Draft Minutes 01-26-06
MINUTES
CUPERTINO PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE:
PLACE:
TYPE:
Thursday, January 26, 2006
Cupertino Community Hall, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA
Special Meeting
Chair Miller called the special meeting to order at 6:45 p.m.
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: Chairperson:
Vice Chair:
Commissioner:
Commissioner:
Marty Miller
Lisa Giefer
Taghi Saadati
Gilbert Wong
Commissioners Absent: None
Staff Present:
Community Development Director:
Parks and Recreation Director:
Assistant Public Works Director:
Associate Planner:
Steve Piasecki
Therese Smith
Glenn Goepfert
Gary Chao
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
There were no minutes for approval.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
There were no written communications.
POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR
There were no postponements or removals from calendar.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Ms. Deborah Hill:
· Advised that she sent a letter to the Bicycle Commission regarding problems she often
experiences when attempting to cross the street at Rodriguez Avenue, Rainbow Drive,
DeAnza Boulevard, McClennan Avenue, Stelling Road and Stevens Creek Boulevard.
· Said that the City needs to take action to help people cross these roadways safely, perhaps
by having officers around to help slow down the traffic in these areas.
· Reported that she just recently had a driver make a right turn right in front of her, as she was
ready to cross the road.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 3
· Informed that she has had seven incidents when attempting to cross at Rainbow and six
incidents when attempting to cross DeAnza.
· Said that people are in a rush. They don't slow down. People don't care anymore.
· Stated that so far, nothing is being done. The problem is getting worse.
· Said that she brought her concerns up to City Hall and the Sheriff's office asking for a
solution to this major concern that is bothering her.
· Stressed the importance in making the streets save.
· Recounted that 15 years ago she was struck by a drunken driver and nearly lost her life.
· Said that she hopes to hear back from someone within the next week or so.
CONSENT CALENDAR
There were no Consent Calendar Items.
...
PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM NO.1
Application No.is): U-2005-15. EXC-2005-18. TM-2005-04. Z-2005-04 iEA-2005-17)
Applicant: Kelly Snider (Toll Brothers). Location: Stevens Creek Blvd. @ Finch Avenue
· Use Permit (U-2005-15) for a master plan for a commercial and residential development
consisting approximately 115,000 square feet of commercial shopping center, up to 402
residential units and a 3.5-acre public park.
· Exceptions from the Heart of the City Plan (EXC-2005-18) to allow for an average 35-foot
front setback along Stevens Creek Boulevard for the commercial shopping center.
· Tentative Map (TM-2005-04) to subdivide 4 parcels (approximately 26-acres) into 6 parcels
for a residential and commercial development consisting of approximately 115,000 square
feet of retail shopping center, up to 402 residential units and a 3.5-acre public parle
· Rezoning (Z-2005-04) to allow for a commercial and residential development consisting of
approximately 115,000 square feet of commercial shopping center, up to 402 residential
units and a 3.5-acre public park.
Continued from the January 10,2006 Planning Commission meeting.
Tentative City Council meeting: February 7, 2006
ACTION TO BE TAKEN:
Approve or deny EA-2005-17
Approve or deny U-2005-15
Approve or deny EXC-2005-18
Approve or deny TM-2005-04
Approve or deny Z-2005-04
Director Steve Piasecki began the staff presentation as follows:
· Explained that he would quickly go through the first slides, as they are a repeat of those
used for the last hearing on this project.
· Added that Project Planner Gary Chao would follow up with technical issues for this project.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 4
· Described the project as consisting of a rezoning, an exception to the Heart of the City
Specific Plan, a Tentative Map and a Use Permit to support a future Site and Architectural
Review Project to allow the construction of a mixed-use development.
· Advised that the applicants have developed their project using two options, Option A and
Option B.
· Des'cribed Option A as consisting of 322 residential condominium units and 80 senior
housing apartments, which results in 20 percent in Below Market Rate (BMR) units, and a
total of 402 units. Option B consists of 314 residential condominium units and 55 BMR
units, which results in a 15 percent BMR ratio, and a total of 369 units.
· Pointed out that the normal BMR unit requirement for a development such as this is 15
percent.
· Stated that in addition to the residential units, this project also includes 112,000 square feet
in retail shopping center space and a 3.5-acre park. An existing 150,000 square foot
industrial/office development on site would be demolished, as it is obsolete.
· Identified the subject property as being surrounded by Stevens Creek Boulevard, Vallco
Parkway, Finch Avenue and Tantau Avenue. There is a residential development adjacent to
the immediate west. To the south there is an undeveloped vacant parcel.
· Reported that in the past there have been several land use options and proposals
considered for this property including medium to big box retail uses, mixed use projects as
well as an 18-story Marriott Hotel project that received approval but never constructed.
· Said that a mixed-use development project is what is being seen tonight.
· Clarified that the two options are identical with the exception to the number and type of
affordable housing units. Option A includes 80 senior units and Option B includes 55
traditional BMR units.
· Advised that the landscape plan proposes quite a bit of private open space as well as
money to enhance a walking trail along Calabasas Creek. A triple row of trees will serve as
a landscape buffer along Stevens Creek Boulevard.
· Described this proposed development as part Main Street and part suburban shopping
center.
· Outlined the project analysis as including both policy and technical issues. The policy
issues include the General Plan, the Heart of the City Specific Plan, City Council direction,
issues such as density, building heights and setbacks, park area and number of housing
units. The technical issues include parking, architectural style, traffic impacts, schools and
trees.
· Reminded that Council previously directed to the project 300 of the 400 proposed
undesignated residential units.
· Said that the General Plan allows for a density of up to 33 dwelling units per gross acre.
The proposal for the West Terrace is at a slightly higher density.
· Said that the ratio for the height plane is 1.5 to 1 with a maximum height of 60 feet. This
project falls under the 60 foot maximum.
· Outlined staff's recommendations to conform to City policies including reducing the density
of the West Terrace building; offsetting the third and fourth ftoors on the East Terrace
building along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau Avenue to conform to the 1.5 to 1 slope
line and reducing the units, if necessary, and perhaps have the fourth story portion look like
it is only three stories with the fourth story pushed back as much as possible to reduce the
appearance of mass along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau Avenue.
· Said that relocating higher density buildings to the back and the villas to the front can be
looked at or some other combination thereof so as to be comparable in height to the
Metropolitan development.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 5
· Said that the inclusion of angled street parking along the north side of Vallco Parkway is
proposed.
· Stated that staff would like to see the proposed square-shaped park be enlarged into a
rectangular-shaped park of at least three acres and is recommending that the City buy an
additional .21-acres to get to that point thereby creating a more functional park.
Commissioner Wong asked what this additional land purchase would cost the City.
Director Steve Piasecki:
· Replied that he was not sure but the purchase price would be based upon market value for
the land. If the value of land were approximately $3 million per acre, one-fifth or 20 percent
of an acre would run about $600,000.
· Outlined the substantial public benefits offered by this project to the City. The project allows
the City to buy .21 acres to expand the proposed park, to add to the purchase of the Rancho
pocket park authorized by City Council, to contribute to the improvements to the Creek Trail
and to provide new pedestrian sidewalks along the west side of Tantau Avenue from Vallco
Parkway to north of Highway 280.
· Said that the commercial square footage, additional street parking and offset buildings
warranted being allocated additional residential units.
· Added that staff feels either Option A or B could be supported. Option A, which includes the
senior housing component would required Council to make the finding that the project fulfills
the BMR requirements although the units are concentrated in one area rather than being
distributed throughout the project.
· Said that an exception to the Heart of the City Plan, which requires a minimum 35-foot
setback along Stevens Creek Boulevard, would be required. Although the average is 35
feet, the setbacks range runs between 26 and 57 feet.
· Said that he would now turn the remainder of the report over to Project Planner Gary Chao
and following that the applicants would make their presentations.
Associate Planner Gary Chao continued the staff report as follows:
· Advised that the parking analysis was broken into two categories, residential and
commercial.
· Described the Code residential parking requirements for Option A as 804 spaces. This
project includes 80 senior housing units and 774 on-site spaces are proposed by the
applicant together with 15 street parking spaces proposed along the new Valley Vista Drive
and 15 street parking spaces along Vallco Parkway. With this street parking, the parking
requirement is met for Option A. For the proposed commercial space, 533 spaces are
required and 405 are provided. Even with the proposed 68 spaces along Finch Avenue and
38 spaces along Vallco Parkway the commercial parking proposed is deficient.
· Compared the parking for Option B, with the standard BMR units instead of senior housing.
For the residential uses, 738 spaces are required and 856 are provided. For the commercial
uses, 533 spaces are required and 520 are provided. With the park, a total of 578 spaces
are required resulting in a deficiency of 58 spaces.
· Informed that the applicant has submitted a report from a private consultant, Hexagon, who
has made the determination that adequate parking is being provided to support both Options
A and B.
· Said that staff is recommending that additional parking stalls be provided along the street on
the north side of Vallco Parkway. Staff estimates that approximately 30 additional spaces
can be added and the applicant believes they could actually accommodate more than 40
spaces along the north side of Vallco Parkway.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 6
Director Steve Piasecki said that staff feels that the Hexagon report has merit and that if 30 to
40 additional spaces can be provided on the street the TDM measures would no longer be
necessary and could be removed from the conditions of approval. These measures are difficult
to implement and enforce.
Commissioner Wong asked if the City's traffic consultant and the applicant's report from
Hexagon used similar methodology.
Director Steve Piasecki replied no. He added that the City's consultant reviewed the Hexagon
report and said that their methodology was reasonable and staff agrees.
Planner Gary Chao:
· Said that the City's Architectural Advisor, Larry Cannon, also reviewed the project and
provided a list of issues to address later with the Site and Architectural approval.
· Outlined the Architect's recommendations for high quality materials, exceptional architecture
and detailing as well as a cohesive architectural concept to tie everything together.
· Explained that 21 intersections were studied for existing conditions, project impacts and
cumulative conditions. Fehr & Peers has calculated a net of 5,600 daily trips. There is no
significant impact on these 21 intersections studied. Re-striping can rectify impacts at Vallco
Parkway and Wolfe Road.
Director Steve Piasecki said that these traffic impacts are evaluated as if the existing industrial
uses on site were fully occupied. When looking at the site, the consultant allocates trips to a
variety of locations. This is a great location relative to access to Highway 280 and the
expressway system that results in less impact on local streets.
Planner Gary Chao:
· Stated that an outside consultant evaluated school impacts. Option A with senior housing
units equals more units but Option B with traditional BMR units generates more students.
Based upon the worse case scenario (Option B) it is estimated that 143 new students could
be generated as a result of this project. Seventy-five (75) would attend Eisenhower
Elementary, 30 would attend High Middle School and 38 would attend Cupertino High
School.
