PC 03-08-05
CITY OFCUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
6:45 P.M.
CITY OF CUPERTINO PLANNING COMMISSION
AMENDED MINUTES
March 8, 2005
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY
The Planning Commission meeting of March 8, 2005 was called to order at 6:45 p.m. in City
Council Chambers, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, by Chairperson Gilbert Wong.
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
~OLL CALL
Comrnissioners present:
Chairperson:
Vice Chairperson:
Comrnissioner:
Cornmissioner:
Gilbert Wong
Marty Miller
Angela Chen
Taghi Saadati
Commissioners absent:
Commissioner:
Lisa Giefer
Staff present:
Community Development Director:
City Planner:
Assistant City Attorney:
Steve Piasecki
Ciddy Wordell
Eileen Murray
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Minutes of the February 14, 2005 Planning Commission meeting:
Motion:
Moved by Com. Saadati, second by Vice Chair MiUer, to approve the
February 14, 2005 Planning Commission minutes as presented.
(Vote: 4-0-0, Com. Giefer absent).
Minutes of the February 22, 2005 Planning Commission meeting:
Motion:
Moved by Vice Chair MiUer, second by Com. Chen, to approve the February
22,2005 Planning Commission minutes as presented. (Vote: 4-0-0; Com.
Giefer absent).
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: The e-mail commnnication ITom Com. Giefer relative to the
Rose Bowl project was noted.
Cupertino Planning Commission
2
March 8, 2005
POSTPONEMENTSIREMOV AL FROM CALENDAR:
2.
Dffi-2004-06
David Perng
(Tian-Hui Temple)
7811 Orion Lane
Appeal of an approval of a Director's Minor Modification for
minor additions to an existing church. Postponed from Planning
Commission meeting of February 8, 2005. Request removal from
calendar.
Motion:
Moved by Com. Saadati, second by Vice Chair MiUer, to remove Application
DIR-2006-06 from the calendar. (Vote: 4-0-0; Com. Giefer absent)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Deborab Hill, resident:
· Said she was on disability and explained her urgent need to find low income housing. She has
contacted many agencies within the city and has been unsuccessful.
· She asked for assistance in fmding housing.
Robert Levy, Wilkinson Avenue:
· Said he felt the audio system and lighting in the new chambers was inferior and it was difficult
to hear the speakers and see the commissioners.
· He also commented on the seating arrangement in the chambers and use of the chambers for
other activities.
Steve Piasecki, Community Development Director:
· Said that the room has been used for other meetings not related to city business.
PUBLIC HEARING
1.
GPA-2004-01,
EA-2004-17
City of Cupertino
Citywide
General Plan amendment to revise the General Plan.
Subject: Circulation (with Bicycle Pedestrian Commission)
& Health and Safety (with Public Safety Commission)
Tentative City Council date: Not Scheduled
Ciddy Wordell, City Planner:
· Explained that the discussion topics would include Circulation Element, and Health and
Safety.
Bob Harrison, Transportation Planning Consultant for the General Plan:
· General Plan in the past has focused on the automobile; 91-92% of trips made within the city
are in the automobile and the city has focused on that.
· The new General Plan proposes a different approach and it was rewritten to emphasis non-
automotive means of getting around Cupertino.
· His role as traffic engineer was to address how to make sure the street system continued to
function.
· Reviewed the level of service (LOS) of traffic, which is a means to measure how well the
street system is working. Cupertino sets Level D as the worst case. He referred to Table 4-2
LOS at Signalized Intersections
Vice Chair Miller:
· Asked if the use of traffic calming measures resulted in a worse LOS at the intersections?
Cupertino Planning Commission
3
March 8, 2005
Mr. Harrison:
· He recalled the policy said that for major streets, they would try to make those function from a
traffic standpoint; for the neighborhood streets, traffic calming might be used to reduce the
speed and reduce the use of those as bypass streets, or people using them that should not be
there.
· If a traffic calming device is put in the middle of DeAnza Boulevard, it would clearly cause
trouble and that would not be recommended in the policies of the plan. Traffic calming is a
more of a neighborhood issue, not an arterial issue.
Com. Chen:
· Is the plan based on the existing General Plan or the revised General Plan?
· When doing the LOS, do you take into consideration the neighborhood city situation and their
General Plan as well?
· Sunnyvale also has a General Plan to develop or redevelop certain areas along Homestead; do
you also take a look at their General Plan to see what the impact of their development is?
Mr. Harrison:
· Said the General Plan is based on the proposed administrative draft General Plan.
· Takes into consideration all the traffic, whether generated in the neighborhood or generated as
through traffic, the total number of cars are counted when doing the LOS calculations.
· The VT A model is used, which covers the entire county; whatever is in the Sunnyvale
General Plan is in the VT A model, their increase in trip making is added and would be added
to the trips coming through the Homestead/DeAnza intersection. It may be the Sunnyvale
development that is the primary cause of that intersection not meeting Cupertino's LOS
standard; the city of Cupertino is looking to Sunnyvale for help on that one widening project to
add the right turn lane on Homestead/DeAnza.
Com. Saadati:
· How long will the impact of construction on LOS be?
· What is the likelihood of the freeway congestion spills on local streets?
Mr. Harrison:
· The projections are a 20 year forecast; it depends on what the land use planners think in terms
of the pace of development.
· That can happen, even though we have some congestion existing on the freeways, the number
of trips that are using the local streets, are able to be accommodated on the local streets. They
are included in the existing conditions analysis.
Chair Wong:
· Relative to the LOS on Homestead Road and DeAnza Boulevard, how would you rectify or
mitigate the concerns regarding the LOS ofE-, E, D+ and D?
· How would you mitigate backup on freeway entrances and exits?
Mr. Harrison:
· For DeAnza and Homestead, we are recommending an additional right turn lane in the
westbound direction to bring it back to a LOS D in the future; the General Plan pennits the
LOS ofE+ in three intersections.
Cupertino Planning Commission
4
March 8, 2005
· Said if LOS is set very high, what you are probably implying is adding capacity that would not
be acceptable from other environmental issues; for example adding lanes, making lanes wider;
make streets wider in order to get to the capacity that would give you less delay at those
intersections. In general, cities have settled on LOS D, D-, maybe E+ as kind of the acceptable,
minimal standard.
· Relative to backup on freeway exits and entrances, one of the issues is ramp metering;
Caltrans sets the ramp meters to keep the freeway moving and is less interested in how much
backup there is on the city streets. Some jurisdictions have said they don't want ramp
metering; we want our local streets to move, we don't want the backup. There is a give and
take; the ramp metering is good in that it keeps the fteeway moving, but others trying to make
the on-ramp move, is backed up. The meter is sensitive to the density of traffic on the on-
ramp.
Jeff Paulson, Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission:
· Said that "adding traffic lanes to solve congestion was like loosening your belt to solve
obesity". As you add traffic lanes such as those right turn lanes that are so difficult for cyclists,
create a tree-flowing traffic situation which in turn attracts more cars, which in turn attracts
more car dependent development, and ends up with the same type of sprawling development
that we are seeking to undo.
· Supports Mr. Harrison's comment that we are looking at a paradigm shift away ftom
automobile dependent commnnities to a community that promotes walking and bicycling.
· Second comment was to emphasize the concept of balance; the introduction to the circulation
element talks about balancing cars with pedestrians and bicycles, but the city budget for street
maintenance vs. sidewalk maintenance, in looking at the number of acres of asphalt devoted to
cars vs. pedestrians and cyclists; and looking at the amount of money spent by residents on
cars vs. cyclists and walking, the balance is in fact way out of balance. They are seeking to
move that balance more toward a bicycle and pedestrian friendly community.
