The URL can be used to link to this page

Director Report CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 TORRE AVENUE, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Subject: Report of the Community Development Directo~ Planning Commission Agenda Date: Tuesday, T anuary 22, 2008 The City Council met on Tanuary 8, 2008 and Tanuary 15, 2008, and discussed the following items of interest to the Planning Commission: 1. Use Permit for Marukai Food Store: Approval to allow a food store (Marukai) totaling 28,690 square feet located in the Marketplace Shopping Center (former Longs Drug tenant space). o Use Permit approved, with conditions regarding refuse and recycling handling and containers; refuse pickup schedule; odor and vector control; and rear corridor limitation. Marketplace and City web sites to include code enforcement contacts and a construction management plan. o Use permit shall be reviewed in one year. (see attached staff report for U- 2007-11) 2. Appeal for a Modification to an existing Use Permit: Appeal to modify the conditions under which food service businesses will be allowed in the Marketplace Shopping Center along the rear service corridor. The appellant is Wayne Okubo. (see attached report for M-2007-02) o Appeal granted pursuant to mod,ified conditions in the model resolution to define" food preparation" as entailing the application of heat. 3. Use Permit, Architectural and Site Approval, and Tree removal for Tantau Investments, LLC: Approval for a Use Permit, Architectural and site approval and tree removal of 34 trees to construct a 1000,000 square foot, two-story building on a 6.6 acre site. o Use permit and Architectural and Site Approval approved, with modifications to the green building condition that the applicant will provide leed silver new construction certification for the core and shell only. o Tree removal approved (see attached report for U-2007-09) Miscellaneous 1. Planners Institute: Reminder that information on the Planners Institute, to be held in Sacramento this year, was sent out. Please contact Melissa Emerling at 408-777-3253 prior to Friday, January 31, 2008 if you plan to attend. Ole-I City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 Fax: (408) 777-3333 CUPERTINO Community Development Department Summary Agenda Item No. _ Agenda Date: January 8, 200S Application: M-2007-02, U-2007-11 Applicant: Wayne Okubo Owner: Evershine VI Location: 19620-19780 Stevens Creek Boulevard, APN 369-06-008, 009,010 APPLICATION SUMMARIES: a. Use Permit (U-2007-11) approval to allow a food store (Marukai) totaling 28,690 square feet located in the Marketplace Shopping Center (former Longs Drug site ); b. Appeal of a Planning Commission denial of a modification (M-2007-02) to an existing Use Permit (16-U-76) to modify the condition under which food service businesses will be allowed in the Marketplace Shopping Center along the rear service corridor. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission first heard these applications on November 13, 2007 and again on December 11, 2007. U-2007-11 (Marukai grocery) requires City Council approval. M-2007-02 (condition limiting food preparation uses) was final at the Planning Commission level. Consequently, the Commission took separate actions outlined below. The Planning Commission: Recommends denial of the use permit U-2007-11 (2:1 vote) to permit a food store (Marukai); Denied the modification of a condition on the existing use permit (3:0 vote) to redefine the limitations on food preparation uses. The applicant is appealing the decision. The Council has the following options: 1. Uphold the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal; or 2. Uphold the appeal; or 3. Uphold the appeal with modifications. j) I t2 -,:3 M-2007-02, U-2007-11 Page no. 2 ENVIRONMENT AL ASSESSMENT: Categorically Exempt January 8, 2007 BACKGROUND: The use permit (16-U-76) requires large food stores exceeding 10,000 square feet proposed to be located anywhere in the Marketplace Shopping Center to obtain a use permit from the City. Additionally, condition #4 of use permit 16-U-76, prohibits new food uses along the rear corridor of the shopping center. DISCUSSION: USE PERMIT Marukai is proposing to locate a Japanese food market (approx. 28,700 square feet) at the former Long Drugs site. Part of the tenant space will be shared by Daiso (7,850 sq. ft.), which is a Japanese houseware retail store. Marukai proposes to stock general pre- packaged food products, general consumer goods, fresh fruits and vegetables and fresh fish and meat. As part of the market, a small bakery is proposed near the front of the store where pre-made and pre-packaged bakery goods will be sold. Originally, Marukai intended to have a kitchen with onsite food preparation in order to sell lunch boxes for off-site consumption. However, in response to the neighbor and Planning Commission concerns, Marukai has decided to withdraw that request by eliminating the proposed kitchen. As a result, there will not be any cooking of hot foods at the site. USE PERMIT MODIFICATION In addition to the use permit to allow the Marukai grocery store, the applicant is requesting a modification of the existing use permit 16-U-76 (condition #4), which limits food uses along the rear corridor of the shopping center. The intent of this condition is to minimize the