. Supplement to the Report to Council Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project, Cupertino Redevelopment Agency Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 9 OOl-OO1.doc 11413 004 00U&t02100 Table * Tax Ineram*nl Rav*nu* Pro%ctliin Vallco Faihlon Park Rmavalopm*nl Prolact Clty of Cupaitlno (OOO'l Omm*d) Fm;al YW Tiilal Raal In%lkmiy New Raal Ptoper7 Gmmh Projects Props' Tobl Personal Inflalk+nary New Pamonal Property Gmwth Pt$cls Pioperty Grass Total Ingemenl Inciemanl HouxJ SJu F'mled OwBase Ramiue (1) SelAm+a Pau Valua $fflsla:la 1.04(IF!)% -20.(X)% Thmugh Nel Tu Rsmus % at Gioss Innl 0 Bass 115,284 0 0 115,264 1 2001-02 115,264 1729 W3 ll7fl6 2 2002-03 116,993 1755 46,998 165,746 3 2003-04 118,741 1,781 68,885 179,424 4 2(X)4-05 120,529 1,BOB 95,288 218,Fi23 5 2005-06 122,337 2,447 98,211 222,995 6 2 €)06-07 124,764 2,496 100,176 227,455 7 2007-08 127,279 2,546 102,179 232,004 a 2008-09 izg,azs 2.5% 104.223 238.644 9 2009-t0 132,421 2A48 106,307 241,377 10 20t(1-11 135,(170 2,701 108,433 246,204 u zant-iz iaz,m 2.755 110,602 251,129 12 2C112-13 t40,527 3811 112,814 256.151 13 2013-14 143,337 2,867 115,070 261,274 14 2(}14-15 146,204 2,924 117,372 266,500 15 2015-16 149,128 2,9a3 119,719 271.830 16 2016-17 152,110 3,042 122,114 277.266 17 2017-18 155153 3,103 124,558 282.al2 j8 2018-19 158,256 3.la5 127.047 28a.488 19 2019-20 161,421 3,228 129,588 2!)4.237 20 2020-21 164.649 3.293 tiz,tao 3CKI,122 21 2021-22 187.942 3,359 1:u,aza 306,124 22 2022-23 171,Xll 3,428 137,520 312.247 23 2023-24 174,n7 3,495 140,270 318.492 24 2024-2!S 178,222 3,€64 143,075 :124,BFi2 25 2026-28 181,7!V! 3,836 145,937 331,359 28 2026-27 1a5,422 3,7a8 148,858 337,!m 27 2027-28 189,130 3,783 151,833 344,746 28 2028-29 192.913 3,8!i8 154,870 351,641 29 2029-30 198,771 3,935 157,96? 358,673 30 2030-31 I 200,706 4,014 161,128 365.847 8,372 0 a 8,372 8,372 0 0 8,372 B,372 0 0 8.372 8.372 0 0 B,372 a,arz 0 3,085 11,458 B.372 a.szz oa as:"zss: ii::a":w" a,372 0 6,263 14,636 8,372 0 6,263 14,636 8,372 0 6,263 14,838 8,372 0 6,263 14,636 8,372 0 8,263 14,638 8,372 0 6.263 14.636 8,372 0 6.263 14.636 a8::'72 : 6s:2;""63 ':4:6aa36" 8,372 0 6,263, 14,638 B,372 0 6.2a3 14.836 :,372 : :,2: ::,:: B,372 0 6,263 14,836 8,372 0 a233 14.638 8,372 0 6,263 14.B38 8,372 0 e,263 14,636 8,372 0 6,261 14,638 B,372 0 8,283 14,636 8,372 0 a,283 14,636 a372 0 6,283 14,636 8.372 0 8,263 14,6Xi ::3:7z2;! oO ss:z:'a:a '1'4:"6"36 123,636 0 0 0 (l {28.2t!1 2.632 27 (5) ('St) 174,118 50,4a2 525 (105) (117) 187,7% 84,160 6t+8 (134) (154) 230,0!Kl 108,444 1,108 1222) (248) 237.631 113.994 1.18a 1237) 1272) 242,091 118,454 1233 (247) (293) 246,640 123,OC13 1,2BCI (256) (314) 251,280 127,643 1,328 (288) (338) 258,013 132,376 1,377 (275) (35!1) 280,840 137,204 1,428 (2W) (382) 265,764 142.1a3 1.479 (2%) (414) 270.787 147.150 1.531 (306) (447) 275,910 *52274 l.Sa4 (317) (481) 281,135 157,49!j 1,63Sl (328) (517) 286.465 182.829 1.694 (339) (553) 291,902 1a8,286 1,751 (350) (590) 297,447 173,!111 1.BO!j 1362) (62'l) 303,103 179,467 1.887 1373) (883) 308,873 185,236 l'j27 (385) (691) 314,758 191,121 1,989 (3')8) (720) 320,76a 197,124 2,051 (410) (750) 326,882 203.246 2.115 (423) (780) 333,127 209,431 2,180 (436) (810) 33fl.497 215,881 2.248 (449) (841) 345,ffi 222,358 2,314 (483) (873) 352,622 228.9a5 2.383 (477) [906) 359,381 235.745 2.453 (491) (Sl3g) 368,276 242,640 2.525 (505) 1973) 373,X)9 249,673 2.598 (520) (1,007) 3B0.483 256,a46 2,672 1534) (1,043) o 13 303 380 640 677 693 710 727 743 760 76j 778 786 zgs 803 810 818 &1) 851 871 8G11 912 934 955 ' tl78 1,000 1.023 i,047 1,071 1,095 48% 58% 57% 58% 57% 56% 55% 55% 54% 63% 52% 51% 50% 48% 47% 46% 45% 45% 44% 44% 43% 43% 43% 43% 42% 42% 42% 41% 41% 41% 31 2031-32 204,721 4,094 184,349 373,164 32 2a32-33 20!1,!115 4,17 € 167,635 380,627 33 2033-34 212,(191 4,260 170,9aB 388,240 34 2034-35 217,251 4,345 174,408 3Q6,DO4 35 2(135-36 ;izi,sgs 4,432 izz.age 403.924 36 2036-37 228,(128 4,521 181.454 412.DC13 37 2037-38 230.54!i 4,611 185J:183 420.243 38 2038-39 235,160 4,703 lea,785 428.648 :is 2039-40 zag,as:i 4,797 tgz,ssi 437,221 40 2a40-41 244,NO 4,893 196,4t2 445.965 41 2041-42 249,553 4,991 20t),340 454.8B5 42 2042-43 254,544 5.091 204,347 463,982 43 xw< zsg,s:is s,tgi zoa,zx 473,262 44 2044A5 264,828 5,297 212.603 412.727 45 2045-46 270125 5,402 216,855 4E12.382 :,372 :- :: f:,:: B.372 0 6.283 14,636 B.372 0 B,263 14,636 8,372 0 Ei,263 14,836 8,372 0 6,263 14.636 :,372 : :: ::,:: 8,372 0 6,263 14.6:16 8,372 0 6.2(i3 14.636 8,372 0 6,263 14,636 B,372 0 6,263 14,636 8,372 0 6,263 f4,636 8,372 0 8,263 14,616 B,372 0 8,263 14,636 :iay,ygg 2M,163 2.749 (ssoj iloasj 395.263 271.626 2.B26 (565) (i,131) 402,875 279.239 2.905 (581) (1,176) 410,640 287,Oa4 2,986 (597) (1,223) 418,560 294,924 :i,osg 1614) (1,270) 426.6"l 303,002 3,153 (631) (1,318) 434,87g 311,242 3,238 (648) (1,367) 443,284 319,647 3.326 it!i5) (1.417) 451.857 328.220 3,415 1683) (1,468) 460,601 336,965 3,506 (701) (1,521) 469,520 345,884 3,599 i720) (1,574) 478,618 354,982 3,694 (739) (1,a28) 487,8g8 364,261 3,790 (7581 (1683) 497,38:) 373,727 3.889 l77B} {1,740} 507,0{7 383,381 3,98'! 