· Sometimes automobile service levels have to be compromised and degraded in order to
accommodate such issues as traffic calming, walkability, bikability. He urged the Planning
Commission to consider those concepts when considering various detailed elements of the
circulation element of the General Plan.
David Greenstein, Bicycle Pedestrian Commission:
· The BikelPed Commission said that the circulation element was well done.
· Reviewed recommendations:
(I) Retain vedestrian f!rid volicv: Pedestrian grid is saying how you get Point A to Point B as
you are walking. We know we have maps for roads, we have maps for how bikes get around,
but we have no idea of how people get around. We just assume they just walk on streets. It is
not necessarily the only way people get around. He cited an example, the Portal Elementary
School has a pass-through connecting two neighborhoods; when they redid the elementary
school, they closed it off, and the neighbors notified us, and we were able to save that path.
We don't know these things exist at the General Plan level and it is important that the city be
aware that people do use thoroughfares in a pedestrian-like way that we don't think of.
(2) Emvhasize some vedestrian asvects of road desilm: Policy 4-12 is about traffic calming
and its neighborhood traffic calming; we want to discourage traffic but just to emphasize that,
encourage walking because that is also a factor of traffic calming. Secondly, there should be
guidelines in the strategies and VT A has created a good technical guideline that can be used;
they have a template and a palette of different ways you can approach traffic calming so that
Cupertino Planning Commission
5
March 8, 2005
we can chose it ftom here and it is already acceptable guidelines at the county level. and the
city can readily adopt them.
(3) Reinstate the policv which was formerlv 4-6: It was taken completely out; there was some
confusion at the Task Force level exactly what this would mean. Some people thought that
LOS would be degraded, it is such a fearfullevei that pedestrians cannot be considered in the
transportation grid, and we have to keep cars moving as much as possible. The BikelPed
Commission would like to see this reinstated. He illustrated two examples of dangerous
intersections where children cross for school and where there have been pedestrians hit by
autos. He noted that they do not have traffic calming on the major arteries and that Stevens
Creek shares the brunt of many pedestrian collisions. He said that parents complained that
their children would not be able to walk and bike to school (Sam Lawson Middle School)
because they have to cross the thoroughfares. He said it was 10 to 15% of the school kids but
those are the ones they need to also protect, even though the ones that walk and bike are a
smaller portion, most vulnerable. This doesn't mean that we need to reduce LOS, there is
actually ways of incorporating LOS and incorporating some pedestrian design, but it has to be
thought of in the same way, rather than adding the pedestrian after you design the intersection.
(4) Put revonal trails back into the circulation element: In the current General Plan which
was made long ago, the regional trails were in the transportation circulation element. The
current draft of the proposed General Plan has put it into a different section. Regional trails
were created as a transportation element. One example is the UP Railroad or the DeAnza trail
which would connect many cities together; Saratoga is already working on their portion, they
are getting money from transportation sources and it should be a transportation element rather
than a recreational element because that is not where they are getting their money from, and
we should be up front and honest about what these things are serving and where we are getting
our money from.
Vice Chair Miller:
· One of the questions I asked the traffic consultant, if we did traffic calming, what would the
impact on LOS be, and his answer was if we reserve it for the neighborhood streets, it is
appropriate, but when we put it on the major arteries, it would deteriorate the LOS.
· One of the comments you made was that there are ways to mitigate that so that we could both
have traffic calming and a reasonable LOS and could you expand on that.
Mr. Greenstein:
· Clarified that he said "be able to accommodate pedestrians better" which is different from
traffic calming. For instance, DeAnza Boulevard is very wide and you have to cross clear
across to get to a safe haven; whereas if you are down by Finch Avenue and Stevens Creek,
they have islands, there are shorter distances for pedestrians to go before they hit another safe
haven, but they are not completely across all the way.
· On DeAnza if anyone is standing in the middle of the intersection, they are a target. There are
ways of expediting traffic and also satisfying mitigating some of the issues with pedestrians
which is different than what they are talking about with LOS.
Com. Saadati and Chair Wong:
· Asked staff to provide some of these documents in the next package; VT A guidelines, and a
hard copy of Com. Greenstein's presentation.
Cupertino Planning Conunission
6
March 8, 2005
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
AI Morales, Planning Resources and Associates:
· The purpose of the Health and Safety Element is to identify and evaluate potential hazards
within the city and to protect it from those risks resulting from those hazards. The hazards
may be either natural or accidental or created by some human. Potential hazards within
Cupertino are geologic and seismic hazards, and fire hazards including hillside fires and urban
fires on the valley floor.
· Reviewed the information relative to the following: fire hazards, crime and police services,
hazardous materials, hazardous waste, disaster plan, excessive noise, as outlined in Section 6
of the staff report.
Com. Saadati:
· Asked about the possibility of having a site in Cupertino to dispose of used paint, instead of
the present policy of calling a number and making an appointment to go to a County location.
Mr. Morales:
· A temporary site could be developed within the city to dispose of the used paint; however, it is
a policy issue that needs to be included and a program developed.
Glenn Goepfert, Public Works:
· Said he did not know if there was a current plan to institute that program; it is within the city's
jurisdiction. It is something staff can return with a progress update.
Ted Sayer, Cotton Shires & Associates:
· Said that he has been involved with city geology and geotechnical issues since 1986.
· Illustrated on a satellite photo the location of Cupertino in relation to the San Andreas fault.
· He reviewed the location of the various faults and hazard zones within the Cupertino planning
area and discussed the various geotechnical hazards including landslides, seismic ground
shaking, earthquake triggered slope failure, surface fault rupture associated with the Monta
Vista fault as well as the Berrocal fault as well as liquefaction.
· He noted that there was a seismic hazard background report which was available on the
internet, which reports how locally hazards were identified.
· Illustrated photos of various geologic/geotechnical problems that have occurred in Cupertino
in the past.
· Answered questions about vertical movement in the area, and noted that there were properties
located where the fault passes through. Data and maps have been available showing what
properties are located on fault lines.
Mr. Piasecki:
· Said that a number of parcels were created in the county as far back as 1917 in the Inspiration
Heights area, and subdivisions occurred regardless of where the faults, slides and geologic
hazards were.
Mr. Sayer:
· Said that when there is development in a hillside area, a geotechnical analysis and survey is
done, and it is reasonably assured that the fault lines will be found if they are on the property.
· Said that from a safety standpoint, the distance between the fault line and the beginning of the
development of the home would be dependent on the width of the rupture and the character of
Cupertino Planning Commission
7
March 8, 2005
the rupture and the strength of the adjacent bedrock material; but generally between 35 to 50
feet or possibly more. The State standard is 50 feet minimum setback from an active fault
trace.
Com. Saadati and Vice Chair Miller:
· Asked questions relative to automobile vandalism, theft, residential break-ins and ifthere was
an additional requirement for staffing of the police force because of the increased
development activities in Cupertino.
Captain John Hirakawa, Sheriff's Department:
· The school district contracts for two school resource deputies working at the elementary and
high school levels and work with the youth from Cupertino attending schools in outside areas.
· There are crime prevention programs, alcohol awareness programs, and driving programs to
address the issues. The school resource officers work within the schools with intervention and
the Sheriffs department is very active in various programs to reduce the vandalism, property
crimes, residential and auto burglaries.
· Presently there is not additional staffing needed to patrol Vallco as tenancy has decreased. In
the past, additional staffmg was needed on a seasonal basis. As Vallco starts to develop and
comes full force, the needs will be addressed to ascertain if additional staffing is needed.