· Explained that both Cupertino Elementary and Fremont Union High School Districts have
reviewed the conclusions of this consultant's report and expressed no opposition to the
project.
· Reported that City Arborist, Barrie Coate & Associates, conducted a tree survey that
identified 317 trees on site. Of those trees, 149 are non-specimen trees that are proposed
for removal. An additional 12 non-specimen trees are to be replaced due to poor health and
14 of the existing trees can be transplanted, one of which is a specimen Oak tree. One
dead Valley Oak will be replaced with a Valley Oak in the same approximate location. The
Arborist identifies 21 non-specimen trees that may be impacted by development. These
trees would be evaluated in more detail during the Site and Architectural phase when final
landscaping plans would be presented. In total, 164 replacement trees would be planted to
offset trees removed as recommended by the City Arborist.
· Recommended that the Planning Commission first consider policy related issues and if it
finds those issues to be addressed, the Commission could then consider the technical
issues and provide staff with direction or recommendation.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 7
· Advised that representatives from Fehr & Peers and David Powers & Associates are here
tonight as well as project representatives.
Chair Miller invited the applicants to make their presentation.
Ms. Kelly Snider, Toll Brothers, Inc.:
· Said they would pick up where they left off two weeks ago.
· Stated that staff did a good job presenting both Option A and B.
· Said that they would like to present a 3-D video depiction of their proposed development to
the Commission (had some technical difficulties)
Director Steve Piasecki suggested that while the technical difficulties are being worked out,
perhaps the Commissioners might have questions for the applicant.
Chair Marty Miller:
· Asked about the letter from the Fremont Union High School District that indicated a deficit of
$411,000 in terms of impacts on these additional students and whether that impact is from
Option A or B.
Director Steve Piasecki said that he believes it was based upon Option B.
Chair Marty Miller asked what the impacts were on schools for Option A.
Director Steve Piasecki said he did not believe that information was available as only the worse
case scenario was evaluated. Anything below that would be better. A rough estimate could
probably be reached by apportioning the students that would come. This would result in the
neighborhood of $300,000 for Option A or three-quarters of the amount estimated for Option B.
Mr. Jack Bariteau, Keenan & Bariteau:
· Identified himself as the retail developer who is partnered with Toll Brothers to make this
application to the City.
· Stated that he is accompanied this evening by Kenneth Rodriguez, of Kenneth Rodriguez &
Associates, who is the shopping center architect and someone that he has known for 25
years and who has designed over a million square feet of shopping center space for his
company throughout Northern California.
· Introduced Mr. Jim Yee, from Dahlin Group Architects, architect for the residential project,
and Mr. Gary Langman, the landscape architect for both the residential and retail
components of this project.
Mr. Jim Yee, Dahlin Group Architects:
· Said that Stevens Creek and Tantau offer a gateway into Cupertino.
· Said that the proposed triple row of trees would offer a sense of entry and place to this area
and set the tone for the rest of Stevens Creek Boulevard.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez, Kenneth Rodriguez & Associates:
· Stated that their landscape architect has helped to knit this project together to create a
walkable community that includes residential, retail and a park.
· Said that there is a wraparound architectural frontage on all four sides.
· Stated that the project is typical of a downtown Main Street type of use with a variety of
building materials and includes a kiosk building.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 8
· Advised that the auto court is well landscaped and that retail uses will also front along Finch
Avenue.
· Pointed out that the park will link this project to the Metropolitan project.
Mr. Jim Yee, Dahlin Group Architects:
· Said that there are three major public spaces, the linear park, the gateway to Cupertino
along Stevens Creek Boulevard and the playfield. A variety of outdoor spaces are provided
that are all tied together. The streetscape knits together this heart of Cupertino.
· Stated that this is the last piece that finishes off this area and ties the heart of the city
together.
· Described the inclusion of benches and said that a passive environment is created with rose
gardens, seat walls, trails, arbors where people can sit and congregate and support the
retail across the street.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez:
· Said that the park would be used by residents and would also benefit the retail uses with its
diagonal street parking further enhancing this Main Street concept that is reiterated by its
four-sided architecture.
· Stated that two large major tenants would front onto Stevens Creek Boulevard, a street that
offers powerful retail frontage that means a lot in the retail market.
· Said that Finch Avenue also will include two-sided retail that opens up to the residences
across Vallco Parkway.
· Added that pedestrian circulation knits all parts of this project and nearby area together.
· Advised that the shops, heights, materials, outdoor seating, landscaping and lots of glass
create nice retail spaces that should be animated at night.
· Expressed his concurrence with the comments of staff and the City's Architectural Advisor.
Mr. Jim Yee said that their plaza ties the retail to the North Terrace area and creates a synergy
between the two developments.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez said that the same types of stone, plaster, and glass would be used for both
retail and residential buildings.
Mr. Jim Yee:
· Assured that the quality materials proposed include one, two and three-story panels of real
stone. A ton of quality materials will be incorporated.
· Suggested that thus far no residential project with this level of quality materials has been
constructed in Cupertino.
· Reported that balconies would be incorporated in the residential units and that residents
would be able to walk across the street to support the retail uses.
· Said that the landscaping would be green and lush and will weave the whole development
together. The project will speak to each other through patios and drives.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez thanked the Commission for allowing them to present their 3-D video
display.
Ms. Kelly Snider, Toll Brothers, Inc.:
· Reported that it has taken two years to develop this proposed development project.
· Said that there are real differing opinions on the location of the public park and that lots of
time has been spent on that issue.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 9
· Said that the 3.5-acre fully dedicated public park is 1.5-acres larger than required. What is
required under Code is 1.9 acres. They are doubling that size to 3.5-acres and offering to
improve it as well.
· Described the improvements as including the installation of grass, sprinklers, hardscape,
plants and trees.
· Opined that it is not a small investment that they are putting into this public space.
· Assured that they have located the park in a place that really welcomes in the entire
community of Cupertino. It is big enough at 3.5-acres to accommodate perhaps two youth
soccer fields, passive space and serves the residents of both the Vallco Rose Bowl and
Metropolitan projects as well as this development.
· Explained that it has been estimated that this project would result in $320,000 in new
revenue to the City's general fund after net costs, including police and on-going
maintenance, are deducted out. This revenue is primarily sales tax revenue from the
112,000 square feet of new retail space.
· Reported that they are committing to spend up to $100,000 on new public art for Stevens
Creek Boulevard.
· Pointed out that they are proposing more than the minimum BMR units with Option A that
incorporates the 80 units of senior housing, representing a 20 percent ratio of BMR units.
Option B has 15 percent in BMR units.
· Described other benefits from the project including linear parking, new pedestrian and
bicycle trails, new sidewalks for Vallco Parkway north over the Tantau overpass, the
Calabasas Creek Trail Program contribution, the development of safe and appealing
crosswalk features at Finch, Tantau, Stevens Creek and Vallco Parkway crossings.
· Said that this project invites the community in. It offers over an acre of private open space
as well for private uses by residents that includes green space, a pool and recreation facility
and beautifully landscaped courtyards. It also provides all of the public plazas within the
shopping center that is on private property.
· Stated that the project results in more open space and meeting places for visitors to the
project and park and residents of the project and neighborhood.
· Said that the shopping center will have a free community room that can be reserved by any
member of the public.
· Advised that this project has supporters from community groups, some of which will
hopefully speak later this evening.
· Pointed out that the 3.5-acre park was originally deep and long but that City leaders wanted
it to be more of an active park space in order to accommodate organized sports. It is a
square park right now with a recommendation by staff to enlarge it into a rectangular shaped
park.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez:
· Reported that Economic and Planning Systems, Inc. prepared a Fiscal Impact Analysis, that
projected the annual revenue of $321.000.
· Added that even if using the City's more conservative capture rate, the revenue is still over
$296,000 net new revenue.
· Said that he believes that the parking program provided and designed with the Hexagon
report provides more than adequate parking for the joint uses.
· Said that the park adds to the parking demand by 45 spaces but that parallel parking could
add 41 spaces and diagonal parking could add 51 spaces.
· Said that adding diagonal parking is acceptable to them but may impact trees.
Ms. Kelly Snider, Toll Brothers, Inc.:
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 10
· Said that the East Terrace building is only approximately one foot higher than the nearby
Metropolitan building.
· Assured that they are willing to work with City staff.
· Stated that this is a Master Plan Community that creates a truly outstanding destination that
includes 112,000 square feet of retail sales space. It provides 20 percent in affordable
housing units for seniors. It is 15-feet below the maximum allowable height limits. It offers
1.6-additional acres in park space from what is required as well as their willingness to
improve the entire park. They are saving trees. They will be participating in the public art
program.
· Declared this to be an outstanding package deal for Cupertino.
· Introduced Mr. Bill Roberts, who is the representative for Hewlett-Packard, the property
owners.
Mr. Bill Roberts, Director of Real Estate, Hewlett-Packard:
· Explained that they selected Toll Brothers over two years ago due to their strong track
record for developing quality projects and delivering what is promised.
· Said that HP wanted a development company that would partner with the community. Toll
Brothers has partnered well and compromised as needed.
· Staled that they are very excited about this project that includes a substantial park
dedication and construction that HP employees will be able to use as well as the provision of
new retail and more affordable housing near employment.
· Stressed that lots of things about this project are attractive as both a community member
and large employer. They are proud to deliver this project to the community for their
employees.
· Urged the Commission to forward recommendations of support to Council
· Stated he would be available for any questions directed to HP.
Ms. Kelly Snider:
· Assured that remaining parking issues can be resolved with on-street parking.
· Added that architectural and massing concerns can be dealt with through the Site and
Architectural approval process.
· Pointed out that maintenance of the new park and street benefits the entire community and
should be maintained by the City rather than the project once constructed.
Chair Marty Miller asked if the financial analysis is changed if someone else pays for this park
maintenance.
Ms. Kelly Snider said no, the analysis took the City's maintenance into account.
Chair Marty Miller asked the Commissioners if they had any questions for the applicant.
Commissioner Saadati asked what the logic was behind two proposals versus just one.
Ms. Kelly Snider:
· Replied that in August 2005 they had originally submitted a proposal for 402 housing units,
of which 80 were affordable senior housing units, which is now known as Option A.
· Said that after presenting that proposal to the Housing Commission as an informational item
as well as to the Senior Commission and meeting with staff, they were told that it might just
be too many units.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 11
· Added that they were also told that since this proposal for senior housing did not technically
meet the City's BMR Housing Ordinance, which requires the BMR units to be dispersed
throughout a project, they might want to think about not doing it that way and to come up
with an Option B.
