Reso 6754 EXC-2014-07
��1 CITY OF CUPERTINO'
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, Califorriia 95014 `
RESOLUTION N0. 6754
OF'THE PLANNING COMIVIISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO'RECOlVIMENDING
APPROVAL OF A PARKING EXCEPTION TO ALLOW TANDEM PARKING AND 156
STALLS WHEN 184 STALLS ARE REQUIRED,LOCATED AT 10380 PERIMETER ROAD
SECTION L• PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:; EXC-2014-07
Applicant: ' Edward Chan
Property_Qwner: Cupertino Proper.ty Development II;LLC;
Location: 10380 Perimeter Road(APN 316-20-092)
SECTION:II: FINDINGS FOR A PARKING EXCEPTION:
WHEREAS, the P1anr,ir,g Coiivnission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Parking
Exception as described in Section I. of this Resolution; and �
� WHEREAS, flie Environmental Review Coininittee has recommended ado tion of a Miti ated Ne�ative
.- ; �, � . . _ ,-, ; ., . p : g ; b
Declaration• and : . _
YVHEREAS,�the necessary public notices have been given as required by the Proeedural Ordiizance of
the City°of'Cupertino; and the Pla,ini„g Coil�u.ilission has::held at least one public hearing in regard to
fl1e:ap.plication; and
WHEREAS,the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said applicafion; and
WHEREAS,the Plannuzg Coininission finds as follows with regard to this application:
_
a) The literal enforcement of this chapter will result in restrictio'ns inconsistent wit11 the spirit and
intent of fhis chapter;
The.pYoject proposes 156 parTcing stalls, or 1.05 stalls per aroorrt.:Table 19.124.040 (A) of the City's Parking
Oa•dinance requires the project to provide a total of 184 parlcing spaces (assuming separate ratios for the
hote�, restaurant/bar, and conference a•oom space) at a Yate of 1.24 spaces per Yoom—resulting in a deficit of
28 stalls in the proposed parking supply. However, Section 19.24.040 (H) of the ordinance:p�^ovides for
alternative parking consideYations through a parlcing study prepared by transpoYtation professionals.
Parlcing studies are especially useful for hotels since there are overlapping uses and aetivities that may not be
addressed by tlze o��dinance ratios in Table 19.124.040 (A). The parlcing study found that the proposed
. ; ,
supply`is adequate to meet the needs of the hotel and otlzer aneillary uses. Applying Table 19.124.040 (A)
ivould Yesult in a large nu�nber of excess s"talls ai�d would'be inconsistent with other hotel parlcing�°atios in
the City.
Resolution No.6754 EXC-2014-07 August 26,2014
b) The granting of the exception will not be injurious to property or improvements in the area nor be �
detrimental to the public safety,health and welfare;
Given that the project is consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Heart of the City Specific
Plan, and South Vallco Master Plan; has been designed to be compatible with and respectful of adjoining
land uses; and that relevant mitigation measures will be incorporated as part of the CEQA review process to
mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant level, the project will not be detrimental or injurious to
property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general
welfare, or convenience.
c) T'he exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification and the minimum
variance to accomplish the purpose;
See Section A above.
d) The proposed exception will not result in significant impacts to neighboring properties;
Given that the project provides more than the minimum supply recommended by the parking study and
there are transportation demand measures proposed by the applicant and included in the conditions of
approval, the proposed exception is not anticipated to result in significant impacts to neighboring properties.
e) The applicant submits a detailed parking study which demonstrates that the proposed use is
compatible with the proposed parking supply. Adjacent on-street parking may be included in the
parking supply;
Field parking surveys were conducted at three similar hotels in Cupertino (Aloft, Cupertino Inn, and Hilton
Garden Inn) during the period of peak parking demand. The results indicate that weekday parking rates �
varied from 0.32 to 0.59 (occupied stalls/occupied room). Weekend parking rates ranged from 0.40 to 0.81
stalls per room. The Hilton Garden Inn had the highest parking demand of 0.81 stalls per room, and is the
most similar to the proposed project since it contains a full service restaurant and bar and conference room
space. Therefore, the study recommends a parking supply ratio of 0.81 stalls per room (or 120 stalls)for the
project. This ratio is higher than the 0.71 stalls per room rate specified for hotels in the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE)parking generation manual. Since the project provides 1.05 stalls per room,
the parking study concluded that the project parking supply is adequate.
� The project is owned or managed by a single entity; and
The project is owned by a single entity.
g) If adjacent properties are used to share parking, they are in close proximity to each other, and
reciprocal parking and access easements and maintenance agreements are recorded on the
applicable properties to run with the land.
There is no shared parking for this project. All of the parking study's recommended parking supply is
provided onsite.
NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of the initial study, maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on�
PAGE 2 thereof,:
Resolutioxi Na 6754 EXG2014-07 August 26;2014
� A Mitigated Negative Declaration (Application no. EA-2014-06) �is hereby recoinmended for acloptiori;
and the application for a Parking Exception, Application no. EXC-2014-07 is hereby recommended for
approval and that the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions speeified in this resolution j
are based and contained in :the Public Hearing record concerning Applicafion no. EXC-2014=07 as set
forth. iri the Minutes of Plaiuiing Coininission Meeting of August 26, 2014,'and are incorp:orated by
reference as though fully set forth herein.
