The URL can be used to link to this page

Desk Items es ems _ _ . annin . . om m � ssion . mee in ,��.� 3 Colin Jun l I l�� '� From: Beth Ebben on behalf of City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 5:26 PM To: Planning Dept.; Colin Jung Subject: FW: Comments/concerns regarding Daryl Harris (Yao/Li residence) on Rainbow Drive Fram the Planning Department's general mailbox: From: May Koski [mailto:maXkoskiSC�gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 12:10 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: Comments/ concerns regarding Daryl Harris (Yao/ Li residence) on Rainbow Drive To the Planning Commission, My comments are in regard to the application EXC-2014-09, TR-2014-42 (EA-2014-07)hillside exception application. Applicant is: Daryl Harris (Yao/Li residence) at location: 21730 Rainbow Drive. I am NOT in favor of allowing any part of this hillside exception. I am COMPLETELY opposed to the removal of three specimen size Coat Live Oaks. What are vou thinkin�? It is ridiculous to remove these specimen-sized trees, especially in a drought when they are among the few trees which might actually survive. I do not think you should ever allow the removal of these trees,just because the owners want to build a house where they stand. I am also opposed to the hillside exception to build a 5,000+ square foot residence with basement on a slope greater than 30%. The rules are made for a good reason, and should be followed. This is an exceptionally large house, and is not appropriate to build on such a steep slope. I am confident that the property owners can come up with a smaller sized house that can be built while com pl yin g with Cupertino's hillside development rules, and without requiring exceptions. If this is not possible, they may want to look at selling the property and purchasing a property where the house they desire to build can be built without having to bend the rules. Sincerely, May Koski 22030 Regnart Road Cupertino, CA 95014 i .��. 3 Colin Jun l��' �C �'t'�� 9 From: Arun Garg [arun_garg_home@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 6:56 PM To: Colin Jung; City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Cc: Munir Vora Subject: Need Trail Access Maintained for Rainbow Drive Attachments: photo 1.JPG; ATT00001.txt; photo 2.JPG; ATT00002.txt To Cupertino Planning Commission, Please maintain Trail Access from Rainbow Drive so that that there is an easement from the gate to the trail for the proposed development on 21730 Rainbow Drive. I am a resident of Cupertino, staying at Seven Springs and hike on this trail. Thanks Arun Garg arun �arg home@hotmail.com Resident of Seven Springs, Cupertino, CA i ,c��c 3 Beth Ebben 1/��✓ �� From: piyush gupta [piyushgupta1157@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 5:54 PM To: Colin Jung; Gary Chao Cc: City Council; City of Cupertino Planning Dept.; Savita Vaidhyanathan Subject: Proposed closure of trail to access Open Space from the end of Rainbow Drive Folks, I do hope you can find a way to keep this open space access open! Many of us have been using this access to hike the lovely trails up in the Preserve for 10 years now. We have been doing so with the knowledge and consent of the existing home owners there. Closing it would cause us to drive or to walk around via Regnart Road. Neither is a good option. The former unnecessary increases pollution. And, the latter increases the chances of pedestrian-vehicular accidents on the windy Regnart Road. Thank you. Piyush Gupta 1 ,,�.��2 3 Beth Ebben il/�� C� y�l�.�� From: Doc Vaidhyanathan [docvaidya@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 10:11 PM To: Colin Jung; Gary Chao; Ciry of Cupertino Planning Dept.; City Council Subject: Development on 21730 Rainbow Drive Reference the development proposal @ 21730 Rainbow Dr(APN 366-03-064), this is a development neaz a existing trail leading to the Fremont Older Preserve. The trail head is at the end of Rainbow Dr and part of the access in on a private road - the current owners all grant access to hikers to use the private road and reach the trail. We would urge you to ensure that the proposed construction does not adversely impact the trail or the private road access to hikers. This access is very convenient to several of us who use this access from Rainbow and therefore avoid driving up on Regnart Road or on Prospect. The Regnart Dr trail head has no real parking space and only a limited number of cars can park on the side of the road there. The Prospect Road trail head is a good drive away and will create traffic and crowding on Prospect. The development should continue to allow access to hikers on the trail and on the private road. Thank you.. Regards R'Doc' Vaidhyanathan On behalf of the Fremont Older Hiking Group - fohg�a,�oogle�roups.com 1 ��'"`�� t � Beth Ebben 'll�� C �2eG� From: Seetha Lakshmi [seetha lakshmi@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2014 11:34 AM To: Colin Jung; Gary Chao; City Council; City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Cc: City Council; City of Cupertino Planning Dept.; Savita Vaidhyanathan; fohg@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Proposed closure of trail to access Open Space from the end of Rainbow Drive Hi, I request you all to please do what it takes to keep this open space access really OPEN! Many of us have been using this access to hike the lovely trails up in the Preserve for overl7 years.We have been doing so with the knowledge and consent of the existing home owners there.Closing it would cause us to drive or to walk around via Regnart Road. We find walking on the winding regnart road very scary when we can't see the cars approaching. If we choose to drive to the trail hear on regnart road,there are not enough parking spots. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android From."piyusl� gupta" <piyushqupta1157 �gmail.com> Date:Sat„ Nav 22, 2C114 at 5:53 PM S�bject:[fohg] Propased closure of trai( to access C.�pen Space from the end of Rainbow Drive Folks, I do hope you can find a way to keep this open space access open! Many of us have been using this access to hike the lovely trails up in the Preserve for 10 years now. We have been doing so with the knowledge and consent of the existing home owners there. Closing it would cause us to drive or to walk around via Regnart Road. Neither is a good option. The former unnecessary increases pollution. And,the latter increases the chances of pedestrian-vehicular accidents on the windy Regnart Road. Thank you. Piyush Gupta You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Fremont Older Hike Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fohg+unsubscribe(a�goo�le r�oups.com. To post to this group, send email to foh�(a�goo l�e�roups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.goo�le.com/�roup/foh�. For more options, visit https://�roups.�oogle.com/d/optout. 1 /�� Beth Ebben �� d2� �(�i " � u� From: Rajiv Puranik[pururaj@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 9:41 PM To: fohg@googlegroups.com Cc: Colin Jung; Gary Chao; City Council; City of Cupertino Planning Dept.; Savita Vaidhyanathan Subject: Re: [fohg] Proposed closure of trail to access Open Space from the end of Rainbow Drive Cupertino City Council and Planning commission members, I urge you to find a way to save the access. One of the charms of living in Cupertino is being so close to the open space that many of us exercise regularly. Cutting the access off will force traffic on winding roads, parking problems, and risk of accidents on Regnart Rd. Besides it is totally unnecessary. The needs of the new homeowners can easily be accommodated without shutting off a convenient access for so many nature loving residents. Thanks, Raj iv Puranik Cupertino, CA On Nov 22, 2014, at 5:53 PM, piyush gupta<pivush�uptal 157(a��mail.com>wrote: Folks, I do hope you can find a way to keep this open space access open! Many of us have been using this access to hike the lovely trails up in the Preserve for 10 years now. We have been doing so with the knowledge and consent of the existing home owners there. Closing it would cause us to drive or to walk around via Regnart Road. Neither is a good option. The former unnecessary increases pollution. And, the latter increases the chances of pedestrian-vehicular accidents on the windy Regnart Road. Thank you. Piyush Gupta You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Fremont Older Hike Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fohg+unsubscribe(a� o�o�legroups.com. To post to this group, send email to fohg,(a��oo��roups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foh�. For more options, visit https://�roups.goo�le.com/d/optout. 1 ,�ti� � Colin Jun !1/�� From: Munir Vora [munir vora@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2014 12:59 PM To: fohg@googlegroups.com; Colin Jung; Gary Chao; City Council; City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Cc: Savita Vaidhyanathan Subject: Re: [fohg] Re: Proposed closure of trail to access Open Space from the end of Rainbow Drive Dear Collin, Planning dept, and city council members, I'm sure planning the city is a daunting task and memory is not yet erased from McLellan accident that lead to a young kid's death due to poor city planning. I'm sure you are aware of the facts that daily 100s of cupertino residents are SAFELY accessing preserve access via @ 21730 Rainbow Dr (APN 366-03-064) for many years without any parking or traffic issues. I'm confident that both planning dept. and council members voting at the end of final meeting on Nov 25th for future of this access will act responsibly. will not close the access. and will 100%avoid creating a future possible incident like McCleallan on Regnart road. At the end of the day City and voting council members decisions are responsible for safety of cupertino's residents. I'd request following i) Outgoing council members shouldn't rush into taking any decisions for such critical concerns of 100s of cupertino residents, specifically during their final week in their position for this term. A perceived rush decision during final hours is not a good precedence and could possibly give a feeling of a foul play. ii)We are not against building a house on the lot with APN 366-03-064. That can still happen without disturbing/touching the current preserve access. Just the preserve access that falls right below PGNE high tension (15MW)wires should be marked as easement for city and preserve access without affecting any building permit. Same is the case for road access to 4 of the neighboring parcels leading to current preserve access. iv) If the proposed preserve access is closed, all preserve access traffic will shift to Regnart road creating traffic hazards. Regnart road preserve access has parking issues, road doesn't have sidewalks, cunry road doesn't have bumps at every curve to cut the speed for the ongoing vehicles, and practically no traffic safety for pedestrians. iii) Each voting council members before voting should visit the preserve access @ 21730 Rainbow Dr (APN 366-03- 064) and possible proposed alternative solutions for preserve access designed by planning department. In my mind till city solves these concerns positively, no decision to close the said preserve access should be taken. I don't think so residents of cupertino has any more nerve