· Said that if the City does not want the senior component, they can meet the more typical
BMR component for family "for sale" housing that is scattered throughout the project and the
total number of residential units would be lowered as well.
· Reminded that this review occurred before the General Plan Update was adopted and
before the election and initiative vote. There was a great deal of sensitivity about these unit
count numbers.
· Stated that they thought they should present the two options to the Planning Commission
and Council so that they could debate the pros and cons of each and suggest what made
the most sense for this community.
Commissioner Saadati:
· Asked Ms. Kelly Snider if they had considered putting the park on the corner of Tantau and
Stevens Creek Boulevard, which would then border three streets, including Vallco Parkway.
· Questioned how that block acreage compares to the presently proposed park site.
Ms. Kelly Snider:
· Said that they did consider putting the park there.
· Assured that they considered putting the park everywhere and joked that she has the
drawings to prove it.
· Stated that one of the deciding factors had to do with the retail needing to be in the middle of
the project accessible from both Vallco Parkway and Stevens Creek Boulevard. Therefore
they needed to take a big chunk of that center project area along Finch, Vallco and Stevens
Creek for the retail portion because that is where it logically makes sense for access.
· Said that City staff was very concerned about what would be abutting the two recently
approved housing projects next door, the Rose Bowl and the Metropolitan.
· Advised that staff did not want the back end of housing or the back end of any retail over on
that side and they felt like the only appropriate use to put in front of that would be either the
front side of residential or open space park.
· Said that once you took those options off the table and put things in their place, the park just
fell out to the logical location at the corner of Finch and Stevens Creek.
Mr. Jack Bariteau, Keenan & Bariteau:
· Explained that this property actually slides down at a diagonal on Vallco Parkway to Tantau.
The depth of the property from Stevens Creek to Vallco Parkway becomes fairly much of a
problem for laying out a shopping center, especially for the larger stores that require a
proper parking field.
· Said that they really need that depth that is found in the middle of this property so it is
something of a design constraint that also played on their concerns.
Director Steve Piasecki:
· Said that staff was looking for a central location for this open space to also serve the several
hundred units in the Rose Bowl and 100 plus units at the Metropolitan.
· Added that staff was looking at this park as being a unifying element for all of Vallco Park
South.
· Stated that while there are some advantages to having the park on the far east end, staff
feels that this proposed location is both unifying and provides a really exciting activated
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 12
Finch Avenue because it will now have activities all along the area. If the park were along
Finch it would be okay and perhaps slightly larger but would be located across the street
from industrial/office uses, Stevens Creek and residential units to one side so you don't get
the functional utility of being surrounded by the new development and retail units.
· Reminded that staff is actually proposing making the proposed park slightly larger.
Commissioner Saadati asked if the proposed grocery and drug stores were considered for
placement at the front of Stevens Creek.
Mr. Jack Bariteau asked if Commissioner Saadati means turning the shopping center around.
Commissioner Saadati clarified his intent as somewhat closing the front of the site from view
from Stevens Creek so it would not be as visible.
Mr. Jack Bariteau:
· Explained that what should really be paid attention to is the constraints.
· Added that one of the principle constraints is the setback issue and the height of buildings
on Stevens Creek.
· Reminded that they are already asking for an exception to the setback because of a need to
average setbacks in order to meet the minimum standard.
· Said that if one took those larger buildings with the grocery store and the drug store and
placed their backs toward Stevens Creek, those buildings would be approximately 32 to 34
feet in height and they would not be able to make the setback work according to the City
requirements.
· Reported that the other aspect of that is that Stevens Creek is a significant boulevard. It is a
major entrance into Cupertino and a real asset to the City that the grocery and pharmacy
would look to orient themselves to in order to create the proper imagery and also to provide
the consumer with ease of access and take advantage of the potency of this location.
· Said it is very important to understand that there are parameters that they have to deal with
when working with these types of retailers and to understand what is going to attract them
into Cupertino.
· Stated if that focus is not there including the orientation of the parking field, etc., and the
imagery they are looking for is not there, they simply will not come to this location.
· Added that they are trying to make this retail site the best sellable package possible.
· Reported that he has talked to the mayor about this issue in the last several weeks in that
Stevens Creek is synonymous with people in this valley as being a retail street or boulevard.
· Recounted that many years ago the City of San Jose, when they were looking at Valley
Fair's renovation, had an opportunity to rename San Carlos Street, which starts from 880 at
Stevens Creek and goes all the way into the downtown, as Stevens Creek Boulevard.
However, San Jose felt there was historical reference to the existing San Carlos name. He
said thai he had encouraged them to rename this part of the street because it would have
given so much power to that area. If you look at that area going into downtown San Jose, it
has remained somewhat inconsistent and moribund. That was an opportunity lost.
· Stated his belief that it would be a bad economic decision for Cupertino to turn its back on
Stevens Creek when it is such an advantageous location.
Commissioner Saadati:
· Referred back to the beginning of the applicant's presentation when three rows of trees and
a setback range of between 46 to 58 feet was brought up.
· Asked if that was to be at the corner of Tantau.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 13
Mr. Jim Yee explained that the setback at the corner of Tantau and Stevens Creek would be 48
feet. The setback would be going back and forth along Stevens Creek.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez said that the setback varies in and out, up and down and helps break up the
building frontages.
Commissioner Saadati asked if the driveway was going to be the entry to the parking lot and
stores.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez replied yes, this driveway would be the entrance and focal point coming into
the site.
Commissioner Saadati pointed out that a market has also been proposed for the Rose Bowl
project and questioned how these two uses (market and grocery) could interact if they are
located so close together.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez explained that their project would accommodate a much broader tenant.
This area will support a market on Stevens Creek.
Mr. Jack Bariteau:
· Said that what is being talked about here is competition and the ability of the Rose Bowl
project to draw in the tenants it has been talking about.
· Stated that he has 30 years of experience in this area.
· Reminded that all businesses have specific facility requirements.
· Advised that he has two strong independent grocers that would like to come in here as the
area is underserved.
· Pointed out that the space at the Rose Bowl project is different space than this project is
offering and will serve a different type of tenant. Rose Bowl's parking is internalized within a
parking structure.
· Assured that they are not afraid of competition from the Rose Bowl development.
· Added his belief that this project is going to be an enhancement to Rose Bowl's ability to
bring that project forward.
· Reiterated that his company has been developing projects such as this for many years.
They have a reputation for producing these properties as well as for being long-term owners
and managers. They own successful shopping centers for the long-term.
· Assured that they will build a very viable project that will also help enhance the opportunity
for Vallco.
Commissioner Saadati asked how the Rose Bowl project compares to this one.
Mr. Jack Bariteau replied that the Rose Bowl building space is about 35,000 square feet with
two large end-on-end units and parking in between and some retail on the front edge that
looked to be in the 40,000 to 50,000 square foot range.
Director Steve Piasecki:
· Cautioned that from staffs perspective it really should not matter.
· Stated that if the City gets good quality buildings, over time the market will decide what is
needed as the free market system is a wonderful mechanism.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 14
· Said that if the City gets two grocery stores, fine. If the City gets one market and one small
box retail on either project, fine. Hopefully, both sites will be successful.
· Said that the focus should be on getting good quality commercial and making sure they are
linked together well and then simply letting the market decide.
Commissioner Saadati asked if staff has concern over the large number of palm trees proposed
and if provision of shade is an issue since palms don't provide shade.
Director Steve Piasecki said that it would be good to have the project landscape architect
discuss the complete landscape plan because there is a mixture of trees going in. While there
is a dominant palm signature, this is simply being used to gain attention.
Mr. Gary Langman, Guzzardo & Associates, Landscape Architect:
· Advised that the landscaping would provide shade in the parking lot and provide a strong
canopy that is a very important component of this project.
· Assured that trees would be planted in a dense pattern. The palm trees would be planted in
concert with other shade trees in the parking areas themselves.
Director Steve Piasecki asked Mr. Gary Langman to speak to what type of trees would be
planted between the palms and whether these trees would fight one another for space.
Mr. Gary Langman:
· Advised that the trees would work in a complimentary fashion.
· Said that the palm trees are creating a very high canopy. The trees in the parking columns
are lower-canopied and broader-headed trees. They work together.
Commissioner Saadati asked if the trees proposed are evergreen or deciduous.
Mr. Gary Langman replied that they are looking at a combination of both.
Director Steve Piasecki asked for examples of proposed species.
Mr. Gary Langman replied that while no final decisions have been made, they are looking at
trees like Crape Myrtles and Pears as well as other broad-headed trees such as Oaks.
Director Steve Piasecki asked for clarification that they are not suggesting placing larger trees
such as London Plane or Ash beneath these palms.
Mr. Gary Langman:
· Replied that those types of trees are important to use around the project perimeter. Ash
trees would be used along Stevens Creek Boulevard. London Plane trees would be used
along Finch Avenue as it offers a great large canopy.
· Said that along with those trees, smaller scale flowering trees such as Cherry, Pear and
other varieties would also be used to give year round seasonal interest and layered canopy.
This gives a very nice pedestrian environment as well as a pleasing environment to drive
through.
Commissioner Saadati asked how much green building would be utilized with this project such
as use of solar. .
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 15
Mr. Jack Bariteau:
· Assured that the commercial project would have a significant amount of green architecture.
· Reported that staff has asked them to document how much green architecture would be
incorporated into this development and this information will be brought out during the Site
and Architectural submittal.
· Added that over the last 15 years they have provided that type of green architecture.
Mr. Jim Yee advised that as a part of State requirements for residential construction, they are
required to do a large amount of energy efficiency construction. New Code requirements
adopted in October of last year have increased efficiency requirements by 10 to 15 percent. He
added that specific details would be provided during the Site and Architectural process.
Director Steve Piasecki asked if some of the demolished building materials would be recycled.
Ms. Kelly Snider, Toll Brothers, Inc., replied yes.
Commissioner Giefer asked staff to clarify that the total number of units committed to this area
within the General Plan as 400.
Director Steve Piasecki replied correct.
Commissioner Giefer asked how many units remain after the Vallco condominium units and
other units were committed.
Director Steve Piasecki replied that staff is recommending the assignment of 100 of the 400
available units to the Vallco project, leaving 300 units available, as well as pulling the remaining
37 from the uncommitted pool for the surrounding area so there would still be 300 for this site.
Due to the benefits of this site, staff is suggesting pulling from the uncommitted pool.
Commissioner Giefer:
· Reported that she reviewed the Heart of the City Specific Plan today and she pointed out
that one specific unifying factor is that primary commercial space is required to have a
visible entrance from the street.
· Asked staff if they are satisfied that these buildings are visible enough from Stevens Creek
to meet the intent of the Heart of the City Specific Plan.