1798) (1,?W) 1.113 1.130 1,148 i,166 1,185 1,204 1,224 1243 1 ,2!)4 1 .2M 1.305 1.327 1.349 1.371 1 ,3'j4 40% 40% 40% 3!1% 39% 38% 38% 37% 37% 37% 36% 36% 36% 35% 35% TOT AL (YEARS 1-3C1) TOTAL (YEARS f-45) (1 ) kidudes pre-1989 properly lax ovemde: Counly Retirement Levy (.0388%) and County Library Relkemenl (.0017%1. Prepaied by Kaysar Marilm Assoaales. kic. Filenam: TI F'rojeclmi 6-3a.xls; TlSummaiy; (!%O; 1a:O!) AAA; RT. 50,965 (10,193) (17,109) 23,663 ioi.ogg (,io.z;io) (:ta,sog) 42,370 Table 2 Feas}blllty Cash Flow - Project Fund Vallco Fashlon Park Redevelopment Project City of Cupertlno (OOO's Omitted) 1. Beginning Balance II. Revenue: Net Tax Increment (Tab(e 1 ) Future TA Bond Proceeds/Loan Interest Earnings at 5% Bond Reserve Eamings at 5oA Total Revenue Ill. Expenditures: Exlsting TA Bond Debt Service Future TA Bond Debt Service Administration (1 ) IdentiFied Public Projects Total Expenditures IV. Net Available Resources Loan Advance Loan Repayment (100% of Net) Available for Dlscretionary Costs V. Discretionary Costs (0% of Net) Discretionary Improvements 100% Vl. Ending Balance 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 it 12 13 14 15 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-08 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 00000 €)000000000 13 o o o 13 o o 30 o 30 (17) 17 o o 303 o o o 303 o o 31 o 31 273 o (18) 255 380 o o o 380 o o 31 o 3? 349 o o 349 840 6,180 o o 6,800 o o 32 5,600 5,632 1168 o o 1168 677 o o 26 702 o 512 32 5 ,6GO 6,144 (5,442) 5,442 o o 693 o o 26 719 o 512 33 o 545 710 880 o 28 1,616 o 512 34 o 548 174 1,070 00 (174) (i,070) 00 727 o o 28 755 153 o (153) o 743 o o .28 772 760 o o 28 789 769 o o 28 797 778 o o 28 806 786 o o 28 BlEi 00 568 568 35 36 00 803 604 00 568 568 37 37 00 605 605 ieg 185 193 201 zog 00000 (169) (185) (193)-..-(!-01.) (209) 00000 795 o o 28 823 216 o (216) o 803 o o 28 831 o 568 40 o 808 223 o (223) o 0 255 349 1168 0000 (1 ) $30,000 annual administrative expenses at 2% inflation. Prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Filename: TI Projections 6-3-00.xls; CashSum; 6/5/DO; 12:13 PM; RTK Table 2 Feasibility Cash Flow - Project Fund Vallco Fashion Park Redevelopment Project City of Cupertino (OOO's Omitted) l<-Debt Incurrence Limit Plan Limit 16 17 18 tg 20 I 21 22 23 24 25 28 27 28 29 30 31 32I- vaia-qr 2017-18 2018-19 2019-2012020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026.27 :o:iz-za 2028-29 zozg-:iolzo:io-ai 2031-32 2032-33 0000000000 891 912 934 955 978 1,000 1,023 1047 1,071 1095 0000000000 0000000000 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35' 35 35 00 1113 10 DO 00 35 35 92E) "947 968" 990 1,012 1,035 1,058 1,082 1,106 1,130 0000000000 697 697 697 697 sgr agr 697 sg-r 697 agr 45 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 0000000000 1,147 1,165 00 697 697 00 00 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 185 205 225 246 267 289 311 334 357 38C1 OOOOO'OOOOO (185) (205) (225) (248) (287) (289) (311) (334) (357) (380) 697 697 451 468 00 (451) (468) 1. Beginning Balance II. Revenue: Net Tax Increment (Table 1 ) Future TA Bond Proceeds/Loan Interest Eamings at 5% Bond Raserve Eamings at 5% Total Revenue Ill. Expenditures: Existing TA Bond Debt Service Future TA Bond Debt Service Administration (1) Identified Publk, Projects Total acpendltures IV. Net Available Resources Loan Advance Loan Repayment (100% of Net) Available for Discretionary Costs V. Discretionary Costs (0% of Net) Dlscretionary Improvements 100% Vl. Ending Balance 0 810 o o 28 839 230 o (230) o o o o 818 o o 28 846 237 o (237) o o o o 831 o o 28 859 249 o (249) o o o o 851 o o 28 879 o 871 1 ,760 o 2 8 2,659 268 2,048 00 (268) (2,048) 00 o o o o (1 ) $30,000 annual administrative expenses at 2% inflation Prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Filanama: TI Projections 6-3-00.xls; CashSum; fi/5/00; 12:13 PM; RTK Table 2 Feasibility Cash Flow - Project Fund Vallco Fashion Park Redavelopment Project City of Cupertlno (OOO's Omitted) Totals Memo Only 41,516 8,800 o ga< o 19,688 i217 11,200 5,459 (22,883) 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 a 44 45 2033-34 2034-35 2035-38 2036-37 2037-38 2038-39 2039-40 2040-41 2041-42 2042-43 2043-44 2044-45 2045-46 I. Beginning Balanca II. Revenue: Net Tax Increment (Table 1 ) Future TA Bond Proceeds/Loan Interest Earnlngs at 5% Bond Reserve Eamings at 5% Total Revenue Ill. Expenditures: Existing TA Bond Debt Service Future TA Bond Debt Service Administration (1) Identified Public Projects Total Expenditures 1V Net Available Resources Loan Advance Loan Repayment (100% of Net) Available for Discretionary Costs V. Dlscretionary Costs (0% of Net) Discretionary Improvements 100% Vl. Ending Balance o 1,148 o o 35 1,183 o 697 o o sgr 486 o (486) o 0 o 0 1,188 o o 9 1,176 o 185 o o 1 85 ggi o (991 ) o o o o 1,185 o o 9 lil94 o 185 o o 185 o 1,204 o o 9 1 ,213 o 185 o o f85 o 1,224 o o a 1,230 o 129 0 0 129 o i,243 o o 6 1 ,2"0 o 129 o o izg o 1,264 o o 8 1,270 o 129 o o 129 1,284 o C) a 1 ,2')1 o 129 o 0 129 0 1,305 o o 8 i,312 0 129 o -O 129 o 1,327 o o €) 1,333 o 129 o o 129 o 1,349 o o B 1,355 o 1,371 o o 6 1,377 00 129 129 DO 