impacts from restaurants or specialty foods to the adjacent residential neighborhood to the south. However, the literal interpretation of this condition would prevent Marukai from having any cutting or packaging of fish and meat and prohibit ' uses such as Yogurtland, a frozen yogurt store, from cutting up or otherwise preparing toppings for their frozen yogurt. Please refer to the attached Planning Commission staff report dated November 13, 2007 and December 11,2007 for the detailed discussion on Marukai and Yogurtland (exhibit B). PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission voted 2-1 (KanedajRose - yes; Geifer - no; Miller - absent) to recommend denial of Marukai's Use Permit request (U-2007-11). The Commission's comments on the Use Permit request are summarized as follows: . The refuse odor associated from the fish and meat products is a key concern. . General food and consumer products (including pre-cooked or pre-packaged food products) are acceptable. . Commissioner Geifer supported Marukai's use permit and suggested that there be a six month review period so that the performance of the new trash facilities may be evaluated. 2 I) I e --- Lf- M-2007-02, U-2007-11 January 8, 2007 Page no. 3 The Planning Commission voted unanimously (3-0-1, with Miller absent) to deny the request to modify the existing use permit to allow limited food services along the rear corridor. The Commission agreed with the concerned neighbors to not modify the language of the existing condition despite the fact that a yogurt shop may not produce any odor impacts. STAFF Staff supported the Marukai's use permit request and the request to modify the existing condition in order to allow food uses that do not have any offsite impacts. The difficulty with the existing condition (condition #4, 16-U-76M) is that it precludes all business involving food preparation without defining what is considered "food preparation". The condition also makes no distinction between tenants that have limited or no offsite impacts from those that do. In addition, the existing condition does not clearly explain the intent. Staff believes that the intent of the condition is to limit food services that may create cooking odor, vector and refuse problems. Therefore tenants such as ice cream or yogurt stores (or any other similar uses that may have incidental food cooked or prepared off-site) that do not have any negative impacts to the adjacent neighbors should be permitted. Food uses comprise about 70% of Hew LeHdHb ill ::;hoppllLg celLLers. TIle limitatiolL on food preparation severely constrains the marketing program for the Marketplace which could result in long term vacancies or a marginal tenant mix. In the interest of economic development the city needs to find reasonable means to protect the interest of neighboring residents while allowing businesses some degree of market flexibility. Staff believes that condition #4 should focus on operational controls (i.e refuse control, venting, location and design of the trash enclosures etc.) to protect the legitimate concerns of the neighborhood and allow some limited food uses. NEIGHBORHOOD The applicant submitted 107 signatures from the surrounding neighborhood supporting the proposed Maruaki use permit and the modification request to allow Y ogurtland in Marketplace Shopping Center (exhibit C). At the Planning Commission meetings of November 13, 2007 (see attached draft minutes) and December 11,2007 (draft minutes are not available but Council members can view this application on line by accessing the archived meetings of the Planning Commission) several adjacent neighbors spoke against the proposed applications. The neighborhood comments are summarized as follows: . Concerns with the fish and meat refuse odor. . Concerns with odors associated with cooking activities. . Yogurt shop should not be allowed because it will open the door up for future intensification and eventually allow new restaurants. 3 i)\f( ~5 M-2007-02, U-2007-11 January 8,2007 Page no. 4 . Concerns with vector issues. . Concerns with parking issues. . Concerns with noise and undesirable activities that may happen in the rear corridor of the shopping center. The detailed neighborhood comments are attached to the November 13, 2007 Planning Commission report (exhibit B). Please also refer to several addition letters/ emails of opposition received at the December 11, 2007 Planning Commission hearing (exhibit B). Enclosures: Planning Commission Resolution Exhibit A: Draft Planning Commission approval resolution with conditions. Exhibit B: PlanningConimission staff report (December 11,2007 and November 13, 2007) with attachments. Exhibit C: Petition in support of the project (submitted to the Planning Coriunission on December 11,2007). Exhibit D: Additional letters/ emails from the neighbors Exchibit E: Draft minutes from the Planning Commission meeting of November 13, 2007 Planset Prepared by: Gary Chao, Senior Planner Approved by: Steve iasecki Director, Community Development RJ( David W. Knapp City Manager 4 0112--(, City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 Fax: (408) 777-3333 CUPERTINO Community Development Department Summary Agenda Item No. _ Agenda Date: Tanuary 8, 200R Application: U-2007-09 (EA-2007-10), ASA-2007-14, TR-2007-06 Applicant: Larry Wallerstein, Tantau Investments, LLC Property Owner: Tantau Investments, LLC Property Location: 10900 N. Tantau Avenue Application Summary: 1. USE PERMIT and ARCI-llTECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL to construct a 100,000 square foot, two-story office building with site improvements. 2. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT for the removal of 37 trees to cOlistruct a 100,000 square foot, two-story office building with site improvements. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Negative Declaration recommended. The project will have no significant, adverse environmental impacts with the proposed mitigation measures. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends on. a 3-0 vote that the City Council approve: L Negative Declaration (EA-2007-10) 2. Use Permit (U-2007-09) and Architectural and Site Approval (ASA-2007-14) to construct a 100,000 square foot, two-story office building with site improvements, in accordance with Resolution. Nos. 6497 and 6498.. 3. Tree Removal (TR-2007-06) for the removal of 37 trees, in accordance with. Resolution No. 6499. Project Data: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: Specific Plan: Acreage (Net): Proposed Building SF: First Floor SF: Second Floor SF: Ind ustrialj Residential P (MP) North ValIeo Special Center 6.6 acres 100,000 square feet 50,320 square feet 49,680 square feet \)1(>-'/ U-2007-09 Page 2 January 8, 2007 Proposed Building Height: Total Parking Proposed: Project Consistency with: General Plan: Zoning: North vatlco Park Special Center: 35.5 feet 416 spaces (up to 500 spaces in future) Yes Yes Yes Environmental Assessment: Negative Declaration BACKGROUND On December 11, 2007, the Planning Commission recommended approval of a Use Permit and Architectural and Site Approval to the City Council on a 3-0 vote (Commissioner Miller was absent), to construct a new 100,000 square foot, two-story office building, with additional conditions of approval pertaining to tree planting and green building requirements. The Commission also recommended a Tree Removal permit to remove 37 trees to accommodate the new development. The applicant is voluntarily proposing to obtain LEED Silver certification for the project,-and-wilLbe-incorporating-a-number~of-green-building_featmoes,-induding-a-coQI- wall exterior, sun shading and insulating glass windows. The LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) New Construction Rating System is a point based rating system allowing up to a maximum of 69 points for various green building features that are incorporated into a project. Each green building feature is assigned a certain point value. In order to obtain LEED silver certification, the applicant will be attaining between 33 and 38 points of the 69 points. The project site is a 6.6 acre property located on the east side of N. Tantau Avenue, south of Homestead Road and Forge Drive. The site is currently vacant, except for a groundwater extraction treatment system located on the northeast corner of the site. The site was identified as part of a IS-acre US. Environmental Protection Agency Superfund site that also includes other surrounding properties due to chlorinated VOCs (volatile organic compounds) that were fOUIld within the soil and grOlmdwater. The soil contamination on the site was completely mitigated in 1993; however, the groundwater extraction treatment system will continue to operate. The site was previously developed with a 94,874 square foot building that was occupied between 1967 -1988 by a company that fabricated integrated circuits and semiconductor devices and between 1992 - 1998 by General Electric. The building was demolished in 1998 and has subsequently been vacant. DISCUSSION Planning Commission Comments The Planning Commission recommended two additional conditions of approval that were incorporated into Resolution Nos. 6497, 6498 and 6499. The Commission recommended that all new trees planted on site be native species of trees and that the Die --b U-2007-09 Page 3 January 8, 2007 LEED Silver green building certification the applicant will be obtaining for the development is for the New Construction category. These conditions of approval have been incorporated into Condition Nos. 6, 7, and 16 of the Use Permit and Architectural and Site approval resolutions, and into Condition No.4 of the Tree Removal resolution. Public Comments During the public hearing, the Commission also heard from two members of the public. One person asked for clarifications on the estimated construction duration of the project, what new tree species would be planted, and when the applicant would be holding the neighborhood meeting. The other member of the public stated that she was pleased with the plans for the building. The applicant responded to the questions stating that the anticipated start of construction would begin in April and last for 11 months, and that the neighborhood meeting would take place on Monday, December 17,2007. The Commission clarified that they would be recommending that any new trees planted on site would be native trees. ENCLOSURES Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 6497, 6498, and 6499. Exhibit A: Planning Commission staff report dated December 11, 2007 (with attachments ). Exhibit B: Negative Declaration Prepared by: Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner Approved