to take on one more traffic tragedy due to poor planning of the city. Finally, the state of preserve access and the entry gate to preserver at the end of @ 21730 Rainbow Dr (APN 366-03-064) will provide you proof of thousands of hikers have access this route in last 15+ years. I can provide a video and pictures if council members can;t visit the site. From, Responsible Resident of Cupertino. On Sunday, November 23, 2014 11:34 AM, 'Seetha Lakshmi'via Fremont Older Hike Group <fohg@googlegroups.com> wrote: � 1 Hi, I request you all to please do what it takes to keep this open space access really OPEN! Many of us have been using this access to hike the lovely trails up in the Preserve for overl7 years.We have been doing so with the knowledge and consent of the existing home owners there.Closing it would cause us to drive or to walk around via Regnart Road.We find walking on the winding regnart road very scary when we can't see the cars approaching. If we choose to drive to the trail hear on regnart road,there are not enough parking spots. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android From:"piyush gupta" �piyushgupta1157@gmail.com> Date:Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 5:53 PM Subject:[fohg] Proposed closure of trail to access Open Space from the end of Rainbow Drive Folks, I do hope you can find a way to keep this open space access open! Many of us have been using this access to hike the lovely trails up in the Preserve for 10 years now. We have been doing so with the knowledge and consent of the existing home owners there. Closing it would cause us to drive or to walk around via Regnart Road.Neither is a good option. The former unnecessary increases pollution. And, the latter increases the chances of pedestrian-vehicular accidents on the windy Regnart Road. Thank you. Piyush Gupta You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Fremont Older Hike Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foh�+unsubscribe(a�google�roups.com. To post to this group, send email to fohg�a�google r�oups.com. Visit this group at http://�ps.��le.com/�roup/fohg. For more options, visit https://groups.google.comld/optout. You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Fremont Older Hike Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fohg+unsubscribe aC�.qooyleqroups.com. To post to this group, send email to fohg(�qooqleqroups.com. Visit this group at http:// r�ps.qoo,qle.com/qroup/fohq. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. z EXC-2014-09 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 DRAFT RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A HILLSIDE EXCEPTION TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTTON OF A NEW 5,213 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH A 1,412 SQUARE FOOT BASEMENT ON SLOPES GREATER THAN 30%AT 21730 RAINBOW DRIVE SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: EXC-2014-09 (EA-2014-07) Applicant: Daryl Harris Location: 21730 Rainbow Drive, APN# 366-37-007 SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR EXCEPTTON WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Hillside Exception, as described on Section II of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more Public Hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support this application, and has satisfied the following requirements: 1. The proposed development will not be injurious to property or improvements in the area nor be detrimental to the public health and safety. The development will comply with planning, building, public works and fire department regulations to protect public health and safety. 2. The proposed development will not create a hazardous condition for pedestrian or vehicular traffic. The development is setback from the common driveway and does not create a hazardous condition for pedestrian or vehicles. 3. 'I'he proposed development has legal access to public streets and public services are available to serve the development. The residence will have access to Rainbow Drive and all utilities are located in the abutting driveway. 4. T'he proposed development requires an exception, which involves the least modification of, or deviation from, the development regulations prescribed in this chapter necessary to accomplish a reasonable use of the parcel. The exception for development on slopes greater than 30% is the only exception required. The development otherwise meets all other RHS development standards. 5. All alternative locations for development on the parcel have been considered and have been found to create greater environmental impacts than the location of the proposed development which is located in the middle of the lot that avoids encroaching on a prominent ridgeline and Draft Resolution EXC-2014-09 November 25,2014 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- minimizes the number of oaks that must be removed. Other driveway alignments will cause more grading and need retaining walls. 6. The proposed development does not consist of structures on or near known geological or environmental hazards that have been determined by expert testimony to be unsafe or hazardous to structures or persons residing therein. Geologic studies demonstrate the lack of unmitigable geologic hazards. 7. The proposed development includes grading and drainage plans that will ensure that erosion and scarring of the hillsides caused by necessary construction of the housing site and improvements will be minimized. Proposed grading will minimize visible retaining walls and drainage plans will minimize the introduction of storm flows into steep,hillside soils. 