Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
14. Main Street Staff Report
CITY OF CUPERTINO City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3251 FAX (408) 777-3333 SUMMARY Community Development Department Agenda Item No. ~ Agenda Date: Taizuary 12, 2009 Application: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06, TM-2008-O1, TR-2008-08 Applicant: Kevin Dare, Saud Hill Property Company Property Location: APN# s: 316-20-078, 079, and 085 -North of Stevens Creek Boulevard and south of Vallco Parkway between the Metropolitaiz i~Z.ixed-use retail/condominium development and Tantau Avenue (Conti~zued from DecenzUer Z6, 2008) Application Summary: 1. Master Use Permit -fora 17.4 acre mixed-use development within a P (CG, O, ML, Hotel, Res) Plaiu-ted Development zoning district 2. Architectural and Site Approval - for the architecture of the individual buildings and overall site layout of the mixed-use development project 3. Tentative Map - to subdivide three parcels into five parcels 4. Tree Removal Request - to remove a total of 84 trees and relocate 13 trees if Scheme A is choseiz, or to remove 74 trees and relocate 8 trees if Scheme B is chosen RECOMMENDATION: T7ze Planning Commission recommends on a 5-O vote that the City Council: L Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR), including the Statement of Overriding Considerations; and 2. Approve the Master Use Permit, Architectural and Site Approval, Tentative Map and Tree Removal Permit, subject to the draft Planning Commission resolutions. BACKGROUND: On December 16, 2008, the proposed 17-acre mixed-use retail, office, seiuor housing, hotel and athletic club project was introduced to the City Council. The City Council made no comments and took only public testimony at the meetuzg, since the Plaiinuzg Commission had not yet made its recommendation to the Council and the Final EIR had not yet been circulated to allow for the Council to make a decision on the project. During the Council meetuZg, public comments were expressed that included: - Retaiul the park along Stevens Creek Boulevard 14 - l Ayplications: U-2008-OJ, ASA-2008-OG Main ~trc°~=t Cu}x~rtii~o January 12, 200y I'M-2008-01 ~ TR-2008-OH Pa~c, 2 - Do not reduce size of the park - Consider active senior living housing, rather than assisted senior living - Provide a greater buffer between the Metropolitan mixed-use condominiums and the senior housing builduzg on the project site - Keep truck loadu1g dock area facing to and accessible from Vallco Parkway, away from the Metropolitan residents - Maintain the mature ash trees around the project site - Retain the Aleppo Pine tree On January 6, 2009, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the project with flexible alternative options that would allow the applicant to develop the 17-acre site itz response to market demand due to the current economic conditions. The Plaiuzing Commission recommendation will be further explained in the Discussion section below. Public comments expressed during the Coin_t~iission meeting reiterated comments from past Planning Commission meetings, including: - Retain the park and do not reduce park from origiuzal proposed size - Maintain the 35-foot setback along Stevens Creek Boulevard - Retain the existing mature ash trees around the project site - Retain the Aleppo Pule tree - Ervsure there is a construction mitigation plan - Concern about parceling the property into pieces - Concern about the effects on Cupertino Square Mall with retail on this site Concern about whether a sports club would work on this site - Concern whether there is a need for an additional hotel i1 the City PROJECT DESCRIPTION In response to the Planning Commission and public comments, the applicant submitted the following two development schemes for the Commission to consider at its January 6th meeting: Pro osed Uses Retail (sf) Athletic Club (sf) Office (sf) Senior Housing (units) Hotel (rooms) Open Space with a Public Easement (ac) On-sit) Parkin (stalls Scheme A Scheme B 127,789 120,331 *145,000 ~ 100,000 205,000 160 160 150 250 4 4 1,596 1,895 "` A nienzbers/iip restriction of 9.000 is applied to Nze ath/etic club (egun~a/ent ro 98.800 sf of convnercia! use based wz rehic/e tr ip eeneratiozt) N~~1r f= ,. burn-efr,nlr~s~y~1r= ~rrrrc 14-2 Applicationsc U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertuno January 12, 2009 TM-2008-O1 8s TT2-2008-OS Page 3 Scheme A Scheme B ~~aa -w _ ._- •~ ._ • • `may ti - .emu ..... ~ 1~ f'L- r~ s ~.~~. ..~ ~ J.J ~ -~ ~ 3 ~' .mod.. • ~ l l ~~ t .~ J .-...... ' J ! i ~~ ~ =tea-• • __ ~. ~ :~ + ~- ~. J ~ '.! E=' 1 ''~ { -ter rte- ~a~~ ~ -..• • .}• - - - '.. DISCUSSION The Plaruzizg Commission voted to reconunnend approval of a flexiUle development plan that would allow for the following with the aUility to incorporate additional alternate options as explained further in this report: - 160-unit senior housing Uuildung - 145,000 square foot athletic cluU per Scheme A or major retail Uuildung per the Alternate Option • Either a 3-story, 150-room hotel (Scheme A) or a 5-story, 250 room hotel (Scheme B) - At least 127,789 square feet of retail shops (with additional if aln alternate option is chosen) - Either a five-level parking garage (Scheme A) or four-level parking garage (Scheme B) - 4-acre puUlic open space, including a town square and park adjacent to the Metropolitan residential condominiums (as shown in Uoth of the revised schemes) - Up to 100,000 square feet of office per Scheme A. Alternate Options The Commission also recommended approval to allow interchangeaUle development options for certain portioins of the project area as descriUed Uelow. These alternative development options are not anticipated to create any additional enviroiunental impacts than the original schemes in order to stay within the scope of the Enviroiunental Impact Report (EII2). Should the City Couincil wish to incorporate any of these alternate options unto the development plan, a finduzg should Ue made to indicate that these options do not create additional environmental impacts than ii the original schemes shown ii the EIR. 14-3 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino TI~Q-2008-O1 S- TR-2008-08 Jaizuary 12, 2009 Page 4 Corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tatltau Avenue Scheme A incorporates a 145,000 square foot athletic c1uU at (--:•:, , - - =_- =- this corner. Scheme B includes a 3-story, 205,000 square t-~ _ -. foot office Uuilding in lieu of the athletic c1uU. The applicant ~~ -- `~ 1' also provided an alternate option for consideration that [fir. ~=` :}~~ ;ter. l - consists of a 30,000 square foot major retail Uuildu~g aizd 6,000 square foot attached retail or restaurant tenant space facing Stevens Creek Boulevard. This option also includes 162 additional surface parking stalls Uelund the building and a truck loading area along N. Tantau Avenue- Scheme A Scheme B Alternate Option ::. . } -J _ ~ ` r ~s-rc~. x ` ' ~ I' ~ ~~ -~~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ATfiETY.. ~ ~~ ~ J - S ORY ~ ~ Q ~- ~ ` ~ i ~ ~ ' J Planning Commission Recommendation: The Commission recommended approval of the 145,000 square foot athletic club (Scheme A) and the Alternate Option (if the market conditions caruzot accommodate the athletic club). The Commission was not supportive of Scheme B due to the amouazt of office proposed. If the Alternate Option is developed, the total retail shop area for the project site would be decreased to 163,789 square feet from 273,789 square feet (countilg the athletic club as commercial square footage). Tlus alternate option would also provide a total of 1,758 on-site parking spaces. Maior Retail on Corner of Vallco Parkway and Finch A~renue __ _ The oriQilal Schemes A aild Bas shown iuz the EIR ro ose ' - __- a rox matel 17 000 s uare feet of retail sho s linitl P Vallco t.~ C: •t_~_ -_ - PP Y ~ cJ P g ._~-~ -_-- - E_..y_ •-- ---- Parkwa on the northwest corner of the Vallco Parkwa and ' Y Y :;- Fitch, with a 40,000 square foot major retail building behind it facing the town square. 14-4 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino January 12, 2009 TAZ-2008-O1 Sz TI2-2008-08 Page S The applicant has provided two alternate options that could replace this corner: 1. A 30,000 square foot major retail building facing Vallco Parkway, two "jewel box" buildungs and surface parking facing Vallco Parkway with the loading dock facing Funch Avenue. 2. A 40,000 square foot major retail Uuildung and approximately 21,000 square foot of retail shops lining Vallco Parkway with the loading dock facing Vallco Parkway. Original Scheme A or B ~-~_~ _ _ - f _ ~~~ _,~~ 1 i ,~. -- ;- Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Conunission recommended approval of Alternate Option 1 or Alternate Option 2 in lieu of the originally proposed Scheme A or B major retail proposal because the originally proposed scheme showed the truck loading dock area closer to the Metropolitan condominium residents. Alternate Option 1 is already incorporated "unto the Scheme A that was proposed at the January 6th Pla~uning Commission meeting; therefore, the retail square footage noted on the plan would not change. Alternate Option 2 would allow for a larger retail area aind would increase the retail shop area to 150,000 square feet if the athletic club remains in the development. If tine retail option is chosen for the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard aild N. Tantau Avenue in lieu of the athletic club, then the total retail shop area would be 186,000 square feet. Staff note: Staff is concerned with a truck loading dock facing Vallco Parkway because it breaks up the continuity of the pedestrian path along Vallco Parkway aind creates an automobile safety issue. Regardless of the option chosen, staff recommends that the truck loadung dock area not be oriented toward Vallco Parkway. is-s Alternate Option 2 Alternate Option 1 Applications: U-2008-01, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino TM-2008-O1 8t TR-2008-OS January 12, 2009 Page 6 Hotel Both existing options include a hotel on the project site. --_- Scheme A includes a 3-story, 150 room hotel. Scheme B ~_:. ~-. ~ = -- includes a 5-story, 250 room hotel. The applicant is s~ ~ _ ~~- ~: _ -- re uestin a royal of either Scheme A or Scheme B. - } ' - '" q g 1~P r..- '' Scheme A Scheme I3 Planning Commission Recommendation: The PlaiuZing Conunission recommends support for either hotel option. Square Parkuzg Plaza _ _ ___ The applicant is proposing a square "European" parkuzg plaza ~ ~' ~- •-.__ to the east of the town square. f--~ -- ~' ,----_-: ~-~-.: is-s Applications: U-2008-01, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino January 12, 2009 Th7-2008-O1 ~ TR-2008-08 Page 7 Staff and the Architectural Advisor, Larry Caiuzon, Uelieve that this concept reduces the functionality and the potential for outdoor pedestrian-oriented plaza space adjacent to the retail shops. Staff is also concerned aUout the inefficient aild conflicting vehicular/parking movements that this compact square plaza may present_ Therefore, staff recommends that this area Ue modified to iZCOrporate a more standard Linear street that allows for the outdoor pedestrian plaza space to Ue expanded to the north and the south creating a more continuous and coherent pedestrian experience. A condition has Ueen added to Condition No_ 19B incorporating staff's recoirunendation_ Street parking could still Ue accommodated Uy 90 degree angled parking_ Staff is presenting two alternative options (see diagrams of the options Uelow)_ One alternative shows 90 degree angled parking only within the area of the square plaza. The other alternative shows the extension of 90 degree angled parking along the street to the east_ During the Plaiuzing Commission nzeetiig, the applicant also indicated that he would Ue comfortaUle with staff's reconunendation. Architectural Advisor's Comments t LT,I Ovc~ o -ray •n.~}'•r ::. t.':~ SF =. i~ - 6 - -~~~~ Circu'a?Ton and par King __ :ery ~_ _ _ __ av:-:r: rd in this - - - 5rea and reta - - ~ - - -a r agar t Alternative Option 1 Alternative (7»fiin» 7 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino January 12, 2009 "I"I~Z-2008-O1 8z TR-2008-OS Page 8 Planning Commission Recommendation: The Plarunung Commission recommended retaining the square "Europeain" parking plaza- Metropolitan Condomiuum 8s Senior Housing Interface _ _ __-__ The applicant has provided a cross section of the interface ~~~``~,,_, = °- Uetween the Metropolitan condominium site and the senor _. - _ ~_ housing Uuilding with the following features: ~ ~~3 .-~~~~ __ , i3=_.. _~, - Miumum 20-foot landscape Duffer Uet~veen the Metropolitan condominiums and senior housung Uuildung - Terraced upper levels to provide greater setUacks from the Metropolitans condominiums - Roof-top garden. Please see the diagram Uelow: Section Interface between Metropotitan 8 Senior Housing _ x..o ..o.. .y ~ "r - ~ .-_. :'t c= nom,-. Even though a suUstantial amouint of the senior housing Uuilding has Ueen set Uack from the Metropolitan condominnium Uuilding, there are still portions of the upper floors (at tine north and south wings) taller than the Metropolitans condominium Uuildung that are only 50 feet away. If the City Council funds additional relief is warranted, the Counncil may consider the follownng options: 1. Further cascade the upper floors of the senior housinng Uuilding to provide greater setUacks to mitigate impacts onto the adjacent Metropolitan complex. 2. hncrease the side yard setUack from 20 feet to 25 feet and consider requiring a green screen trellis feature that can soften the impact of the upper floor walls faciung the Metropolitan complex. Planning Commission Recommendation: Tlne Planning Commission did not recommend increasing the 20-foot lanndscape Duffer Uetween the Metropolitans condominiums and the senior housing Uuilduzg, or to further setUack the upper floors of the senior housing Uuilding. 14-8 Site Plan of Senior Housing Applications= U-2008-01, ASA-2008-06 Maul Street Cupertino "IT4-2008-O1 8z TT2-2008-OS January 12, 2009 Page 9 Park During the meeting, residents of the adjacent Metropolitaiz _ ~ __ condominiums expressed concerns aUout the proposed park ~~' - f' ~~-'_~--_,: _ along Stevens Creek Boulevard Uei1g further reduced i1 the '~ "~-.-.~'l~~ "T January 6*h version of Schemes A and B to a .4 acre park from the ~t _ -~ }~~ -~--i'~~ origiulally proposed park size of .89 acres. Originally Proposed Park (.89 acres) ws711~ --- I - OUSIIJG ~~~E~T , ,;J ...d.. ~ I _ ~.o..,.~ ., ,~.~ ~ ,~ ~ d ~{ _ ...~.: J .n_rwa - wctw~ reps ,.,~ sops •.>w sr ti a ~a cs n t r"~ J - _ __ ~ ~ . ~I acvw~ One of the Plannilg Commissioners suggested ~videizi~g the park Uy shifting the driveway and adjacent retail shop Uuilduzg slightly to the east. Staff is supportive of wideiung the park area to the east Uy reducii~g the width of the adjacent driveway to accommodate aone-way exit only onto Stevens Creek Boulevard and removing the half circular drive and some parking to the north of the driveway. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Plaiuzulg Commission recommended approval of the currently proposed park with the reduced park size (.4 acres) and recommended that the Parks and Recreation Commission review the desigiz of the park, including crash-resistant fencing materials for any area of the park adjacent to vehicular traffic areas, for its recommendation to Ue forwarded to the City Couizcil for review and approval. Add Future Retail alonti Vallco Parkway _ _ The parkng garage will Ue constructed to allow for ( ~ _° conversion of the ground floor area of the parking garage € facing Vallco Parkway to retail shop area i1 the future- The ~~ -~°~ '° applicant has provided an altenzate option indicating that ~4 _! _}~~_ ~~ ~, 9,000 square feet of retail shop area could Ue incorporated iZto the grouiZd floor parking garage that would result in the removal of 43 parking spaces. This could Urizg the total retail shop area iz the project to a maximum of 195,000 square feet, if all major retail shop options are chosen. is-s Current Proposed Park (.4 acres) Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino TAQ-2008-O1 8z TR-2008-OS Alternate Option _ -- ~at - /. ~~ _ ~-_ 5J , l ~ ~ ~~ ~' NEW RETNL - F -= ~ f,0~0 SF 4 ~ J- J • _ J ~ - - -- ~~,: -= ~ -- 3_ -y-~-.J..- ~ - . _ _ January 12, 2009 Page 10 Planning Commission Recommendation: The Plaiuluzg Conunission recommended approval of the future conversion of the groul~d floor of the parkitzg garage. This will add 9,000 square feet of additional future retail shop area and 'include the loss of 43 parking spaces when it is developed. General Plan Allocations The proposed project is located within the Vallco Park South commercial center and will require allocation for the retail, hotel, office, and senior housilzg uses. Additioizally, for Scheme A, the project will require additional conunercial allocation for the athletic c1uU and any additional retail shop area allocations that are chosen. Below is a table that outluzes the existing development allocations for the Vallco Park South center and the allocations needed for both Scheme A and B: Available Allocation Scheme A Scheme B er the General Plan Commercial 231,270 sf 127,789 sf (retail shops) 120,331 sf "98,800 sf (sports club) Total: 226,589 sf _adGiiior.a.i retail shop area options z. i.i reyn.;re allocatiora &.-om other centers in the Gtv Office O 100,000 sf ~iJ'.,0o0 sf Hotel ""78 rooms i~_l -ocnls ?30 roo-s Residential 400 units 160 units 160 wZits * A membership restriction of 9,000 is applied to the athletic club (equivalent to 98,800 sf of cotrunercial use based on vehicle trip generation) *"686 rooms of the 764 are coiruztiitted to Cupertno Square through a Development Agreement Note= Numbers in rrd exceed the General Plan available allocation Based on the available allocations per the General Plan, Sand Hill is requestuig redistribution of available allocations for office aild commercial, if needed with additional retail shop options, (Scheme A) from other geographical areas. There are no available hotel allocations in other geographical areas within the City. 14 - 1 O Existing Scheme A or B Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main. Street Cupertino January 12, 2009 '1ZVI-2008-01 St 'TR-2008-08 Paee 11 Office Allocations The Plaruling Commission recommended approval to allow up to 100,000 square feet of office as shown in Scheme A to be drawn. from existing available allocations in the different planning areas and removed staff's recommended language in the conditions of approval to require a General Plait amendment for the office allocations needed in lieu of the applicant's request to take office= allocations from other centers within the City. The original intent of requiring that the added office square footage be obtained through a General Plan Amendment was to ensure that the project does not diminish the office space available for other major corporate interests. Hotel Allocations: Currently, 686 hotel rooms are earmarked for Cupertino Square through a Development Agreement. This only leaves 78 rooms available for this project. Depending on which site option the City Council ultimately decides, the amount of available hotel allocation is short by 72 to 172 rooms. The City Council may consider the following options: 1. Reduce the number of hotel rooms 2. Request that Sand Hill may communicate with Cupertino Square to release some of their earmarked hotel rooms. 