by: -' ~ Steve Piasecki Director, Community Development David W. Knapp City Manager G:\Planning\PDREPORT\CC\U-2007-09 CC Report.doc Dlk ~(./ Real estate: Commercial real estate cools, landlords eye uncertainty - Silicon Valley I San Jose Business ... Page 1 of 3 Silicon Valley / San Jose Business Journal- January 7, 2008 http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjoselstories/2008/01/07/story11.html SILICON VALLEY I SAN JOSE BusilessJournal Friday, January 4, 2008 Real estate: Commercial real estate cools, landlords eye uncertainty 2007 Review & 2008 Preview Silicon Valley I San Jose Business Journal.. by Sharon Simonson Don Shaver, Northern California president for Irvine's LBA Realty LLC, is negotiating several leases he'd like to sign sooner rather than later. The commercial property landlord has become a major regional player in recent years, with 4.2 million square feet, most of it in Silicon Valley. Hitherto, LBA was intent on "buying vacancy" in the region, with an eye on capturing the financial upside of rising rents as that vacancy filled. But with his portfolio occupancy at 65 percent, and tenant requirements for additional space slowing, Shaver is keen to reel in some good tenants. Dennis Hendricks Don Shaver View Larger "Our focus right now is on stabilizing the portfolio a bit," he says. "We think tenant demand is going to be steady next year, but it's not going to be as robust as 2006 and 2007, both of which were strong years." The Silicon Valley commercial real estate market enters 2008 at its most indecisive since the mop-up from the dot-com bust began in late 2004. The brash investment pace and prices of the last several years, driven by great expectations for healthy rent increases, have given way to sobriety. No one predicts cratering property values yet, though there is no question that they are falling. Nor do folks believe that the leasing market will fall off a cliff. Yet, with national and international credit markets in turmoil and economic growth in question, companies are stepping gingerly before approving expansion into larger or more expensive digs. Going forward, Shaver says, landlords are going to have to "work harder and smarter to position themselves for (leasing) success, and certain spaces will probably suffer as things begin to slow." The valley's commercial landlords enter the year better prepared for adversity than they have been in some time. Vacancy rates have been on a steady slide since post-dotcom peaks in 2003. Rents have ticked up, particularly in the most desirable markets. Job growth -- the best predictor of office-space demand-- continues steady if not spectacular. Valley corporate stalwarts including .~i~.~~..~Y~!~.~~..!.~~.~.' Apple Inc., and .!:!.~~!.~!!.~.~.~~~.~~~...~~.~. appear as financially fit as they have in years. Indeed, the weak dollar, a clear boon to Cisco and HP, is sure to help the entire South Bay, an export-driven economy. As a "global pathway market," regions like the San Francisco Bay Area are the nation's best-poised to weather the vicissitudes of the current wobbly world economy, according to "Emerging Trends in Real Estate 2008," an annual study by the Urban Land Institute and PricewaterhouseCoopers. Moreover, Silicon Valley, which did not begin its commercial real estate recovery until well after the rest of the country, retains value and leasing momentum that markets like New York City and Washington, D.C., http://www.bizjournals.comlsanjose/storiesI2008/0 1/07 Istory 11.html ?t=printable f)lI< Ie, 1/1512008 Real estate: Commercial real estate cools, landlords eye uncertainty - Silicon Valley / San Jose Business ... Page 2 of 3 which recovered sooner, have lost. Still, lots of people are clearly worried. "I am seeing offerings from brokers all of the time, and they all say 'price reduced, price reduced, price reduced, '" says one capital markets expert in San Francisco who asked not to be identified for fear of breaching a professional confidence. "It starts with the lesser properties but works its way in." Lenders holding debt on commercial buildings nationwide, including Silicon Valley, also have begun to quietly shop commercial property loans, eager to shore up balance sheets and perhaps to rid themselves of an unexpected liability. So far, several sources say, lender discounts on the loans have generally been too shallow to excite much buyer interest. The fear is that property values will drop below the value of the outstanding borrowings against them, even with the price cut. In a possible example of this, San Francisco-based ~~.Q.~~.~~~~'!.~..~.~QP~.!:!!.~~..~~~ recently acquired a $40 million subordinated loan on the first 900,600-square-foot phase of ~~y..~.~~...~~.~.'s Moffett Towers project. The junior interest is part of a $216.75 million construction-financing package provided to the Sunnyvale development in early 2007 -- before the credit crunch froze capital markets and made such borrowing difficult. Moffett is speculative and as yet has not announced any confirmed tenants. Marketplace thinking assumes that should Jay Paul find itself unable to execute its plans, Shorenstein would feel good about owning Moffett Towers itself, either all or in part. At the same time, the template offered by the residential real estate market also is not encouraging. Though Silicon Valley's housing market remains better than many others, more than 18 percent of the 6,424 homes and condos on the market at the end of November were in foreclosure, owned by the bank or being offered for sale by owners for less than the amount owed on their mortgage, according to Redwood City's M.