Director Steve Piasecki:
· Replied yes, this proposal does meet the intent of this plan.
· Said that this is a hybrid project. Buildings B, C, D and E cover two-thirds of this street
frontage. The project needs to leave some gap open in order to have visibility into the
interior if this project if it is to be successful.
Commissioner Giefer asked where the bus stop on Stevens Creek would be located.
Director Steve Piasecki said that VTA would make that decision.
Commissioner Giefer asked about the comments and concerns raised by both the Housing and
Senior Commissions about concentrating all the senior housing units along Highway 280.
Director Steve Piasecki:
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26. 2006
Page 16
o Replied that he did not attend their meetings.
o Said that he believes that they prefer the units be located further from the freeway and
closer to the Rose Bowl project.
o Said that he believes that the Housing Commission is more concerned about the dispersal
of the BMR units throughout the development to more closely follow the BMR manual.
o Added that the Housing Commission is more in favor of Option B and the Senior
Commission is more in favor of Option A.
Commissioner Giefer questioned the risk of soccer balls being kicked onto busy Stevens Creek
and why the housing and park locations were not flipped.
Director Steve Piasecki:
o Reminded that staff believes this park needs to be central to this larger expanse of
residential and commercial uses to become a unifying element for the activities in the Vallco
area. the project itself as well as being accessible to the Rancho Encinitas area.
o Said that this park placement results in one of the greatest elements of this project. the
newly revitalized Finch Avenue.
o Said that the concept of lost soccer balls is an issue for which there might be some technical
solution such as netting when soccer is being played on site.
o Suggested that Parks and Recreation Director Therese Smith address this issue as she is
present this evening.
o Added that the parks need to be visible to drive by traffic to become a part of the community
fabric.
o Stated that he does not like to hide parks from public view.
Commissioner Giefer asked about noise impacts.
Director Steve Piasecki said he does not want to drive the location of parks based on technical
issues and reminded that the City needs as much visible open space as possible.
Ms. Therese Smith. Parks and Recreation Director:
o Pointed out that this proposed park, at 350 feet by 350 feet, is slightly larger than Library
Field.
o Stated that the opportunity to put sports play there is very limited and not likely.
o Said that this park is more likely to be used for youth practice fields.
o Said that if more utility is desired, the extra space proposed by staff makes a great deal of
difference in the use of this park space.
o Reminded that open space is there forever and endures.
o Pointed out that the east part of town is park deficient.
Commissioner Giefer asked for clarification on the linear park mentioned by the applicant and
whether it is the setback area along the street frontage.
Ms. Kelly Snider replied that this area is 50 feet wide. 38 feet public space and 12 to 15 feet
being private patio space.
Commissioner Giefer asked how old the trees depicted on the animation are and how long the
trees on the actual project site might take to reach that size.
Ms. Kelly Snider replied between five and 10 years.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 17
Commissioner Giefer asked where the dead Valley Oak tree would be replaced and with what
size replacement tree.
Mr. Gary Langman replied that it would be located close to the street frontage and near the
Metropolitan project. It would be a field-grown specimen tree of substantial size.
Ms. Kelly Snider said that this is documented on the Tree Relocation Plan that she has in her
computer and could provide.
Commissioner Giefer said it was not necessary at this stage. She is happy to learn that the
replacement tree would be a specimen tree of some size. She asked if a reciprocal parking
agreement is proposed between the housing and commercial uses.
Director Steve Piasecki:
· Advised that the parking for the housing stands alone from the commercial uses.
· Reported that more than the Ordinance required two to one ratio of parking is provided for
the residential project and is in structured parking lots, perhaps gated.
· Informed that the retail uses are relying on both on-site and street parking and what parking
is proposed should be fine.
· Added that staff does not want to see residential parking spill over into the commercial
spaces although residents can park on the public street.
Commissioner Giefer questioned whether people might park in this lot to go over to Vallco.
Director Steve Piasecki said that street parking is fine. He reminded that Vallco is a 1.1 million
square foot development while this development is one-tenth that size.
Commissioner Giefer questioned the freeway noise impacts on the North Terrace and Villas.
The area is quite noisy and the 81-decibellevel is unacceptable.
Mr. Jim Yee, Dahlin Group:
· Agreed that the maximum decibel level inside must be less than 45.
· Said that noise is buffered through wall construction and window assemblies.
· Pointed out that this is not much different than the Oak Park Village project currently under
construction.
· Assured that this project would be using the same noise mitigation measures to meet the
noise standards required by law.
Ms. Kelly Snider advised that the existing 9 to 10 foot sound wall would be replaced with a
minimum 12-foot high sound wall.
Commissioner Giefer asked if there is really a market for housing on the freeway.
Ms. Kelly Snider:
· Assured that Toll Brothers has a lot of experience in developing multi-family housing with
many projects located in high traffic areas.
· Agreed that this project would not draw the buyer looking for a half-acre lot with a single-
story ranch house.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 18
· Pointed out that developments like this one draw a younger buyer because it is more
affordable.
· Recounted that several of their projects in Sunnyvale, San Jose and the East Bay had no
loss of desirability when located close to a freeway.
· Assured that this location is not a negative.
Director Steve Piasecki said that in the Noise Report Option B was found to be the better option
in relation to noise. Perhaps the design of Option A could be amended to beef up the exterior
walls closest to the freeway.
Commissioner Giefer asked if retail use of this area nearest the freeway had been considered.
Ms. Kelly Snider replied no.
Mr. Jack Bariteau said that since there is no exposure to any major retail street and thus no
visibility into this area, only a large box retailer might function here but this remote location is not
likely to attract that tenant.
Commissioner Giefer asked how many car trips are required to make this site successful.
Mr. Jack Bariteau said that no more than are already there at 35,000 to 50,000 car trips per day.
There is enough existing traffic and people to serve this site even without adding these
residential units.
Director Steve Piasecki advised that the minimum standard is 20,000 car trips per day to
support retail.
Commissioner Wong asked if Parks and Recreation Director Therese Smith could advised how
two soccer fields could be accommodate on this new park.
Ms. Therese Smith, Parks and Recreation Director, replied that adult size fields could not be
accommodated but practice fields like at Library Field would fit.
Commissioner Wong asked how these practice fields would be configured, as he wants to be
sure this park would be functional.
Director Therese Smith:
· Said that the site could accommodate fields serving youth under age 10.
· Explained that the standard adult soccer field is 360 feet by 240 feet.
· Said that with the added .21 acres to the proposed park size, perhaps one adult field could
be accommodated on site.
· Pointed out that these days there is a demand for cricket fields that have different
configurations from soccer fields. While current fields in America are designed around a
rectangular shape, a cricket field is 420 feet by 420 feet with a pitch in the center. This field
design and shape does not lend itself to multiple uses.
Commissioner Wong asked about the existing cricket field and whether it is an adult or youth
size field.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 19
Director Therese Smith replied that it is youth sized and kids are already passing the ball off the
field and hitting library patrons. It is simply too small to accommodate cricket matches.
Commissioner Wong asked for the dimension of a youth soccer field.
Director Therese Smith said that it depends upon the age group. For really little kids the size is
cut down by 30 percent.
Commissioner Wong pointed out that the applicant is calling for two fields on this park while
Director Smith is saying only one would fit.
Director Therese Smith pointed out that space between the soccer fields is needed.
Commissioner Wong asked if the expansion of the park would allow more flexibility.
Director Therese Smith said even expanded it would still accommodate just one field.
Commissioner Wong asked how many soccer fields there are at the Creekside Park.
Director Therese Smith replied three, one adult field and two youth fields.
Commissioner Wong asked the size of lhat park.
Director Therese Smith said she was not certain, perhaps 30 acres.
Director Steve Piasecki said approximately 15 acres.
Director Therese Smith pointed out that Library Park is 330 feet by 330 feet between trees.
Director Steve Piasecki said that if the new park remains square, it could accommodate only
youth soccer. If it is enlarged into a rectangular park, it might accommodate adult soccer.
Commissioner Wong asked if cricket and soccer could share the space.
Director Therese Smith replied no.
Commissioner Wong asked if this park is more an issue for the Parks and Recreation
Commission than the Planning Commission.
Director Steve Piasecki advised that the issue for the Commission is to determine whether the
park should remain square or be enlarged into a rectangle with the City purchasing an addition
.21 acres of space to make that happen.
Commissioner Wong questioned whether a tumaround in the park might be possible to allow
drop off to occur off the street.
Director Steve Piasecki said that since this park is already small he believes that street
circulation can be used for drop off purposes at this park.
Commissioner Wong asked about the bus stop on Stevens Creek.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 20
Director Steve Piasecki said that bus drivers prefer a bus pad rather than a pull out area
because it is harder to enter back into traffic from within a pull out area.
Commissioner Wong asked the applicant to discuss the technical issues raised on sUbjects
such as setbacks and density and asked if the project could be rearranged in such a way as not
to lose housing units while still meeting minimum requirements.
Mr. Jim Yee:
· Replied yes, they could.
· Reminded that there is no living space within the setback area. It is just the parapet or
façade above the ceiling line that is within the setback area.
Ms. Kelly Snider:
· Agreed that there is an opportunity to massage the location of the back buildings by shifting
units around the entire site whether on the north or south parcel.
· Cautioned that losing units altogether presents lots of problems.
Commissioner Wong asked if it would be possible to keep the density to fewer than 35 units per
gross acre.
Ms. Kelly Snider said it would be easy if the park went along with it.
Commissioner Wong:
· Replied that the park space cannot be used but perhaps additional building height could be
supported.
· Stressed the importance of complying with the Ordinance requirements.
Ms. Kelly Snider said that close to an acre of land is coming back into their parcel.
Mr. Jim Yee added that they would only be two units over the maximum if that land comes back.
Commissioner Wong stressed that the minimum setback called out for in the Heart of the City
Specific Plan is 35 feet.
Mr. Jack Bariteau reminded that they are exceeding minimum setbacks in some areas and are
slightly less than minimum setbacks in some. If averaged, the setback requirement is satisfied.
Commissioner Wong asked how much frontage is at the 26-foot setback distance and
questioned whether this frontage could not easily be pushed back to a 30-foot minimum as a
compromise.
Mr. Jack Bariteau:
· Said that this is their signage building with a cluster sign for the building and a small
boutique shop such as a floral shop is proposed for this space.
· Reminded that the length of the project meets minimum setbacks if averaged and stressed
the importance of keeping these units along Stevens Creek staggered in and out.
Commissioner Wong suggested that with a 3D-foot minimum setback that goal of varied
frontages could still be accommodated.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 21
Mr. Jack Bariteau said that if the project were cramped on the inside, they would lose the flavor
of their urban design.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez:
· Stated that he looks at this project as an urban/suburban hybrid.