8. The proposed development consists of structures incorporating designs, colors, materials, and outdoor lighting which blend with the natural hillside environment and which are designed in such a manner as to reduce the effective visible mass, including building height, as much as possible without creating other negative environmental impacts. Grading design will minimize visible retaining walls. Building materials and colors will meet RHS design standards. 9. The proposed development is located on the parcel as far as possible from public open space preserves or parks (if visible therefrom), riparian corridors, and wildlife habitats unless such location will create other, more negative environmental impacts. The proposed residence will not be visible from the nearby public open space preserve. 10. The proposed development is otherwise consistent with the City's General Plan and with the purposes of this chapter as described in Section 19.40.010. The development is consistent with the RHS zoning ordinance which implements the General Plan's hillside protection policies. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of the initial study, Environmental Review Committee recommendation, maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the Commission finds that the project with mitigations incorporated will not have a significant environmental impact and adopts a mitigated negative declaration with a mitigation monitoring report (file no. EA-2014-07) and application no. EXC-2014-09 is hereby approved; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application EXC-2014-09, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of November 25, 2014 and are incorporated by reference herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Approval is based on the plan set titled: "A PROPOSED RESIDENCE FOR:/ JONATHAN YAO & CATHY LI/21730 RAINBOW DRIVE CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA" dated July 2014, and consisting of 16 sheets labeled A1 through A9, C.0 and C-1 through C-6 except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. Draft Resolution EXC-2014-09 November 25,2014 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS/TREATMENTS, LANDSCAPING Final building exterior treatment plan(including but not limited to details on exterior color, material, architectural treatments and/or embellishments, lighting, retaining walls and landscaping) shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits for compliance to RHS zoning and other relevant regulations. Any exterior changes determined to be substantial by the Director of Community Development shall require a modification approval with neighborhood input. 3. NOTICE OF FEES,DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. 4. GENERAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION The applicant's project is granted a General Plan Development Allocation of one dwelling unit from the Other Residential Neighborhoods allocation pool. 5. LANDSCAPE PROTECT SUBMITTAL Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall determine in consultation with staff whether a full landscape project submittal per section 14.15.040 of the Landscaping Ordinance is warranted. The Water-Efficient Design Checklist (Appendix A of Chapter 14.15), Landscape and Irrigation Design Plans, and Water Budget Calculations shall be reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. 6. LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION REPORT In conjunction with any required landscape project submittal, a landscape installation audit shall be conducted by a certified landscape professional after the landscaping and irrigation system have been installed. The findings of the assessment shall be consolidated into a landscape installation report. The landscape installation report shall include, but is not limited to: inspection to confirm that the landscaping and irrigation system are installed as specified in the landscape and irrigation design plan, system tune-up, system test with distribution uniformity, reporting overspray or run-off that causes overland flow, and preparation of an irrigation schedule. The landscape installation report shall include the following statement: "The landscape and irrigation system have been installed as specified in the landscape and irrigation design plan and complies with the criteria of the ordinance and the permit." 7. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE In conjunction with any required landscape project submittal, a maintenance schedule shall be established and submitted to the Director of Community Development or his/her designee, either Draft Resolution EXC-2014-09 November 25,2014 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- with the landscape application package, with the landscape installation report, or any time before the landscape installation report is submitted. a) Schedules should take into account water requirements for the plant establishment period and water requirements for established landscapes. b) Maintenance shall include, but not be limited to the following: routine inspection; pressure testing, adjustment and repair of the irrigation system; aerating and de-thatching turf areas; replenishing mulch; fertilizing; pruning; replanting of failed plants; weeding; pest control; and removing obstructions to emission devices. c) Failed plants shall be replaced with the same or functionally equivalent plants that may be size- adjusted as appropriate for the stage of growth of the overall installation. Failing plants shall either be replaced or be revived through appropriate adjustments in water, nutrients, pest control or other factors as recommended by a landscaping professional. 