3. Redirect commercial/retail space to hotel rooms (this was recently done with the approval of a hotel at the Oaks Shopping center) 4. Request for a General Plan Amendment to increase hotel allocation Commercial /retail: Under both Schemes A and B, the commercial allocations can be taken from the existing available commercial allocations for the Soltth Vallco Park area (231,270 sf remaining). However, if any of the additional alterriate options are chosen, then additional commercial allocations will be required eith~.r from other centers in the City or through a General Plan amendment. For purposes of commercial allocation equivalent, the athletic club will only need a commercial allocation of 98,800 square feet in lieu of the actual development proposal of 145,000 square feet. Fehr and Peers, the traffic consultant that prepared the traffic impact analysis for the project, calculated trte traffic and parking impact of the athletic club with a membership limit of 9,000 members as proposed by the applicant. Based upon this limit, the club would generate traffic equivalent to a 98,800 square foot facility, as opposed to the proposed 145,000 square foot facility. Therefore, staff suggests that the athletic club,, if included alto the project, be required to draw down only 98,800 square feet from the commercial allocation. Senior Housing The Planning ComTM+ission modified Condition No. 12 and requests that the City Council allow the applicant other alternatives, such as paying an in-lieu fee, to meet the objectives of the Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Program requirements rather than dedicating 15% of the total number of senior housing units at below market ratesr4T}~~e Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino TM-2008-01 8z TR-2008-08 January 12, 2009 Page 12 Commission recommends that the Housing Commission suggest alternative options for the City Council to consider. Final EIR and Statement of Overriding Considerations Should the City Council approve the project based upon the proposed schemes and alternative development options, the Council will first need to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report (See Exhibit D) with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (See Exhibit E) and Statement of Overriding Considerations before actions are made to approve the applications associated with the project. The Statement of Overriding Consideration addresses the impacts that the EIR has identified as significant and unavoidable. A resolution will be provided at the City Counncil meeting for the Statement of Overriding Considerations. Submitted : Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner Submitt App ov Steve iasec i David W. Knapp Director of Community Development City Manager Attachments: Plan set w/additional updated plans Exhibit A: Statement of Overriding Considerations Resolution Exhibit B: Draft Planr,;r,g Commission Resolutions Exhibit C: January 6, 2009 Planning Commission staff report w/attachments Exhibit D: Final EIR Exhibit E: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 14 - 12 Exhibit B U-Zoos-ol CITY OF C1:JPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTIC>N NO. 6537 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MASTER USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT FLEXIBLE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS CONSISTING OF A 4-STORY, 160- UNIT SENIOR HOUSING BUILDING, UP NCO A 5-STORY HOTEL WITH 250 ROOMS, UP TO 150,000 SF OF RETAIL SHOPS, UP TO 9,000 SF OF GROUND FLOOR PARKING GARAGE AREA CONVERTED TO FUTURE RETAIL SHOP AREA, UP TO A 145,000 SF ATHLETIC CLUB OR 36,000 SF OF ADDITIONAL RETAIL SHOP AREA, 100,000 SF OF OFFICE BUILDING, A 5-LEVEL PARKING GARAGE AND 4 ACRES OF PUBLIC SPACE ON A 17.4 ACRE SITE LOCATED NORTH OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD BETWEEN FINCH AVENUE (INCLUDING THE WEST SIDE OF FINCH AVENUE) AND N. TANTAU AVENiJE, SOUTH OF VALLCO PARKWAY SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use Permit, as described in Section II o1. this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; ~uzd WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has satisfied the following requirements: 1) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; and 2) The proposed use will be located anti conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of the Conditional Use Permits Chapter of the Cupertino Municipal Code; and 3) The proposed development is consi;tent with the South Vallco Special Center and South Vallco Master Plan; and 4) The proposed development is consistent with the Heart of the City Specific Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for a Use Permit is hereby recommended for approval, subject to the conditions which arc= enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and 14 - 13 Resolution No. 6537 U-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 2 That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. U-2008-O1 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planr~;r,g Commission Meeting of January 6, 2009,'and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: U-2008-O1 Applicant: Kevin Dare of Sand Hill Property Company Location: North of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Finch Avenue (including the west side of Finch Avenue) and N. Tantau Avenue, south of Vallco Parkway SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is based on Exhibits titled: "Main Street Cupertino Zoning Permit Package ' consisting of 115 pages labeled Title Sheet, AO through A53, Landscape Plan A, and CO.O through C5.3., parking garage elevations, tree disposition plan, section drawings, updated site plan, and option plans, except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 2. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Approval of a Master Use Permit is granted for a period of five (5) years following issuance of the Master Use Permit to allow the construction of interchangeable mixed-use development options in accordance with the approved exhibits consisting of a 4-story, 160-unit senior housing building; up to a 5-story, 250 room hotel; up to 150,00 square feet of retail shops; up to 9,000 square feet of ground floor parking garage area converted to future retail shop area; up to a 145,000 square foot athletic club or up to an additional 36,000 square feet of retail shop area and an additional 162 surface parking spaces at the northwest corner of Stevens ,Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue; 100,000 square foot office building; a 5-level, 1,288 space parking garage; and 4 acres of public open space consisting of a town square, plaza areas, park, and green landscaped area. The ground floor level of the office building and senior housing building will accommodate retail shops facing the town square. Scheme A OR the followin additional o bons Senior Housin 160 units Hotel 3-stories, 150 rooms 5-stories, 250 rooms Athletic Club 145,000 sf 30,000 sf major retail building and 6,000 sf adjacent retail/restaurant building azea and additional 162 surface azlcin s aces Pazlcing Garage 1,288 spaces Conversion of 9,000 sf along Vallco Parkway for conversion to future additional retail shop area with loss of 43 arkin s aces to-ta Resolution No. 6537 U-2.008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 3 Retail 127,789 square feet Up to 22,211 squaze feet of additional retail shop area for a total of 150,000 s uare feet Office 100,000 s uaze feet Public O en S ace 4 acres 3. TENTATIVE MAP Approval of a Tentative Map is granted to subdivide the property from three parcels into five parcels in accordance with the Tentative Map submitted in the approved exhibits, except as amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 4. COVENANT OF RECIPROCAL INCiRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record a deed restriction for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between each lot created by the new development. The applicant shall also record appropriate deed restrictions for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between the adjacent properties to the west, to be implemented at such time that the City can require the same of adjacent property owners. The easement language shell be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. The covenant of easement shall. be recorded prior to final map approval. 5. PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT' Public access pedestrian easements through the interior pedestrian paths and plazas, the town square, and park area shall be required. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation of the easement on the project site with the i=final map approval. 6. COVENANTS. CONDITIONS ANIr~ RESTRICTIONS The project CCBsRs shall be reviewedi and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation with the final map approval. The conditions of approval for the project shall also be recorded on the properties and incorporated into the CCB~Rs. 7. TOINT USE AGREEMENT Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit a joint use agreement between the City and the applicant to be reviewed by the City Attorney and the Director of Parks and Recreation, and approved by the City Council, which permits the City to u:;e the town square and park area for public use for community events or other similar City-approved events or activities, such as, but not be limited to a farmers' market, holiday activities, and summer events. The joint use agreement shall be recorded and incorporated into the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCBzRs) of the project site. The joint use agreement shall govern the public use, programming, public access and percentage of time available for the allowable public activities and events for 14 - 15 Resolution No. 6537 U-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 4 which the town square and park may be used. The agreement shall also make available publicly identifiable restroom facilities for public use during normal business hours. No structures will be constructed on the town square area without the approval of the City of Cupertino. The progranuniilg provisions of the joint use agreement shall be adm;r+;stered between the applicant and the Parks and Recreation Department. 8. GROUND FLOOR RETAIL Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate the ground floor retail functionality for buildings proposed at heights over 45 feet in accordance with the City's General Plan, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The ground floor retail shall be of substantial and appropriate size to accommodate the functionality of retail uses. The building frontages of all buildings facing the town square, including the senior housing building, the retail shops, and the office building, shall have ground floor retail as illustrated by the plans in the approved exhibits. The athletic club shall provide a floor plan to demonstrate the inclusion of ground floor retail along at least 10 percent of the ground floor. 9. DISCLOSURE CLAUSE TO THE FUTURE PROPERTY OWNERS The applicant/developer shall inform the future owners through the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC8=Rs) of the surrounding projects. The CCBzR language shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. 10. BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING PROGRAM The applicant shall either participate in the City's Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing program by dedicating 15% of the total number of senior housing units at below market rates or obtain an alternative approval by the City Council to meet objective of the Below Market Rate Housing Program. The Housing Commission shall suggest alternatives for the City Council to consider to meet this requirement. For dedication of any senior housing units at below market rates, the applicant shall record a covenant, which shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney, to be recorded prior to issuance of building permits for the planned senior housing building. 11. MITIGATION MONITORING-AND REPORTING PROGRAM The project shall adhere to all of the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRI') of the Environmental Impact Report prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009. 12. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION The applicant shall receive an allocation of up to 150,000 square feet of retail commercial square footage; up to 98,800 square feet of commercial for the ~a - ~s Resolution No. 6537 U-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 5 athletic club or up to an additional 3E~,000 square feet of retail commercial square footage for the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue; 160 units of residential units for the senior housing; and up to 250 hotel rooms, depending on the build oizt options chosen. The applicant is also authorized up to 100,000 square feet of office space. 13. CONSTRUCTION PROTECT PHASi[NG The applicant shall prepare a construction phasing schedule, demonstrating completion of the project within 5 years of this approval. The construction phasing schedule shall detail critical milestones- of the construction. Critical nulestones of the construction shall include but not be limited to the following: A. The town square, park area, and t71e four retail buildings adjacent to the town square and directly fronting Stevens Creek Boulevard, the street and pedestrian infrastructure around these portions of the project site, and sufficient parking to support these uses, shall be constructed together as part of the first development phase, if the project is developed in phases. B. The major retail tenant building=., the mixed-use office and retail building, senior housing, hotel, athletic club and parking garage may be developed following the first development please of the project. C. Adequate parking shall be pro~aided on the project site during phased development of the project. The applicant will be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development that adequate parking is provided for the development of each building on site. 14. PARKING The applicant shall comply with the minimum parking requirements for the project per the parking analysis in the Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers dated September 5, 2008 and incorporated into the Environmental Impact Report. The ;applicant shall also comply with the swales and permeable surfaces requirement (;Section 19.100.040(0)) of the City's Parking Regulations. 15. PARKING LOT LIGHTING Lighting in the parking lots shall be approved by the Director of Community Development for compliance with ~ipplicable regulations prior to issuance of building permits. 16. BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL The Director of Community Development shall review the final building permits for full conformance with this approval and the design approval prior to issuance of building permits. ~a-n Resolution No. 6537 U-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 6 17. SIDEWALKS/CROSSWALKS A. The final sidewalk plan shall be required to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the final map. B. The applicant shall provide decorative crosswalks with decorative precast concrete pavers across Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The decorative pavement materials shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and the Public Works Department, and shall be consistent with the recommendation of the traffic analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers in the Transportation Impact Analysis dated September 5, 2008 on p. 48. 18. SIGNAGE Signage is not approved with this application. Signage shall conform to the City's Sign Ordinance, Heart of the City Specific Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to final occupancy and approval of any individual signs on site, a detailed master sign program shall be submitted for review and approval by the Design Review Co*~-+*r~ttee. 19. ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL A. The building and architecture shall substantially conform to the elevations and details as shown in the approved exhibits, unless otherwise noted below. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of separate Architectural and Site Approval application(s) for each of the buildings on the project site. Building colors and materials shall be reviewed and approved in conjunction with the Architectural and Site Approval. 1. For buildings in which full elevations have been provided in the approved exhibits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of Architectural and Site Approval applications by the Design Review Com m;ttee. 2. For buildings in which full elevations have not been provided in the approved exhibits, such as the athletic club, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of Architectural and Site Approval applications by the City Council. B. The applicant shall address the following issues as part of the separate Architectural and Site Approvals: Town Square 1. The town square area shall be designed as a "flexible ' public area space that may be expanded or shifted by the temporary closure of one or more of the surrounding "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets 14 - 18 Resolution No. 6537 U-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 7 2. The town square area will be developed to be flush with the grade of the surrounding "Finch Avenue ' ,private drive streets to allow for a seamless expansion or shifting of the town square area. 3. The applicant shall provide decorative semi-pervious pavement treatment in the town square and plaza areas to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. 4. Parking on the circular "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets shall be delineated by decorative semi-pervious paving rather than painted stripes. 5. Final design and landscape of the town square area shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Conziiuttee. 6. Temporary closure of any portion of the private drive streets, including methods used to temporarily close the street(s), will require approval of the Director of Community Development. Corner Building Any building(s) proposed at i:he northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue shall have prominent architectural design enhancements to emphasize the importance of this corner as the eastern gateway entry to the City including: L Identifiable street frontage public entrances along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Averiue 2. Glass storefronts to allow for the visibility of activities along the street frontages 3. Interesting and unique architectural features to enhance the gateway entrance into the City Cupertino 4. Corner building architectural and site features Street Furniture The applicant shall provide streel= furniture along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vallco Parkway. Prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the street furniture shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Com,-r,;ttee. Plaza Area The applicant shall modify the square parking plaza area to the east of the town square area to a be a more standard linear street that allows for outdoor pedestrian plaza space adjacent to the surrounding retail shop areas and 90 degree-angled street parking. Garage 1. The parking garage shall be designed and constructed to allow conversion of the ground floor area along `~7allco Parkway to retail shop areas. 14 - 19 Resolution No. 6537 iJ-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 8 2. The parking garage shall provide architectural details and designs along the ground floor facing Vallco Parkway to promote pedestrian orientation along the street. 3. When the ground floor of the parking garage is converted to retail shop area, the ground floor area shall have storefront windows facing Vallco Parkway. 20. GATEWAY ENTRY The applicant shall be required to construct and install a gateway entry feature on the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue that will be consistent with the policies of the General Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. The gateway entry feature shall be a prominent design that may fulfill the public art requirement and could include a decorative monument feature that spans over Stevens Creek Boulevard, or vertical structural elements on both sides of Stevens Creek Boulevard and on the median to announce entry. Also, this corner shall include a community banner and enhanced pedestrian crossings that may include crosswalk lighting, special paving materials and/ or prominent art or architectural feature announcing the entry to the City, such as a wrought iron element, subject to review and approval by the City Council. 21. LANDSCAPE PLAN The applicant shall submit detailed landscape and irrigation plans to be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. The landscape plan shall provide the following= A. The landscape plan shall include water conservation and pesticide reduction measures in conformance with Chapter 14.15, Xeriscape Landscaping, and the pesticide control measures referenced in Chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. B. Landscaping along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue in accordance with the streetscape design requirements of the Heart of the City Specific Plan. C. Planting of two specimen oak trees flanking entrance to the development on the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Finch Avenue as replacements for the removal of the existing dead specimen oak tree. 22. TREE REMOVAL A. The applicant is approved to remove a total of up to 84 trees and relocate 13 trees on site per Option A in accordance with the City Arborist's report prepared by David Babby and dated April 30, 2008. Although the applicant is requesting approval to remove these trees in accordance with the City Arborist's recommendation, the intent is to retain as many of the existing perimeter street trees for the remaining life of such trees where they are not considered dead or do not require immediate removal. B. The Aleppo Pine tree (Tree No. 113) shall be preserved on site. 14-20 Resolution No. 6537 U-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 9 C. For any trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions, are considered dead, or die as a result of relocation, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. D. For any trees that require removal due to construction plan drawing changes and/or construction activity, the applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. 