· Said that their proposed setback works with lots of landscape.
· Reiterated that the average setback on Stevens Creek is 35 feet.
· Stressed that they are trying to create a pedestrian friendly project.
Commissioner Wong reminded that they are not following the Heart of the City Plan.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez replied that they are asking the City to accept an average to meet that
minimum standard requirement.
Commissioner Wong asked Director Steve Piasecki for input on this issue.
Director Steve Piasecki said he had nothing to add.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez explained that they are coming to the Commission because they think this
varied building frontage setback along Stevens Creek is a better solution for the design and that
they are asking the Commission to think about it.
Commissioner Wong pointed out Building A and B. Building A depicts where the back of a
house is located. He questioned where the back of a house is on Building B.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez said Building B is a bookstore and not a house. This site would have duel
entries onto the project and no loading dock.
Commissioner Wong asked how deliveries would be made.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez replied through the use of wide doors, six feet by eight feet.
Commissioner Wong asked if this is a public or private street.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez asked Mr. Jim Yee to explain the spine.
Mr. Jim Yee advised that there would be parallel parking on both sides with a pass through drive
and would include sidewalk and planting.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez reminded that they are wrapping the architecture 360 degrees.
Commissioner Wong asked if a bookstore would use this entire area.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez reported that this is a large tenant space encompassing 16,000 square feet.
It also has its own outdoor patio of Stevens Creek Boulevard.
Commissioner Wong asked if there would be pedestrian access here.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez replied yes.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 22
Commissioner Wong asked if pedestrians would have to walk through the bookstore to get to
the interior of this project at this location.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez replied yes and that this would without a doubt be a desirable thing for the
bookstore tenant to have potential customers passing through their store.
Commissioner Wong expressed concern that if the bookstore was closed and the nearby coffee
business remained open later, potential customers would have to go around the building to
reach the coffee business.
Mr. Jack Bariteau advised that typical operating hours for larger bookstores is to 11 p.m.
Commissioner Wong suggested that an open access be provided that would be available for
use when the bookstore closes.
Mr. Jack Bariteau said that the key is finding exactly what the bookstore tenant wants. Once
approvals for this project are obtained they will check with the intended tenant.
Commissioner Wong brought up circulation into the shopping center and questioned the
adequacy of parking for the shopping center as well as the public park.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez:
· Said that the center is self sufficient as far as parking. The debate is the requirement for this
project to also provide parking forthe 3.5-acre public park.
· Reminded that not only are they giving the 3.5 acres for the park, they are also improving
that park.
· Questioned the fairness in also asking them to provide off-site parking to serve this public
park on top of that.
· Stressed that the analysis done supports the parking adequacy.
Commissioner Wong asked if they support the staff suggested parking along the street.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez said absolutely.
Ms. Kelly Snider advised that they project they can add approximately 41 spaces of street
parking.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez pointed out that exisling trees along East Vallco Parkway that would have to
be worked around in order to preserve.
Director Steve Piasecki suggested 40 spaces that are angled in order to miss impacting these
trees.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez said that an added benefit is that this street parking would help to slow traffic
down here. .
Commissioner Wong asked if this is to be a public or private street.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez said that it is a private street that separates the retail and residential
components.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minules of January 26, 2006
Page 23
Commissioner Wong asked how wide that private street would be.
Mr. Ken Rodriguez replied 56 feet.
Commissioner Wong asked if there would be four-way stops.
Ms. Kelly Snider replied yes and added that this would be a private street with a public access
easement.
Commissioner Wong pointed out that there is only one way in to the East Terrace and
questioned circulation for this housing complex.
Mr. Jim Yee:
· Replied that this is a typical configuration.
· Advised that there would be 246 spaces.
· Advised that traffic for residential uses has more greatly varied comings and goings than do
other types of uses.
Commissioner Wong asked about the parking areas and if they were open.
Mr. Jim Yee replied no and said that these garages are larger and each unit has a garage door
that closes as well as private stairs to the individual units. He stated that this is a unique
product.
Ms. Kelly Snider added that all the residential parking is underground below grade.
Commissioner Wong asked if this is for the whole complex.
Mr. Jim Yee said for the 108 Villas there are 108 two-car garages.
Commissioner Wong expressed concern about two parallel driveways near the West Terrace
building and the corresponding circulation.
Ms. Kelly Snider said that one serves as a service lane for the Rose Bowl project and is not an
access to a garage while their driveway is a private drive leading to a private garage.
Commissioner Wong asked if Option B could include 15 percent in senior housing.
Ms. Kelly Snider replied she did not think so but said that they haven't examined that concept
from a land planning perspective.
Mr. Rick Nelson, Toll Brothers, Inc., added that while they have not analyzed the idea of 15
percent senior housing with Option B, they could look at it if the Commission would like them to.
He advised that senior housing requires additional subsidies.
Ms. Kelly Snider cautioned that reducing senior units from 80 to 55 makes that a more
expensive building.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 24
Commissioner Wong agreed that they would have to make sure that proposal pencils in. He
asked why the senior housing building is located in the back versus being closer to Vallco
Parkway and Stevens Creek Boulevard.
Ms. Kelly Snider:
· Replied that the location of the park played a role in the placement of the senior units.
· Added that surface parking is needed for senior housing, which adds security as well as
cost.
· Advised that senior parking demand is at 50 percent of typical family parking.
· Concluded by saying that the placement of the senior housing building is in a location where
the use of surface parking is not a visual detriment to the landscape.
Commissioner Wong asked for the parking ratio for senior housing units.
Ms. Kelly Snider:
· Explained that a condominium requires 2.38 spaces per unit. For senior units, the parking
ratio ranges between 1 to 1 and 1.5 spaces per unit.
· Added that overall, their parking ratio is 2.1 or 2.2 spaces per unit, which is a little higher
than the City's requirement.
Commissioner Wong asked about the possibility of adding to the park to make it four acres.
Director Steve Piasecki cautioned that the increase proposed by staff would bring the park area
up to three acres and not four.
Ms. Kelly Snider:
· Said that overall the land plan would probably not change.
· Added that the total amount of public space when all proposed areas are counted together
actually does equal four acres including some additional off-site improvements being
required.
· Stated that the City would have title to only three of those acres.
Director Steve Piasecki:
· Stated that staff feels that the park would benefit by adding another .21 acres to the total
area, especially since the panhandle is not needed for public use and may allow for a few
more residential units as well as a re-evaluation of the entrance.
· Said that the City and developer should be able to share the maintenance cost of the public
park space perhaps at a SO/50 rate, which is fair since a private interest is taking advantage
of a public street.
Ms. Kelly Snider:
· Reminded that any movement has repercussions on the entire land plan and could be
detrimental to the retail uses.
· Assured that they are willing to work with the City to explore options.
· Cautioned what is being discussed is not just one tweak but rather a whole series of
potential changes.
Commissioner Wong reminded that up to 60 foot building height is possible. He questioned
whether any possible lost units that might result from imposed changes by the Commission
might not be recovered elsewhere with added building height.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 25
Director Steve Piasecki:
· Said he is less concerned about height in relation to the West Terrance but is still not
suggesting any higher building height.
· Added that he has more of a problem with the East Terrace.
· Said that he is fine with a transfer of units between the two sites.
· Advised that the key issue is not simply unit count but also includes good design, a
functional park and a good offset.
· Pointed out that the Metropolitan project may have added height but that height is softened
by a sloped roof.
· Said that he prefers to err on the side of lower buildings than density.
Commissioner Wong asked Director Steve Piasecki if he supports flexible unit counts.
Director Steve Piasecki stated that he is willing to explore different options to meet the
developer's and City's needs.
Commissioner Wong asked if Director Piasecki stands by the staff report.
Director Steve Piasecki replied yes.
Chair Miller:
· Suggested that there might be ways to tie in this project with the Rose Bowl project including
moving more retail there.
· Pointed out lhat Vallco is being developed as a theme entertainment center.
· Described a development called City Place that is in West Palm Beach and where an
excellent job was done in tying in open space area that is surrounded by a theatre.
· Stated that there are ways to serve other functions to tie in with Vallco.
Mr. Jack Bariteau:
· Said that Vallco is unique and is focused on entertainment retail and that implies theatres
and restaurants and requires a broader and bigger vision.
· Reminded that this project is just a tenth the size of Vallco.
· Stated that with this development, they are trying to bring a unique neighborhood and
environment to Cupertino that serves an underserved immediate need.
· Assured that these uses will compliment what they are trying to do at Vallco.
· Advised that he had seen photos of the City Place development and pointed out that a
significant amount of underground parking was included in that development that allowed
the creation of the large plaza.
· Added that the City Place project is a very dense development.
· Stated their intent to bring in a better scale grocery, pharmacy and bookstore to create a
nice bookend to what Vallco has to offer and at the same time tie back into Vallco.
· Said that he does not want to compete with them, as that would be a mistake.
· Said that questions remain on how best to tie this project into the area since it is unclear
what exactly is planned for Vallco beyond the theatres and the Rose Bowl project has not
yet begun construction.
Chair Miller said he is suggesting synergy to rather than competition with Vallco.
Mr. Jack Bariteau:
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 26
· Said he would consider options.
· Added that he relishes the opportunity to get on to the next level and study the intricacies of
this project.
· Stated that during the zoning process, they are speaking more of generalities. It is during
the Site and Architectural review process that the details are all scoped out and it is clear
how it would work.
Chair Miller asked why the project is not considered one site instead of several, which could
help deal with the maximum density limitations.
Director Steve Piasecki advised that the applicant wishes to subdivide the lots independent of
one another. He agreed that if this were one large contiguous parcel, it would not be difficult to
consider an average over the entire parcel, but it is not one parcel. These are independent
parcels and separate sites cannot be averaged. Doing so would require a General Plan change
and would open the door to potentially wildly different densities on the same parcel.
Chair Miller raised the issue of a parking agreement with the Hewlett Packard property across
the street and asked staff if they have any comment on this. He said it would make sense to
have shared parking available.
Director Steve Piasecki advised that this suggestion was one of the TDM (Traffic Demand
Management) measures in the event of a parking problem but this suggestion is not needed any
longer.
Chair Miller suggested that it might be nice to have this parking available as a backup plan.
Director Steve Piasecki reiterated that staff is comfortable with the on street parking proposed.
Chair Miller asked if it would be reasonable to require the. availability of that HP parking area as
backup parking for this development.
Director Steve Piasecki replied probably not. There àre security concerns with a high tech
business such as HP that requires secured parking. Use of their lot for public retail parking
would be problematic.
Chair Miller asked for a description of the unit sizes for the proposed 80 senior units.