00 129 129 1,009 1029 1,101 1,121 1,141 il62 1,183 1,204 1,226 1,249 0000000000 (1009) (1,029) (1,101) (i,12!) (1,141) (i,162) (1,183) (i,204) (1,226) (1,249) 0000000000 o o o o o o 0 o o 0 o o o o o o o o 540 o o 6 546 o 129 0 o 129 417 o (417) o 0 o i,772 (1) $30,000 annual administrative expenses at 2% Inflation. Prepared by Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Filename: TI Projections 6-3-00.xls; CashSum; 6/5/00; 12:13 PM; RTK TABLE3 ESTIMATE OF FISCAL OFFICER'S REPORT VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CITI' OF CuPERTlNO 1. FY20 €10/01 Assessed Value for the Project Area Secured Land 8emred Improvements Secured Personal Property $37,593,014 (1) $68,396,423 (1)$2,442,983 (2) Homeowner Exemptions $0 Total Unset.ured Total Asseased Value $i5,203,884 (2) $123,638,304 II. FY2000/01 Base Year Project Area and Total Ad Valorem Tax and FY2000/01 Taxes Available to Redevelopment Agam;y Estimated Estimated Share of Less Estimated FY2001/02 Taxes FY2001/02Gross FY2001/02 forRDAfrom Ingement (5) Pass-Through (5) Each Agency (6) $6,487 $1,293 $5,173 $1162 $232.43 $930 $604 $120.74 $483 $8,670 $1,333.99 $5,336 $4,504 $4,000 $504 $1,720 $343.90 $1,376 $839 $167.80 $671 $4,075 $814.93 $3,260 $420 $B4.08 $336 $490 $97.93 $392 350 $9.gg $40 $27,000 - $8,499 $18,50al Ag8nCY Share of Property Tax Revenue (3) County Library Cupertlno CuperUono ESD Fremont UHSD Foolhill CCD County Education County Fire MPROSD 8CVWD BAAQMD 23.95% 4.30% 2.24% 24.70% 16.68% 6.37% 3.11% 15.09% 1.56% 1.81% 0.18% 100.OO% Estimated Ff200a/01 Base Year Tax from Project Area $308,110 $55,371 $28,765 $317,795 $214,616 $81,927 $3GI,974 $194,139 $20,029 $23,330 $2,380 $1,286,436 " Property Tax Rate: 1.0405% (lndudes pre-1989 property tax override: County Retirement L8V)/ (.0388%) am COun7 Li5rar%r Retirement (.0017%)). Estimated Net Total FY 2000/01 Prop Tax Ravenues (4) $19et,919,982 $9,852,818 $2,855,594 $34,652,225 $42,787,025 $33,700,482 $32,473,525 $28,080,545 $9,419,997 $30,525i849 $2,883,878 $422,151,916 (1) SantaClaraCouniyAssassorNotifi>tionsofCorrectedAssessment(10/22/09), with land and improvements adjusted by a 1% assumed gromh rate and $6.6 million of Macy's and Sears improvements. (2) County Fiscal Officer's Report (9/20/99). (3) Santa Clara County Controller-Treasurer (8/8/99) (4) County Flscal Officer's Report (9/20/99), adjusted by 2.5o/o assumed growth factor. (5) Estimated by KMA (B) Indudes Housing Set-Aside PREPARED BY: KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC. FILENAME: FksrA Officers Repod Eslimate 6-4-00.xla; 8haall; 6/5/00; 12:11 PM; RTK ( Counry of Sanra Clara Office nf tlic Cnunrv Executive Cntlllty (inviaminrnl Qonirr. atsi Wing 70 Well )-katkliit[ Slr("eat Snn JOSP. r.hlilnniiii os I 10 i-UX41 2(,%}24:% September 20, 1999 Dorffld D. Brown City Manager/Executive Director Cupertino Redevelopmait Agency 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Dear Mr. Brown: Re: F'roposed Vanco Fashion Park Redevelopmerit Project The FY1999-2000 Assessed Value for the project area is as follows: Secured Land Secured Improvemaits Secured Pa'sonal Property Home Owner Exanptiors Total Local Assessed Value $37,560,808 $86,275,865 $2,442,983 0 $15,203,884 $141,483,540 'The following ageiaes lev5r taxes in the project area: County of Santa Clara County Library City of Cupertino Cupertino Elementary School District Fremont Union High School Distcict Foothffl Commumty College District County Office.of Eduation County Fire Department (Centrd Fire District) Mid-Pula Regional Open Space District Santa Oara Valley Water District Bay Asea Air Quality Management Distict The amount of tax revenue to be derived by each taxing agency from the FY2000 base year assessment roll haom the project area and the total ad valorem tax revenues from all property within its boundaries for eadi taxing agency Li shown in Ta61e 1 below. Table I also reports the estimated fu"it year property taxes available to the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency broken down by the taxing agen6es, as required by Section 33328 of the Health and Safety Code. Eln;tr<l nl' 54tpiars'isnrs: DollilllI F. Crl4t'. Blnl1Cn .'yll'nm(in. Ptale' ,%lcHugh, J;inleS T. Benll Jr.. s. JOSel)11 Similiall Cl)111 lt}' Esr'rr ttivr: Rit'l inrtl 1Vi!IF i'iberg #5 Table 1 FY2000 Base Year Proiect Area Tax and Totffl FY2000 Ad Valorem Tax and Estimated First Year Taxes Available to Redevelopmerrt Agency by Taxing Agency in Proposed Vallco Fashion Puk Redevelopment Project Estimated EstimatedNet FY2000 Base Total FY2000 Estimated First Year Taxes for RDA From Agency $6,040 1;085 564 6,229 4107 1,606 783 3,806 393 4 58 47 Year Tax From Project Area $33,886 6,090 3,164 34,951 23,604 9,010 4,397 21,352 2,203 2,567 262 Agency County Library Cupertino Cupertino ESD Fremont tJHSD Foothin CCD County Edumtion County Fire MPROSD SCVWD BAAQMD Property Tax Reveriue $192,117,056 9,612,503 2,785,945 3 3,807,049 41,743,439 32,878,519 31,681,488 25,444,434 9,190,241 29,781,316 2,813,538 Taxes fi From $6,040 1;085 564 6,229 4107 1,606 783 3,806 393 4 58 47 Total First Year Tax Available to Redevelopment Agency $25,217 Sincerely, David mledge Auditor-Controller cc Larry Stone, Assessor Emma Rock, Tax Collector Ridiard Witteg, County Executive ,;lD(p Exhibit 9 t [PROPOSED] RULES GOVERNING PARTICIPATION BY PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE EXTENSION OF REASONABLE REENTRY PREFERENCES TO BUSINESS OCCUPA?SJTS IN THE CUPERTINO V ALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Phpared by flie Cupertino Redevelopment Agency CUP/OPRules October 25, 1999 .,QI I TABLE OF CONTENTS I.