DIR Report
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 TORRE AVENUE, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA 9S014
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Subject: Report of the Community Development Directo&"-
Planning Commission Agenda Date: Tuesdav, January 10, 2006
The Citv Council met on Tuesdav, January 3, 2006, and discussed the following- items
of interest to the Planning Commission: (see attached reports)
1. Consider Application Nos. U-200S-1S, ASA-200S-14, TM-200S-oS, Z-200S-06,
Rockwell Homes, 10716 Stevens Canyon Road, APN 3S6-o3-047: The City
Council approved the applications with the following conditions:
IJ A wrap-around porch is required on the corner unit.
IJ An amount equal to the rental difference for the relocation units for 4 months.
IJ The displaced tenants shall receive a relocation allowance equal to three times
the current monthly rental rate.
IJ The property owner shall provide dumpsters onsite when the residents begin
to move out
IJ Current tenants shall have first right of refusal to purchase market-rate units.
2. Valko nig-httime construction: The City Council approved nighttime
construction hours for the AMC theaters steel construction for a period of 4 1h
months.
3. Stevens Creek Corridor Studv Session: The City Council set January 17, 2006
from 5:30 - 6:30 p,m. to hold a study session for an update on the status of the
Stevens Creek Corridor Plan,
Enclosures:
Staff Reports
G: \Planning \ SteveP \Director's Report \2006 \pdOl-l 0-06.doc
DI(2- \
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM
Application: U-2005-18, TM-2005-08, Z-2005-06, ASA-2005-14
Agenda Date: December 13, 2005
Applicant (s): Michael Abdollahi
Property Owner: Rockwell Homes
Property Location: Stevens Canyon Road & St, Andrews Avenue
APPLICATION SUMMARY
REZONING (File no. Z-2005-06) of an 1.47-gross acre site from Multiple-Family
Residential (R-3) Zone to Planned Residential P(RES) Zone
USE PERMIT (File no. U-2005-18) to demolish 15 residential aparhnents and construct a
15-unit townhome community housing development, Stevens Canyon Villas
TENTATIVE MAP (File no, TM-2005-08) to subdivide an 1.10 net acre property into 16
lots for a 15-unit townhome community housing development
ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL (File No. ASA-2005-14) for the design of a 15-
unit townhome community housing development
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approvals of the:
REZONING (File no, Z-2005-06) per the model resolution.
Rezone from R-3 to P (RES),
USE PERMIT (File no, U-2005-18) per the model resolution.
TENTATIVE MAP (File no. TM-2005-08) per the model resolution,
ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL (File Nò. ASA-2005-14) per the model
resolution.
PROJECT DATA
General Plan Designation:
Existing Zoning Designation:
Proposed Zoning Designation:
Net Site Area:
Gross Site Area:
Residential MedjHigh 10-20 DUjGr Ac
R-3 - Multi-Family Residential Zone
P (RES) - Planned Residential Zone
1.10 acres
1.47 acres
b-;L
File No. U-2005-18, TM-2u05-08, Z-2005-06, ASA-2005-14
December 13, 2005
Page 2
Existing Land Use:
Building Sq, Ft, (to be demolished):
Proposed Land Uses:
Proposed Net Residential Density:
Proposed Gross Residential Density:
Envirorimental Assessment:
Dwelling Unit Summary:
Multi-Family Residential
21,645 square feet (five buildings)
Residential (15 dwelling units)
15/1.10 = 13.64 dwellings/net ¡¡cre
15/1.46 = 10.20 dwellings/ gross acre
Categorically Exempt
# of # of Beds # of Unit Sq. Ft. Unit Type Garage
Units Baths . TVDe
12 3 2.5 2,667 Townhome 2-car
conventional
3 2 2.5 1,563 Townhome I-car
conventional
Parking:
Parking Required (Townhouse):
Parking Supplied - Garage:
Open:
Total:
42 stalls (2.8 per DU x 15 DU)
27 stalls
18 stalls
45 stalls
The Planning Corrunission first reviewed the proposed project on October 25, 2005 (see
Attachment C for staff report) at which time public testimony and Corrunission
discussion raised questions in the area of seven issues that required more information
from staff and building redesign by the developer, This staff report addresses the seven
issues raised at the October 25, 2005 public hearing, presented below in the Discussion
section of this report.