Ms. Kelly Snider:
· Explained that Toll Brothers has partnered with Bridge Housing and other senior housing
providers in the past.
· Described the building holding the senior units as a four-story building.
· Said that there are 70 one-bedroom units ranging from 750 to 800 square feet in size and 10
two-bedroom units with about 1,000 square feet of space. The building is served with an
elevator and has ADA design features including door widths and other accommodations.
· Reminded that the building is on grade with no basement or below-grade space.
· Said that provision of secure parking is a special consideration for senior housing and that is
handled with the use of surface parking.
· Said that handicapped parking and a drop off area are provided.
· Advised that these senior units are pretty and consist of a kitchen, bedroom, living room and
bathroom. Shared facilities include a community room, library and on-site manager's office.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 27
Chair Miller asked again for the breakdown between one and two-bedroom units.
Ms. Kelly Snider said that there are between 70 and 72 one-bedroom units and between 8 and
10 two-bedroom units.
Chair Miller asked whether the affordable units would be moderate, low or very-low income
units.
Ms. Kelly Snider said that they would be low and very-low units and as deeply affordable as
possible.
Chair Miller asked for the price range of the entire project.
Ms. Kelly Snider said that similar projects, such as the Montebello Project, cost about $500 per
square foot although they are smaller units than the family units in this project.
Chair Miller asked if there would be $500,000 units in this development.
Ms. Kelly Snider replied no. There are no 1,000 square foot units so $500,000 would be low.
Chair Miller said that if the units are approximately 1,500 square feet than it is reasonable to
expect that they would equal about $750,000. He asked when the project is proposed to be
built out and sold.
Ms. Kelly Snider said that if the project receives its zoning approval in February, it would then
take about six months to go through the Site and Architectural Review process into September
2006. After that, building plans are submitted. They could possibly begin preliminary grading
by the end of 2006 or early in 2007. She added that retail goes up the quickest.
Mr. Jack Bariteau said that Ms. Snider has provided a pretty accurate project timeline.
Ms. Kelly Snider said that if the housing units start at the same time, it would be one year or
early in 2008 before the project is completed.
Chair Miller asked if the build out of all units would be completed 12 months after construction of
the first units begins but might more likely be completed into 2009
Ms. Kelly Snider said that probably everything would be completed by between February and
June 2009.
Chair Miller asked where the senior units fit into this schedule.
Ms. Kelly Snider said that the owner of the senior housing would be a private non-profit
organization.
Chair Miller asked if Toll Brothers would be constructing the senior units.
Ms. Kelly Snider replied maybe but it is not certain at this time. The senior units would require
one year for construction.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 28
Chair Miller:
· Pointed out that since the projection is that schools will begin to have declining enrollment in
about two to three years that it is actually advantageous if the completion of this project is
out two to three years too.
· Asked if the issue of a fiscal deficit to schools has been addressed, particularly the impacts
on the high school system.
Ms. Kelly Snider advised that she has met with representatives of both the high school and
elementary school districts. It is her understanding that neither district has a problem with this
proposed housing. They gave her no indication that the schools could not accommodate
students resulting from these new housing units. She said she couldn't speak to the letter in the
packet from the school that outlines a deficit of $400,000.
Director Steve Piasecki reported that this letter represents a standard comment from the school
district that building fees do not cover costs. They have made no suggestion that they are
unable to accommodate additional students.
Chair Miller stressed the importance of schools to this community and said that it is important to
address any issues to the satisfaction of the school districts.
Chair Miller at this point asked if the Commission would like to take a break or continue the
public hearing.
Director Steve Piasecki asked the audience members to raise their hand if they wish to speak
under this item's public hearing.
Chair Miller reported that he has approximately 12 speaker cards and 12 hands raised in
response to Director Piasecki's inquiry.
Chair Miller called for a recess at approximately 10 p.m.
Chair Miller reconvened the meeting at approximately 10:08 p.m.
Chair Miller opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item NO.1.
Ms. Jane Vaughan, Menlo Equities:
· Explained that Menlo Equities is the owner of the Metropolitan project for which 107 units
are under construction.
· Said that 91 units are market rate units and 16 are BMR units.
· Stated her support for this project.
· Admitted that they are very appreciative of having a park next door.
· Said that she likes having the residences on the back end so that their development faces
either residences or park.
· Stated that as the adjacent landowner, this project is wonderful for them.
· Pointed out that the Planning Commission has the responsibility for providing more housing
for the community.
· Said that this project is being developed at 20 units per gross acre when taking the parkland
into consideration.
· Declared that that is too Iowa density in her estimation.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 29
· Recounted that the day following her project approval she had her first call from someone
who wanted to be placed on a waiting list. They now have 450 names on that waiting list for
91 available units.
· Described those on the list as young, high tech workers who rent and want to own here.
These young people want more density.
Commissioner Wong asked Ms. Jane Vaughan when her project would be completed and at
what price the 91 market-rate units would sell.
Ms. Jane Vaughan said that they expect to complete construction between April and June. The
two-bedroom units will range from $500,000 while the three-bedroom units would be in the
$600,000 range.
Chair Miller asked Ms. Jane Vaughan what the square footage is for these units.
Ms. Jane Vaughan said that these units range in size from between 1,150 and 1,400 square
feet with the average being 1,250 square feet. The three-bedroom units are between 1,400 and
1,500 square feet.
Mr. Hamid:
· Explained that he is here as a representative of the Cricket Academy.
· Added that he is asking for some modifications to the proposed park since a minimum of 3.8
to 4-acres is the minimum land necessary on which to play cricket. The cricket field is a
380-foot by 446-foot playing area.
· Said that this is the last chance for a multi-purpose field.
· Urged an increase in park area and the opportunily to make this park available for cricket.
· Pointed out that there is a growing population of cricket loving citizens.
Mr. Sunil Tagare:
· Thanked the City for allowing kids to play cricket all year.
· Stated that cricket is not an American game but it has a following.
· Explained that the popularity of cricket is second only to soccer internationally.
· Said that it brings in only 1/501h of the revenue of baseball but cricket is going to become
huge in the United States.
· Stated that he wants a home for cricket in Cupertino where 10 percent of its population is
Indian, a people who loves to play cricket.
· Explained that every country has a team and plays against the other teams.
· Asked that the City encourage lhern and give thern a facility that they need.
Mr. Vermiel Salanke:
· Thanked the Cornrnission for this opportunity to speak.
· Stated his appreciation for the City's strong commitment already to this game of cricket.
· Said that this is the opportunity to preserve the open space that will endure.
· Explained that he is a new citizen to Cupertino having rnoved here a couple of months ago
frorn Sunnyvale.
· Reported that in Sunnyvale he lived near four parks that provided nice open space.
· Stated that Cupertino's schools are desirable but he didn't want to leave the open space
available in Sunnyvale.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 30
· Offered Ortega Park as a good example of a multi-use facility that accommodates cricket,
soccer, tennis, basketball, baseball and softball but granted that it is a much larger space.
· Suggested making this new open space as large as possible.
· Added that from an economic perspective, Southeast Asian Indians are the population with
the highest per capita income and having cricket facilities available will attract them as
residents of Cupertino.
Ms. Shiloh Ballard, Silicon Valley Leadership Group:
· Stated that Silicon Valley Leadership Group represents 200 businesses in Silicon Valley and
she is here to support this development proposal.
· Said that when evaluating this proposal, there are important economic, physical and social
context issues.
· Pointed out that this is a 26-acre parcel and that the potential for it is incredible.
· Reminded that one does not find many parcels that size in Cupertino or anywhere else
these days.
· Said that housing is an incredible need.
· Stated that statistics show that only 18 percent of residents can afford to buy a median
priced home in Santa Clara County. Nationwide, that figure is 48 percent. There is a huge
demand.
· Reported that office vacancies are 14 percent right now.
· Said that this project is located across the street from a struggling shopping mall. It is on
Stevens Creek Boulevard, a major arterial.
· Stated her agreement with Jane Vaughan's question as to why more housing is not going in
here.
· Reminded that originally the request was for 600 units and is now down to 400.
· Said that she was dismayed to see the housing unit count drop by 200 homes.
· Said she hopes the Commission approves this development and that she does not want to
see any more units lost, as more are needed not fewer.
Ms. Chris Kennedy Pierce:
· Informed that she is a 20 year resident of Cupertino who hopes to remain another 40 years.
· Said that she serves on the Cupertino Senior Commission but is here this evening as a
private citizen.
· Expressed her interest in seeing the needs for our citizens being addressed as they age and
not just when they need a small apartment.
· Stated that she would like to see a range in sizes of homes available for seniors.
· Said that there are many complex aspects to this project.
· Commended the Senior Commission, Housing Commission, Planning Commission and
developers for all their work and diligence that has gone into this project.
· Stated lhat she would like to see a hybrid of Options A and B with the same footprint but
with some for sale BMR units as well as senior housing units available.
· Reiterated her interest in having senior units that are adjacent to public transportation.
· Added that she would like to have the location of the senior units re-evaluated from that
back corner.
· Encouraged the City to look at a combination of Options A and B.
· Staled that massaging can be done to meet all interests including BMR and senior housing.
· Added that as a member of the Senior Commission, the Commission has scheduled a
special meeling on this project.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 31
Ms. Jennifer Griffin:
· Said that it has been interesting seeing this project progress.
· Informed that she is glad that the unit count is down to 400 as she wants to see smart
growth and not overbuilt areas with a resulting good use of this lot.
· Reminded that this site is the former location of Tandem Computers.
· Said she hopes to see a nice big city park at this project and that it would be nice not to
have buildings at the creek bed.
· Expressed her hopes that the Ash trees would be protected and stated that the Valley Oak
tree perished under mysterious circumstances.
· Said that she hopes that the dead tree, located at Finch and Stevens Creek, would be
replaced and that she hopes Tree #126 would be preserved. Additionally, she would like
Tree #174, a Sycamore with a five-foot diameter, to also be preserved along with the
evergreens at the back of the technology building along the Creek.
· Said she hopes to follow this project into its conclusion so the end result is a high-quality
project at this site.
Mr. Charlie Ahern:
· Said that he is a future neighbor to this project.
· Thanked the Commission for its patience, stamina and composure at the Tuesday meeting.
· Seconded the comments of Ms. Jane Vaughan on the need to focus on providing affordable
housing for younger people.
· Said he likes the idea of the project, park and retail uses and that this project looks like a
neighborhood forming that will become an interesting area.
· Advised that he has attended four presentations on this project.
· Expressed support for Option A with the senior housing and said that the number of trips
generated by a senior is substantially lower than others thereby having less of a traffic
impact. He added that senior units would also have less impact on schools.
· Recommended also having BMR and inclusionary housing.