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEUELOPIVIENT DEPT.
�lanning�ivision:
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval recornmendation is based on the plan set received Augusf 13, 2014 consisting of 47 sheets
labeled A-0.0 to A-0.3, C-1.0 to C-5.0, G5.1, C-6.0,L-1 to L-5, A-1.0 to A-1.4,A2:0 to A-2.6,A-3.0 to A-
3.8, A-4.0 to A-4.2, A-5.0; A-6.0, A-6.1, E-0.1, and E-1.0 to E-1.2, entitled, "Hyatt House; Cupertino
California, Wolfe Road & Interstate 280," drawn by Gene Fong Associates, Sandis, Bruce Jett
Associates, and Emerald City Engineers, Inc.; and the Transportation Impact Analysis (uzcluding
parking survey) dated August 14, 2014 consisting of 180 pages entitled, "Hyatt House Hotel
Transportation Iinpact Analysis," prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consu.ltants, Inc.; except as
;,
may be amended by conditioris in this resolution.
2. ACCURACY OF PROTECT PLANS
� The applicant/property owner is responsible to verify aIl pertinent property data including but not
li_mifed to property boundary locations, building setbacks,.,property size,building sguare footage,
any relevant easements and/or construction records. Any misrepreseritation of any property`data
.,.,. : ,. ,
' rriay invalidate fhis approval and may require additional review.
3. CONCURRENT:APPROVAL CONDITIONS �' '
The conditions of approval confained in file nos. ASA-2014-06, U-2014-04, DP-2014-04, TR-2014-28,
and TR-2014-40 shall be_applicable to this approvaL
4: ANNOTATION OF THE CONDITIONS"OF APPROVAL '
"Tlie condifions of approval set'forth shall be incorporated irito and'annotated on the first page of the
: buildiilg plans. _
5;..• PARKING EXCEl'TION APPROVAL AND PROTECT AMENDMENTS
Parking Exception approval is granted to allow eight tandem parking stalls and 156 stalls when 184
are required. The Director of Community Development may approve minor modifications to the
: _
locations of the tandem and regular stalls; and the quantify of regular' stalls, provided it does`not
reduce stalls below fhe approved parkuig rafi.o: `
The Planning Coinrunission shall review,mo,difications 'considered major by the Director of
: Comxnuxuty Development.
�� 6, ALJTO PARKING RATIO
\ The ro'ect auto arkin su 1 shall be r�vided at a minimum ratio of 0.8�1 stalls er hotel room
p l p g PP Y p-. . .- . ;_ p ,
or 120 spaces based on the parking stiidy contained in the project,transportation impact analysis.
Resolution No.6754 EXC-2014-07 August 26,2014
7. TANDEM PARKING STALL MANAGEMENT
Prior to final occu�anc� the applicant shall submit a tandem parking stall management plan. �
Tandem parking stalls shall be reserved for employee use only. Employee vehicles shall be moved
when necessary in order to allow employees to leave when their shift is over. The plan shall take
into accound the start and end times of employees' shifts in order to minimize the amount of vehicle
re-parking that needs to occur.
S. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MEASURES(TDM)
The Director of Community Development has the ability to require additional transportation
demand measures (TDM) to address any future parking concerns. Examples of TDM may include,
but are not limited to:
a. Valet service
b. Off-site parking
c. Carpool or vanpool services
d. Additional onsite parking
e. Transit improvements
f. Non-motorized improvements
g. Shift peak-shared parking
h. Guaranteed ride home
i. Taxi service
j. Pricing
k. Increased shuttle service �
9. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS
The applicant is responsible to consult with other departments and/or agencies with regard to the
proposed project for additional conditions and requirements. Any misrepresentation of any
submitted data may invalidate an approval by the Community Development Department.
10. INDEMNIFICATION
To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City
Council, its officers, employees and agents (the "indemnified parties") from and against any claim,
action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to
attack, set aside, or void this ordinance or any permit or approval authorized hereby for the project,
including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorneys' fees and costs incurred in
defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with
attorneys of its choice.
11. 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.
Resolution No.6754 EXG2014-07 August 26,2014
� PASSED AND ADOPTED this 26th da of Au st 2014 Re Iar Meetin of the Plalvlin oininission
Y � � � � g gC
of the City of Cupertino, State of California,by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Gong,Sun, Takahashi
NOES; COMMISSIONERS: Chair Brophy,Vice Chair Lee
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONEIZS:none
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:none
ATTEST: APPROVED:
.,--- �,;,,,�' ;
�G,.ar�. . > o Paul Brophy, Cha'
Assist.Director of Community Develo�ment Planning Coinini '�ion
�
�,1 �
G`\Planning\PDREPORT\RES\2014\EXG2014-07 res.doc �
• ; :