· When development occurs, the developer considers the lighting conditions and environmental
mitigation relative to potential crime; and the Sheriff's department considers the issues and
makes recommendations to address concerns.
· In instances such as a large theater complex at Vallco, the Sheriffs department considers
potential auto break-ins, and assaults. The issues would be addressed with appropriate lighting
and security patrols. He said they do not anticipate problems with a theater complex in Vallco.
· Said that traffic would be increased with a theater complex, and the consultants would address
the issue.
· Relative to outreach, he said that the Sheriff's department contracts with AT&T for translation
services in the event they are needed for non-English speaking residents; there are also three
Asian officers on duty.
· Response times are not impacted with the relocation of the substation because the officers
patrol the streets, and respond to calls from their patrol cars, not the substation.
Tom Walsh, Santa Clara Co. Fire Department:
· Said that wood shake shingles can be treated to be fire retardant.
· It has not been documented how long the fire retardant lasts after the shingles have been
treated.
· Wood shake shingles are not permitted in Cupertino; Class A roofs are required.
· Relative to fire prevention for the hillside, there are two fire prevention programs; the County
hazardous vegetation mitigation program which the county oversees; we are a big part of it as
far as the inspections and following up complaints and making sure that properties are in
violation get on the county program for mitigation. There is also a brush program utilized for
many of the hillsides including Cupertino and it is more a ftre procedure program, that we use
at fire stations and all the engine companies go after the fires. They do inspections, mass
mailings to all residents in the hazardous fire area stating that it is the residents' responsibility
to look after the fire safety of their own residence. We tell them how to do that in removing
vegetation away from the structure, 30 feet and trimming trees that are close to chimneys and
those types of things. We tell them how to do it, send engine companies out to do inspections,
Cupertino Planning Commission
8
March 8, 2005
answer questions, and will send inspectors out to talk to residents if needed. The county also
has a program that will do the work for them.
Chair Wong:
· Acknowledged that the residents were appreciative of the Sheriff s department and County fire
department for their services to Cupertino.
Ms. Wordell:
· Thanked the consultants and agency representatives for sharing the information.
James Jason, Public Safety Commission (PSC):
· Will comment on 3 areas within the General Plan task force, Section 6, 4, and 2.
· Applauded the task force for a job well done; considering the physical size of the membership
of the task force and the scope and complexities that they faced, the plan revisions were well
done and comprehensive. Also applauded staff and the Planning Commission on a
magnanimous effort in the city and the unenviable task of applying a delicate balance before
you in balancing the commnnity and citizens' needs and city's needs.
· The PSC strongly endorses the task force recommendations on reducing general residential
density per acre, especially in the Homestead and North DeAnza sections.
· Relative to lower height restrictions, while we endorse 99.5% of the overall plan, we would
like to submit the following observations and recommendations for consideration:
o Section 6: Specifically area Policy 6-11, should be revised to omit the reference to
reducing the need for firefighting personnel and equipment. The policy will then read:
"Consider adopting a residential fire sprinkler ordinance. This will reduce fire flows."
Although we understand that the earlier intervention was provided by residential fire
sprinklers, and the city should reduce the number of large fires and therefore reduce the
source of demand for firefighting personnel and equipment, we think the General Plan
should avoid language that could justify a reduction in available firefighting personnel and
equipment resources.
o Section 4: We believe the policies contained in Section 4 that might lead to a reduction in
the street intersection level of service, pose a potential hazard to the public safety by
leading to greater traffic delays, and in turn an increase in marginal behavior, such as
speeding, red light running, unsafe lane changes, failure to yield, right of way to
pedestrians, additionally driving commute traffic into neighborhoods as the LOS increases
and it makes it more difficult to move around the city. The Commission's review of
proposed strategies could lead to delays and difficulties for emergency vehicles to reach
their ultimate destinations and within the targeted response times. There was concern in
those areas as well.
o The report in the roads and intersections targeted for narrowing increased weight times are
in direct path of the three fire stations.
o Other concerns from a health and safety standpoint relative to circulation were with the
decreased LOS, was the addition of noise and air pollution.
o Another observation was the comparison of the daily traffic volumes.
o Section 2: The Planning Commission believes that policies contained in Section 2 of the
Land Use Commnnity Design that encourage mixed use development have many positive
characteristics for the city and community, but there is also the potential to pose a hazard
to public safety by locating people in homes closer to sources of noise and air pollution
and other hazardous materials that they might not be in close proximity to, had it just been
a single residential.
Cupertino Planning Commission
9
March 8, 2005
Chair Wong opened the public hearing.
Julia Miyakawa, FaraUone Drive:
· Opposed to Regnart Creek Trail.
· Before the fence was built cutting off access to the flood control ditch, rocks were constantly
thrown over their fence, and teens would climb their fence to shortcut through their yard.
· Said she had empathy for the residents of the townhouses on Rodriguez because of their
vulnerability if the path is put in, with no fence to protect them.
· Said that more lights on the pathway would be intolerable; the lights from the library now
impact their privacy by shining into their kitchen window, bedroom windows, and family
room window.
Leonard Ezerski, FaraUone Drive:
· Opposed to the Regnart Creek bike and pedestrian path.
· Asked why they needed the path since they had sidewalks and streets to handle the bikes and
foot traffic.
· There is a shortage of funds in government facilities throughout the county, and money is
being spent on something not needed.
· Who will clean up and police the area?
· Is the city self-insured in the event anyone is hurt on the path or fall into the creek?
· Will there be guardrails to stop bicycles from falling into the creek?
Robin Wilson, Las Ondas Way:
· Opposes the trail.
· Former Mayor Sandra James said the city's primary responsibility was to protect its citizens;
unlocking the gates will bring back the crime that we had before the gates were locked, even
though lights and benches are planned.
· Legitimate users would frighten off illegitimate users.
· If the trail was not heavily used, people who plan to break in would have the opportnnity and
kids could once again dam up the creek, toss rocks, but a trail can draw from residences, dog
walkers, the library, the hotel, senior residents, businesses, shops, children, etc.; which is a
high heavy use.
· The people do have use of the city sidewalks and parks and don't need the trail.
· The residents would have to endure the high noise level of people talking, laughing and
children hollering; cannot in good conscience expect the residents who live by the potential
trail to tolerate a high noise level day and evening and then worry about crime during the
night.
· It is not an appropriate safe place for the trail.
· A molestation took place before the gates were locked; you want to put in a low split rail fence
where the children can fall off and go straight down in. .
· The potential for car, bike and pedestrian accidents is obvious even with lights and barriers. It
is a congested area of Cupertino and it is not an appropriate place for a bike and pedestrian
trail.
Rich Boyle, La Mar Drive:
· Said at the previous Wilson School, many years ago a walkway was put in for the students to
pass through along the creek; in the early 70s the walkway was removed because of the high
number of home burglaries in the area.
· History is repeating itself with more crime and burglaries.
Cupertino Planning Commission
10
March 8, 2005
Nita McGalliard, Clifden Way:
· Said that shortly after moving into her home many years ago, the ditch was dug.
· They were told that someday they would get back the land and the ditch would be covered and
replaced with a culvert, which did not happen.
· There are rocks on their roof and their home has been burglarized three times; her neighbor's
home has been burglarized; almost every home backing up the creek has been burglarized.
· She said that if the trail is open to the public, the residents will not be safe in their homes, and
property values will drop.
· She questioned who would be responsible for the liability it would create.