· Read a paragraph as follows, "Traditional inclusionary housing policies that require the
development of like for like units distributed uniformally within the market rate development
are often not the most effective or efficient way to provide affordable housing. "
Mr. AI DeRidder:
· Advised that he is a 44-year resident.
· Said that he has seen a lot of changes in this valley and has to admire the foresight of
planners from past generations.
· Recounted that when he first moved out here, Lawrence Expressway was Lawrence Station
Road with two lanes back in 1960.
· Added that Stevens Creek Boulevard was a two-lane road.
· Said that planners preserved space to accommodate larger roadways.
· Said that Vallco Parkway needs lots of wide streets to handle the traffic.
· Asked that diagonal street parking not be used, as it would cut available traffic lanes in half.
· Said that this decision would be forever cast in concrete and can't be taken back.
· Urged the Commission not to give away our streets.
Ms. Marilyn Howard:
· Said she is in support of this project and likes its design and the fact that it would serve as a
gateway into Cupertino from the east side of town.
· Stated that the senior housing element of this project needs fine-tuning.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 32
o Suggested leaving school district issues up to them as it appears to be manageable and by
2009 the number of students may be less than current numbers.
o Said that this is a quality project.
o Announced that she is a 50-year resident.
o Added that this area is fortunate to have Toll Brothers.
o Expressed concern about trees and said she remembers when the dead tree was still alive.
o Reiterated her support of this good project and recommended the Commission support it.
Mr. Keith Murphy:
o Said that this is a very interesting project.
o Said thai he attended a special meeting in December held by Toll Brothers.
o Pointed out that this project would create 5,500 new trips in the area. Add that to the
Metropolitan and Vallco projects and this traffic increase will add to the impacts on Stevens
Creek Boulevard, including access to the freeway.
o Agreed that this is a well-situated area but discouraged decreasing Finch Avenue from four
traffic lanes to two in order to allow diagonal parking.
o Explained that his father is 86 years old and is finding it more difficult to drive in this area, as
the streets get too busy.
Chair Miller closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item NO.1.
Commissioner Saadati asked for more details on the potential infrastructure impacts from this
project.
Mr. Glenn Goepfert, Assistant Public Works Director:
o Advised that traffic is not seen as having a significant degradation with the addition of a turn
movement on Wolfe. That would lower the project's resulting level of service from LOS-E
back to an LOS-D, which equals an acceptable level.
o Informed that a requirement is imposed thai the developer looks at signal sequencing at the
intersections of Tantau & Stevens Creek and Finch & Stevens Creek.
o Reminded that the civil plans are not yet in but assured that storm drainage would be looked
at.
o Pointed ,out the new pedestrian and bicycle connections including the walkway at Tantau
that will connect the neighborhood to the north.
o Said that other traffic requirements include a five-year requirement to do a small Congestion
Management Study.
o Stated that since Vallco has been underutilized for years. Traffic originally authorized for that
location would come back with the pending revitalization of that site.
o Said that there is no doubt lhat the nature of traffic in this area will change. It will be slower
and include more local shopping and residential retail type of activity.
o Said that Finch Avenue will change quite a bit with the diagonal parking and taking out a
lane. It will become more of a local road.
o Said that this is probably about it as far as infrastructure impacts are concerned at this time.
Commissioner Saadati asked how the fact that only 300 of the 400 allotted housing units for this
area remains available jives with the proposal for 400 units on this project.
Director Steve Piasecki reminded that the new General Plan allows the City to take out of other
buckets as it sees fit.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 33
Commissioner Giefer asked if the bicycle access would use the same trails as pedestrians.
Ms. Kelly Snider said that the sidewalk directly in front of retail is not intended for bicycle traffic
but there would be bicycle access on the outer arc. The interior is for pedestrians only.
Commissioner Giefer asked about the two adjacent buildings.
Mr. Bill Roberts, Hewlett Packard Representative:
· Advised that it consists of 280,000 square feet of space. The previous tenant left in 2003.
· Added that HP would never occupy this space because it was not designed for HP use.
· Said that HP activities are concentrated to the north of 280.
Commissioner Giefer asked if the north site were to be used for a park would a cricket pitch be
possible.
Director Steve Piasecki replied, yes, if the applicant were willing to give up two more acres.
Chair Miller reminded that the cricket field requires an area 400 feet by 400 feet.
Commissioner Wong questioned whether the Sycamore tree could be preserved without impact
on the footprint of the proposed building.
Director Steve Piasecki said that the applicant could be asked to evaluate that tree for retention.
Commissioner Giefer pointed out that it is located at the edge of the Villa #1 footprint.
Director Steve Piasecki suggested that the applicant could be asked to make every effort
possible.
Mr. Gary Langman, Guzzardo & Associates, Landscape Architect, advised that there are
significant issues with root development and severed roots and that this tree is in declining
condition.
Commissioner Giefer challenged that statement saying that she does not recall reading that in
the Arborist report regarding that tree. She suggested that it simply needs some of the end
weight and dead weight to be removed. There was no comment about root or instability
problems.
Mr. Gary Langman, Guzzardo & Associates, Landscape Architect, said that this tree is rated at
3, which is marginal for retention.
Chair Miller suggested that the issue of conversion be discussed first and be taken out of the
way. This regards comments on whether this project is appropriate as far as changing from
office to mixed use. He pointed out that other issues to consider include: the number of
residential units, density, park, heights and setbacks and affordable units. Technical issues
include architecture, parking, traffic, schools and trees.
Director Steve Piasecki added that there is also the exception to setbacks on Stevens Creek
Boulevard.
Director Miller asked the Commissioners to speak to the issue of conversion.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 34
Commissioner Wong:
· Thanked the applicant and the rest of Cupertino.
· Said that a good case has been made to redevelop these buildings, rated by HP as being
obsolete.
· Stated that there is a public benefit with the 112,000 square feet of new commercial space.
· Said that it is not a perfect world and that there is a job-work imbalance but the City has to
be flexible in order to get the park and retail although he would like to see industrial land
remain industrial.
· Announced that he would support this conversion based upon smart growth principles.
· Pointed out that this is the last 26-acre master plan parcel in Cupertino.
Commissioner Giefer expressed her support for the conversion from commercial to residential.
Commissioner Saadati said he also supports the conversion.
Chair Miller said that he also supports this conversion as appropriate especially to replace this
non-productive commercial land into a productive shopping center and housing. He added that
there would be a great deal of amenities for the community as well.
Chair Miller next asked the Commissioners to address the proposed number of housing units.
Commissioner Wong:
· Said he has concerns but that everything is negotiable.
· Reminded that the General Plan allowed up to 400 maximum residential units in this area.
· Said that he supports higher building heights.
· Agreed with the comments of Ms. Jane Vaughan about the need for housing but said he
could not support 400 units but could support 399 units.
· Gave his reasons for supporting up to 399 units as including the fact that the developer has
met the criteria including parkland, traffic improvements, trees and diagonal parking.
Director Steve Piasecki asked each Commissioner to indicate a preference for Option A or B.
Commissioner Wong said that for him there has to be a senior housing component.
Commissioner Giefer:
· Said that she would like to see the park located by the freeway where the senior housing is
proposed to be located.
· Added that she thinks the park should be larger to accommodate more sports such as
cricket.
· Expressed support for senior housing units and stated that it is important that the senior
housing be located near public transportation.
· Said that she would prefer to see things moved around a little and has concern about
placing housing on freeways, which she does nol think is the best use.
· Added that if this park were to be located by the freeway perhaps it could be enlarged in the
future onto the adjacent HP property when and if it is ever redeveloped.
· Stressed her preference to keep housing away from the freeway.
· Stated that she can support anywhere between 350 up to 399 units.
Commissioner Saadati:
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 35
· Said he too likes the senior housing component and Option A.
· Said that there should be no substantive noise impacts.
· Supported the idea of having senior housing units close to public transportation.
· Stated he could support 399 to 400 units based upon layout and open space use.
Chair Miller:
· Also supported Option A.
· Pointed out that the General Plan review did also put 300 units associated with this area for
an exceptional project, which he thinks this is.
· Said that having senior housing located close to public transportation bears more
discussion.
Commissioner Wong asked whether the acreage would be increased if the park were to be
located in the back.
Commissioner Giefer replied yes. Relocating the park to the back would result in more parkland
and help save the Sycamore tree.
Commissioner Wong asked Commissioner Giefer if she would be supportive of up to 450
residential units if the park were to be increased in size.
Commissioner Giefer replied not right now.
Commissioner Wong said he would be open to a bigger park and allowing Toll Brothers to have
more units.
Commissioner Saadati cautioned that the back area is not wide enough to accommodate
cricket.
Director Steve Piasecki said that perhaps cricket could be accommodated at Creekside Park
and the soccer fields from there could be relocated here.
Chair Miller said that this might be a better solution and should be studied.
Director Steve Piasecki said he spoke with Therese Smith and that this issue would have to be
brought forward to Council.
Chair Miller asked if this project still requires the enlarged park site.
Director Steve Piasecki replied yes, the additional .21 acres is still needed to accommodate
adult soccer fields.
Chair Miller asked if there is a consensus on number of units and the preference for Option A
with senior housing units.
Commissioner Wong said he supports up to 399 units with the addition of .21 acres to the park.
Chair Miller said that it appears to be one vote for 402 units, one vote for 400 units and two
votes for 399 units.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 36
Chair Miller advised that density is the next issue for discussion, specifically the one area of the
project that is over the allowed density.
Director Steve Piasecki said that a lot line adjustment could be used to correct the imbalance
and retain a larger area to accommodate the West Terrace.
Chair Miller said that this results in no density issue. He said that the next item for discussion is
the park area.
Commissioner Saadati said he supports the staff recommendation.
Commissioner Giefer asked if anyone else was as concerned about the proposed park
placement as she is.
Commissioner Saadati said he is comfortable with the proposed location.
Chair Miller said that he would be concerned that a park localed at the back would not be visible
and therefore not effectively used. He stated his preference for the Stevens Creek location.
Commissioner Giefer said that she was not comfortable with the idea of soccer balls landing in
the roadway on Stevens Creek.
Chair Miller said that the soccer fields could be oriented to the creek and Torre.
Commissioner Wong asked Commission Giefer if she prefers the park at the rear.
Commissioner Giefer:
· Reiterated that she is uncomfortable with housing on the freeway.
· Stated that this senior housing is being placed in the worse possible location.
· Said she is concerned that this is a noisy space.
· Stressed the need in this community for a permanent cricket field.
Commissioner Wong asked Commissioner Giefer what size she felt the park should be.
Commissioner Giefer replied that she believes that four acres are required for cricket.
Commissioner Wong pointed out that if the park were located in the rear its accessibility by the
public does not make sense.