~y'Q.~Q~.~Q.~. That's up from 14 percent in October. ~Q.~~~.!~.~.!-!~~.~.!:!~.~~.~~.~.' a California-based research service, says bankers have begun to cut the prices at which they are starting the bidding on homes being auctioned in foreclosure sales on courthouse steps. Typically, in such cases, the bank will start bidding at the loan's outstanding principal amount. But the lender on a California Street home in San Francisco, on which the borrower owed more than $939,000, started bidding at $710,000 last month, a 24 percent discount, the service says. A Redwood City home was offered at $488,750. The principal owed on the house was more than $612,000. "A notable sea change occurred in November. Lenders are starting to aggressively discount properties" said ForeclosureRadar founder Sean O'Toole. "We were surprised by the magnitu'de of the discount and even more surprised that most of the homes went back to the bank with no investor bidding in spite of the price cut." Initially, commercial brokers and others argued that the credit turmoil in the housing market would not spread to the larger economy and was unlikely to affect commercial real estate. Events on the ground have disproved that theory, and it is well-known that underwriting standards on commercial real estate debt weakened in the same way that they did on residential debt. "Loans were priced to perfection," says the capital markets expert in San Francisco. "People got commercial real estate loans who were never going to be able to repay them." Some might call that deja vu all over again. http://www.bizjournals.comlsanjose/storiesI2008/0 1/07 /story II.html ?t=printable D \k 1/ 1/15/2008 Real estate: Commercial real estate cools, landlords eye uncertainty - Silicon Valley / San Jose Business... Page 3 of 3 "There is no doubt that in every investor's mind there is a question as to what values are in light of the capital markets, and what will happen to values going forward, based on economic performance," says Bill Halford, president and chief executive of .~~~Y...~~.!!~...~~.~.' an Irvine-based private real estate investment trust. Bixby is a California-centric investor. It has acquired over a million square feet in the valley in the last year. Bixby remains a valley believer. They recently paid more than $300 a square foot, or $36-4 million, for a n8,400-square-foot officejR&D campus in Santa Clara. The buildings are leased to ~PP.!!~.4...M~!~!..!.~!~.. Inc., but the lease expires in July 2009. Buoying Halford's optimism is what he says is the valley's history of explosive tenant demand in chunks as big as a million square feet at a time from a single company as well as the leasing strength he continues to see, particularly in comparison to Southern California, where the company is also an investor. With finance-driven property appreciation clearly a thing of the past, the strength of such fundamentals is the only force that can keep commercial real estate in good stead now, Pricewaterhouse Cooper's Jonathan Miller recently told an audience of commercial brokers, owners and financiers. How strong those fundamentals can remain, of course, depends on the economy's and companies' ability to weather the current storm. SHARON SIMONSON covers real estate for the Business Journal. Reach her at (408) 299-1853. All contents of this site @American City Business Journals Inc. All rights reserved. http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2008/0 1/07/story 11.html ?t=printable Dr<-IQ 1/15/2008 San Jose Mercury News - Going green receives a boost from home builders It)eJltertUf!\ News MercuryNews.com Going green receives a boost from home builders GROUP PUSHES FOR STANDARDS IN BAY AREA By Katherine Conrad Mercury News Article Launched: 01/14/200801 :30:48 AM PST Green Energy . More updates and information Faced with one of the worst housing markets in decades, the Bay Area home-building industry - long opposed to mandatory environmental standards - has decided to give up and go green. In a move believed to be a first in the country, the Home Builders Association of Northern California today will ask the region's 101 cities and nine counties to impose green building standards that would reduce energy usage by 15 percent for every home built in the Bay Area. It's not just about the planet. With home sales sinking to historic lows, many builders have discovered that in the environmentally conscious Bay Area, green sells. ''This is not a fad, this is where things are going," said Joseph Perkins, president of the home builders association, which represents 100 publicly traded and private builders, including major developers such as KB Home, Pulte and Centex. That's not news to the Bay Area's largest two cities. Both San Jose and San Francisco already are working on their own green building codes for residential and commercial real estate. Smaller cities, such as Los Altos, Livermore, Pleasanton and San Rafael, already have them in place. And that's exactly the problem this proposal seeks to address by bringing uniformity to the hodgepodge of regulations