· It is not for the greater good of the residents who live by the trail.
Chair Wong:
· Asked staff to address the issue as well as the concern about the library lights.
Glen Goepfert, Public Works:
· Will look at what is required for the custodial chores.
· Said he was not familiar with their schedule; but it is something they can look at since that has
been brought to the Planning Commission's attention. Said he heard it before, just the
visibility of the structure from the other side of the creek.
· Said he would investigate what can be done to cut down on late night, early morning lighting.
Chair Wong:
· Suggested that Mr. Levy continue discussions with Glen Goepfert of the Public Works
department.
Robert Levy, Wilkinson Avenue:
· Discussed the General Plan in general terms.
· Said the General Plan needs to be proorread as there are numerous grammatical and content
errors.
· He asked that more consideration be given to the pedestrians who cannot drive or do not have
cars.
· He commented on the composition of the task force.
Vice Chair Miller:
· Said that the comments made by several residents relative to the Regnart Creek trail were
accurate; he concurred that the safety issues discussed were valid, and he said he sympathized
with the comments made as his home backed up to the creek trail.
Chair Wong:
· Asked the Sheriffs department to comment on additional trails in Cupertino relative to the
comments on vandalism and safety issues.
Cptn. Hirakawa:
· Said that more information was needed to comment on crime trends; but in general when an
unofficial pathway is opened and it is closed to the public, it tends to generate more crime.
When the area is opened up for legitimate use, the studies have shown that the crime usually
drops.
· When a public trail is opened, the users themselves tend to keep watch on what is going on as
it is being used more, and notify the authorities when something is awry.
Cupertino Planning Commission
II
March 8, 2005
Deborah Hill:
· Said she opposed the creek trail because she felt it was unsafe for the neighbors and the
neighbors should not be subjected to the noise and the people climbing over residents' fences.
· Funds should not be spent on a trail that the residents do not want.
Anne Ng, Bollinger Road:
· Said she was concerned about changes to the circulation element.
· Expressed concern that there was no mention of accommodations made for pedestrians in the
General Plan, especially Section 4-6.
· The conclusion in the General Plan is that moving cars through intersections is more important
than giving pedestrians enough time to safety cross the street.
· Recommended that the trails be added to the circulation element because they will provide
ways for pedestrians to get around town in a calmer environment.
Leslie Burnell, Holly Oak Drive:
· Commented on the use of the bicycle lanes.
· Presently students use the bicycle lanes, riding in the wrong direction and riding on the
sidewalks.
Dennis Whitaker, Cupertino resident:
· When the City Council approved Seven Springs, they anticipated no children because of the
high cost of the homes.
· The elementary school task force had to force the Faria and Jollyman students to cross DeAnza
and Stevens Creek Boulevard to get to Lawson, which are two very busy streets. When you
build, are you foreseeing the future like they didn't; what kind of problems are you looking to
in the future; what will be accomplished to protect the students coming from those two schools
across the streets?
· What is being done to protect the students from the Rosebowl project getting across Wolfe
Road?
· He expressed frustration about the length of time a motorist has to wait to get through the
lights at Mary Avenue/Stevens Creek Boulevard.
· Said no comments were made from the emergency services about concerns relative to traffic
and circulation.
· The comment was made that adding traffic lanes attracts cars, but if the lanes are minimized, it
causes clogging elsewhere and coming up with more pollution because of stopped cars and
more frustration by the people driving.
· The General Plan task force requested that the neighborhood children be permitted to go to
neighborhood schools, but the more you grow, the more you put them at risk at doing that.
· No mention was made of DeAnza College which keeps adding on, and the residents are
suffering the circulation problem because of them and have no control of it.
· Major power outages have occurred because of construction problems, and there were
numerous intersections without coverage from Sheriff's officers, creating major accidents.
· Relative to potential earthquake damage, he noted that homeowners should bolt their
foundations and take other precautionary measures.
· What is the fire department doing to prepare for high rise fires?
· Adding more congestion will increase the problems.
Cupertino Planning Commission
12
March 8, 2005
Allen Caldwell, Cupertino resident and a member of the Public Safety Committee:
· Commented that the irmer doors of the community hall were not handicapped accessible.
Fari Aberg, So. Blaney Avenue:
· Opposed to the opening of Regnart Creek trail.
· Her home has been broken into; stones thrown into the home; backyard and driveway have
been full of stones.
· Opening the creek trail will not be safe.
· During the rainy season, the water is very high and dangerous.
Chair Wong closed the public hearing.
Vice Chair Miller:
· Relative to pedestrian vs. cars, he referred to the City Council's goal of safe streets and a
walkable community.
· There has been conflicting testimony at the meeting regarding the best way to achieve that; the
goal is laudable and is one that we should be striving for; and whether it is reducing traffic
levels, or increasing traffic levels; the objective is to have a more walkable community, which
he said he supports.
· Said they talked about concepts for mitigating traffic, and there are several in the General Plan
that weren't mentioned. One is locating housing close to employment centers, which is in the
General Plan; some of the task force felt it should not be in the General Plan.
· He said it was not a unique concept to Cupertino; he read excerpts from articles about other
cities, and their suggestion for dealing with the issue of jobs/housing imbalance.
· He said there was information and support for building housing close to job centers as a way
of mitigating traffic and it makes sense if you live close to your job center and there is also
other needs close by, you are more likely to walk or bicycle as opposed to getting in your auto.
Com. Chen:
. Said she supported the walk and pedestrian needs, and would support to restore Policy 4-6
and also encourage a trail; but suggested increasing language for stronger safety measures.
. Said there were some concerns about the intersections that were not included in the LOS
study or the circulation study, and suggested addressing them by education and providing a
process to review the problem areas by the city.
Com. Saadati:
· Supports a walkable community.
· Said he would comment on seismic hazard and fIre at the next meeting.
Chair Wong:
· Regarding Policy 6-1 on seismic geological review process, asked staff to explain "in addition
require a 10% reference that they need a study on development" (any slope exceeding 10%
needs a geotech study).
· Relative to Policy 4-4, increasing use of public traffic use; another meeting will be scheduled
about giving recommendations; suggest commuter bus within the city of Cupertino, to be
sponsored by the Cupertino businesses or try to find alternative funding to have this bus
system.
Cupertino Planning Commission
13
March 8, 2005
· Long term on that policy, I would like to see a light rail come into Cupertino, either through
the city of San Jose downtown or through Sunnyvale, and since this is a 20 year plan, I would
like to staff to look into that as well.
· Relative to Policy 4-6, said he heard that there were some concerns about the policy, and
understood Com. Chen's concern, but he viewed it differently; and understood that they want a
walkable community, but if the midsection on Stevens Creek is reduced, creating a bottleneck,
it will adversely affect the businesses on Stevens Creek because of the accessibility of the
retail businesses. He said he needed to give it more thought before supporting the policy.
· Expressed thanks to Cptn. Hirakawa, Mr. Walsh, the Public Safety Commission, the Bicycle
Pedestrian Commission, and the three consultants for attending the meeting.
Ms. Wordell:
· The 10% was something resulting from the task force subcommittee, which was composed of
some technical people, Said she would need to talk with them to get more information on it
and see if the consultants have any reaction to it. She said she had not heard of any problems
with it.
· Reviewed the schedule, will be bringing these subjects back at the next meeting for further
discussion. The Planning Commission chair is suggesting we bring Land Use back at that time
also because there are still some loose ends.
· Another suggested change is April 12; limiting the subject to the draft Environment Impact
Report. The suggestion is to delay the preliminary amendments to April 26th and the EIR
discussion to that date as well if needed. It pushes out the final recommendations at least two
weeks to a month.