23. TREE REPLACEMENTS Final approval of the required tree replacements shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Comm;ttee in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. The applicant may be ably: to reduce the number of replacement trees on site, if larger size trees are proposed, in accordance with the tree replacement standards of the ordinance. For any additional trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions or are considered dead, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. Species and size of replacement trees shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. 24. TREE PROTECTION As part of the building permit drawirigs, a tree protection plan shall be prepared by a certified aborist for the trees to be retained. The applicant shall be required to install tree protection measures before and during development in accordance with the City Arborist's report dated April 30, 2008, and in accordance with requirements of the Public Works Department for the preservation of existing street trees. In addition, the following; measures shall be added to the protection plan: A. For trees to be retained, chain lint; fencing and other root protection shall be installed around the dripline of the tree prior to any project site work. B. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the projject aborist. C. No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City Arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. D. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers. E. Retained trees shall be watered to :maintain them in good health. 25. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in an amount deter**~;*~ed by the City Arborist to ensure protection of trees slated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, subject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. is -zi Resolution No. 6537 U-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 10 26. TREE REPLACEMENT IN-LIEU FEE The applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance for any trees that cannot be replaced on site. 27. HEART OF THE CITY DESIGN GUIDELINES A. The project shall comply with the Heart of the City design guidelines in effect at the time of project approval. B. If any portions of the buildings on the Master Use Permit site plan do not meet the min;mum setbacks per the Heart of the City Specific or Conceptual Plan, the applicant must either modify the building setback as part of the Architectural and Site Approval for the building, or obtain approval of an Exception application to the Heart of the City Specific or Conceptual Plan. 28. SOUTH VALLCO MASTER PLAN The project shall comply with the South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to release of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the final boulevard plan along Vallco Parkway shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council. The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to contact adjacent property owners to show improvement plans including, but not limited to the specific lighting, sidewalk furniture, and landscaping treatments to be consistent with the vision of the South Vallco Master Plan. 29. CREEK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS The applicant shall contribute an amount not to exceed $65,000 to the improvements of a trail connection along Calabazas Creek from Vallco Parkway to I-280. This contribution shall be used by the City to administer a creek trail plan and necessary approvals and improvements. If this fund is not used within five years of the project completion, then it shall be returned to the applicant. 30. PARK AREA ALONG METROPOLITAN A .4 acre park area shall be maintained along the western property line adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development. The design of the park area, including designs for crash-resistant fencing materials adjacent to vehicular traffic areas, shall include but not be limited to passive recreation apparatuses, such as a tot lot and sitting areas. The Parks and Recreation Cornnlission shall review the park design and shall refer its recommendation to the City Council for review and approval. The green space park buffer shall be installed prior to issuance of building occupancy permits. 31. SECURITY PLAN FOR PARKING GARAGE The applicant shall develop a comprehensive private security plan for the entire development encompassing patrol hours, mann;ng levels and frequency, closed circuit cameras in the parking garage, and adequate lighting levels. The plan is-Zz Resolution No. 6537 U-''<?008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 11 shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Sheriff's Department prior to final occupancy. 32. PARKING GARAGE NOISE MITICsATION The parking garage floors shall be treated/coated with materials as deemed appropriate by the City to lessen the noise impacts of vehicle movements. 33. RESTAURANT ODOR ABATEMEt1T All restaurants shall install odor abatement systems to be incorporated into the air handling systems to reduce they odor impact from the restaurants to the adjacent community. Detailed plar4s shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Departrne:nt prior to issuance of building permits. 34. SCREENING All mechanical and other equipment on the buildings and site shall be screened so they are not visible from public street areas or adjoining developments. Screening materials/colors shall mzitch building features and materials. The height of the screening shall be -taller than the height of the mechanical equipment that it is designed to screen. The location of equipment and necessary screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Cornniunity Development prior to issuance of building permits. 35. TRASH AND DELIVERY ACTIVITIES A. A detailed refuge and truck delivery plan must be prepared by the applicant. The plan shall specify locations of trash facilities, refuge pick up schedules and truck delivery schedules and routes. All trash facilities must be screened and enclosed to the satisfaction ~~f the Public Works Department. The final plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. B. All deliveries shall comply with. the mitigation measures provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 200'x. 36. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT' PLAN A construction management plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by staff prior to issuance of building permits. Staging of construction and equipment shall not occur withi'.n 250 feet of any residential property. The applicant shall also provide a construction manager hotline phone number for residents of the adjacent Metropolitan condominium complex to call for construction related activities on the project site. The hotline number shall also be posted on the project site and at the Metropolitan condom;n;um complex. Said construction management plan shall ~Llso provide the following: 14-23 Resolution No, 6537 U-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 12 A. Construction Vehicle Access and Routing B. Construction Equipment Staging Area C. Dust Control (Best Management Practices) D. Hours of Operation E. Street Cleaning Schedule and Program 37. GREEN BUILDING The applicant shall obtain LEED Silver certification designation for the hotel, office and senior housing buildings in accordance with the U.S. Green Building Council standards and the City's Green Building policies. The applicant shall also design the athletic club (if developed) and retail buildings to LEED certification standards, but will not be required to certify these buildings as LEED certified. The applicant shall also provide solar hot water heating for any pools provided on the project site. 38. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT A. The applicant shall create an Improvement and Maintenance District to maintain the sidewalks and landscaped park strips along Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard directly adjacent to the subject project site. Said district shall be part of the Covenants, Codes and Restrictions of the project and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to approval of the final map. B. The applicant shall record a maintenance agreement subject to the approval of the City Attorney for the maintenance of the shared driveways by the property owners of each of the lots. 39. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT The applicant shall com*r;t to implementing a transportation demand management (TDM) plan incorporating solutions as indicated in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting (MMR) Program prepared by David j. Powers and Associates dated January 2009 that may include parking cash-out and eco passes for employees, valet for customers and off-site parking options. The TDM plan including the projected funding shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Comm;ttee prior to issuance of building permits. 40. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS All demolished building and site materials shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible subject to the Building Official. The applicant shall provide evidence that materials will be recycled prior to issuance of final demolition permits. 14-24 Resolution No. 6537 U-:'_008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 13 41. NOTICE OF FEES. DEDICATION_ S, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approves]. set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requiren-cents of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. 42. PUBLIC ART The applicant shall provide public azt in accordance with General Plan policy 2- 66. Public art selection will be reviewed by the Fine Arts Comm;ssion. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 43. STREET WIDENING Public street widening and dedicatio~zs shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 44. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and. related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer. 45_ STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as approved by the City Engineer. Lighting fixtures shall be positioned so as to preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining properties, and shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site is located. 46. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. 47. GRADING Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required. Please c~~ntact Army Corp of Engineers and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. is-zs Resolution No. 6537 U-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 14 48. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Hydrology and pre- and post-development hydraulic calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be constructed or renovated. The storm drain system may include, but is not limited to, subsurface storage of peak stormwater flows (as needed), bioretention basins, vegetated swales, and hydrodynamic separators to reduce the amount of runoff of the site and improve water quality. The storm drain system shall be designed to detain water on-site (e.g., via buried pipes) as necessary to avoid an increase of one percent flood water surface elevation of the culvert to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 49. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer. 50. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for under grounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits Fees: a. Checking 8i Inspection Fees: $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $3,847.00 1TL17't i m 1.1rT1 b. Grading Permit: $ 6% of Site Improvement Cost or $2,239.00 m;n;mum c. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 2,000.00 d. Storm Drainage Fee: $ TBD e. Power Cost: ~'~ f. Map Checking Fees: $3,638.00 g. Park Fees: N/ A h. Street Tree By Developer *'~ Based on the latest effective PGBsE rate schedule approved by the PUC Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements b. Labor 8s Material Bond: 100 % of Off-site and On-site Improvement 14-26 Resolution No. 6537 U-x:008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 15 c. On-site Grading Bond: 100'% of site improvements. -The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final snap or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. 51. TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencvig and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. The transformer shall not be located in the front or side -building setback area. 52. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (;BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading and street improvement plans. 53. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with California Water Services Company for water service to the subjer_t development. 54. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL. PERMIT The developer must obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) from the State Water Resources Control Board, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), use of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control storm water runoff quality, and BMP inspection and maintenance. 55. C.3 REQUIREMENTS The developer shall reserve a m;n;murr~ of 4% of developable surface area for the placement of storm water treatment facilities on the tentative map, unless an alternative storm water treatment plan to satisfy c.3 requirements is approved by the City Engineer. The developer must include the use and maintenance of site design, source control and storm water treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs), which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. A Storm Water Management Plan, Storm Water Facilities Easement Agreement, Storm Water Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement, and certification of ongoing operation and maintenance of treatment BMPs are required. 14-27 Resolution No. 6537 U-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 16 56. EROSION CONTROL PLAN The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. 57. WORK SCHEDULE Every 6 months, the developer shall submit a work schedule to the City to show the timetable for all grading/erosion control work in conjunction with this project. 58. TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS The developer shall agree to fund up to $250,000 for the purpose of installing a traffic signal at Finch Avenue and Vallco Parkway. The developer shall submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 59. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT WOLFE ROAD AND VALLCO PARKWAY The developer shall mitigate for traffic impacts at Vallco Parkway and Wolfe Road by implementing one of the options stated in the Environmental Impact Report for Main Street Cupertino per the approval of the City Engineer. 60. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT HOMESTEAD ROAD AND LAWRENCE EXI'RES SWAY The developer shall agree to submit their fair-share cost of up to $334,100 to improve Homestead Road at Lawrence Expressway according to the direction of the City Engineer. The fair-share contribution to the County will be dependent on the amount of traffic generated by the approved Plan. In the event that a Plan is approved that has reduced traffic impacts,. the same formula would be used (calculating the percentage of traffic the project is adding to total growth between background and cumulative conditions). The cost shall be submitted to the County of Santa Clara in the form of a bond or cash deposit prior to the City issuing building permits, with the proviso that the funds be committed to this specific improvement in accordance of section 66000 et. seq. of the California Government Code. 61. PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS The developer shall provide pedestrian crosswalk improvements at Finch Avenue and at the project's eastern driveway. Final crosswalk improvement plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 62. BUS STOP LOCATION The developer shall improve bus stops on Stevens Creek Boulevard to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; this may include consistent shelters for the bus stops, but will not include duck outs or relocation of the bus stops. is-zs Resolution No. 6537 U-2008-O1 January 6, 2009_ Page 17 63. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The developer must submit a traffic control plan by a Registered Traffic Engineer to be approved by the City. The plan shhall include a temporary traffic control plan for work in the right of way as well as a routing plan for all vehicles used during construction. All traffic control signs must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of work. The City has adopted Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards for all signage and striping work throughout the City. 64. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City. 65. TRAFFIC CALMING The developer shall agree to fund up to $100,000 for the purpose of mitigating traffic impacts in the adjacent neighborhoods resulting from the project for a period of 5 years following project occuipancy. The developer shall submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 66. BICYCLE PARKING The developer shall provide bicycle parking consistent with the City's requirements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 67. OPERATIONS 8z MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT The developer shall enter into an Oper~itions 8z Maintenance Agreement with the City prior to final occupancy. The Agri>ement shall include the operation and maintenance for non-standard appurtenances in the public road right-of-way that may include, but is not limited to, sidewalk, pavers, and street lights. 68. TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Manager. Clearance by the Public Works Department is needed prior to obtain;ng a building permit. 69. REFUSE TRUCK ACCESS The developer must obtain clearance from the Environmental Programs Manager in regards to refuse truck access for the proposed development. 70. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance wii:h Ordinance No. 125. 71. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in an.y new construction to the approval of the City. i a - zs Resolution No. 6537 U-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 18 72. SANTA CLARA WATER DISTRICT CLEARANCE Provide Santa Clara water district approval before recordation of the final map. The developer shall pay for and obtain Water District permit for activities or modifications within the. District easement or fee right of way or affecting District facilities. 73. SANITARY DISTRICT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Cupertino Sanitary District prior to issuance of building permits. 74. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. 75. UTILITY EASEMENTS Clearance approvals from the agencies with easements on the property (including PGBsE, PacBell, and California Water Company, and/or equivalent agencies) will be required prior to issuance of building permits. 76. CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY CLEARANCE Provide California Water Service Company approval before recordation of the final map. CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF ENGINEERING/SURVEYING CONDITIONS (Section 66474.18 of the California Government Code) I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV. Of this resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices /s/Ralph Qualls Ralph Qualls, Director of Public Works City Engineer CA License 22046 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6*h day of January 2009, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Chair Miller, Vice Chair Giefer, Brophy, Rose, Kaneda NOES: COMMISSIONERS: none ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: none ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: none 14-30 Resolution No. 6537 U-2:008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 19 ATTEST: /s/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki, Director Community Development Department APPROVED: /s/Marry Miller Marty Miller, Chair Planning Commission G: \ Planning \ PDREPORT \ RES \ 2007 \ LI-2 008-OZ res. d oc 14-31 ASA-2008-06 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6538 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MASTER USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT FLEXIBLE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS CONSISTING OF A 4-STORY, 160- UNIT SENIOR HOUSING BUILDING, UP TO A 5-STORY HOTEL WITH 250 ROOMS, UP TO 150,000 SF OF RETAIL SHOPS, UP TO 9,000 SF OF GROUND FLOOR PARKING GARAGE AREA CONVERTED TO FUTURE RETAIL SHOP AREA, UP TO A 145,000 SF ATHLETIC CLUB OR 36,000 SF OF ADDITIONAL RETAIL SHOP AREA, 100,000 SF OF OFFICE BUILDING, A 5-LEVEL PARKING GARAGE AND 4 ACRES OF PUBLIC SPACE ON A 17.4 ACRE SITE LOCATED NORTH OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD BETWEEN FINCH AVENUE (INCLUDING THE WEST SIDE OF FINCH AVENUE) AND N. TANTAU AVENUE, SOUTH OF VALLCO PARKWAY SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Comr*i;ssion of the City of Cupertino received an application for an Architectural and Site Approval, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the P1aiuling Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has satisfied the following requirements: 1) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; and 2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of the Architectural and Site Review Chapter of the Cupertino Municipal Code; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for Architectural and Site Approval is hereby approved, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application 14-32 Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008-06_ January 6, 2009 Page 2 No. ASA-2008-06 as set forth in the Minutc~s of the Planning Commission Meeting of January 6, 2009, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: ASA-2008-06 Applicant: Kevin Dare (Sand Hill Property Company) Location: North of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Finch Avenue (including the west side of Finch Avenue) and N. Tantau Avenue, south of Vallco Parkway SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMI]~lISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is based on Exhibits titIled: "Main Street Cupertino Zoning Permit Package ' consisting of 115 pages labeled Title Sheet, AO through A53, Landscape Plan A, and CO.O through C5.3., parking garage elevations, tree disposition plan, section drawings, updated site plan, and option plans, except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 2. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Approval of a Master Use Permit is granted for a period of five (5) years following issuance of the Master iJse Permit to allow the construction of interchangeable mixed-use develo~~ment options in accordance with the approved exhibits consisting of a 4-story, 160-unit senior housing building; up to a 5-story, 250 room hotel; up to 150,.00 square feet of retail shops; up to 9,000 square feet of ground floor parking €;arage area converted to future retail shop area; up to a 145,000 square foot athletic club or up to an additional 36,000 square feet of retail shop area and an additional 162 surface parking spaces at the northwest corner of Stevens Creek E>oulevard and N. Tantau Avenue; 100,000 square foot office building; a 5-level, 1,288 space parking garage; and 4 acres of public open space consisting of a town square, plaza areas, park, and green landscaped area. The ground floor level of the office building and senior housing building will accommodate retail shops facing the town square. Scheme A OR the followin additional o tions Senior Housin 160 units Hotel 3-stories, 150 rooms U to 5-stories, 250 rooms Athletic Club 145,000 sf 30,000 sf major retail building and 6,000 sf adjacent retail/restaurant building area and additiona1162 surface azkin s aces Parking Garage 1,288 spaces Conversion of 9,000 sf along Vallco Parkway for conversion to future additional retail shop area with loss of 43 azkin s aces Retail 127,789 square feet Up to 22,211 squaze feet of additional retail shop azea for a total of 150,000 s uare feet 14-33 Resolution No. 6538. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 3 Office 100,000 s uare feet Public O en S ace 4 acres 3. TENTATIVE MAP Approval of a Tentative Map is granted to subdivide the property from three parcels into five parcels in accordance with the Tentative Map submitted in the approved exhibits, except as amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 4. COVENANT OF RECIPROCAL INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record a deed restriction for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between each lot created by the new development. The applicant shall also record appropriate deed restrictions for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between the adjacent properties to the west, to be implemented at such time that the City can require the same of adjacent property owners. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. The covenant of easement shall be recorded prior to final map approval 5. PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT Public access pedestrian easements through the interior pedestrian paths and plazas, the town square, and park area shall be required. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation of the easement on the project site with the final map approval. 6. COVENANTS. CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS The project CCBzRs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation with the final map approval. The conditions of approval for the project shall also be recorded on the properties and incorporated into the CCBsRs. 7. TOINT USE AGREEMENT Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit a joint use agreement between the City and the applicant to be reviewed by the City Attorney and the Director of Parks and Recreation, and approved by the City Council, which permits the City to use the town square and park area for public use for community events or other similar City-approved events or activities, such as, but not be limited to a farmers' market, holiday activities, and summer events. The joint use agreement shall be recorded and incorporated into the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCBsRs) of the project site. The joint use agreement shall govern the public use, programm;ng, public access and percentage of time available for the allowable public activities and events for which the town square and park may be used. The agreement shall also make available publicly identifiable restroom facilities for public use during normal 14-34 Resolution No. Ei538 ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 4 business hours. No structures wil]. be constructed on the town square area without the approval of the City of ~~upertino. The programming provisions of the joint use agreement shall be adm;n;stered between the applicant and the Parks and Recreation Department. 8. GROUND FLOOR RETAIL Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate the ground floor retail functionality for buildings proposed at heights over 45 feet in accordance with the City's General Plan, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The ground floor retail shall be of substantial and appropriate size to accommodate the functionality of retail uses. The building frontages of all buildings facing the town square, including the senior housing building, the retail shops, and the office building, shall have ground floor retail as illustrated by the plans in the approved exhibits. 'The athletic club shall provide a floor plan to demonstrate the inclusion of ground floor retail along at least 10 percent of the ground floor. 9. DISCLOSURE CLAUSE TO THE FUTURE PROPERTY OWNERS The applicant/ developer shall inform the future owners through the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCBzR:>) of the surrounding projects. The CCBsR language shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. 10. BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING PROGRAM The applicant shall either participate in the City's Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing program by dedicating 15% of the total number of senior housing units at below market rates or obtain an ~ilternative approval by the City Council to meet objective of the Below Market Rate Housing Program. The Housing Con-.r,-.~ssion shall suggest alternativ~as for the City Council to consider to meet this requirement. For dedication of any senior housing units at below market rates, the applicant shall record a co~~enant, which shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney, to be recorded prior to issuance of building permits for the planned senior housir~g building. 1T. MITIGATION MONI'T'ORING ANI7 REPORTING PROGRAM The project shall adhere to all of the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) of the Environmental Impact Report prepared by David J. rowers and Associates dated January 2009. 12. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION The applicant shall receive an allocation of up to 150,000 square feet of retail commercial square footage; up to 98,800 square feet of commercial for the athletic club or up to an additional 3E~,000 square feet of retail commercial square footage for the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau 14-35 Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 5 Avenue; 160 units of residential units for the senior housing; and up to 250 hotel rooms, depending on the build out options chosen. The applicant is also authorized up to 100,000 square feet of office space. 13. CONSTRUCTION PROTECT PHASING The applicant shall prepare a construction phasing schedule, demonstrating completion of the project within 5 years of this approval. The construction phasing schedule shall detail critical milestones of the construction. Critical milestones of the construction shall include but not be limited to the following: A. The town square, park area, and the four retail buildings adjacent to the town square and directly fronting Stevens Creek Boulevard, the street and pedestrian infrastructure around these portions of the project site, and sufficient parking to support these uses, shall be constructed together as part of the first development phase, if the project is developed in phases. B. The major retail tenant buildings, the mixed-use office and retail building, senior housing, hotel, athletic club and parking garage may be developed following the first development phase of the project. C. Adequate parking shall be provided on the project site during phased development of the project. The applicant will be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development that adequate parking is provided for the development of each building on site. 14. PARKING The applicant shall comply with the m;r,;mum parking requirements for the project per the parking analysis in the Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers dated September 5, 2008 and incorporated into the Environmental Impact Report. The applicant shall also comply with the swales and permeable surfaces requirement (Section 19.100.040(0)) of the City's Parking Regulations. 15. PARKING LOT LIGHTING Lighting in the parking lots shall be approved by the Director of Community Development for compliance with applicable regulations prior to issuance of building permits. 16. BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL The Director of Community Development shall review the final building permits for full conformance with this approval and the design approval prior to issuance of building permits. 17. SIDEWALKS/CROSSWALKS A. The final sidewalk plan shall be required to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the final map. 14-36 Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 6 B. The applicant shall provide decorative crosswalks with decorative precast concrete pavers across Vallco Park:way, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The decorative pavement materials shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and the Public Works Department, and shall be consistent with the recommendation of the traffic analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers in the Transportation Impact Analysis dated September 5, 2008 on p. 48. 18. SIGNAGE Signage is not approved with this application. Signage shall conform to the City's Sign Ordinance, Heart of the City Specific Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to final occupancy and approval of any individual signs on site, a detailed master sign program shall be submitted for review and approval by the Design Review Committee. 19. ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL A. The building and architecture shall substantially conform to the elevations and details as shown in the approved exhibits, unless otherwise noted below. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of separate Architectural and Site Approval application(s) for each of the buildings on the project site. Building colors and materials shall be reviewed and approved in conjunction with the Architectural and Site Approval. 1. For buildings in which full ele~~ations have been provided in the approved exhibits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of Architectural and Site Approval applications by the Design Review Committee. 2. For buildings in which full elevations have not been provided in the approved exhibits, such as the athletic club, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of Architectural and Site Approval applications by the City Council. B. The applicant shall address the following issues as part of the separate Architectural and Site Approvals: Town Square 1. The town square area shall be designed as a "flexible ' public area space that may be expanded or shifted by the temporary closure of one or more of the surrounding "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets 2. The town square area will be developed to be flush with the grade of the surrounding "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets to allow for a seamless expansion or shifting of the tov~rn square area. 14-37 Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 7 3. The applicant shall provide decorative semi-pervious pavement treatment in the town square and plaza areas to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. 4. Parking on the circular "Finch Avenue" private drive streets shall be delineated by decorative semi-pervious paving rather than painted stripes. 5. Final design and landscape of the town square area shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. 6. Temporary closure of any portion of the private drive streets, including methods used to temporarily close the street(s), will require approval of the Director of Community Development. Corner BuildintT Any building(s) proposed at the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue shall have prominent architectural design enhancements to emphasize the importance of this corner as the eastern gateway entry to the City including: 1. Identifiable street frontage public entrances along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue 2. Glass storefronts to allow for the visibility of activities along the street frontages 3. Interesting and unique architectural features to enhance the gateway entrance into the City Cupertino 4. Corner building architectural and site features Street Furniture 'The applicant shall provide street furniture along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vallco Parkway. Prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the street furniture shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. Plaza Area The applicant shall modify the square parking plaza area to the east of the town square area to a be a more standard linear street that allows for outdoor pedestrian plaza space adjacent to the surrounding retail shop areas and 90 degree-angled street parking. Garage 1. The parking garage shall be designed and constructed to allow conversion of the ground floor area along Vallco Parkway to retail shop areas. 2. The parking garage shall provide architectural details and designs along the ground floor facing Vallco Parkway to promote pedestrian orientation along the street. 14-38 Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008--06 January 6, 2009 Page 8 3. When the ground floor of the parking garage is converted to retail shop area, the ground floor area shall have storefront windows facing Vallco Parkway. 20. GATEWAY ENTRY The applicant shall be required to construct and install a gateway entry feature on the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue that will be consistent with the policies o1- the General Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. The gateway entry feature shall be a prominent design that may fulfill the public art requirement and could include a decorative monument feature that spans over Stevens Creek Boulevard, or vertical structural elements on both sides of Stevens Creek Boulevard and on the median to announce entry. Also, this corner shall include a community baruler and enhanced pedestrian crossings that may include crosswalk lighting, special paving materials and/or prominent art or architectural feature announcing the entry to the City, such as a wrought iron element, subject to review and appro~Tal by the City Council. 21. LANDSCAPE PLAN The applicant shall submit detailed landscape and irrigation plans- to be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. The landscape plan shall provide the following: A. The landscape plan shall include -water conservation and pesticide reduction measures in conformance with Chapter 14.15, Xeriscape Landscaping, and the pesticide control measures referericed in Chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. B. Landscaping along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue in accordance with the streetscape design requirements of the Heart of the City Specific Plan. C. Planting of two specimen oak treE~s flanking entrance to the development on the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Finch Avenue as replacements for the removal of the existing dead specimen oak tree. 22. TREE REMOVAL A. The applicant is approved to remove a total of up to 84 trees and relocate 13 trees on site per Option A in accordance with the City Arborist's report prepared by David Bobby and dated April 30, 2008. Although the applicant is requesting approval to remove these trees in accordance with the City Arborist's recommendation, the intent is to retain as many of the existing perimeter street trees for the rem~iining life of such trees where they are not considered dead or do not require ;mmediate removal. B. The Aleppo Pine tree (Tree No. 113) shall be preserved on site. C. For any trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions, are considered dead, or die as a result of relocation, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with the ~~ity's Protected Trees Ordinance. 14-39 Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 9 D. For any trees that require removal due to construction plan drawing changes and/or construction activity, the applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. 23. TREE REPLACEMENTS Final approval of the required tree replacements shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. The applicant may be able to reduce the number of replacement trees on site, if larger size trees are proposed, in accordance with the tree replacement standards of the ordinance. For any additional trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions or are considered dead, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. Species and size of replacement trees shall be reviewed and approved by the Co*r*-+~unity Development Director. 24. TREE PROTECTION As part of the building permit drawings, a tree protection plan shall be prepared by a certified arborist for the trees to be retained. The applicant shall be required to install tree protection measures before and during development in accordance with the City Arborist's report dated April 30, 2008, and in accordance with requirements of the Public Works Department for the preservation of existing street trees. In addition, the following measures shall be added to the protection plan: A. For trees to be retained, chain link fencing and other root protection shall be installed around the dripline of the tree prior to any project site work. B. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the project arborist. C. No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City Arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. D. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers. E. Retained trees shall be watered to maintain them in good health. 25. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in an amount determined by the City Arborist to ensure protection of trees slated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, subject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. 26. TREE REPLACEMENT IN-LIEU FEE The applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance for any trees that cannot be replaced on site. 14 - 40 Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008-~06 January 6, 2009 Page to 27. HEART OF THE CITY DESIGN GU:[DELINES A. The project shall comply with the Heart of the City design guidelines in effect at the time of project approval. B. If any portions of the buildings on the Master Use Permit site plan do not meet the minimum setbacks per the Heart of the City Specific or Conceptual Plan, the applicant must either rnodify the building setback as part of the Architectural and Site Approval for the building, or obtain approval of an Exception application to the Heart of the City Specific or Conceptual Plan. 28. SOUTH VALLCO MASTER PLAN The project shall comply with the Scruth Vallco Master Plan. Prior to release of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the final boulevard plan along Vallco Parkway shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council. The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to contact adjacent property owners to show improvement plans including, but not limited to the specific lighting, sidewalk furniture, and landscaping treatments to be consistent with the vision of the South Vallco Master Plan. 29. CREEK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS The. applicant shall contribute an amount not to exceed $65,000 to the improvements of a trail connection along Calabazas Creek from Vallco Parkway to I-280. This contribution shall be used by the City to administer a creek trail plan and necessary approvals and improvements. If this fund is not used within five years of the project completion, then it shall be returned to the applicant. 