Commissioner Giefer again expressed concern over putting senior housing on the freeway.
Chair Miller said that there is not an unlimited ability to settle all of our wants.
Commissioner Giefer said that it appears there is no support for the relocation of the park. She
asked whether staff is recommending the increase in park size.
Commissioner Wong also asked if staff is supportive of increasing the park size by .21 acres.
Director Steve Piasecki said that the Commission does not have to decide this but rather could
let Council handle it on their review.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 37
Chair Miller said he too supports the staff recommendation.
Commissioner Saadati agreed to whatever Council wants.
Chair Miller asked for the next issue for discussion.
Director Steve Piasecki replied building heights and setbacks.
Commissioner Saadati:
· Said he likes the project as proposed with the variable setbacks.
· Stated that this variety gives the architecture more character with buildings frontages broken
up.
· Expressed support for the averaging of the setback along Stevens Creek.
· Asked if staff is recommending a reduction in height.
Director Steve Piasecki said staff supports the three to four story offset.
Chair Miller said that if asked for a reduction in total units on the East Terrace, those units have
to go somewhere else. Perhaps it could be with a higher building on the West Terrace.
Commissioner Saadati said he could go along with that as long is it is not an eyesore.
Director Steve Piasecki said that the best area to absorb more height is the Villas in the north
area.
Commissioner Giefer said she agrees with Director Steve Piasecki.
Director Steve Piasecki said that this building needs to be stepped down from the Rose Bowl
development.
Commissioner Giefer agreed.
Commissioner Wong:
· Said that an exception is sought to the Heart of the City Specific Plan, which calls for
minimum 35-foot setbacks.
· Advised that he could support averaging the setbacks along Stevens Creek however only
with the minimum setback being 30 feet and not the 26 feet proposed.
· Expressed agreement with the staff position on building height.
· Said that if housing units were lost with the addition to the park, he would want to see
additional units added to the North Terrace.
Commissioner Giefer:
· Agreed with Commissioner Wong on the importance of setbacks along Stevens Creek
Boulevard being no less than 30 feet.
· Stated that she can support a variable setback that is averaged to meet the 35-foot
standard.
· Said that the Villas area can accommodate the Sycamore tree with setbacks and by building
around it.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 38
Chair Miller:
· Expressed support for stepping the building back on East Terrace.
· Said that an average setback compromise raquiring a minimum of 30 feet is reasonable.
· Stated that if the applicant needs accommodation, he is okay with an increase in building
height as long as it remains below General Plan requirements.
· Said that the Sycamore tree should be saved if possible.
Commissioner Wong concurred.
Commissioner Saadati said that as much as possible should be preserved.
Chair Miller said that next topic is the BMR units.
Commissioner Giefer said that she is willing to allow 399 units with BMR units that exceed 15
percent.
Director Steve Piasecki reminded that with the senior housing component the BMR units equal
20 percent.
Commissioner Giefer said she is comfortable with that.
Commissioner Saadati said fine.
Commissioner Wong concurred.
Director Steve Piasecki added that the 80 senior housing units are all BMR units. They are very
low-income units that are concentrated in one area.
Commissioner Giefer said that she withdraws her support for senior housing only as she would
like some for-sale BMR units in addition to the 80 senior units.
Chair Miller asked Commissioner Giefer how many additional for-sale BMR units she is asking
for in addition to the 80 senior units.
Commissioner Saadati reminded that the Housing Commission has recommended in the past to
disperse BMR units throughout a development.
Commissioner Wong said that he is not okay with the location of the senior housing but wants to
make it work. He said that the West Terrace is his first choice for locating the senior housing
but said that the Planning Commission should look at the proposal it has before it right now.
Director Steve Piasecki said that a total of 402 units was advertised. Any increases beyond that
number puts this project back and requires re-advertising.
Commissioner Wong said that if the Commission plays with the location and size of the park the
project would lose value for the applicant.
Director Steve Piasecki reminded that the City would pay market value price for the .21 acres
proposed for addition to the park.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 39
Commissioner Wong asked Director Steve Piasecki for his comments on the location of the
senior housing units.
Director Steve Piasecki:
· Said he has less of a problem with that.
· Reminded that these units would be designed with noise attenuation.
· Pointed out that lots of residential units are already built along Highways 280 and 85.
· Added that relatively few of the homes in this zone would be problematic but it is not
overwhelming.
Commissioner Giefer said that if the senior housing remains where proposed, she wants to see
five percent more in BMR units available for purchase throughout the project. If the senior
housing units were relocated elsewhere, she would remove that requirement.
Chair Miller:
· Said that he supports BMR units in the City.
· Asked if the applicant is willing to consider an increase in the BMR units.
· Said that no one on the Commission likes lhe placement of senior housing units on the back
lot near the freeway but pointed out that a very reputable affordable housing developer with
experience developing senior housing supports this location.
· Said he supports the project as it is currently designed.
Chair Miller said the next issue is parking.
Commissioner Wong asked Chair Miller if all technical issues could not be considered at once in
the interest of time and the late hour.
Chair Miller said that would be fine.
Commissioner Wong:
· Said he supports staff recommendation for parking including diagonal parking on both sides
of Vallco Parkway.
· Stressed the importance of saving the Sycamore tree if at all possible.
· Suggested that the replacement Oak tree for the one that is dead should be located on the
corner of Finch and Stevens Creek on the park side.
· Said as far as architecture is concern, the fourth story should be set back to avoid the
appearance of bulk.
Director Steve Piasecki said that the details of the third to fourth stories should be dealt with at a
later date.
Commissioner Wong:
· Said he trusts the applicant to work with staff on such architectural details.
· Challenged the applicant to provide a package to Council that is a little more generous to
schools, such as another recent developer did to help with school impacts.
· Said he supports this project, as it is well-designed and uses smart growth principles.
· Said the applicants can work with staff on General Plan and technical policies.
· Stated his hope that the Parks and Recreation Director can work out accommodating cricket
at Creekside Park.
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 40
Commissioner Giefer:
· Said that she is comfortable with the parking numbers and likes the idea of angled parking
on the street that saves the existing trees.
· Said that the East Terrace is too bulky and massive.
· Said that the parcel on the North Terrace is going to change considerably based upon
comments made this evening.
· Said that something should be done to the Villa #1 in order to retain the nearby Sycamore
tree.
· Said she is okay with the traffic numbers.
· Agreed with the challenge made by Commissioner Wong about financially supporting the
schools.
Commissioner Saadati:
· Agreed that parking is adequate.
· Supported the staff position on architecture.
· Said that he has no issues with the traffic recommendations.
· Stated that the Sycamore tree should be protected as discussed.
· Concurred with Commissioner Wong on the issue of schools.
Chair Miller:
· Said hat he is comfortable with the parking, including angled parking.
· Added that his is also comfortable with the architecture and is pleased with the amount and
depth of relief.
· Said that traffic would not be an issue.
· Echoed the comments made by Commissioner Wong on schools.
· Supported the discussion on retention of the Sycamore tree.
· Asked staff if the Commission is leaving anything out.
Director Steve Piasecki suggested removing Condition 12 that required a TDM program.
Commissioner Wong asked if there is agreement on the BMR units.
Chair Miller said that there is a consensus for 20 percent and said that the applicant should be
asked how they feel about the suggestion to increase that percentage.
Ms. Kelly Snider said that increasing BMR units by as much as five percent is a lot and is
problematic. They are stretched with the 20 percent senior housing units. In addition to giving
the land, which is 1.5 acres, they are also giving $60,000 per unit. There is no profit here and
the cost is passed on to the rest of the project.
Commissioner Giefer said that the Commission should still ask Council to see if they can make
it work.
Director Steve Piasecki suggested treating this issue as a separate minute action.
Motion:
Upon motion of Commissioner Wong, seconded by Commissioner Saadati,
the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of an
Environmental Assessment (EA-2005-17) with the mitigation-monitoring
program as outlined in the staff report. (4-0)
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2006
Page 41
Motion:
Motion:
Motion:
Upon motion of Commissioner Wong, seconded by Commissioner Saadati,
the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of
Exceptions from the Heart of the City Plan (EXC-2005-18) to allow for an
average 35-foot front setback along Stevens Creek Boulevard for the
commercial shopping center with a modification to the proposal requiring
the minimum building setback along Stevens Creek to be 30 feet from curb.
(4-0)
Upon motion of Commissioner Wong, seconded by Commissioner Saadati,
the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of a
Tentative Map (TM-2005-04) to subdivide 4 parcels (approximately 26-acres)
into 6 parcels for a residential and commercial development. (4-0)
Upon motion of Commissioner Wong, seconded by Commissioner Saadati,
the Planning Commission unanimously (4-0) recommended approval of a
Use Permit (U-2005-15) for a master plan for a commercial and residential
development with the following amendments to the proposal:
· Allowing two sided parking along Vall co Parkway;
· Requiring the retention of the Sycamore tree (#174) on Stevens Creek
Boulevard;
· Deleting condition of approval #12 that required a TDM plan;
· Incorporating Option A that includes 80 senior housing units that
equals 20 percent BMR units;
· Locating the replacement Valley Oak tree at the corner of Finch and
Stevens Creek near the new public park;
· Requiring all parcels not to exceed the allowed density; and
· Limiting the total residential unit count so as not to exceed 399 units.
Commissioner Wong asked about the suggestion that the developer further negotiate with the
school to assist with fiscal impacts.
Director Steve Piasecki said that this issue should also be handled as a minute action.
Motion:
Upon motion of Commissioner Wong, seconded by Commissioner Saadati,
the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of a
Rezoning (Z-2005-04) to allow for a commercial and residential
development. (4-0)
Director Steve Piasecki advised that this project has been pre-advertised and would be
considered by Council at its meeting of February 7th.
Commissioner Wong thanked Hewlett-Packard and the applicant for their two years of work on
this project. They are giving a lot to the community.
Chair Miller said that he appreciates their patience and the quality of their project. He pointed
out that no serious concerns were raised and that he is looking forward to a good project.
MINUTE ORDERS
Cupertino Planning Commission Minutes of January 26. 2006
Page 42
Motion:
Upon motion of Commissioner Giefer, seconded by Commissioner Wong,
the Planning Commission unanimously (4-0) recommended the following
minute orders:
1. That Toll Brothers be asked to add an additional five percent (5%) offor-
sale BMR units to this project to be dispersed throughout the
development.
2. That the applicant be asked to work with the School Districts regarding
supplementing school fees to the Districts to make them whole.
...
Chair Miller adjourned the meeting at approximately 12:00 a.m. to the next Regular Planning
Commission meeling of February 14, 2006, at 6:45 p.m.
MINUTES PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY:
Corinne A. Shinn, Minutes Clerk