[§100] PURPOSE AND INTENT n. [§200] DEFINITIONS m. [§300] ELIGIBILITY IV. p] TYPES OF PARTICIPATION V. [§500] CONFORMING OWNBRS VI. [4] OWER PARTICIPATION AC.REEMENTS VII, [§700] CONTENTS OF OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS VIII. [§800] LIMITATIONS ON ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY BY THE AGENCY IX. [§900] REENTRY PREFERENCE TO BUSINESS OCCUPANTS WffHIN THE PROJECT AREA X. [§1000] AMHNDMENT OF RUlBS CUP/OPRules 10/25/99 !O')!, RULES COVERNING PARTICIPATION BY PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE E)mNSION OF RHASONABLE REENTRY PREFERENCES TO BUSINESS OCCUPANTS IN THE CUPERTINO VALLCO REDEVELOPMbNT !RC)JEL: l I, [§100] PURPOSE AND INTENT These r'ules are adopted pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of Califomia (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) in order to implement the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project regarding participation by property owners and the extension of reasonable reentry preferences to business occupants within the Project. These rules set forth $e procedures goveming such participation and preferences. It is the intention of the Agency to encourage and permit participation in the redevelopment of the Project Area by property owners and to extend reasonable reentry preferences to business occupants of real property within the boundaries of the Project Area to the maximum extent consistent with the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan. n. [4] DEFINITIONS As used herein, the following definitions apply: (1) "Agency" means the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency. (2) "Business Occupant" means any person, persons, corporation, association, partnership, or other entity engaged in business within the Project Area on or after the date of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City Couni. (3) "City Council" means the City Council of the City of Cupertino, Califomia, (4) "Owner" means any person, persons, corporation, association, partnership, or other entity holding title of record to real properFy in the Project Area on or after the date of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City Council. (5) "Owner Participation Agreement" means an agreement entered into by an Owner with the Agency in accordance with the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan and these rules. CUP/OPRules 10 /25 /99 (6) "Project Area" means the area described in the "Legal Description of the Project Area Boundaries" (Attachment No. 1 of the Redevelopment Plan) and shown on the "Project Area Map" (Attachment No. 2 of the Redevelopment Plan). (7) "Redevelopment Plan" means the Redevelopment Plan for the Cupertino Vallco Redevelopment Project as adopted by the City Council by OrdinanceNo. on ,2000. m. [§300] ELIGIBIIflY Owners shall be eligible to participate in the redevelopment of property within the Project Area in accordance with the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan, these rules, and the limitations herein described. Participation opportunities are necessamy subject to and limited by factors such as the following: (1) The appropriateness of land uses proposed and consistency with the General Plan of the City of Cupertino and the Redeve!opment Plarr, (2) The constmchon, widening, or realignment of streets; (3) The ability of participants to finance redevelopment in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan and development criteria adopted by the Agency in implementation of the Redevelopment Plan; (4) The constmchon or expansion of public facilities; and (5) The fact that, other than public rights-of-way, the Project Area consists of a single retail shopping center that is intended to be redeveloped as a uniform and consistent whole. The Agency presently contemplates that in carg out the Redevelopment Plan, certain portions of the Project Area may be acquired by the Agency for public improvements, facilities, or utilities. Therefore, owner participation opportunities will not be available for such properties. IV. [pl TYPES OF PARTICIPATION Subject to these rules and the limitations in Section 300 and this Section 400, Owners shall be given a reasonable opportunity to participate in redevelopment by' retaining their properties and redeveloping or improving such property for use in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan. CUP/OPRules 2 10/25/99 gl0 Eaffi proposal for participation shall be reviewed by the Agency specifically with respect to the following: (1) Conformity with the land use provisions of the Redevelopment Plan; (2) Compatibility with the standards, covenants, restrictions, conditions