8. PERMIT EXPIRATION The subject hillside exception approval shall expire two (2) years from the date of approval if not used. 9. ACCURACY OF PROTECT PLANS The applicant/property owner is responsible to verify all pertinent property data including but not limited to property boundary locations, building setbacks, property size, building square footage, any relevant easements and/or construction records. Any misrepresentation of any property data may invalidate this approval and may require additional review. 10. PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN Prior to commencement of construction activities, the applicant shall arrange for a pre-construction meeting with the pertinent departments (Building, Planning, and Public Works) to review the prepared construction management plan, to ensure that construction complies with the conditions of approval, staging of construction equipment is appropriate, tree protection measures are in place, public access routes are defined, and noise and dust control measures are established. 11. BUILDING PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENT Applicant shall submit an annotated response to all of these conditions of approval with his building permit submittal. 12. GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW Prior to building permit approval, the applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Cotton Shires & Associates, Inc. Geologic and Geotechnical Peer Review Letter dated August 8, 2014 and pertaining to the proposed development. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 13. GRADING PLAN Conceptual Grading and Drainage plans will need to be modified at the Building Permit stage to satisfy Public Works' preliminary comments regarding proposed storm drain systems. Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required. Please contact Draft Resolution EXC-2014-09 November 25,2014 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Army Corp of Engineers and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. 14. DRAINAGE T'he proposed infiltration system shown on sheet C-3 is not recommended for hillside projects unless the project geotechnical engineer provides a stamped and signed report with recommendations for installation, and the City's geotechnical engineer reviews and approves the recommendations. The report must include an evaluation of the existing soils and the proposed device with recommendations, and letter stating that the Civil Plans have been reviewed and are consistent with their recommendations. Consider an alternative retention system with facilities that meter storm runoff to a level consistent with the pre-project condition. Storm draina�e lines and other constructed draina�e features shall be sited to avoid crossin�the cano��dri�lines of the protected oak trees. Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Hydrology and pre- and post- development hydraulic calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be constructed or renovated. 15. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BNII's), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading and street improvement plans. 16. EROSION CONTROL PLAN Developer shall provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. 17. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES Developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. Developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer. 18. ABOVE GROUND EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURES Electrical transformers, telephone cabinets and similar equipment shall be placed in underground vaults. The developer must receive written approval from both the Public Works Departxnent and the Community Development Department prior to installation of any above ground equipment. Should above ground equipment be permitted by the City, equipment and enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas, as determined by the Community Development Department. Transformers shall not be located in the front or side building setback area. 19. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park Draft Resolution EXC-2014-09 November 25,2014 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- dedication fees and fees for under grounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits Fees: a. Checking&Inspection Fees: $Per current fee schedule($2,788.00 or 6%) b. Grading Permit: $Per current fee schedule($2,618.00 or 6%) c. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 1,000.00 d. Storm Drainage Fee: $TBD e. Power Cost: *�' f. Park Fees: $Per current fee schedule($28,875) ** Based on the latest effective PG&E rate schedule approved by the PUC Bonds: Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements Labor& Material Bond: 100%of Off-site and On-site Improvement On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. -The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. 20. WORK SCHEDULE Every 6 months, the developer shall submit a work schedule to the City to show the timetable for all grading/erosion control work in conjunction with this project. 21. OPERATTONS&MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Developer shall enter into an Operations&Maintenance Agreement with the City prior to final occupancy. The Agreement shall include the operation and maintenance for any non-standard appurtenances in the public right-of-way that may include,but is not limited to, sidewalk, pavers, and street lights. 22. REFUSE TRUCK ACCESS Developer must obtain clearance from the Environmental Programs Manager in regards to refuse truck access for the proposed development. 23. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new building construction to the approval of the City. 24. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. Clearance should include written approval of the location of any proposed Water Backflow Preventers, Fire Department Connections and Fire Hydrants (typically Backflow Preventers should be located on private property adjacent to the public right of way, and fire department connections must be located within 100' of a Fire Hydrant). 25. FIRE HYDRANT Draft Resolution EXC-201409 November 25,2014 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. 26. SAN TOSE WATER COMPANY CLEARANCE Provide San Jose Water Service Company approval for water connection, service capability and location and layout of water lines and backflow preventers before issuance of a building permit approval. 27. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES Developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water Services Company for water service to the subject development. 28. DEDICATION OF UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS Developer shall "quit claim" to the City all rights to pump, take or otherwise extract water from the underground basin or any underground strata in the Santa Clara Valley. 29. SANITARY DISTRICT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Cupertino Sanitary District prior to issuance of building permits. 30. UTILITY EASEMENTS Clearance approvals from the agencies with easements on the property(including PG&E,AT&T, and California Water Company, and/or equivalent agencies) will be required prior to issuance of building permits. 31. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT When and where it is required by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the developer must obtain a Notice of Intent(NOI) from the SWRCB, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP),use of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control storm water runoff quality, and BMP inspection and maintenance. 32. C.3 REQUIREMENTS Complete a Project Impervious Surface Data and LID Feasibility Form. C.3 regulated improvements are required for all projects creating and/or replacing 10,000 S.F. or more of impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site). The developer shall reserve a minimum of 4% of developable surface area for the placement of low impact development measures, for storm water treatment, on the tentative map,unless an alternative storm water treatment plan, that satisfies C.3 requirements,is approved by the City Engineer. The developer must include the use and maintenance of site design, source control and storm water treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs), which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. A Storm Water Management Plan, Storm Water Facilities Easement Agreement, Storm Water Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement, and certification of ongoing operation and maintenance of treatment BMPs are each required. All storm water management plans are required to obtain certification from a City approved third party reviewer. 33. WATER BACKFLOW PREVENTERS Draft Resolution EXC-2014-09 November 25,2014 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Domestic and Fire Water Backflow preventers and similar above ground equipment shall be placed away from the public right of way and site driveways to a location approved by the Cupertino Planning Department, Santa Clara County Fire Department and the water company. 34. EXCHANGE OF PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT AREAS Prior to building permit approval, the applicant shall apply to the City for a summary vacation of the 20-foot wide Pedestrian and Equestrian Easement("P.E.E".) along the front of the property. In exchange for this summary vacation of easement, the property owner has agreed to and shall simultaneously dedicate a new 20-foot wide pedestrian easement near the rear and side property lines and extend a connecting pedestrian easement along the private street with the objective of facilitating pedestrian access to the lands of the Fremont Older Preserve currently owned by Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. The pedestrian easement shall be approved as to form by the City Attorney and shall be granted prior to the issuance of building permits for this project. The Summary Vacation of the existing P.E.E.,by the City Council shall occur prior to building permit issuance for this project. The applicant shall be responsible for the engineering drawings, plat and legal descriptions necessary for the realignment of the trail including that portion of the trail which will continue across the two adjacent properties prior to accessing the Fremont Older Preserve. The trail is relocated on the applicant's property in order to avoid the new driveway requested by applicant. The applicant shall also cooperate with adjacent neighbor(s) to help facilitate the pedestrian access through the lower gate located at the terminus of the Rainbow Drive. 35. MAINTAINING OF PEDESTRIAN ACCESS The property owner shall maintain pedestrian access through the property to facilitate access to the lands of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District for the life of this Hillside Exception Approval. Access can be provided either through maintaining the existing infarmal trail on the property or developing a new trail alignment on the property, subject to prior approval by the City, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of November 2014, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Gary Chao, Assistant Director Paul Brophy, Chair Community Development Department Planning Commission G:PlanninglPDREPORTIRESl2014/EXC-2014-09 res