DISCUSSION:
1. Provide some two-bedroom units to reduce the overall building height. The
project should not infringe on the daylight plane of the adjoining properties on
the east side,
The applicant has redesigned the townhome complex to provide one two-
bedroom unit in each of the three building townhome clusters, resulting in 12
three-bedroom units and three two-bedroom units, The two-bedroom units have
less floor area and have one-car garages. This results in an increase in the side
setbacks and more landscaped area of the site, The roofline above the twO-
bedroom units was lowered, and the grading of the site was revised to lower the
buildings into ground by one foot (the height remains the same at 35' 8").
D-3
File No, U-2005-18, TM-2U05-08, Z-2005-06, ASA-2005-14
December 13, 2005
Page 3
The applicant has provided a graphic illustration that shows the sun angle at the
lowest point of the year which adequately demonstrates that the proposed
buildings will not adversely impact the daylight plane of the adjoining
properties.
Additionally, the landscape plan was revised to replace the proposed redwood
tree plantings at the rear property line with smaller, deciduous trees to further
protect the sun exposure of the adjoining properties.
2. Clarify the accessibility of the front balconies.
There was discussion about whether the front balconies had windows or doors
. and if they were intended to be accessible from the inside. The floor plans were
revised to show sliding doors for access to the balconies.
3, Ensure that the attic space is not accessible and cannot be used as living space.
The plans were revised to show the attic space does not have sufficient height to
be used as living space, The UBC requires a floor to ceiling height of 7' for living
space, and the attic space ranges from 0' to 5' at the highest point. The plans also
indicate that the attic is not accessible for living space. However, the attic will
have a small panel opening that is required by code.
4. The Relocation Plan should provide a list of comparable apartment and
availability.
The applicant prepared a list of nearby apartments which lists the number of
apartments in each complex. It is not possible to state at this time what the
availability will be at a future date when the tenants would actually move, but
the applicant has committed to assisting the tenants at that time - see list
attached to Relocation Plan, Attachment C
5. Clarify the Monta Vista boundary as it relates to General Plan policy restricting
height to 30'.
The project is not located within the Monta Vista boundary, see Attachment E.
6. Determine the school impact,
The student generation rate used in the EIR for the General Plan are:
o K-8: 0.2 students/units for low density (15 duel acre or less)
b-4-
File No. U-2005-1S, TM-:w05-0S, 2-2005-06, ASA-2005-14
December 13, 2005
Page 4
o High School: 0.12 students/unit forlow density
Therefore, the projected students generated from the proposed development are:
o K-S: 3 students
o High School: 1,S students
The applicant provided the following information on current tenants and
students in attendance at local school:
o K-S: 4 (1 at Kennedy Middle and 3 at Stevens Creek Elementary)
o High School: 2 (Monta Vista High)
7. Notice all tenants of the 12/13/05 meeting.
The applicant provided a list of the tenants and the City has duly noticed all
addresses on the list of the 12/13/05 meeting.
Additionally, the applicant held an informative meeting on November 19, 2005
(see attached noticing letter, Attachment D) for the tenants and reports that
tenants from S units attended and were pleased with the Relocation Plan. Some
of the tenants wanted information about the BMR units and about the
construction period, Overall the mood was positive. The applicant delivered an
informative packet to the tenants who were not at the meeting.
ENCLOSURES:
A Model Resolution
B. October 25, 2005 Staff Report with attachments,
C Relocation Plan with Apartment Listing
D, Tenant Meeting Letter
E. Map showing Monta Vista boundary
Submitted by: Tricia Schllnpp, Contract Planner
Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development3þ--é 8-<'>2<2 e-l¿'(
ð¿ÆF
1)-5
,
~\)-
, .