and controls of the Redevelopment Plan; and (3) The partiapant's abffity to finance the redevelopment or tmprovement in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan. V. [§500] CONFORMING OWNERS The Agency may, in its sole and absolute discretion, determine that certain real property within the Project Area presently meets the requirements of the Redevelopment Plan, and the Owners of such property will be permitted to remain as conforzning Owners without an Owner Participation Agreement with the Agency, provided su* Owners continue to operate, use, and maintain the real property wit the requirements of the Redevelopment Plan. In the event that any of the conforming Owners desire to construct any additional improvements or substantially alter or modify qxisting stnictures on any of the real property desibed above as conforming, then, in such event, such conforming Owners may be required by the Agency to enter into an Owner Participation Agreement with the Agency. VI, [4] OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS Owners wishing to participate in redevelopment within the Project Area may be required, as a condition to participation, to enter into an Owner Participation Agreement with the Agency if the Agency determines it is necessary to impose upon the property any of the standards, restrictions, and controls of the Redevelopment Plan, 'The Agreement may require the participant to join in ffie recordation of such documents as the Agency may require in order to ensure the property will be developed and used in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan and the Owner Participation Agreement. VII. [§700] CONTENTS OF OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS An Owner Participation Agreement shall obligate the Owner, his or her heirs, successors and assigns, and tenants to devote the property to the uses specified in the Redevelopment Plan, abide by all provisions and conditions of the Redevelopment Plan for the period of time that the Redevelopment Plan is in force and effect, and CUP/OPRules 3 10/25/99 Al/ comply with all the provisions of the Owner Participation Agreement according to their terms, duration, and effect. An Owner Participation Agreement may provide that if the Owner does not comply with the terms of the Agreement, the Agency, in addition to other remedies, may acquire such property or any interest therein by any lawful means, including eminent domain, for its fair market value as of the date of the Owner Participation Agreement, and the Agency may thereafter dispose of the property or interest so acquired in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan, An Owner Participation Agreement shall contain such other terms and conditions which, in the discretion of the Agency, may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of the Redevelopment Plan. VIII. [§800] LIMIT ATIONS ON ACQUISmON OF PROPERTY BY THE AGENCY The Agency shall not acquire real property to be retained and developed by an Owner pursuant to a funy executed Owner Participation Agreement if the Owner fully performs under the Agreement. The Agency shall not acquire real property on which an existing building is to be continued on its present site under the Redevelopment Plan and in its present form and use without the consent of the Owner, unless: (1) Such building requires sttuctural alteration, improvement, modernization, or rehabilitation; (2) The site or lot on which the building is situated requires modification in size, shape, or use; or (3) It is necessary to impose upon such pmperty any of the controls, limitations, restrictions, and requirements of the Redevelopment Plan, and the Owner fails or refuses to participate in redevelopment by executing an Owner Participation Agreement in accordance with the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan. IX, [§900] REENTRY PREFERENCE TO BUSINESS OCCUPANTS ffHIN THE PROJECT AREA Business Occupants who desire to remain within the Project Area shall be extended a reasonable preference to remain or reenter in business within the Project CUP/OPRules 4 10/25/99 ,, Area if they otheise meet the requirements prescribed in these rules and the Redevelopment Plan. X. [§1000] AMENDMENT OF RULES These rules may be modified or amended from time to time by the Agency at any regular or duly called special meeting, provided, however, that no such amendment shall retroactively impair the rights of Owners who have executed Owner Participation Agreements with the Agency in reliance upon these rules as presently constituted. CUP/0PRules 5 10 /25 /99 02-SP-00 CITY OF CUPERTTNO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, Califomia 95014 RESOLUTION N0. 6019 (Minute Order) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTTNO RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY EVALUATE ASPECTS OF THE VALLCO REDEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ENSURE CONFORMITY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN The Planing Commission of the City of Cupertino recommends that the City Council and the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency evaluate traffic, air quality, height and setbacks pertaig to the Vallco Redevelopment Areato ensure that'they corform with the General Plan. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of March, 2000, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of thei City of Cupertino, State of Califomia, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: AJ3SENT: COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Doyle, Kwok, Stevens and Chairperson Harris COMMISSIONERS: COMM[SSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: /s/ Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of Commuity Development g:planning/pdreport/res/vallcomo APPROVED: /s/ Andrea Harris Andrea Harris, Chairperson Cupertino Planing Commission ai% PUBLICECONOMICS, INC. f"ublic F/nance Urban Ecormmia Deve/opmenf Serv/ces Exhibit 10 i "-"n May 26, 2000 Mr. Don Brown Direct'or, Redevelopment Agency City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Ave. Cupertino, CA 95014 Subject: Vallco Fashion Park Redevelopment Proiect: Coosultation and Statutory Payment Issues, Response to Agency Response to January 21, 2000 Consultation Meeting Letter Dear Mr. Brown: This letter is submitted by Public Economics, Inc, ("PEI") on behalf of Fremont Union High School District and Foothill-De Anza Community College District (collectively-"Districts") with respect to the City of Cupertino's proposed Vallco Fashion Park Redevelopment Project. This letter is in reply to the May 9, 2000 letter from the Cupertino Redevelopment Agency which responds to issues raised by the Districts in the January 21, 2000 Consultation Meeting and in various follow-up phone discussions regarding the proposed redevelopment plan and the implementation of statutory payments to the Districts for the proposed Project. It is requested that this letter and attachment be entered into the record of the Joint Public Hea*g for adoption of the Project. Please note that this letter is to be considered a part of an ongoing dialogue between the Districts and the %ency regarding processes and procedures relating to the implementation of the Project and the statutory payments. This letter is not to be considered a statement of concern or objection to the proposed Redevelopment Plan. The following are responses to the Agency's May 9th point-by-point response to the issues raised in the January 21, 2000 Consultation Meeting and in the letter submitted by the Districts at that meeting regarding the implementation of the statutory payments. 820 W Town and Counq Road ii Orange, CA 92868-4772 (774)647-6242 ' FAX(774)647-6232 World Wide Web: hhtrilA.riub-econ.com 9-/<:)- May 26, 2000 Mr. Ron Brown Page 2 A. AB 1290 Payment Issues Not Addressed in Community Redevelopment Law 1. Responsibility for Calculating and Making Payments. While the District's agree that if the County is willing to calculate the AB 1290 payments, it would be better for the County to do so, given their access to the necessary information and their expertise in these matters. The Districts do not know to what degree the Agency is able to release itself from ultimate responsibility for the payments, given the way the relevant portions of the Health and Safety Code are written (HSC Section 33607.5, et seq.). The Districts will await fiirther information from the Agency regarding responsibility for the payments, subsequent to the adoption of the plan, 2. Frequency and Dates of Payments. That the pass-through payments be made at the same time as the Agency receives tax increment installments is acceptable to the Districts. 3. Documentation of Payment Calculations. Irrespective of whether the' Agency or the County calculate the payments, the Districts remain interested in receiving documentation of payment calculations in sufficient detail to enable the Districts to determine whether they have been paid according to ongoirig understanding. 4., ' Interest Payments. The Districts. agree that if payments are made per Item 2 above (when Agency receives tax increment installments), then an interest provision is not a concem over the normal course of payments. The Districts will consider the matter of an interest provision for payments not made due to subordination of the payments to Agency debt, if and when the Agency makes a request for subordination per HSC Section 33607.5(e). B. }ssues Needing Further Clarification 1. Years of First and Last AB 1290 Payments. No response required because Agency and Districts are in agreement on the timing of first and last payments. (Please see Item B. l in the att,ached May 9, 2000 letter from the Agency to Districts and the January 21, 2000 letter from the Districts to the Agency for the actual exchange of comments.) 