Chair Wong:
· Said they have not had the opportunity to discuss the Hot Topics issues line by line to
determine if there were any other concerns with the document. There are other plans such as
the Crossroads, Bubb Road, Vallco South, that haven't been discussed. There is a Council
meeting on March 14th to address some of the other areas.
· He felt that EIR should be discussed on a separate night.
Coms. Saadati and Chen:
· Agreed with the proposed schedule.
Vice Chair Miller:
· Said the proposed schedule was suitable, and added that time was needed to discuss the
housing allocations in specific locations in the city, or decide if they should remain status quo
or relocate them.
Discussion continued regarding dates for additional meetings.
Chair Wong:
· Asked staff how the residents could address their concerns about the Regnart Trail.
Mr. Piasecki:
· What the Commission is doing tonight is looking at General Plan policy structure about trails
in general, one of which is the Regnart Creek connecting to Calabazas Creek trail system,
which is actually denoted as a possible trail in our current General Plan which was adopted in
Cupertino Planning Commission
14
March 8, 2005
1993. The concept that there might be something along this area has been there for quite a
while and I think. Com. Chen's comments how do you and should you implement trails in
urban areas, and how do you go about it. Captain Hirakawas' comments about is it safer or
less safe, those are relevant things to talk about in generality about trails in the valley floor
urban areas, but the Commission is not holding a hearing on whether or not that trail should be
opened and under what specific conditions it should be opened; that was not the subject of
your discussion.
· It is appropriate for people to talk about it in generality, but you were not having that kind of
hearing.
Mr. Goepfert:
· The proper forum for discussion of the Regnart Creek trail is the Bicycle Pedestrian
Commission hearings which they will continue to have as appropriate. The people who have
expressed their opposition tonight will have more opportnnities to shape that discussion
relevant to that trail segment specifically, not in connection with the General Plan.
Chair Wong:
· In general, it is appropriate to talk about whether or not we want a trail abutting an urban area,
and things do change; ten years ago the community was comfortable having urban trails; and
today there is a large segment that don't want that, and I would like to continue that
conversation.
Vice Chair Miller:
· One ofthe comments besides the safety issues, there is also a legitimate comment that it would
impact property values, and I have a concern from the city's standpoint that it might put the
city in the position of having to deal with potential lawsuits from loss of property values. That
should be an additional consideration when putting trails in similar urban areas that have
people walking by someone's back fence.
Mr. Goepfert:
· I think the Commission would address it in terms of General Plan comments in terms of the
issue of trails in general, not this specific one.
Vice Chair Miller:
· The other comment is when I looked through the circulation element, I did notice that one
section that was weakened by the task force was the protection of residential streets from
traffic and I think that is something that needs to be rectified.
· We want to strive as a community to be protecting our residential streets for the children living
there and the children playing there.
Chair Wong declared a short recess.
3.
ASA-2005-03
Mike Rohde
(VaÌlco Shopping
Center) 10123
& 10150 No.
Wolfe ~d
Architectural and site review for a previously approved use permit
for 204 residential units, 105,200 square feet of new retail space
and a parking structure. Planning Commission decision final
unless appealed
Com. Saadati:
· Relative to the south elevation, you show some shrubs; how tall would they grow; there is a
blank wall at the base which is the garage wall which I presume is solid.
John Eller, SB Architects, SaD Francisco:
· He said his firm inherited a concept design previously approved by the Planning Commission,
and his presentation would include changes made and the reasons for the changes.
· Reviewed the changes made to the corner of Wolfe Road and Vallco Parkway, replacing the
former proposal with an octagon tower with a taller tower to provide a stronger focal point.
· One bedroom units were eliminated and square footage of the two and three bedroom units
range from 1100 square feet for the two bedroom nnits, up to 1450 square feet for the three
bedrooms, with some special townhouse units with up to 1900 square feet.
· Reviewed the parking garage layout, and noted that the residential and retail parking were
separated.
· Outlined the changes to the courtyards in response to the condition in the use permit, calling
for an increase in the courtyard space.
· Illustrated computer simulations showing different elevations of the project.
· He noted that the retail was a condition of approval to return before Planning staff in terms of
both the design guidelines prepared for retail development, and also the specifics of the shop
fronts as they are designed by the tenants.
· Discussed the landscaping; street furniture used; use of scored concrete, pavers, concrete
bands; and the use of a pair of palm trees at the corner. A double row of trees is proposed,
some will engage out to the street, and street trees will be put out into the parking zone. He
said they concurred that a fountain element in the plaza area is an appropriate gesture.
· He said that the computer generated elevations accurately reflects the design intent.
Mike Rohde, Vallco Fashion Park:
· Explained that the architectural firm was changed to SB Architects who are focused on mixed
use and housing projects.
Ms. Wordell presented the staff report:
· Application is for architectural and site approval for a previously approved use permit for 204
residential nnits, with retail space and a parking structure.
· The number of residential units remains the same; but the square footage of the residential
units and the parking garage has increased. The retail space in the Vallco Rosebowl site has
also increased as well as the additional parking spaces. The number of two bedrooms units
was increased which increased the size of the residential portion; and the increase in the
parking stalls increased the square footage of the parking structure.
· Reviewed the site plan and noted that the side and rear setbacks have changed since the use
permit was approved.
· She reviewed the changes in the architectural design of the residential units and the parking
garage as set forth in the staff report. Changes include elimination of one bedroom nnits;
increase in number of two bedroom nnits; addition of one floor to the parking structure; more
tower elements added; increase in height of tower elements; provide more design interest in
the south elevation, particularly the garage area; and consolidation ofthe courtyard areas.
· Discussed the tree removal and protection as outlined in the staff report.
· Illustrated the location of the water features and noted that a condition is included regarding
inclusion of another art feature.
· Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council.
March 8, 2005
15
Cupertino Planning Commission
Cupertino Planning Commission
16
March 8, 2005
· Did you also look at the relationship between the property adjacent to this elevation and how
they relate to each other?
· Asked the applicant to comment on the center portion of the south wall, it seems to have less
articulation as far as the windows than the left and right side.
· Said he preferred the taller element on the corner element on Wolfe Road because it is the
cornerstone ofthe property.
· Said he was pleased to see the four bedroom units deleted.
Mr. EUer:
· Responded that it was not solid at the base; there will be punched openings in all levels of the
garage; and there is the one entry point that punctuates the façade on the garage as well. The
openings go down to the ground; the shrubs that are anticipated there will hopefully grow 3 to
4 feet tall. A proposal of redwood trees along the back is shown, and will provide a screen.
· Said they were aware of the Menlo Equities development; it is important to note that their
development is adjacent in our development to the area opposite the nested garage, and it was
one of the reasons we felt it was important to articulate that garage façade dramatically and to
keep the scale of it as low as possible. It shows that way in the elevation.
· There are four stories of residential flanking that center section; the center section, looking
somewhat akin to that residential is just the garage façade, and those garage openings will be
treated in a variety of ways, including the louvers that would be engaged in those openings.
Weare providing the louvers for the interest and also because we are parking on the ramps;
they go by those openings and we don't want those headlights shining into the Menlo Equities
development.
· Said they were addressing the connectivity of the adjacent property, there is an opportunity
along our east property line, and we have included a walkway that would bring residents from
that corner out to Vallco Parkway. In the Menlo Equities plan they are showing an opportunity
for some connection to our property happening at about that center point. That is not as safe a
location for people, but we could accommodate an access path that would take them into the
garage.