that now dot the region. Because even builders admit green is inevitable. "Buyers and residents are totally embracing green. They understand the issues facing us with global warming," said Cheryl O'Connor, who as vice president for marketing of Warmington Homes pushed to make its Vantage housing development in Palo Alto one of the greenest in the region. She found that building the 76-townhome community with solar panels on every roof and a dual-flush toilet in every bathroom resulted in twice as many sales as non-green developments. "People are willing to pay extra for a new home that has green features as opposed to an older home that uses more energy." Perkins plans to announce the proposal today at the California Public Utilities Commission summit in San Francisco. Experts say his proposal on behalf of home builders puts the Bay Area at the forefront of the green construction movement. "This will have a huge impact," said Panama Bartholomy, an adviser to the California Energy Commission, because most homes in the state are built by production or large-scale builders as opposed to smaller, custom builders. "The builders now building in Northern California will. . . see how easy it is to build environmentally friendly," Bartholomy said. "I promise you that they will take it beyond the Bay Area. You will see it ~/'t f)r2//3 San Jose Mercury News - Going green receives a boost from home builders IbejteMtfl\ News MerruryNews.com across the nation." Buildings account for 40 percent of carbon emissions in the United States, and residential buildings are roughly half of that, said Jason Hartke, director for advocacy and public policy for the U.S. Green Building Council. Hartke, who is familiar with the proposed guidelines, said he has never heard of a home builder group asking for mandatory standards. "It's extremely important that we begin to look to residential building as part of the solution to the climate issues that we face." Not to say it won't be a hard sell. Since green building became the darling of the environmental movement, builders everywhere have fought efforts to mandate these policies, saying they were too expensive and too difficult to incorporate. And not all builders are convinced that green sells homes. "Buyers in the community at large are very interested in green products and going green," said Chris Apostolopoulos, division president for KB Home, one of the region's biggest builders. "However, they're not willing to pay for it." Nevertheless, he's willing to support mandatory standards if only because it promises fewer headaches by offering consistency. San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed, who last year unveiled a sweeping "green vision" for the city, supports the idea. "For a prospective new home buyer, reducing energy cost is a very important thing with oil at - $100 a barrel." The proposal to go green was developed a few months ago, after the home builders association began working with Build It Green, a Berkeley non- profit organization founded in 2003 to promote green building practices. Build It Green offers a rating system that allows builders to choose green features that work best for their projects. Energy and water efficiencies can be achieved through improved insulation, orienting homes with respect to the sun, window glazing, energy-efficient lighting and appliances, drought-resistant landscaping, recycling construction debris and solar panels. A Build It Green inspector, paid for by the builder, judges whether the home earns its seal of approval or not. Although the program provides flexibility, Perkins said it is not easy to meet the requirements. The standards go beyond AB 32, the state's Global Warming Solutions Act passed in 2006, which requires a 25 percent reduction in global warming emissions in California by 2020. Plus, they require a 15 percent savings beyond the state's energy code, Title 24, already the strictest in the country. "That's not a little thing," said Brian Gitt, executive director for Build It Green. "A lot of cities have already jumped on board; the difference is, in the past, we have not had the buy-in and support of _ the Home Builders Association." Warmington's O'Connor, who also is the new chairwoman of the builders association, acknowledged that the timing of the proposal during a stagnant housing market is not the best. Building green adds as much as $2 a square foot, and sometimes more, to a home's price. In the Bay Area, where the median price of a home is $678,000 and the average size is 2,000 square feet, the added cost would be $4,000. But every dollar counts for the state's home- building industry, which generated $68 billion in 2005 and is projected to fall to $35 billion in 2008. And O'Connor knows it. "Adding one or two dollars per square foot is not a whole lot. But in a slow market where we've had to reduce prices and we're working with little or no profit margin, that's the hard part. The timing for us to embrace additional costs is difficult, but we all know it's inevitable." Contact Katherine Conrad at kconrad@mercurynews.com Qr (408) 920-5073. ~~a1r;' c) I( -/ '-I Gross Net Absorption Absorption Asking City/Region Inventory Overall Direct Sublease Overall Direct Sublease (SF) (SF) Rate* Campbell - 32 2,235,823 14.1 % 13.4% 0.7% 3 14,649 298,916 15,733 49,171 (53,111) $2.78 Cupertino - 