2. Deductions for Low and Moderate Income ("LMI") Housing Set-asides. No response required because Agency and Districts are in agreement on the impact of LM[ set-aside deductions on the pass-through payments. (Please see Item B.2 in the attached May 9, 2000 letter from the Agency to Districts and the January 21, 2000 letter from the Districts to the Agency for the actual exchange of comments.) MIICUPRT!NOlRDARE3P.SAM ,v{(z MaJ 26, 2000 Mr. Ron Brown Page 3 3. Tax Overrides. The Agency letter of May 9th points out that currently only two tax override amounts over the one percent basic levy exist within the project area-one for the County Library and one for County Retirement funding. Therefore, it will only be in the eventuality that the Districts approve and implement future overrides that it will be necessary for the Agency and the County to remain aware that per HSC 33676(a) and 33670(e), the Auditor/Controller is required to allocate to the Districts, not the Agency, all tax override amounts within the Project area for any new bonded indebtedness incurred by the Districts. C. AB 1290 Payment IsSueS Subject to Misinterpretation 1. Allocation of AB 1290 Payments after Accounting for Impact of Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund ("ERAF")/"Tax Shift." The Districts also arq in discussions with the County regarding this matter and would request that the Agency keep the Districts irformed regarding the ongoing status of their discussions. The Districts will do likewise for the Agency, 2. Sponsoring Community Share of Statutory Payments in Tiers 2 and 3. The Districts do not believe that the Agency's position on this matter-tliat the City-generated portion of the Tier 2 and Tier 3 statutory payment funds revert to the Agency-is correct. The Districts' position is that the fiinds created by applying the specified payment percentages in each Tier to total tax increment generated by each Tier are to be distributed among the affected taxmg entities-the Redevelopment Agency is not an affected taxing entity and is therefore ineligible to receive these pass-through paymems. The portion of the paymems in Tiers 2 and 3 left over, as a resutt of the City's express ineligibility to receive these fiinds, should be distributed among all the affected taxing entities in proportion to each entity's percentage share of property taxes within the Project area. Because this matter will not affect the amount of AB 1290 payments until the start of the second tier of payments, beginning the 1 1th year in which the Agency is allocated tax increment, it is probable that this matter will by that time have been clarified by legal precedent or legislation. (With respect to a 1995 amendment to Health and Safety Code Section 33607.5 to clarify this issue, mentioned in the Agency's May 9th letter-if the Agency is referring to AJ3 1424-this legislation did not, to our understanding, address this issue.) M:lCUPRTTNOlRDARESP.SAh4 ;2/7 Mast 26, 2000 Mr. Ron Brown Page 4 D. Other Issues for Agency Consideration 1, AB 1290 Payments as a Debt of the Agency. The District's consultant PEI, who is suggesting consideration of the point of view expressed in the January 21st letter, understands the Agency's opinion on this matter as expressed in the May 9th letter, However, PEI's main point in bringing up this matter is to create additional understanding by the Agency of aspects of the HSC Section 33607.5 payment formulas that impinge on the long run amount (and therefore usefulness) of these paytnents to the Districts. Further, notwithstanding the Agency's cornrnents in the May 9th letter, PEI believes the at the right time in the future, if redevelopment law in this regard has not changed, the possibility should be explored that an agency could, while at the same time corforming to the requirements of the law, make a facilities financing commitment to a district under HSC Section 33445, which if established as a debt of the agency could make the maximum amount of the statutory payment stream available for use in repayment of this debt by the agency. (The "property tax" portion of the payments would, of course, need to be sent by the agency to the district, per the Code, for the district to apply to its revenue limit.) 2. Subordination. The May 9th letter's response to this isstte reflects a misunderstanding of the intent of the subordination "Guidelines" submitted to the Agency with the January 21St letter. The District's are not requesting that the Agency commit in advance tO following the procedures set forth in the Guidelines. The purpose of the Guidelines is to make the Agency aware that it is recommended that the Districts keep on file and apply these Guidelines in evaluating whether, in the eventuatity of future request for subordination of the Districts' payments by the Agency, the Districts should approve or disapprove the Agency's request based upon "substantial evidence." By requesting that these Guidelines be placed in the public record of the Project adoption and be kept on file by the Agency, the Districts are seeking to encourage the Agency to refer to these Guidelines in the eventuality that the Agency does request subordination of the Districts' payments, If the Agency were to choose to follow the Guidelines in preparing a request for subordination, it would facilitate the Districts' evaluation and increase the chance for approval of the request. (The Guidelines are included with this letter as Attachment 1,) E. Item Not Covered in the Districts' January 21st Letter or the Agency's May 9th Response Letter 1. "Basic Aid" Pass-Through Payments to Fremont Union High School District. Fremont Union Thgh School District is a "basic aid" school district, which means that the District finances essentially all of its operations through local property taxes, and does M:lCUPRTn!01Rj)ARJSP.SAM li € May 26, 2000 Mr. Ron Bmwn Page 5 not receive any general apportionment from the State. For a basic aid district, loss of property taxes to a redevelopment project represents a direct and irreplaceable loss of revenue to the district. 