· Said the one bedroom nnit was 800 square feet, and the smaller two bedroom units start at
1100 square feet for the two bedroom unit. He clarified that there was very little demand for
the one bedroom nnits.
· The townhouses have 3 bedrooms, with 1900 square feet.
· Explained the increase in square footage for residential. Said that it was a response to the
market to have two and three bedroom nnits in lieu of one, two and three bedrooms. Through
the introduction of just two and three bedrooms, there is a significant increase in the square
footage; and it is accommodated by building up one story, less visible from the community.
Com. Chen:
· Asked how the height compared with the south side and north side of adjacent properties.
· Does the residential nnits have access through the inside of the bldg to the commercial space?
Mr. EUer:
· The south side neighbors are the Menlo Equities development as well as commercial office
development facing Wolfe Road. Menlo Equities is about 40 feet and the theater is 70+ feet;
the office buildings are approximately the same height as Menlo Equities.
· The residents have access to the retail in a variety of ways; if the residents want to shop
downstairs, they go to the residential lobby that is along the Vallco Parkway side where there
Cupertino Planning Commission
17
March 8, 2005
is an entry lobby with an elevator and storefront and comfortable fumiture inside, with access
to the entire center. There is not direct access to the retail area because of security.
Com. Chen:
· If we go back to the mixed use, for high density development, we define it based on total units
per acre, but we don't restrict any development by the total residential space; like aFAR. The
only restriction we have for residential square footage is the height.
· Did the development, the special agreement, include residential units or was it just for
commercial?
· Relative to height, what is the setback for the Verona development?
Ms. Wordell:
· It is not FAR, it density of units.
· In this case the heights for Vallco are 8 stories; they could go as high as 8 stories through their
development agreement, so they are not; that is the only control we have on height because of
their development agreement, except for what you want to approve through this project.
· It allowed residential units, but it dido't have a density for residential units.
· The setback for the Verona development is 36 feet in the Heart of the City.
Mr. Piasecki:
· Said that during the use permit hearings, the width of the sidewalk was an issue on Vallco
Parkway, and with the new design they managed to add 9 feet; the city identified to that width
and it was important to get the building set back further. There is a much more generous
sidewalk along Vallco Parkway as well as the fairly significant setback on Wolfe Road.
· Vallco Parkway is a 6 lane boulevard presently and with the on-street parking added and bump
outs, it will be reduced to 4 lanes; they have studied the traffic and it works; it is going to be
much more manageable, but it has a width equivalent to a 6 lane street.
· The other side of Vallco Parkway, they are planning to have a parking garage in front of
Penneys and lower level retail shops along Vallco Parkway; there will not be the same height
they are proposing on the south side.
Mr. Piasecki:
· In response to Vice Chair Miller's question, he said that the Montebello development would
sell in the range of $600,000 for a two bedroom unit.
Vice Chair Miller:
· Relative to circulation, in the illustrations you have a pattern at the intersection of Wolfe and
Vallco Parkway that looks like a traffic circle but isn't a traffic circle. Is that part of the
circulation or is it just a pattern on the street?
· Asked applicant to review the internal circulation.
Mr. Eller:
· It is not part of the circulation and I think staff identified that it was not a part of our
application tonight. It will be a condition that it go through design review prior to occupancy
of our development. It will be submitted specifically with the Vallco theater complex.
· Relative to internal circulation, he said it was a full level basement; and that is all commercial,
to support not only the anchor tenants in the development, but also to support the entire Vallco
shopping center, particularly late night arrivals for movies in the future.
Mr. Eller:
· Commercial will exit in both these locations, those two are the primary points to exit but they
can also exit onto the service road; there are three points of egress or entry for the garage.
· For the residential, it is a duplication of all that; the difference is that there is the speed ramp
up to the third floor, a one-way up, so their exit would take them through the levels of garage
as they come down from the residential parking and they can exit at any of those three
locations.
· Said they could not separate the retail and residential traffic during high volume traffic. It is
true that if I am corning home at II p.m. and the theater just let out and everybody is trying to
exit out of there, I am going to cross paths with some of those people, but generally the
expectation is that the peak times of 7 a.m., 5 to 6 p.m. are not peak times for the movie going
population. Our residential exit/entry system for the normal comings and goings should not be
in conflict with the evening guests or the matinee guests at the theater. The basement will be
used as the main parking since it will be accessible.
· He said there was a median restricting left in/left out traffic. Relative to peak hours in the west
parking entry, the opportunity for entry will be unrestricted with in and out lanes. There is a
direct dive down ramp into the basement; at peak hours people will use all three of those
points of exit. He said that the directional signs would be part of the sign package.
· Relative to elimination of one bedroom units, he said that the two bedroom units would offer
the option of using one bedroom for an office or guest bedroom. A one bedroom unit does not
offer that flexibility.
Chair Wong:
· Asked how the residential exits and the commercial exit.
· Expressed concerns about west parking entry and the stacking up.
· Agree with the concern that one bedroom units don't sell well; but an option is with the 165
two bedroom units, you make it an option that you can make them into an office or den and
have a one bedroom to give an option for a single person.
· Asked staff to address the school impacts.
· What we are doing is providing them with easy access off Vallco Parkway and in the
intersection will have right in, right out and left in and left out. We have full turning motions
available to us to get in at that point. At this location we introduce a direct access one way
ramp down into the basement to encourage people to use the basement. If you return to the
basement plan, you will see that we are putting entry points from the garage directly into our
anchor tenants, so we have an elevator and escalators in the vestibule in the garage that is well
lit, attracts attention and draws people to those points, so that an educated user who wants to
go to the market can park in that proximity and take an elevator directly into the market; trying
to encourage people to use the significant amount of parking in the basement level.
· The primary circulation is a series of 5% ramps that circulate up a ramp; drive around and
drive up on the next level, and that circulation pattern continues through that garage all the
way up, At the 4th level there is a security gate, and as described earlier, it segregates the
residential in the upper levels and satisfies parking for the residential component.
· In addition to those elements for the circulation, we are saying that the resident population
entering here would have a speed ramp that would short circuit that and take us up from the
first level to the third level to try to expedite the arrival for the resident and that short cut going
through the commercial parking.
March 8, 2005
18
Cupertino Planning Commission
Cupertino Planning Commission
19
March 8, 2005
Ms. Wordell:
· Said that the school impacts did not change because they do not do their analysis by number of
bedrooms, it is done by multi-family vs. single family.
Chair Wong:
· Relative to staff's suggestion of improving the tower element on the corner of Wolfe and
Val1co Parkway with a clock tower; what was being considered?
Mr. Eller:
· Said he would not choose a clock tower, but would bring multiple proposals for Mr. Cannon
and staff to review. The element would be tall.
Chair Wong:
· Asked staff to explain the design review guidelines they have to meet with staff's suggestions.
· Asked if staff had any input regarding Com. Giefer's concerns about one of the elevations.
Ms. Wordell:
· The property owner will develop some design guidelines that staff will review and any future
tenants of the retail space would design to those guidelines and also review their designs.
· Said that the use of natural materials was suggested because there are a number of projects in
Cupertino and other cities where they have used natural materials such as slate, and it would
be nice to see some of those elements introduced, not just manufactured. It is a suggestion to
provide high quality building. Staff would be open to the Commission's suggestions if the
materials meet the quality of natural finishes.
· Said that Com. Giefer's concern was related to the south elevation, the garage elevation which
faces Menlo Equities doesn't have enough interest. She said that staff felt that it did, but their
main concern was screening. It would be up to the Commission if there were additional
suggestions.