33 3,856,555 5.3% 3.1% 2.2% 202,930 117,983 84,947 46,291 (71,840) $3.61 Los Gatos - 31 1,268,389 7.8% 7.1% 0.8% 99,420 89,828 9,592 16,836 (190) $3.29 Milpitas 1,162,304 8.4% 8.3% 0.2% 98,186 96,208 1,978 10,426 (39,747) $2.02 East 880 - 24A 1,001,015 5.4% 5.2% 0.2% 54,198 52,220 1,978 10,426 (98) $1.99 Oak Creek - 24B 161,289 27.3% 27.3% 0.0% 43,988 43,988 0 (39,649) $2.05 Mountain View 5,860,523 6.9% 6.5% 0.5% 407,306 378,359 28,947 101,256 (11,427) $3.5 I Downtown - 17 A 1,215,998 10.9% 9.2% 1.7% 132,744 111.994 20,750 NiA 26,430 $4.17 Central - 17B 418,471 7.1% 6.6% 0.5% 29,525 27,525 2,000 N/A 15,652 $2.30 Shoreline - 17C 2,369, I 08 1.5% 1.5% 0.0% 34,532 34,532 0 N/A (9,896) $3.03 Middlefjeld - 17D 875,238 13.5% 13.5% 0.0% 117,857 117,857 0 N/A (48,931 ) $3.02 EI Camino Corridor - 17E 981,708 9.4% 8.8% 0.6% 92,648 86,451 6,197 N/A 5,318 $3.78 San Jose 26,444,919 10.9% 10.1% 0.9% 2,889,922 2,663,808 226,114 326,407 (88,854) $2.49 North - 21A 6,159,000 8.0% 7.8% 0.2% 492,378 479,819 12,559 17,879 (3,016) $2.81 Trimble South - 21 B 1,874,740 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% I 86,776 186,776 0 73,885 (1,930) $2.60 IBP - 21C 616,995 41.9% 41.9% 0.0% 258,311 258,311 0 (9,305) $2.68 Downtown - 22A 9,390,725 13.0% 12.0% 1.0% 1,219,009 1,128,919 90,090 122,689 (24,964) $2.25 Airport - 22D 4,280,928 10.1% 7.8% 2.3% 433,678 335,091 98,587 66,096 (27,513) $2.84 South - 23A 481,009 20.0% 20.0% 0.0% 96,176 96,176 0 23,527 4,267 $1.86 West - 34 3,641,522 5.6% 4.9% 0.7% 203,594 178,716 24,878 22,331 (26,393) $2.42 Santa Clara 9,024,671 12.8% 7.7% 5.1% 1,155,733 691,857 463,876 176,015 (145,941) $2.68 Downtown - 20A 796,655 8.4% 6.8% 1.5% 66,756 54,500 12,256 7,224 6,880 $2.24 Central Expwy. N - 20B 691,709 18.5% 17.6% 0.9% 128,238 121,864 6,374 41,763 3,454 $2.90 Marriott Park - 20C 5,849,959 14.7% 7.1% 7.6% 860,847 415,601 445,246 65,383 ( 176,800) $2.76 101 North - 20D 608,295 11.8% 11.8% 0.0% 71,495 71,495 0 17,269 8,141 $1.97 101 South - 20E 677,542 1.3% 1.3% 0.0% 8,600 8,600 0 18,565 10,365 $1.90 Central Expwy. S - 20F 400,511 4.9% 4.9% 0.0% 19,797 19,797 0 25,811 2,019 $2.15 Saratoga - 30 3 13,097 13.1 % 6.5% 6.6% 40,883 20,319 20,564 2,899 (11,349) $2.89 Sunnyvale r 7,230,647 22.2% 20.9% 1.3% 1,605,937 1,512,054 93,883 169,921 (285,297) $3.65 Downtown - 19 A 1,214,854 14.4% 13.9% 0.6% 175,449 168,656 6,793 19,804 (45,575) $3.33 Peery Park - 19B 1,226,262 22.6% 22.6% 0.0% 276,935 276,935 0 72,250 3,305 $2.91 Moffett Park - 19C 3,973,748 28.6% 26.4% 2.2% 1,135,239 1,048,149 87,090 3,485 (3 16,684) $3.91 The Woods - 19D 90,825 13.8% 13.8% 0.0% 12,542 12,542 0 725 $1.79 Oakmead - 19E 566,379 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 5,772 5,772 0 73,657 73,657 $2.57 South Central - 19F 158,579 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0 $0.00 *Rental rates reflect FS/SF/Month **Please note, our expense adjustment from NNN to FS for Mountain View was changed from $0.75 co $0.90 in Q2'06 2 Dr2"/5 The list. 30 THE BUSINESS JOURNAL sanjose.bizjournaJs.com JANUARY 4, 2008 ~l"closer look', :J Jobless rates rise again ~ 2007, neared a close, jobless r.ams were up compared to the same period a year ago in all 'six counties. Gornparison of county unarnplovrnant rates 1.0 ~ 4.0 r0- D /lev 2lloa .1 o IIDv 21107 -- - C:I en Ld Ld .... ~ r- - ~ --~~; - ( ~ , ~ ..... ~ ~ ~ r: i~ r; = -: T"' . ~ ~ ~ ~C'O:I I -- 1 / ~ 'j ~ ~~ t ~~ I ~~ , ._ ~; f / ~ " ~ ,I.. .. f-: ':~ l~ i: t;... r ~ t~ . '.!~ , I 6.5 6.0 ~ 5.5 ffi ~ c:: ~ 5.0 4.5 3.5 3'.0 Santa San Alameda Santa San Monmrey Clara Mamn Cruz 8arnadlnn Mixed performance lreliminary 2007 figures through November showed some lrowth in the labor force in allloc:!1 counties except u1onterey, which remained flat ~ornparisnn of county labor forces moo' #~ ~-$:' ~# ~~- o /lav 2lloa m /lev 21107 BOO ~600 z ....: en ::::l Cl ' ~ 400 ~ ~-~ "'oJ ~. 200 ~~ f:"J- ~' ~~ o Santa San Alameda ,Clara Mamn SOURCE: CALIFORNIA STATE EMPLOYMENT OEVELOPIAEIIT OEPARTME1IT ~."."~.....'..' ,-_.,:,~j.~~>.'%.~.'ll."~.'~~'~~ " -l~; '.. ,~t-'J'.j:...~l',iIi..~'i~.,i1'" bree notable companies - Apple Inc., Hoogle Inc. and Kaiser lermanente - declined to provide local infonnation., Silicon Valley* Employers 'Ranked b" numbe~ of fulB-time equivalent emplovees in Silicon Vallev* Employer Address' Ranlc Phonl!l, Web addre= 1 ~~P~.s.g~~~~ I~~~u. Siln Jnsu 95134 408-526-4000, www.cl:sco.com FTiE amplovees in Silicon Valle'!"/ 'companywlde Nature of operations 17.100 CompU!or notworl( olluipml!nt 61,535 manutacruror 3 ~;~~ ~~~r~'~oo;~:san JOllO 95110 -IOB-299-5151, www.:sccaov.ora 2 Stanford Univer:slty, Ho:spital & Clinics, Unear Accelerator 655 Serra St.. Stanford 94305 650-723-188a, www.stanford.edu 4, ~~~~~~~h~::~;~~c~=~eU~~~':;le 94069 , 408-742-1.780. www.lockheedmartin.com 5~~~~as~;~.D~~o':~~uiJdJno, SullO 400, Sacrll~onto 95814 916-324-0455, www.dpu.cl1.Qov t \ '6 '~O~~I~~:~~~~~~ ~:io Alto 9430~ 650-857-,1501, lMMN.hp.com 'J .::; {~~~,e;;i::;lJn;CDIIQOIol Blvd,. Santn CTllra 9S1:!B 40lJ-765-8080, www.intul.com 8 ~~~H~~ Road, San Jose 95120 408-921-1100"www.ibm_com 9 ~~~~a~~rpParkWIIY, Rodwood CIty 94065 650-506-7000, www.ornclu.com 1 0 ~;~~~~~~~~~ :;:~IO Park 94025 650-786-7015', www.sun.com 11 City 'of. S~n' jo~'a 200E. Suot:! Clam St., Son JOllU 95113 408-535-3500. www.:sanlo:lQco.gov 12 ~~aJs~~~g~~~~~~~~:~;~ .)ose 95192 408-924-1000, www.sjsu.edu- 13 ~5~~Ou~~~~~~~tl~~I~;r~~~~;~~gd~c. 510-498-5500, www.nummLcom 14 ~;lf:~~Yn~nr~dge Mall Road, Plea:mrton 94588 925-457-3000. www.safeway.com 1'5 ~;~~~ ~~u"r:~~~~~,~s~d~~~~~a9~~;0 406-805-5000. www.:scvOlod.orl] 16 :ri~li:~~~~~v~~ ~a~a Clara 9505~, 408-721-5555. www.appliedmaterials.com 17 ;~4~Y ~~~i1ton Ave., Siln Jo::o 95125 408-376-7458. lMMN.oboy.com 18 ~~~~~~~ SO~, ~~~~~~ir~zs9~r;;:4 Cruz 831-459-0111, www.ucsc.edu 1 9, ~~~;c~~~~~r~:~;t~~ad, San Josa951J5 408~717-5000, www;hit13chi.uslrd ' 20 Son Jose Unified School District 855 Le,!z'=l},AYe.., San J~ 9~125 __..... 