2. Redevelopment law as amended by AB 1290 provides a mechanism (Health and Safety Code Section 33676(b)) to at least partially offset this loss of revenue to a basic aid school district. HSC Section 33676(b) provides formulas for additional PAYMENTS to a basic aid district to supplement the standard AB 1290 payments. (The standard AJ3 1290 payments are not nearly sufficient to mitigate a basic aid district's loss of reVenue to a redevelopment project.) 3. The Agency's redevelopment consultant, Keyser Marston, Associates and the Districts' consultant, PEI, have discussed and reviewed implementation of the basic aid formulas, Based on a review of Keyser Marston's basic aid portion of Tax Increment Projections sent to PEI, PEI believes that, to the extent that the calculations remain consistent with what was forwarded to PEI, the consultants are in agreement on the methodology for calculating these payments. However, the High School District is advised to provide for review of the actual calculations and payments when they begin to occur (at earliest, January 2002), especially since !he Agency has indicated the County Controller-Treasurer may be contracted to make the payments. Initial payments will be small. That is when any discrepancies in payment methodology should be identified. Please do not hesitate to call Dante Gumucio at (714) 647-6242 or the undersigned at (949) 499-7676 to discuss any matters relating to this letter. The Districts and PEI thank the Agency and its consultant for their time and consideration in the consultation process. Sincerely yours, Public Economics, /nc. Carl Goodwin, Consultant Attachment cc: Mr. Jim Keller, Vice Chancellor, Foothill-De Arm Community College District Mr. Chael RdettO, ASSOCiate Superintendent, Fremont Union ggh School District Ms. Wendy Beadle, Tax Apportionment Manager, Santa Clara Co. Controller-Treasurer Ms. Ciddy Wordell, City Planner, City of Cupertino M:lCt?RTTNCllRDA RESP.SAM ATTACHMENT 1 flallco Fashion Park RedevelopmntPrOjeCt Guidelines Regarding Future Requests forSubordirxation of ,4B 1290 Payments Fremont Union High SchoolDistrict Foothill-De Ama Communhy College District The redevelopment agency ("Agency") is authorized pursuant to Health & Safety Code ("HSC") Section 33607.5(e) to request subordination of the Districts' AB 1290 payments to Agency bonds, loans, or other indebtedness Subordination is good for the Agency, the Districts, and the community because it allows the Agency to issue bonds at lower interest rates and accomplish more with the availatJe revenues. Subordination is bad for the Districts in the event that the Agency does not have adequate fiinds to paythe District, Wben requesting subordination, HSC 33607.5(e) requires the Agency to provide "substantial evidence" that sufficient fiinds will be available to pay both debt service and AB 1290 payments to the Districts. The Districts consider the following as constituting substantial evidence: 1. When requesting subordination from the Districts, the Agency should provide the following materials (most of which are typically produced as documentation for a tax allocation bond financing), at least 30 days in advance of debt issuance; Copy of the Preliminary Official Statement and related documents Report explaining how RDA intends to repay indebtedness and still meet its obligations to the Districts Annual ta,y increment projections, including amiual assessed valuation growth assumptions Annual total debt service requirements of the RDA 2. In sizing its bonds, the Ageru,r should utilize tax increment projections which assume an assessed valuation growdi of no more than 2.0 percent in any year, unless clearly justified. 3. The Agency should request subordination only if tax increment projections, net of payments to the Districts and other affected taxing entities, are equal to or greater than debt semce requirements in each year. 4. The Agency should submit all documents to the Districts via certified mail, followed by phone contact. 5. Unless written consent to the contrary is provided by Districts, die Districts will not accept subordination of its AB 1290 payments unless AB 1290 payments to all other affected taxing entities are also subordinated 6. Any paymems missed or deferred by the Agency due to subordination wtll be considered by the DisMcts to be a loan to the Agency, wMch should be repaEd to the DEstrEcts, with interest, from the first tax incremertt available to the Agenq. M:lCtJT'RTtN(AATT ACHl.SAM f?#;/;i Atfimd-71;! )4H310 ulO ONIIH:ldnC) )J-fl ,-t-yr>t a(iia)y r>or'z /"Z'/ A )" ""' At -/7 9/ W3J -7 -} 0 ")4]3]]-![ A u 3now4 :')(;N37d za) oo7 /i) }yn('