Mr. Piasecki:
· If you recall, the earlier design was not developed sufficiently so that you could judge what the
offsets and details were; and when I look at the earlier design I see a lot of darkness, and
Ciddy's earlier comment that they have done a lot on that south elevation along the garage
façade to blend it in better; is an appropriate comment and one staff feels comfortable with in
terms of the design features.
Chair Wong:
· Relative to the internal garage and the market; by having a market with an internal garage, do
you feel comfortable that customers will come into the internal garage, and are the parking
stalls wide enough?
· There will be people coming in for the theaters, and late night shopping; does it make sense to
have that market, and is the circulation the right circulation?
Mr. Piasecki:
· Said he was familiar with the market in Santa Barbara that has underground parking in a
suburban community and is a popular location. He said from a marketing standpoint, he was
not sure that people coming to grocery stores have an aversion to them.
Cupertino Planning Commission
20
March 8, 2005
Mr. Rohde:
· Said Mr. Piasecki's point was well taken, but their real focus is the market, most of those
patrons will park on the top level and many customers will park on the lower level. They
specifically made a point of pushing the ramp all the way to the back so that there is a full field
of view from one anchor tenant to the other, and the elevators will be large enough to
accommodate shopping carts. There are several similar markets in San Francisco and
Southern California.
Chair Wong:
· Regarding the optional retail on the anchor retail, it would be nice to see sidewalk cafes or
some kind of active retail on the Vallco Parkway. If there was one anchor retail, how can we
have the active sidewalk at the corner of Vallco Parkway and Wolfe Road?
· Asked if staffs recommendation regarding the two rows of ash trees on Wolfe Road would
work for the applicant.
Mr. Rohde:
· Said they would like to have that flexibility; however it is not their intent on 56,000 square feet
to have one anchor tenant only. The concept is to do some retail facing tenants on Vallco
Parkway and have that anchor tenant have a corner of Vallco Parkway and wrap around Wolfe
Road. We don't see the benefit for retail tenants to be on Wolfe Road because of the lack of
turning capability immediately and the speed at which people are traveling on Wolfe Road.
The main retail tenants will be on Vallco Parkway. In the future, across the street in ÍÌ"ont of
Penneys that will mirror that image on Vallco Parkway on the north side where we will have
retail tenants in front of that parking garage to break up that massive parking structure.
· The inner row of ash trees is problematic; we have met with the Fire Department and they
have some room to set up, but the problem will occur when they lift their ladder, they will clip
the trees. The trees need to be trimmed above their ladder so that they could do a fire rescue.
An option would be to remove the inner row of ash trees and replant with trees that will
benefit and highlight the property.
· The primary amenity for the residents exists in the main courtyard as a fitness center and
community clubhouse; the deep setback of 52 feet on Wolfe Road would be an opportunity for
a park which encourages commnnity involvement and engaging residents with greater
community at the pedestrian level. The identical thing occurs on a smaller scale along Vallco
Parkway.
Chair Wong opened the public hearing.
.Jennifer Griffin, Rancho Rinconada resident:
· Expressed concern about the following: the amount of density occurring at the busy corner;
the proposed closure of the two lanes on Vallco Parkway; the parking arrangement for the
theater patrons; the height increase; consideration of removal of the double row of ash trees on
Wolfe Road.
· The rows of ash trees on Wolfe Road, Vallco Parkway and Stevens Creek are a hallmark of the
Vallco shopping district and have provided a welcome greenbelt for residents of Southern
Cupertino for 30 years.
· Said she felt it made more sense to move the housing complex back 10 feet ÍÌ"om Wolfe Road
and the double row of ash trees, providing a buffer zone between the proposed buildings and
the greenbelt along Wolfe Road.
· She urged the Planning Commission to protect the valuable landmark of the ash trees.
Mr. Rohde:
· The development agreement specifically states they have the opportunity to create an
interesting architectural element, such as a clock tower; and the applicant feels that the
architectural element being added in the tower is what the architectural element. The Council
and Commission talked to us about increasing the courtyard sizes, and to do that we removed
some of the townhomes resulting in some ofthe townhomes on the upper level.
Mr. Piasecki:
· Part of the reason this did not get the notoriety that a typical application would get is that this
was a condition of approval approved by the Planning Commission and City Council that said,
before you file this, bring it back and show it to us. That mayor may not be sufficient for
some people but that is the nature of why this application is coming to you; to refine the
details, and yes there are some changes going on, many of them are in response to the
correction and guidance provided by the Planning Commission and City Council; again the
response has been, move the building back, pop things up, move things down a little, move
things around; this is not just a big block.
· Staff recommended widening the sidewalks, but they had to pull the building back and they
moved back a little closer on the south end.
· The Planning Commission has to make a judgment whether it is a good project and refer it to
the City Council, and if the Council feels it needs broader notice, it can be done. There was
very broad notice for the use permit hearing.
Ms. Wordell:
· Said no special outreach was done for the ASA, only website notification.
· Indicated that the height difference from the old plan to the new plan, on the Vallco frontage,
is 58 and the tower element on the east side was 52; some of the tower elements are
significantly higher; some of the floors, stories across that façade are actually lower. On the
rear, you can see some of the same; some are increased and on the west quite similar.
Chair Wong closed the public hearing.
Dennis Whitaker, resident:
· Relative to theater parking, he urged the developers to put ample directional signage one or
two streets away from the theaters.
· Said he was not opposed to the project but had major concerns.
· Expressed concem about the ground level, right turn to the expressway or speedway ramp; it is
a sharp right turn and appears to be made for very small cars only.
· Concerned about the exceptions; everyone knew that the theaters were going on top of Vallco
and the people were used to the idea of 70 feet there; it seems like an entire new project, new
heights and a second exception to the rule.
· Removal of the one bedroom nnits is removing part of the affordability of housing and not
allowing a variety of choices,
· Said he objected to the lighting at the library; the residents were previously informed there
would not be lights facing them, and because of an architectural change, the neighbors are
impacted by the lights.
· The heights are a major issue; the Town Center project originally was two to three stories, but
now Phase 2 and 3 are four stories.
· Questioned the amount of public notice regarding the changes; suggested that the meeting be
sustained to give the public a chance to know what is occurring and have a public hearing.
There are surprises with the final phase and the public did not have a chance for input.
March 8, 2005
21
Cupertino Planning Commission
Com. Chen:
· Overall, I like the design of the development; it does look good and I agree that a height adds
to the interesting look of the elevation.
· Expressed concern about the height, especially when the height appears to be on the small
street as compared to DeAnza Boulevard and also a shorter setback; and 72 feet height
happens to be on Val1co Parkway and that is very high. The corner feature of 66 feet at Wolfe
and Vallco Parkway is a very big building standing there, compared to that side of the street
and the sidewalk. I cannot support the project especially when the height attributes to the
increased square footage; I can see why we need to increase the height to support interesting
design or improvement of the design, but I can't see the increased height to increase the total
residential square footage. Other than that, the rest of the project looks good, it is just the
entrance to the garage appears to be really sharp; if it is similar to the Santana Row it is pretty
sharp turn to the garage, and I am referring to the west side of the entrance to the garage.
Com. Saadati:
· In general, supports the project.
· Relative to the height, I see height as low as 48 feet and I prefer some articulation, particularly
horizontally which by the time it is built, will add flavor to this and the color variation also
will add a lot to this.
· Some of the staff comment on the east elevation, south elevation, and circulation needs more
study to make sure it is going to work because if it doesn't work, it is not going to be a
successful project for the developer.