City Hall
10300 Tone Avcnu.
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408) m-3220
Fax: (408)717-3366
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
CUPEIQ1NO
SUMMARY
Agenda Item No: I Î
Meeting Date: January 3, 2006
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Consideration of a request by Valleo to approve a five-month, 24-hour construction schedule for
the new AMC Theaters as required by Section 10.48.031 of our Noise Contrul Ordinance.
BACKGROUND
Vallco has requested a five-month, 24-hour construction schedule for build out of the new AMC
Theaters. This request is unusual for the city due to the length of the request, the safety issues
while the mall is open and the noise associated with the steel construction.
The work is scheduled to start on January 4111 with an estimated completion date of May 31"- The
work will be conducted Monday through Saturday in two shifts, with the steel construction
occurring between the hours of lOpm to 6am and the bolt, rack and welding crews working
during the day. This schedule has been proposed to help mitigate any safety issues with the
occupied mall and its patrons. Both DPR Construction and its sub-contractors will perfonn daily
safety inspections.
The goal will be to minimize the noise levels whenever possible. The equipment will be staged
on Wolfe and the majority of the work will be conducted ftom this site. We are told that only
one week of work will be necessary on the west side of the mall closest to the neighborhood,
Mall security staff will provide overnight patrols throughout the complex and specifically focus
on the areas closest to residential sites. In addition, employee parking for the nighttime work
will be limited to the existing Rose Bowl site on the south side of Wolfe Road.
As required hy our Community Noise Control Ordinance, the City notified owners and/or
occupants of properties within a 1,000-foot radius of the mall on December 12, 2005. Staff will
provide a summary of citizen comments geÌ1erated ftom that notice at the Council meeting. In
addition, Vallco management confirmed that Menlo Equities has agreed to include this noise
disclosure in their sale documents.
Attached is a map of the complex and the proposed construction phases.
Printed 011 Recycled "-
Ì>-(o.
CUPEI(fINO
Parks and Recreation De.partment
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Number J:L
Agenda Date: January 3, 2006
ISSUE
Set a study session on the Stevens Creek Corridor Plan for January 17, 2006, ftom 5:30
p.m. to 6:30 p.m. (prior to the regular meeting).
BACKGROUND
We need to circulate the environmental document for this project for public and agency
review. The environmental document is for all phases of Stevens Creek Corridor Park;
we believe the project will be constructed in three phases begiIU1ing in 2007.
The background analysis for the environmental review has been completed and
includes:
· Biological studies (bats, birds, reptiles, amphibians and plants)
· A cultural resource inventory, and
· Traffic analysis
These background reports have infonned the initial review or "Initial Study" prepared
by the consultant team. The background reports have also infonned the project design.
The Initial Study with findings and a proposed mitigation and monitoring plan must
now be circulated for public comment. We want the Council to understand what is in
the report and plan before it hits the streets.
The Council made a number of decisions regarding the design of the project over the
last year, ITom the most general to the more specific. Decisions made to date include:
· Reaffinning the goals for the project in September 2004 following the community
visioning process
· Sizing the picnic ground to 800; accepting the corresponding loss of revenue in
March 2005
· Extending the trail fÌ'om Stevens Creek Boulevard to McClellan Road in May 2005
· Deleting the Scenic Circle access and stream crossing !Tom the project in December
2005
lYB
PrInted on Røcyc/8d Paper
January 3, 2006
Page 2 of2
At the January 17 study session, YOI.\ will have an opportunity to see how the pieces of
the puzzle fit together, review the grant funded elements to be constructed in 2007 and
review the funding sources.
Following your review, agency and public comments on possible environmental impacts
will be collected and necessary mitigations drafted to reflect the public comment The
City Council will ultimately be asked to adopt a final environmental document before
the project is bid for construction.
We can accomplish this presentation, and a question and answer period in one hour.
RECOMMENDATION
Set a study session on the Stevens Creek CoITidor Plan for January 17,2006, ftom 5:30
p.m. to 6:30 p.m. (prior to the regular meeting).
Respectfully submitted:
Therese Ambrosi Smith, Director
Parks and Recreation Department
.
g:'Parks and recrœlÎon admin\ I stevens creek conidonstaff rcports\cc study session request 01 0306.dœ
\)-4