40B~535-6000, www.sjusd.kl2.:ca.lr.i . - 21 ;J~~n~~a~~~;Craek Blvd., Cupertino 95014 0108-517-8000, www.:symllntBc.com ~~~:~miijQ.JlS1!;tn f1!'1lTlnf'!~! 800-310-2355, WWW.an.com , 23 Xlllnx Inn. " . , 2100 Logic Orlve,'San Jose 95124 408-55S-n76. www.xllinx.com 24 County of Santa Cruz ' 701 Ocean St., Room 310. Santa Cruz 95050 831-454-2500, www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us 25 '~7~f,;~~a-i~as Expressway, ~a~ta Clara 95050 408-486-2000, www.nvldla.com .SlIIcon Valley Indudes: Santa Clara County; Fremont. Newark and Union City in Alameda County; Atherton, Belmonr. East Palo Alto, Foster City. Menlo Park. Portola Valley, Redwood City, San Carlos. San MlItI!o and Woodside In San Mateo COtlnty; San Benita, Santa Cruz lInd Monrerey ccuntles. Although every attempt Is made to ensure the aCaJracy and thoroughness at BU5ln~ JoumalllstS. omissions sometimes ocaJr. 6.650 355,786 5,000 201,000 2,488 303,570 , i,:lOO" 4,083 16,600 16,600 Academic research, hospital, medical research, electron 'accelerators, related facilities . County aovernmant 15.000 15.000 8,000 14,600 Aerospace systems 7,7011 206,783 StatD govurnment 1,000 156.000 Technology soludons provider 6.120 88,100 MlcroprocuslIur manl,foctlJrOr 6,5J:! 77,6S2 Creates, develops and manufactures information techl1ologies Software devaloptJr 0.456 37,000 Network computing servers, storage, sa'ftware and services 6,187 8.190 Lacsll]overnment" 5,727 5,727 Higher education 5,500 5,500 AUtoiriotive manufadruring Food and drug retailer 4,063 4.063 , Hospil:!1 4.000 14,000 Nanomanufacturing technology , solutions 3.(]10 lJ.100 Online alobal trod-inc platform 2,B79 2,819 Higher education 2,800' :;: Supplhls North America with 0 broild'ranCl! of hiC'h-tflch products Public education 2.570 2~570 Sample of starting benefit:s Mudlcal, donml. vision, lite insur:!ncu. disability. ronrllnlBnt/IlO1I(. on-sita child cure Medical, dental, vision, life insurance, disability, retirement Msdicat dancol;ovision, IIfo lnllur:!nca, disability. rorlramunr, ADO, f1axlblD :Ipunulng account:! Medical. dental. vision. life insurance, disability, retirement;A01 k, matching savings plan, fitness/recreaticin cerner Tap local Bxecutive(:;) Ji:ihn;ChamberS John Hennessy Martha Marsh Jonathan Dortan PeterKutras Jr., Joanne Maguire, MUdlca', dum:!I, lito In:Iuranco; flexlbla . Arnold.'.. bonutlr proorams, rotfromllnt ',:~~h~!Ir:!~n,e'~g~r" .:f.~..<..:-:. .~~ Medical, dental, vision, life insuranca. Marlc Hurd disability. retirement Medical, dentBl. vision. life insurance, dls,abi,lity, retirement ~:~J~~~,~:~I:~V~~i~n; "ilf~i;:;iiurance;' ,:;:.: ::peui'DrelJi~~':;7 Marlc Dean Madical, dumal, vlllJon, IItll Insur:!nclI, ",', -, .iarryEllison' '.: , AD&O, long-turm'dhrabillr'l, omployaa all:JlllOtDnCU proor:!", Medical. dental, vision, lite insurance, Jonathan Schwam disability, ratirement, open work (work anywhera, anytime using any device) r.1I1dic:JI,. domal, vlsion;'lIta lnsu'rani:ii: ' ." -': :,,' ,~.e",b, ra;,Ftrio.ne disability, rOrirDmant Medical, dental. vision, lite insurance. dIsability, retirement Madlcnl,danral; vision, life InauranclI. ' disabilitY; rlJtlrunlunT/401 k. vahiclu dlllcolJnts. tuitIon :/1I:ri:mlOce Don I<assing ,,'V~kio.Azuma Karl Schroeder :t:, , ' , ',;-' ,: - 'Michae"Skehan Mike Spllntar Medical. dental, vision, life insuranca, disability. retirement. flex work location. community volunteer/giving opportUnities MedIcal, demal, vision, lite Insurance, disability, retiremem Medical, dental, vision, Ilre inSUr11nCe, retiremem 1,5ol:! 17,tOO ,Security and,avaiiabillty software Medical, dennil.vislon'; lite insurance, provider disability, rotfrem'Eirir; emploY!!!1 stac/< purchase.plon'o " Communications holding company 2.440 3,353 'Su'p'pllesfteld-programmable gate + arrays-and complex programmable logic devices 2,335 2,335 County government' Gra'phics arid digital madla processors NOTES: :; . Old not disclose. NA , Nor rnnk!ld. ADO - Accldentlll death and dismembannent. Information wes obtained from employer representatives. amployer Web sites, municipality representative. municipal Web situ, Business Journallisrs and SEe filings. , In case at ties, employers are listed alphabetically. 'Ml!Ig Whit'ma'n, George Blumenthal Mesahtqe-Tariigalci Don Iglesias John_7hompson Tim Harden ,Wlllem Roelandts Medical, dental. vision. life insurance, Susan Mauriello disability, redrem'em M-.!dicali'cietrtal.-,~ision;lite insurance,. - ,Ja~-:Hsun Huang disa hiJity , It your company would like to be considered for naxtyaar's IIsr.. or Ittl1era ere any carractlons or addftlons, write to: Rasaerch, Business Joumal, 96 N. Third St., Suita lOn, San Joss, CA 95112; rax 40B-295-5028; or a-mail:lhayden@bizjoumsl:l.com. Research bV Sara:R. Havden , and Lisa D. Bell p{2-li,