· Suggested a light where the cars are corning out of the garage. '~"~Ull~l.
Mr. Eller:
· Said that parking garage security will be handled through a variety of mechanisms, such as
painting the garage for high light levels; there will be stairs and elevators to convey people.
As a part of the corner element, we are introducing stairs bringing the parking people up to
that corner intersection to facilitate connection to the retail and the whole shopping center.
· Relative to security, the commercial parking being primarily open public parking, there is an
opportunity to have certain hours of operation where there could be a control. There will be a
security mechanism for all the residential to pass through a level of security, so that all
residents will have car key access to a garage gate and the residential would be secure.
· The residential parking levels will provide walk-off opportunity at their residential level or a
short communication in an elevator or stair to connect that way.
· Mall security will provide security also, and a security staff maintains the property 24/7 and
the parking areas especially for the retail and filtering to the residential, will be patrolled by
security staff in vehicles and on foot. It will be a continuance of the mall security throughout
the property.
· Relative to concerns mentioned about the parking structures, he said that not all theater patrons
are going to park in the Rosebowl development. There are two parking structures, one on the
west side of the property and one on the east side of the property. There are very specific REA
agreements from the depàrtment stores which require them to park specific numbers of cars on
their property. We have exceeded that because of the important of getting approval from
Penneys
· The Rosebowl project itself will be an amenity to the residents as it will cut down the use of
the auto because of everything being available within walking distance.
March 8, 2005
22
Cupertino Planning Commission
Cupertino Planning Commission
23
March 8, 2005
Vice Chair Miller:
· Relative to the City Council's goals, pointed out two goals that fit this project; under economic
development encourage, retain and support a healthy environment for retail growth, and to
provide housing opportunities for Cupertino workers including affordable housing. I believe
this is going to generate 15% affordable nnits, and even though the price point of $600K is
high, it is amazing to find that there is a development called DeAnza Forge which is 28 years
old and two bedroom condos, 1200 square feet are going for almost $600K now. It is clear
that this projects meets two of the goals the City Council would like to see achieved.
· Expressed concern about the lack of noticing and I take Mr. Whitaker's comments to heart;
this is an important project and I believe that even though it has been sent back from the City
Council, it should be noticed and people should have the opportunity to come out and speak to
it.
· The design is excellent; the elevations, the detailing, the relief - it is a fIrst class job.
· The height is an issue for many residents, but I also understand the tradeoffs were made before
setbacks were an issue also, and the height gained some setbacks; it gained some more
parking. Apparently the height is also in terms of increasing the square footage and am not
pleased about that because it increases the price points and I would like to see more affordable
housing.
· The other issue raised by Chair Wong is just how that circulation is going to work; I do see if
people are exiting and making left turns onto Vallco Parkway to get out to Highway 280, that
is going to create a traffic issue, but it does seem that since you have a means of exiting out the
south side of the structure, that you could make that circulation work; it does need more work.
· I agree the east elevation needs more work in terms of detailing and I reserve judgment on the
tree plan on Wolfe Road until I see it revised.
· I also reserve judgment on the tower element at the corner until it is revised.
· With those points in mind, I am in favor of the project, I think it is going to be good for
Cupertino, we can't have everything, but it does meet the goals of the community even we
have to make tradeoffs to meet those goals.
Ms. Wordell:
· Said the condition of approval does call for more evaluation of circulation; plans came to staff
late last week and staff was not able to put in the technical analysis needed, so they are
reserving the ability to do that before they do their final plans.
Vice Chair Miller:
· The other issue is I am still not clear as to how comfortable it is for people to cross Wolfe
Road and I understand that is not a part of this. What we are doing, but I think it is a critical
part of the project.
Chair Wong:
· I do support this proj ect.
· Some concerns I want to raise similar to Vice Chair Miller concerns.
· We want more economic development in the city and I believe that with this project, it will
help revitalize Vallco mall; it is important to revitalize this mall and this will be a starting
point.
· It will address the affordable housing concerns that we have; I am concerned about having too
many 2 bedrooms and ask that before it goes to City Council for final approval to consider
some one bedroom nnits as well. The market will demand that as well.
Cupertino Planning Commission
24
March &, 2005
· Relative to connectivity, when it goes to City Council I want to see the connectivity between
the Menlo Equities and the future Hewlett Packard property better detailed; presently it is
sketchy, and request that staff follow up with that before it goes to Council to see that. As
stated by the applicant, it is not pleasant to walk into a parking garage and we want to make it
more user friendly to approach that building on both the Menlo Equities and future Hewlett
Packard site.
· Relative to Mr. Whitakers concern about the location and am concerned about that even
though it is an ASA application I strongly suggest to staff is to notify the neighbors; they are
within the City Council directions; the more notification we have, the better off you are and I
feel it is important.
· Regarding the height, the applicant had a good point; relative to the development agreement,
they are permitted to go to 8 stories, so they supercede the General Plan and they do have that
right as a property owner.
· The other concern is the circulation. As you exit to; because folks want to get on the freeway;
I can see the circulation backing up into the parking lot and also conflicting with the
residential up above and I think that before it goes to Council, the applicant needs to work
more on the circulation.
· I am glad you have that service road you can exit out there, but it needs to be better worked; I
am not sure if a street light will work there but something needs to be done.
· There has to be a tradeoff regarding the height; and I understand that you did get approved for
204 housing units and in order to fit that in, the only way is to go up. I see the concern is
regarding the height and it is a tradeoff that you can either have less housing units but then
there is a benefit, for addressing for more affordable housing. It does need more work and I
am sure that the applicant can work closely with staff in addressing that.
· I want to give more flexibility to the design review regarding the materials, that as long as they
have high quality materials, I wish that staff can work with the applicant.
Mr. Piasecki:
· Relative to noticing, he asked the Commission their preference because it is an item that was
scheduled to go to the City Council next Tuesday and staff has been trying to work with the
application to expedite it.
· It is critical to this applicant that this move quickJy so that they can line up issues with
financing, approvals, etc.
· He discussed the most appropriate meeting dates to return to the Planning Commission.
Ms. Wordell:
· Reviewed the concerns that could be addressed before and at the meeting.
Mr. Rohde:
· A delay would be critical as the department stores are eager to have the application move
forward; we are ready to move forward on the theater, which is the marketing engine for the
revitalization of the center and the Rosebow\ is the economic engine, and they go together. A
delay is a problem, and we would like to push forward.
Motion:
Motion by Com. Saadati, second by Vice Chair Miller, to approve
Application ASA-2005-03 with the conditions as stated: Noticing to the
neighbors for the City Council meeting, east elevation, circulation, high
quality materials with some flexibility, and other items stated by staff. (Vote:
3-1-0; Com. Chen voted no; Com. Giefer absent)
Cupertino Planning Commission
25
March 8, 2005
Chair Wong:
. Suggested that the applicant do some community outreach and specific groups; voice their
concerns at the City Council meeting and some concerns at the Planning Commission meeting.
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS: None
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Environmental Review Committee: Meeting was cancelled due to lack of business.
Housim! Commission: Com. Saadati presented his report at the previous Planning Commission
meeting.
Economic Development Committee Meetinl!: Quarterly meeting; no report.
Mavor's Monthlv Meetinl! With Commissioners:_No report available in Com. Giefer's absence.
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: No additional report.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned to the regular Planning Commission
meeting on Tuesday, March 22'", at 6:45 p.m.
SUBMITTED BY:
-
Q.~
is, Recording Secretary
Approved as amended: March 22, 2005