30. PARK AREA ALONG METROPOLITAN A .4 acre park area shall be maintained along the western property line adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development. The design of the park area, including designs for crash-resistant fencing materials adjacent to vehicular traffic areas, shall include but not be limited to passive recreation apparatuses, such as a tot lot and sitting areas. Tl1e Parks and Recreation Commission shall review the park design and shall refer its recorrunendation to the City Council for review and approval The green space park buffer shall be installed prior to issuance of building occupancy permits. 31. SECURITY PLAN FOR PARKING GARAGE The applicant shall develop a comprehensive private security plan for the entire development encompassing patrol hours, manning levels and frequency, closed circuit cameras in the parking gars€;e, and adequate lighting levels. The plan shall be prepared by the applicant rind approved by the Sheriff's Department prior to final occupancy. 14 - 41 Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 11 32. PARKING GARAGE NOISE MITIGATION The parking garage floors shall be treated/coated with materials as deemed appropriate by the City to lessen the noise impacts of vehicle movements. 33. RESTAURANT ODOR ABATEMENT All restaurants shall install odor abatement systems to be incorporated into the air handling systems to reduce the odor impact from the restaurants to the adjacent community. Detailed plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. 34. SCREENING All mechanical and other equipment on the buildings and site shall be screened so they are not visible from public street areas or adjoining developments. Screening materials/colors shall match building features and materials. The height of the screening shall be taller than the height of the mechanical equipment that it is designed to screen. The location of equipment and necessary screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. 35. TRASH AND DELIVERY ACTIVITIES A. A detailed refuge and truck delivery plan must be prepared by the applicant. The plan shall specify locations of trash facilities, refuge pick up schedules and truck delivery schedules and routes. All trash facilities must be screened and enclosed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. The final plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. B. All deliveries shall comply with the mitigation measures provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009. 36. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN A construction management plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by staff prior to issuance of building permits. Staging of construction and equipment shall not occur within 250 feet of any residential property. The applicant shall also provide a construction manager hotline phone number for residents of the adjacent Metropolitan condominium complex to call for construction related activities on the project site. The hotline number shall also be posted on the project site and at the Metropolitan condominium complex. Said construction management plan shall also provide the following: A. Construction Vehicle Access and Routing B. Construction Equipment Staging Area C. Dust Control (Best Management Practices) D. Hours of Operation E. Street Cleaning Schedule and Program is-az Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008--06 January 6, 2009 Page 12 37. GREEN BUILDING The applicant shall obtain LEED Si]ver certification designation for the hotel, office and senior housing buildings in accordance with the U.S. Green Building Council standards and the City's Green Building policies. The applicant shall also design the athletic club (if d-eveloped) and retail buildings to LEED certification standards, but will not be required to certify these buildings as LEED certified. The applicant shall zlso provide solar hot water heating for any pools provided on the project site. 38. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT A. The applicant shall create an Improvement and Maintenance District to maintain the sidewalks and landscaped park strips along Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard directly adjacent to the subject project site. Said district shall be part of the Covenants, Codes and Restrictions of the project and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to approval of the i-inal map. B. The applicant shall record a mair~tenance agreement subject to the approval of the City Attorney for the maintenance of the shared driveways by the property owners of each of the logs. 39. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND M1~NAGEMENT The applicant shall com*r;t to implementing a transportation demand management (TDlVl) plan incorporating solutions as indicated in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting (MMR) Program prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009 that may include parking cash-out and eco passes for employees, valet for customers a-nd off-site parking options. The TDM plan including the projected funding shall: be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. 40. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS ' All demolished building and site materials shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible subject to the Building Official. The applicant shall provide evidence that materials will be recycled prior to issuance of final demolition permits. 41. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS. RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in wYuch you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 14-43 Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 13 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. 42. PUBLIC ART The applicant shall provide public art in accordance with General Plan policy 2- 66. Public art selection will be reviewed by the Fine Arts Commission. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 43. STREET WIDENING Public street widening and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 44. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer. 45. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as approved by the City Engineer. Lighting fixtures shall be positioned so as to preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining properties, and shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site is located. 46. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. 47. GRADING Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required. Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/ or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. 48. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Hydrology and pre- and post-development hydraulic calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be constructed or renovated. The storm drain system may include, but is not limited to, subsurface storage of peak stormwater flows (as needed), bioretention basins, vegetated swales, and hydrodynamic separators to reduce the amount of runoff of the site and improve water quality. The storm drain system shall be designed to detain water on-site (e.g., via buried pipes) as necessary to avoid an increase of ~a-aa Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 14 one percent flood water surface elevation of the culvert to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 49. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Saici plans shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer. 50. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for under grounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits Fees: a. Checking 8~ Inspection Fees: $ 6°6 of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $3,847.00 minim71rr1 b. Grading Permit: $ 6% of Site Improvement Cost or $2,239.00 min;mum c. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 2,000.00 d. Storm Drainage Fee: $ TBD e. Power Cost: ** f. Map Checking Fees: $3,638.00 g. Park Fees: N/ A h. Street Tree By Developer ** Based on the latest effective PG~BzE rate schedule approved by the PUC Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements b. Labor 8z Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement c. On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. -The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final neap or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. 14 - 45 Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 15 51. TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. The transformer shall not be located in the front or side building setback area. 52. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading and street improvement plans. 53. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with California Water Services Company for water service to the subject development. 54. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT The developer must obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) from the State Water Resources Control Board, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), use of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control storm water runoff quality, and BMP inspection and maintenance. 55. C.3 REQUIREMENTS The developer shall reserve a„-,;,,;mum of 4% of developable surface area for the placement of storm water treatment facilities on the tentative map, unless an alternative storm water treatment plan to satisfy c.3 requirements is approved by the City Engineer. The developer must include the use and maintenance of site design,. source control and storm water treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs), which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. A Storm Water Management Plan, Storm Water Facilities Easement Agreement, Storm Water Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement, and certification of ongoing operation and maintenance of treatment BMPs are required. 56. EROSION CONTROL PLAN The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. 57. WORK SCHEDULE Every 6 months, the developer shall submit a work schedule to the City to show the timetable for all grading/erosion control work in conjunction with this project. 14-46 Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 16 58. TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENT;S_ The developer shall agree to fund up to $250,000 for the purpose of installing a traffic signal at Finch Avenue and Vallco Parkway. The developer shall submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 59. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT WOLFS ROAD AND VALLCO PARKWAY The developer shall mitigate for traffic impacts at Vallco Parkway and Wolfe Road by implementing one of the options stated in the Environmental Impact Report for Main Street Cupertino per the approval of the City Engineer. 60. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT HOMESTEAD ROAD AND LAWRENCE EXPRESSWAY The developer shall agree to submit their fair-share cost of up to $334,100 to improve Homestead Road at Lawrence Expressway according to the direction of the City Engineer. The fair-share contribution to the County will be dependent on the amount of traffic generated by the approved Plan. In the event that a Plan is approved that has reduced traffic impacts, the same formula would be used (calculating the percentage of traffic th.e project is adding to total growth between background and cumulative conditions). The cost shall be submitted to the County of Santa Clara in the form o1` a bond or cash deposit prior to the City issuing building permits, with the proviso that the funds be com,-r,;tted to this specific improvement in accordance of section 66000 et. seq. of the California Government Code. 61. PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS The developer shall provide pedestrian crosswalk improvements at Finch Avenue and at the project's eastern driveway. Final crosswalk improvement plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 62. BUS STOP LOCATION The developer shall improve bus si:ops on Stevens Creek Boulevard to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; this :may include consistent shelters for the bus stops, but will not include duck outs or relocation of the bus stops. 63. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The developer must submit a traffic control plan by a Registered Traffic Engineer to be approved by the City. The plan slhall include a temporary traffic control plan for work in the right of way as well as a routing plan for all vehicles used during construction. All traffic control signs must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of work. The City has adopted Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards for all signage and striping work throughout the City. 14-47 .Resolution No. 653$ ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 17 64. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City. 65. TRAFFIC CALMING The developer shall agree to fund up to $100,000 for the purpose of mitigating traffic impacts in the adjacent neighborhoods resulting from the project for a period of 5 years following project occupancy. The developer shall submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 66. BICYCLE PARKING The developer shall provide bicycle parking consistent with the City's requirements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 67. OPERATIONS 8r MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT The developer shall enter into an Operations 8r Maintenance Agreement with the City prior to final occupancy. The Agreement shall include the operation and maintenance for non-standard appurtenances in the public road right-of-way that may include, but is not limited to, sidewalk, pavers, and street lights. 68. TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Manager. Clearance by the Public Works Department is needed prior to obtaining a building permit. 69. REFUSE TRUCK ACCESS The developer must obtain clearance from the Environmental Programs Manager in regards to refuse truck access for the proposed development. 70. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125. 71. Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 72. SANTA CLARA WATER DISTRICT CLEARANCE Provide Santa Clara water district approval before recordation of the final map. The developer shall pay for and obtain Water District permit for activities or modifications within the District easement or fee right of way or affecting District facilities. 14 - 48 Resolution No. .6538 ASA-2008-•06 January 6, 2009 Page 18 73. SANITARY DISTRICT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Cupertino Sanitary District prior to issuance of building permits. 74. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. 75. UTILITY EASEMENTS Clearance approvals from the agencies with easements on the property (including PGBzE, PacBell, and California Water Company, and/or equivalent agencies) will be required prior to issuance of building; permits. 76. CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY CLEARANCE Provide California Water Service Company approval before recordation of the final map. CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF ENGINEERING/SU]ZVEYING CONDITIONS (Section 66474.18 of the California Government Code) I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV. Of this resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices /s/Ralph Qualls Ralph Qualls, Director of Public Works City Engineer CA License 22046 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6~ day of January 2009, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Chair Miller, Vice Chair Giefer, Brophy, Rose, Kaneda NOES: COMMISSIONERS: none ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: none ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: none ATTEST: APPROVED: 14-49 Resolution No. 6538 ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 -Page 19 /s/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki, Director Community Development Department / s / Marty Miller Marty Miller, Chair Planning Commission G: \ Plan Wing \ PDREPORT \ RES \ 2008 \ASA-2008-06 res.dac 14-50 TM-2008-O1 CITY OF C'UPERTINO 10300 Tonre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6539 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TE3E CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A TENTATIVE MAP TO CREATE FIVE hTEW PARCELS ON A 17.4 ACRE SITE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD BETWEEN FINCH AVENUE (INCLUDING THE WEST SIDE OF FINCH AVENUE) AND N. TANTAU AVENUE, SOUTFI OF VALLCO PARKWAY SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Tentative Map, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given ixz accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has satisfied the following z•equirements: 1) That the proposed subdivision map is consistent with the City of Cupertino General Plan. 2) That the design and improvements of the proposed subdivision are consistent with the General Plan. 3) That the site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of development contemplated under the approved) subdivision. 4) That the design of the subdivision. or the proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial envirorunental damage nor substantially and unavoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. 5) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements associated there is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 6) That the design of the subdivision and its associated improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for Tentative Map is hereby approved, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application is - si Resolution No. 6539 _ TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 2 No. TM-2008-O1 as set forth ixi the Minutes of the Plasuzing Commission Meeting of January 6, 2009, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: TM-2008-O1 Applicant/Owner: Kevin Dare (Sand Hill Property Company) Location: North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Finch Avenue (including the west side of Finch Avenue) and N. Tantau Avenue, south of Vallco Parkway SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is based on Exhibits titled: "Main Street Cupertino Zoning Permit Package" consisting of 115 pages labeled Title Sheet, AO through A53, Landscape Plan A, and CO.O through C5.3., parking garage elevations, tree disposition plan, section drawings, updated site plan, and option plans, except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 2. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Approval of a Master Use Permit is granted for a period of five (5) years following issuance of the Master Use Permit to allow the construction of interchangeable mixed-use development options in accordance with the approved exhibits consisting of a 4-story, 160-unit senior housing building; up to a 5-story, 250 room hotel; up to 150,00 square feet of retail shops; up to 9,000 square feet of ground floor parking garage area converted to future retail shop area; up to a 145,000 square foot athletic club or up to an additional 36,000 square feet of retail shop area and an additional 162 surface parking spaces at the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue; 100,000 square foot office building; a 5-level, 1,288 space parking garage; and 4 acres of public open space consisting of a town square, plaza areas, park, and green landscaped area. The ground floor level of the office building and senior housing building will accommodate retail shops facing the town square. Scheme A OR the followin additional o bons Senior Housin 160 units Hotel 3-stories, 150 rooms U to 5-stories, 250 rooms Athletic Club 145,000 sf 30,000 sf major retail building and 6,000 sf adjacent retail/restaurant building area and additional 162 surface arkin s aces Parking Garage 1,288 spaces Conversion of 9,000 sf along Vallco Parkway for conversion to future additional retail shop area with loss of 43 azkin s aces Retail 127,789 squaze feet Up to 22,211 square feet of additional retail shop azea for a total of 150,000 s uaze feet 14-52 Resolution No. .6539 TM-2008-CIl January 6, 2009 Page 3 Office 100,000 square feet Public Open Space 4 acres 3. TENTATIVE MAP Approval of a Tentative Map is granted to subdivide the property from three parcels into five parcels in accordance with- the Tentative Map submitted in the approved exhibits, except as amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 4. COVENANT OF RECIPROCAL INC~RESS/EGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record a deed restriction for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between each lo't created by the new development. The applicant shall also record appropriate deed restrictions for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between the adjacent properties to the west, to be implemented at such time that the City can require the same of adjacent property owners. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. The covenant of easement shall be recorded prior to final map approval. 5. PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT', Public access pedestrian easements through the interior pedestrian paths and plazas, the town square, and park area shall be required. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by t:he City Attorney prior to recordation of the easement on the project site with the final map approval. 6. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS ANDS RESTRICTIONS The project CCBsRs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation with the final map approval. The conditions of approval for the project shall also be recorded on the properties aired incorporated into the CCBsRs. 7. TOINT USE AGREEMENT Prior to recordation of the final m:~p, the applicant shall submit a joint use agreement between the City and t:he applicant to be reviewed by the City Attorney and the Director of Parks and Recreation, and approved by the City Council, which permits the City to u:;e the town square and park area for public use for community events or other similar City-approved events or activities, such as, but not be limited to a farmers' market, holiday activities, and summer events. The joint use agreement shall be recorded and incorporated into the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCBsRs) of the project site. The joint use agreement shall govern the public use, programm;r,g, public access and percentage of time available for the allowable public activities and events for which the town square and park may be used. The agreement shall also make available publicly identifiable restro~~m facilities for public use during normal 14-53 Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 4 business hours. No structures will be constructed on the town square area without the approval of the City of Cupertino. The programming provisions of the joint use agreement shall be adm;nistered between the applicant and the Parks and Recreation Department. 8. GROUND FLOOR RETAIL Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate the ground floor retail functionality for buildings proposed at heights over 45 feet in accordance with the City's General Plan, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The ground floor retail shall be of substantial and appropriate size to accommodate the functionality of retail uses. The building frontages of all buildings facing the town square, including the senior housing building, the retail shops, and the office building, shall have ground floor retail as illustrated by the plans in the approved exhibits. The athletic club shall provide a floor plan to demonstrate the inclusion of ground floor retail along at least 10 percent of the ground floor. 9. DISCLOSURE CLAUSE TO THE FUTURE PROPERTY OWNERS The applicant/developer shall inform the future owners through the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCB::Rs) of the surrounding projects. The CCBsR language shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. 10. BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING PROGRAM The applicant shall either participate in the City's Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing program by dedicating 15 % of the total number of senior housing units at below market rates or obtain an alternative approval by the City Council to meet objective of the Below Market Rate Housing Program. The Housing Commission shall suggest alternatives for the City Council to consider to meet this requirement. For dedication of any senior housing units at below market rates, the applicant shall record a covenant, which shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney, to be recorded prior to issuance of building permits for the planned senior housing building. 11. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM The project shall adhere to all of the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) of the Environmental Impact Report prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009. 12. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION The applicant shall receive an allocation of up to 150,000 square feet of retail commercial square footage; up to 98,800 square feet of commercial for the athletic club or up to an additional 36,000 square feet of retail commercial square footage for the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau 14-54 Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 5 Avenue; 160 units of residential units for the senior housing; and up to 250 hotel rooms, depending on the build oLit options chosen. The applicant is also authorized up to 100,000 square feet of office space. 13. CONSTRUCTION PROTECT PHASING The applicant shall prepare a construction phasing schedule, demonstrating completion of the project within 5 years of this approval. The construction phasing schedule shall detail critical milestones of the construction. Critical milestones of the construction shall include but not be limited to the following: A. The town square, park area, and the four retail buildings adjacent to the town square and directly fronting Stevens Creek Boulevard, the street and pedestrian infrastructure around these portions of the project site, and sufficient parking to support these uses, shall be constructed together as part of the first development phase, if the project is developed in phases. B. The major retail tenant buildings, the mixed-use office and retail building, senior housing, hotel, athletic club and parking garage may be developed following the first development phase of the project. C. Adequate parking shall be provided on the project site during phased development of the project. The applicant will be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development that adequate parking is provided for the development of each building on site. 14. PARKING The applicant shall comply with the minimum parking requirements for the project per the parking analysis in the Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers dated September 5, 2008 and incorporated into .the Environmental Impact Report. The applicant shall also comply with the swales and permeable surfaces requirement ('iection 19.100.040(0)) of the City's Parking Regulations. 15. PARKING LOT LIGHTING Lighting in the parking lots shall be approved by the Director of Community Development for compliance with applicable regulations prior to issuance of building permits. 16. BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL The Director of Community Development shall review the final building permits for full conformance with this approval and the design approval prior to issuance of building permits. is-ss Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 6 17. SIDEWALKS/CROSSWALKS A. The final sidewalk plan shall be required to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the final map. B. The applicant shall provide decorative crosswalks with decorative precast concrete pavers across Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The decorative pavement materials shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and the Public Works Department, and shall be consistent with the recommendation of the traffic analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers in the Transportation Impact Analysis dated September 5, 2008 on p. 48. 18. SIGNAGE Signage is not approved with this application. Signage shall conform to the City's Sign Ordinance, Heart of the City Specific Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to final occupancy and approval of any individual signs on site, a detailed master sign program shall be submitted for review and approval by the Design Review Committee. 19. ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL A. The building and architecture shall substantially conform to the elevations and details as shown in the approved exhibits, unless otherwise noted below. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of separate Architectural and Site Approval application(s) for each of the buildings on the project site. Building colors and materials shall be reviewed and approved in conjunction with the Architectural and Site Approval. 1. For buildings in which full elevations have been provided in the approved exhibits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of Architectural and Site Approval applications by the Design Review Co*r*r+i ttee. 2. For buildings in which full elevations have not been provided in the approved exhibits, such as the athletic club, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of Architectural and Site Approval applications by the City Council. B. The applicant shall address the following issues as part of the separate Architectural and Site Approvals: Town Square 1. The town square area shall be designed as a "flexible ' public area space that may be expanded or shifted by the temporary closure of one or more of the surrounding "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets 14-56 Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-C11 January 6, 2009 Page 7 2. The town square area will be developed to be flush with the grade of the surrounding "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets to allow for a seamless expansion or shifting of the to`m square area. 3. .The applicant shall provide decorative semi-pervious pavement treatment in the town square and plaza areas to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. 4. Parking on the circular "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets shall be delineated by decorative semi-pervious paving rather than painted stripes. 5. Final design and landscape of the town square area shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Comrr,;ttee. 6. Temporary closure of any portion of the private drive streets, including methods used to temporarily close the street(s), will require approval of the Director of Community Development. Corner Building Any building(s) proposed at i:he northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue shall have pro*n~nent architectural design enhancements to emphasize the importance of this corner as the eastern gateway entry to the City including: 1. Identifiable street frontage public entrances along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Averiue 2. Glass storefronts to allow for the visibility of activities along the street frontages 3. Interesting and unique architectural features to enhance the gateway entrance into the City Cupertino 4. Corner building architectural and site features Street Furniture The applicant shall provide street furniture along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vallco Parkway. Prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the street furniture shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Co*-*~**-+:ttee. Plaza Area The applicant shall modify the square parking plaza area to the east of the town square area to a be a more standard linear street that allows for outdoor pedestrian plaza space adjacent to the surrounding retail shop areas and 90 degree-angled street parking. Garage 1. The parking garage shall be designed and constructed to allow conversion of the ground floor area along `Jallco Parkway to retail shop areas. is-sue Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 8 2. The parking garage shall provide architectural details and designs along the ground floor facing Vallco Parkway to promote pedestrian orientation along the street. 3. When the ground floor of the parking garage is converted to retail shop area, the ground floor area shall have storefront windows facing Vallco Parkway. 20. GATEWAY ENTRY The applicant shall be required to construct and install a gateway entry feature on the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue that will be consistent with the policies of the General Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. The gateway entry feature shall be a prominent design that may fulfill the public art requirement and could include a decorative monument feature that spans over Stevens Creek Boulevard, or vertical structural elements on both sides of Stevens Creek Boulevard and on the median to announce entry. Also, this corner shall include a community banner and enhanced pedestrian crossings that may include crosswalk lighting, special paving materials and/or prominent art or architectural feature announcing the entry to the City, such as a wrought iron element, subject to review and approval by the City Council. 21. LANDSCAPE PLAN The applicant shall submit detailed landscape and irrigation plans to be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. The landscape plan shall provide the following: A. The landscape plan shall include water conservation and pesticide reduction measures in conformance with Chapter 14.15, Xeriscape Landscaping, and the pesticide control measures referenced in Chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. B. Landscaping along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue in accordance with the streetscape design requirements of the Heart of the City Specific Plan. C. Planting of two specimen oak trees flanking entrance to the development on the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Finch Avenue as replacements for the removal of the existing dead specimen oak tree. 22. TREE REMOVAL A. The applicant is approved to remove a total of up to 84 trees and relocate 13 trees on site per Option A in accordance with the City Arborist's report prepared by David Babby and dated April 30, 2008. Although the applicant is requesting approval to remove these trees in accordance with the City Arborist's recommendation, the intent is to retain as many of the existing perimeter street trees for the remair,;ng life of such trees where they are not considered dead or do not require ;mrnediate removal. B. The Aleppo Pine tree (Tree No. 113) shall be preserved on site. 14-58 Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 9 C. For any trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions, are considered dead, or die as a result of relocation, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. D. For any trees that require removal due to construction plan drawing changes and/ or construction activity, the applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. 23. TREE REPLACEMENTS Final approval of the required tree replacements shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review ComT,,;ttee in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. The applicant may be able to reduce the number of replacement trees on site, if larger size trees are proposed, in accordance with the tree replacement standards of the ordinance. For any- additional trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions or are considered dead, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. Species and size of replacement trees shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. 24. TREE PROTECTION As part of the building permit drawings, a tree protection plan shall be prepared by a certified aborist for the trees to be retained. The applicant shall be required to install tree protection measures be:Eore and during development in accordance with the City Arborist's report datE~d April 30, 2008, and in accordance with requirements of the Public Works Department for the preservation of existing street trees. In addition, the following measures shall be added to the protection plan: A. For trees to be retained, chain link fencing and other root protection shall be installed around the dripline of the tree prior to any project site work. B. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the project arborist. C. No trenching within the critics] root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees +to be retained, the City Arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. D. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers. E. Retained trees shall be waterecL to maintain them in good health. 25. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in an amount determined by the City Arborist to ensure protection of trees slated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, s~ibject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. is-ss Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 10 26. TREE REPLACEMENT IN-LIEU FEE The applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance for any trees that cannot be replaced on site. 27. HEART OF THE CITY DESIGN GUIDELINES A. The project shall comply with the Heart of the City design guidelines in effect at the time of project approval. ]3. If any portions of the buildings on the Master Use Permit site plan do not meet the minimum setbacks per the Heart of the City Specific or Conceptual Plan, the applicant must either modify the building setback as part of the Architectural and Site Approval for the building, or obtain approval of an Exception application to the Heart of the City Specific or Conceptual Plan. 28. SOUTH VALLCO MASTER PLAN The project shall comply with the South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to release of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the final boulevard plan along Vallco Parkway shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council. The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to contact adjacent property owners to show improvement plans including, but not limited to the specific lighting, sidewalk furniture, and landscaping treatments to be consistent with the vision of the South Vallco Master Plan. 29. CREEK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS The applicant shall contribute an amount not to exceed $65,000 to the improvements of a trail connection along Calabazas Creek from Vallco Parkway to I-280. This contribution shall be used by the City to administer a creek trail plan and necessary approvals and improvements. If this fund is not used within five years of the project completion, then it shall be returned to the applicant. 30. PARK AREA ALONG METROPOLTI'AN A .4 acre park area shall be maintained along the western property line adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development. The design of the park area, including designs for crash-resistant fencing materials adjacent to vehicular traffic areas, shall include but not be limited to passive recreation apparatuses, such as a tot lot and sitting areas. The Parks and Recreation Commission shall review the park design and shall refer its recommendation to the City Council for review and approval. The green space park buffer shall be installed prior to issuance of building occupancy permits. 31. SECURITY PLAN FOR PARKING GARAGE The applicant shall develop a comprehensive private security plan for the entire development encompassing patrol hours, manning levels and frequency, closed circuit cameras in the parking garage, and adequate lighting levels. The plan is-so Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-O1 _ January 6, 2009 Page 11 shall be prepared by the applicant ,end approved by the Sheriff's Department prior to final occupancy. 32. PARKING GARAGE NOISE MITIC=ATION The parking garage floors shall be treated/coated with materials as deemed appropriate by the City to lessen the ~zoise impacts of vehicle movements. 33. RESTAURANT ODOR ABATEMEI~7T All restaurants shall install odor abatement systems to be incorporated into the air handling systems to reduce the odor impact from the restaurants to the adjacent community. Detailed plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. 34. SCREENING All mechanical and other equipment on the buildings and site shall be screened so they are not visible from public= street areas or adjoining developments. Screening materials/colors shall match building features and materials. The height of the screening shall be 1=alley than the height of the mechanical equipment that it is designed to screen. The location of equipment and necessary screening shall be reviewed and 2~pproved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. 35. TRASH AND DELIVERY ACTIVITIES A. A detailed refuge and truck delivery plan must be prepared by the applicant. The plan shall specify locations of trash facilities, refuge pick up schedules and truck delivery schedules and routes. All trash facilities must be screened and enclosed to the satisfaction c>f the Public Works Department. The final plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. B. All deliveries shall comply with the mitigation measures provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009. 36. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT' PLAN A construction management plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by staff prior to issuance of building permits. Staging of construction and equipment shall not occur within 250 feet of any residential property. The applicant shall also provide a construction manager hotline phone number for residents of the adjacent Metropolitan condominium complex to call for construction related activities on the project site. The hotline number shall also be posted on the project site and at the Metropolitan condo*nin;um complex. Said construction management plan shall ~~lso provide the following: A. Construction Vehicle Access and Routing B. Construction Equipment Staging Area 14 - 61 Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 12 C. Dust Control (Best Management Practices) D. Hours of Operation E. Street Cleaning Schedule and Program 37. GREEN BUILDING The applicant shall obtain LEED Silver certification designation for the hotel, office and senior housing buildings in accordance with the U.S. Green Building Council standards and the City's Green Building policies. The applicant shall also design the athletic club (if developed) and retail buildings to LEED certification standards, but will not be required to certify these buildings as LEED certified. The applicant shall also provide solar hot water heating for any pools provided on the project site. 38. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT A. The applicant shall create an Improvement and Maintenance District to maintain the sidewalks and landscaped park strips along Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard directly adjacent to the subject project site. Said district shall be part of the Covenants, Codes and Restrictions of the project and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to approval of the final map. B. The applicant shall record a maintenance agreement subject to the approval of the City Attorney for the maintenance of the shared driveways by the property owners of each of the lots. 39. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT The applicant shall commit to implementing a transportation demand management (TDM) plan incorporating solutions as indicated in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting (MMR) Program prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009 that may include parking cash-out and eco passes for employees, valet for customers and off-site parking options. The TDM plan including the projected funding shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Comm;ttee prior to issuance of building permits. 40. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS All demolished building and site materials shall- be recycled to the maximum extent feasible subject to the Building Official. The applicant shall provide evidence that materials will be recycled prior to issuance of final demolition permits. 41. NOTICE OF FEES. DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute is-sz Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 13 written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. 42. PUBLIC ART The applicant shall provide public art in accordance with General Plan policy 2- 66. Public art selection will be reviewed by the Fine Arts Commission. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 43. STREET WIDENING Public street widening and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 44. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMl3NTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer. 45. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATIC)N Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as approved by the City Engineer. Lighting fixtures shall be positioned so as to preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining properties, and shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site is located. 46. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as re9 wired by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. 47. GRADING Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required. Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. 48. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Hydrology and pre- and post-development hydr~iulic calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be constructed or renovated. The storm drain system may include, but is not limited to, subsurface storage of peak stormwater flows (as needed), bioretention basins, 14-63 Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 14 vegetated swales, and hydrodynamic separators to reduce the amount of runoff of the site and improve water quality. The storm drain system shall be designed to detain water on-site (e.g., via buried pipes) as necessary to avoid an increase of one percent flood water surface elevation of the culvert to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 49. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer. 50. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for under grounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits Fees: a. Checking 8z Inspection Fees: $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $3,847.00 minimum b. Grading Permit: $ 6% of Site Improvement Cost or $2,239.00 minimum c. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 2,000.00 d. Storm Drainage Fee: $ TBD e. Power Cost: ~ f. Map Checking Fees: $3,638.00 g. Park Fees: N/ A h. Street Tree By Developer ~~ Based on the latest effective PGBzE rate schedule approved by the PUC Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements b. Labor 8z Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement c. On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. -The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the is-sa Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 15 event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. 51. TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaiilts and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencvzg and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. The transformer shall not be located in the front or side building setback area. 52. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices j BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMI' plans shall be included in grading and street improvement plans. 53. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the CitJ,r all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with California Water Services Company for water service to the subje~.t development. 54. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAI. PERMIT The developer must obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) from the State Water Resources Control Board, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), use of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control storm water runoff quality, a~zd BMP inspection and maintenance. 55. C.3 REQUIREMENTS The developer shall reserve a minimun-i of 4% of developable surface area for the placement of storm water treatment facilities on the tentative map, unless an alternative storm water treatment plan to satisfy c.3 requirements is approved by the City Engineer. The developer must include the use and maintenance of site design, source control and storm water treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs), which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. A Storm Water Management Plan, Storm Water Facilities Easement Agreement, Storm Water Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement, and certification of ongoing operation and maintenance of treatment BMPs are required. 56. EROSION CONTROL PLAN The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. is-ss Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 16 57. WORK SCHEDULE Every 6 months, the developer shall submit a work schedule to the City to show the timetable for all grading/erosion control work in conjunction with this project. 58. TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS The developer shall agree to fund up to $250,000 for the purpose of installing a traffic signal at Finch Avenue and Vallco Parkway. The developer shall submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 59. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT WOLFS ROAD AND VALLCO PARKWAY The developer shall mitigate for traffic impacts at Vallco Parkway and Wolfe Road by implementing one of the options stated in the Environmental Impact Report for Main Street Cupertino per the approval of the City Engineer. 60. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT HOMESTEAD ROAD AND LAWRENCE EXPRESSWAY The developer shall agree to submit their fair-share cost of up to $334,100 to improve Homestead Road at Lawrence Expressway according to the direction of the City Engineer. The fair-share contribution to the County will be dependent on the amount of traffic generated by the approved Plan. In the event that a Plan is approved that has reduced traffic impacts, the same formula would be used (calculating the percentage of traffic the project is adding to total growth between background and cumulative conditions). The cost shall be submitted to the County of Santa Clara in the form of a bond or cash deposit prior to the City issuing building permits, with the proviso that the funds be com,,,;tted to this specific improvement in accordance of section 66000 et. seq. of the California Government Code. 61. PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS The developer shall provide pedestrian crosswalk improvements at Finch Avenue and at the project's eastern driveway. Final crosswalk improvement plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 62. BUS STOP LOCATION The developer shall improve bus stops on Stevens Creek Boulevard to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; this may include consistent shelters for the bus stops, but will not include duck outs or relocation of the bus stops. 63. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The developer must submit a traffic control plan by a Registered Traffic Engineer to be approved by the City. The plan shall include a temporary traffic control plan for work in the right of way as well as a routing plan for all vehicles used during construction. All traffic control signs must be reviewed and approved by the City is-ss Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-CIl January 6, 2009 Page 17 prior to commencement of work. The City has adopted Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) st2~ndards for all signage and striping work throughout the City. 64. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic control signs shall be placed at l~xations specified by the City. 65_ TRAFFIC CALMING The developer shall agree to fund up to $100,000 for the purpose of mitigating traffic impacts in the adjacent neighborhoods resulting from the project for a period of 5 years following project occupancy. The developer shall submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 66. BICYCLE PARKING The developer shall provide bicycle parking consistent with the City's requirements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 67. OPERATIONS 8z MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT The developer shall enter into an Opereitions 8s Maintenance Agreement with the City prior to final occupancy. The Agreement shall include the operation and maintenance for non-standard appurtenances in the public road right-of-way that may include, but is not limited to, sidewalk, pavers, and street lights. 68. TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Manager. Clearance by the Public Works Department is needed prior to obtaining a building permit. 69. REFUSE TRUCK ACCESS The developer must obtain clearance from the Environmental Programs Manager in regards to refuse truck access for the proposed development. 70. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125. 71. Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 72. SANTA CLARA WATER DISTRICT CLEARANCE Provide Santa Clara water district apf~roval before recordation of the final map. The developer shall pay for and obt~i;r+ Water District permit for activities or is-sue Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page i s modifications within the District easement or fee right of way or affecting District facilities. 73. SANITARY DISTRICT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Cupertino Sanitary District prior to issuance of building permits. 74. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. 75. UTILITY EASEMENTS Clearance approvals from the agencies with easements on the property (including PGBsE, PacBell, and California Water Company, and/or equivalent agencies) will be required prior to issuance of building permits. 76. CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY CLEARANCE Provide California Water Service Company approval before recordation of the final map. CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF ENGINEERING/SURVEYING CONDITIONS (Section 66474.18 of the California Government Code) I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV. Of this resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices / s /Ralph Qualls Ralph Qualls, Director of Public Works City Engineer CA License 22046 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of January 2009, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Comrn;ssion of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Chair Miller, Vice Chair Giefer, Brophy, Rose, Kaneda NOES: COMMISSIONERS: none ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: none ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: none 14-68 Resolution No. 6539 TM-2008-CIl January 6, 2009 Page 19 ATTEST: / s /Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki, Director Community Development Department APPROVED: 1sfMarty Miller Marty Miller, Chair Planning Commission is-ss TR-2008-08 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6540 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING THE REMOVAL OF UP TO 84 TREESAND RELOCATION OF UP TO 13 TREES ON A 17.4 ACRE SITE LOCATED NORTH OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD BETWEEN FINCH AVENUE (INCLUDING THE WEST SIDE OF FINCH AVENUE) AND N. TANTAU AVENUE, SOUTH OF VALLCO PARKWAY (MAIN STREET CUPERTINO) SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: TR-2006-08 Applicant: Kevin Dare (Sand Hill Property Company) Location: North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Finch Avenue (including the west side of Finch Avenue) and N. Tantau Avenue, south of Vallco Parkway SECTION IIc FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application to remove up to 84 trees and relocate up to 13 trees; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Comm;ssion has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, application for Tree Removal is hereby approved and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concernuzg Application TR-2008-08, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of January 6, 2009 are incorporated by reference herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVAL ACTION The approval is based on Exhibits titled: "Main Street Cupertino Tree Disposition Plan' consisting of 1 page, numbered "7", except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. ~a-~o Resolution No. 6540 TR-2008-08 January 6, 2009 Page 2 2. LANDSCAPE PLAN The applicant shall submit detailed landscape and irrigation plans to be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Comm;thee prior to issuance of building permits. The landscape plan shall provide the following: A. The landscape plan shall include water conservation and pesticide reduction measures in conformance with Chapter 14.15, Xeriscape Landscaping, and the pesticide control measures referenced in Chapter 9.18, St:ormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. B. Landscaping along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue in accordance with the streetscape design requirements of tree Heart of the City Specific Plan. C. Planting of two specimen oak trees flariking entrance to the development on the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Finch .Avenue as replacements for the removal of the existing dead specimen oak tree. 3. TREE REMOVAL A. The applicant is approved to remove a total of up to 84 trees and relocate 13 trees on site per Option A in accordance with the City Arborist's report prepared by David Bibby and dated April 30, 2008. Although the applicant is requesting approval to remove these trees in accordance with the City Arborist's recommendation, the intent is to retain as many of the existing perimeter street trees for the remaining life of such trees where they are not considered dead or do not require ;*+~*rediate removal. B. The Aleppo Pine tree (Tree No. 113) shall be preserved on site. C. For any trees that are removed due to h<zardous conditions, are considered dead, or die as a result of relocation, the applicaz~t shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. D. For any trees that require removal due to construction plan drawing chaizges and/ or construction activity, the applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. 4. TREE REPLACEMENTS Final approval of the required tree replacements shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Com**~;ttee in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. The applicant may be able to reduce the number of replacement trees on site, if lazger size trees are proposed, in accordance with the tree replacement standards of the ordinance. For any additional trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions or are considered dead, the applicant shall be required to replace thes~a trees in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. Species and size of replacement trees shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. 5. TREE PROTECTION As pazt of the building permit drawings, a tree protection plan shall be prepared by a certified arborist for the trees to be retained. The applicant shall be required to install tree protection measures before and during development in accordance with the City Arborist's report dated April 30, 2008, and in accordance with requirements of the Public Works Department for the preservation of existing street trees. In addition, the following measures shall be added to the protection plan: A. For trees to be retained, chain link fencing and other root protection shall be installed azound the dripline of the tree prior to axiy project site work. 14-71 Resolution No. 6540 TR-2008-OS January 6, 2009 Page 3 B. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the project azborist. C. No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City Arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. D. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers. E. Retained trees shall be watered to maintain them in good health. 6. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in an amount deter*+-~~r+ed by the City Arborist to ensure protection of trees s7.ated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, subject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. 7. TREE REPLACEMENT IN-LIEU FEE The applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee in accordance with the Cites Protected Trees Ordinance for any trees that cannot be replaced on site. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of January 2009, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Chair Miller, Vice Chair Giefer, Brophy, Rose, Kaneda NOES: COMMISSIONERS: none ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: none ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: none ATTEST: /s/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki, Director Co**~muruty Development APPROVED: /s/Marty Miller Marty Miller, Chair Cupertino Planning Commission G: \ Plann ing \ PDREPORT \ RES \ 2008 \ TR-2008-08 res.dac ~ q _ 72 ADMINISTRATNE DRAFT Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cupertino Project CUPERTINO A January 2009 V W W y I~ Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation Transportation Impact TRAN-1: The proposed MM TRAN -1.1: The proposed project project (under either scheme), with (under either scheme) shall implement one the implementation of the of the two measures below to reduce identified mitigation measure, impacts at Vallco Parkway and Wolfe Road would result in a less than to a less than significant level: significant impact at the intersection of Wolfe Road and 1. Maintain the existing intersection Vallco Parkway. configuration, but install a westbound right-turn overlap phase; OR Less Than Significant Impact 2. Add a second, westboundright-turn lane. with Mitigation Incorporated The additional turn lane could be accommodated by re-striping the existing Impact C-TRAN -1: The westbound through lane as ashared- project (under either scheme), with through-right turn lane. the implementation of the identified mitigation measure, would not result in a significant impact at,the intersection of Wolfe Road and Vallco Parkway. Less Than Significant Cumulative Impact with Mitigation Incorporated A J A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertmo Pro'ect Timeframe and Method of Oversight of Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Responsibility for Compliance Implementation Im lementation Impact TRAM - 5: The proposed MM TRAN - 5.1: At the final design At the final design Improvements Director of project, with the implementation stage, the project shall include programs or phase, the project related to this Community of the identified mitigation facilities delineated in the "Immediate proponent shall be mitigation Development measure, would reduce impacts to Implementation Action List" of the Draft responsible for printing measure shall be significantly impacted freeways Countywide Deficiency Plan (CDP) to the all improvements printed on all segments but not to a less than satisfaction of the Director of Community related to this mitigation construction significant level. Development. Measures from the list that measure on construction documents, Significant and Unavoidable are appropriate for this project may include documents, contracts, contracts, and Impact providing pedestrian facility improvements, and project plans. project plans and bus stop improvements, HOV parking shall be reviewed preference program, bike facilities, a by the Duector of pedestrian circulation system, and other The project proponent Community Transportation Demand Management and subsequent owners Development (TDI41) measures such as providing future shall be responsible for prior to issuance employees with transit passes at a reduced completing all of pemuts. rate and providing bicycle lockers and improvements related to showers for future employees. this mitigation measure during construction and post-construction. Impact TRAN - 6: The proposed AM TRAM - 6.1: The project applicant At the final design Improvements Duector of project (under either scheme), with shall provide pedestrian crosswalk phase, the project related to these Public Works the implementation of the improvements at Finch Avenue and at the proponent shall be measures shall be identified measures, would not project's eastern driveway located in front responsible for printing printed on all result in significant impacts to of the proposed athletic club in Scheme 1 all improvements construction bicycle facilities. and adjacent to the 205,000 square foot related to these documents, Less Than Significant Impact office building in Scheme 2. The final measures on contracts, and with Mitigation Incorporated crosswalk improvement plan shall be construction documents, project plans and reviewed and approved by the City prior to contracts, and project shall be reviewed issuance of building permits, plans. by the Director of ~ Public Works Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation and/or Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation MM TRAM - 6.1: The existing bike lane At the construction prior to issuance to be removed as part of the project shall be phase, the project of building relocated between the new travel lane and proponent shall be permits. the on-street parking. The new bike lane responsible for shall be located five feet from the end of the completing all angled parking stalls. This relocation improvements related to requires the striping of sparrows (a sparrow these measures. is a pavement marking or pavement legend intended to help cyclist better position themselves on the roadway where bike lanes are recommended but might not be striped for some reason) and signage alerting motorists to the presence of bicyclists. Impact TRAN - 7: The proposed MM TRAN - 7.1: The applicant shall At the fmal design Improvements Director of narrowing of Vallco Parkway and work with VTA and the City to detemvne phase, the project related to these Community the addition ofthe on-street the appropriate location of the existing bus proponent shall be measures shall be Development parking, with the implementation stops at Stevens Creek Boulevard/Finch responsible for printed on all of the identified measures, would Avenue and Stevens Creek coordinating with VTA construction result in a less than significant BoulevardlTantauAvenue to ensure that and the City on MM documents, impact to the existing bus stop at existing bus service is not disrupted by the TRAM - 7.1 and with contracts, and Vallco Parkway and Perimeter project (e.g.,addition of on-street parking) the VTA, City, Bay project plans and Road. along those areas. The project shall include Area Air Quality shall be reviewed Less Than Significant Impact a 22-foot curb lane for the existing bus Management District, by the Director of with Mitigation Incorporated stops at Stevens Creek Boulevard/Finch Caltrain, and private Community Avenue and Stevens Creek employers on AM Development Boulevard/TantauAvemse. TRAM - 7.2, prior to issuance of permits. A A 4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measnre(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation The project proponent shall coordinate with The project proponent the City and VTA on the fmal landscape shall be responsible for plans on Stevens Creek Boulevard along the printing all project site frontage; and coordinate with improvements related to VTA to provide bus shelters per VTA's these measures on requirements. The bus stop at Vallco construction documents, ParkwaylPerimeterRogd shall be contracts, and project incorporated into any designs for the plans. roadway. At the construction AM TRAM- 7.2: The City and applicant phase, the project shall coordinate with Bay Area Air Quality proponent shall be Management T)istrict ('.altrain anr~ nrivate reennncihle fnr employers to determine the appropriate completing all change in route for the Callrain commuter improvements related to shuttle that currently uses Finch Avenue as these measures. a tum-back along its route. It should be noted that the route could easily be re- routed to Wolfe Road. Impact TRAM- 8: The proposed MM TRAM- 8.1: When a restaurant use Prior to issuance of The project Director of project (under either scheme), with is proposed on the project site, the proposed occupancy permits, the proponent shall Community the implementation of the restaurant use's tenancy shall be reviewed project proponent shall submit a memo Development identified mitigation measure, by the City as follows: be responsible for (and a Parking would not result in inadequate . Up to 10 percent of the approved coordinating with the Management Plan parking capacity. commercial square footage shall be City planning staff to if necessary) Less Than Si nificant Im act g p pemutted for restaurant use without ensure compliance with stating the with Mitigation Incorporated City planning staff review. this measure. project's compliance with ° • More than 10 percent of the approved this measure to Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation commercial square footage for the Director of restaurant use shall require City Community planning staff review to verify that the Development for proposed use meets the parking review and requirements outlined by the Institute of approval prior to Transportation Engineers (ITE), Urban issuance of Land Institute (ULI), or developed as occupancy part of a parking analysis prepared by a permits. qualified parking consultant to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. If the review process indicates that the proposed commercial uses exceed the minimum parking required by the Tf E, ULI, or parking analysis, a Parking Management Plan (PMP) shall be required. Components of the PMP may include, but are not limited to, the following: • Provision of valet parking (either on- or off site); • Provision of off site employee parking with a shuttle; • Provision of off site shared use with nearby property owners during peak parking periods; and/or • Provision of off site land for parking if A strate 'es to reduce total demand are Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation ineffective. A condition of approval of the PMP may include conduct~g a parking study at some defined date (e.g., six months after full occupancy of the commercial uses on the project site) during evening and weekend periods), which would include recording the number of parked vekucles during peak time periods. Results of the study may trigger additional conditions (e.g., a transportation demand management program) be met to continue the cnmmereial rases f(i e restaurant use(s)] on-site. ImpactTRAM - 9: The proposed MM TRAN - 9.1: The project shall At the final design Improvements Duector of project (under either scheme), with provide bicycle parking consistent with the phase, the project related to this Community the implementation of the City's requirements outlined in the proponent shall be measure shall be Development identified mitigation measure, Municipal Code 19.100, which state that the responsible for having printed on all would have sufficient bicycle required number of Class I bicycle parking all improvements construction parting. spaces should be 40 percent of the number related to this measure documents, Less Than Significant Impact of units and five percent of total automobile (amount of bicycle contracts, and with Mitigation Incorporated paz~g spaces for office uses; and the parking, location, project plans and required number of Class II bicycle parking design, etc.) printed on shall be reviewed spaces should be five percent of the total constuction documents, by the Director of number of automobile parking spaces for contracts, and project Community commercial and hotel uses. The project plans. Development proponent shall consult the VTA's Bicycle prior to issuance Technical Guidelines when determining of building A appropriate bicycle parking siting and p~~, V Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation and/or Avoidance Measare(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of ' Im lementation Compflance Implementation design. At the construction phase, the project proponent shall be responsible for completing all improvements related to this measure. Air Quality ImpactAIR- 2: Scheme 1 would MM AIR - 2.2: The project shall be At the final design Improvements Director of result in significant regional air reviewed and appropriate bicycle amenities phase, the project related to these Community quality impacts related to shall be included to the satisfaction of the proponent shall be measures shall be Development emissions of ROG, NOX, and Community Development Duector. responsible for having printed on all PM,o, Scheme Z would result in Bicycle amenities shall include bike lane all improvements construction significant regional air quality connections throughout the project site. In related to these ~ documents, impacts related to emissions of addition, off site bicycle lane improvements measures printed on contracts, and ROG and NOx. Implementation of shall be considered for roadways that serve construction documents, project plans and the identified mitigation measures the project site. contracts, and project shall be reviewed would reduce impacts, but not to a plans. by the Director of less than significant level. Community Significant and Unavoidable ~ ~ - 2.3: Pedestrian sidewalks Development Impact and/or paths shall be provided throughout During the construction prior to issuance the project site with convenient access to and post-conshuction of building bus stops within or adjacent to the site. phases, the project permits. Impact C-AIR-1: The project proponent shall be (under either scheme) would result ~ ~- 2.4: The incorporation of responsible for implementing these in a cumulative impact on regional air quality. Implementation of the Pedestrian signage and signalization shall measures, including >~entified mitigation measures be considered, including convenient tenant improvements. could reduce the ro'ect's pedestrian crossings at strategic areas with Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation emissions but not to a less than count-down signals that would enhance significant level. pedestrian use. The project proponent Significant and Unavoidable and subsequent owners Cumulative Impact ~ ~ _ 2.5: Office and large retail shall be responsible for uses on the site shall provide amenities to unplementing encourage pedestrian and bicycle use such rmhgation measures as showers, locker facilities, and bicycle ~ ~- 2.6 and 2.7. parking for employees. Bicycle parking for retail customers shall be provided at strategic locations. MM ATR - 2.6~ pi'n1Pnf cite rmnlnvarc shall be required to promote transit use by providing transit information and incentives to employees. MM AIR- 2.1: The project applicant shall work with the City to explore opportunities for employers to implement measures that would reduce vehicle travel by reducing parking availability (such as an employee parking cashout program). MM AIR - 2.8: The project shall provide outdoor electrical outlets, encourage the use of electrical landscape maintenance A equipment, and provide 220 volt outlets in ~° each arkin ara a suitable for electrical 9 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation auto recharging. MM AIR- 2.9: The project shall implement "green building" designs, such as a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), Build it Green for residential units, or an alternative environmental and sustainable measurement systemlchecklist, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development to increase energy efficiency, which would reduce the future energy demand caused by the project, and therefore reduce air pollutant emissions indirectly. MM AIR- 2.10: The project applicant shall create a landscape plan for the project that ensures new trees would shade buildings and walkways in the summer to reduce the cooling loads on buildings. MM AIR- 2.11: The project shall not include wood burning fireplaces or woodstoves in the proposed senior residences or the hotel. A JO Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation and/or Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation ImpactAIR - 5: The proposed Dust Control At the final design Improvements Director of project (under either scheme), with ~ ~ _ 5.1: The project shall phase, the project related to these Community the implementation of the implement the following dust control proponent shall be measures shall be Development identified mitigation measures, would not result in si rficant ~~ measures recommended by BAAQMD: responsible for printing these measures on printed on all construction impacts related to construction • Water all active construction areas at construction documents, documents, dust and construction equipment least twice daily and more often during contracts, and project contracts, and exhaust. windy periods. plans. project plans and Less Than Significant Impact • Cover all hauling trucks or maintain at shall be reviewed with Mitigation Incorporated least two feet of freeboard. Dutirrg the construction by the Director of Community • Pave, apply water at least twice daily, or phase, the project Development apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all proponent and their prior to issuance unpaved access roads, parking areas, and contractors shall be of building staging areas. responsible for permits. • Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all rrrrplementing these paved access roads, parking areas, and measures. staging areas and sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is deposited onto the adjacent roads. • Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (i.e., previously-graded areas that are inactive for 10 days or more). • Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles. A ~ • R rant vegetation in disturbed areas as Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation quickly as possible, • Suspend construction activities that cause visible dust plumes to extend beyond the construction site. Construction Equipment Exhaust MM AIIt - 5.2: The proposed project shall implement the following diesel exhaust control measures during construction: • Diesel equipment standing idle for more than two minutes shall be fumed off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate, or other bulk materials, Rotating drum concrete bucks could keep their engines running continuously as long as they were onsite and located more than 200 feet from residences • Properly tune and maintain equipment for low emissions. • Construction equipment shall not be staged within 200 feet of existing residences. • Use alternative powered construction equipment (i.e., hybrid, compressed , natural gas, biodiesel, electric) as ' feasible. 12 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation • Use add-on control devices such as diesel oxidation catalysts or particulate filters as feasible. • Require all contractors to use equipment that meets California Air Resources Board's (ARB) most recent certification standard for off-road heavy duty diesel engines. Biological Resources Impact BIO -1: The Tree Nesting Buds Tree Nesting Birds Tree Nestin¢ Tree Nestin¢ developmentoftheproposed roject with the im le t ti ~RTn,,.ne.,,,,..,,~„cti.,.,-,...~,,_ •.url L1V'1.~.1U.111V Y41 Vl U WJ Ull LLlb ,r~_______._,__.,_ u ucc iouiuvai uu we Buds Birds - p , p men a on ofthe identified mitigation and project site could be scheduled between site is to occur between A final report of Director of avoidance measures, would not September and December (inclusive) to January and August, the nesting birds, Community result in significant impacts to avoid the nesting season for buds and no project applicant shall including any Development nesting migratory buds, additional surveys would be required. be responsible for protection loggerhead shrikes, burrowing implementing MM BIO measures, shall owls, or raptors. -1.2 no more than 14 be submitted to Burrowine MM BIO-1.2: If removal of the trees on- days prior to the the Director of Owls Less Than Significant Impact site is planned to take place between initiation of Community with Mitigation Incorporated January and August (inclusive), apre- demolition/construction Development Director of construction survey for nesting buds shall activities during the prior to the start Community be conducted by a qualified ornithologist to early part of the of grading. Development identify active nesting raptor or other bud breeding season and CDFG (if nests that ma be disturbed Burin ro'ect Y g p ~ (January through April) necessary) implementation. Between January and and no more than 30 Burrowing Owls April (inclusive) pre-construction surveys days prior to the A final report shall be conducted no more than 14 days initiation of these , includin an prior to the initiation of construction activities during the late g y rotection 13 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation activities or tree relocation or removal. part of the breeding measures, shall Between May and August (inclusive), pre- season (May through be submitted to construction surveys shall be conducted no August). the Director of more than thirty (30) days prior to the Community initiation of these activities. The surveying Development ornithologist shall inspect all trees in and Burrowing Owls prior to start of immediately adjacent to the construction The project proponent ~~g' area for nests. If an active raptor nest is shall be responsible for found in or close enough to the construction having a qualified area to be disturbed by these activities, the ornithologist complete a ornithologist shall, in consultation with the pre-const<uction surveys State of California, Department of Fish & p~ CDFG guidelines no Game (CDFG), designate aconstruction- more than 30 days prior free buffer zone (typically 250 feet) around to the start of site the nest until the end of the nesting activity. grading. Buffers for other birds shall be determined by the ornithologist. MM BIO-13:A report summarizing the results of the pre-construction survey and any designated buffer zones or protection measures for tree nesting birds shall be submitted to the Community Development Director prior to the start of grading or tree removal. Burrowin Owls A MM BIO-1.4: Pre-construction surveys for m burrowin owls shall be conducted in 14 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Sheet Cu ertino Pro'ect Timeframe and Method of Oversight of Impact Mitigation and/or Avoidance Measure(s) Responsibility for Compliance Implementation Im lementation conformance with CDFG protocols, no more than 30 days prior to the start of any ground•dishubingoctivity such as clearing and grubbing, excavation, or grading. If no burrowing owls are located during these surveys, no additional action would be warranted. However, if burrowing owls are located on or immediately adjacent to the site, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented.. • Buffer Zones. If burrowing owls are ~iG~G111 UU1111~' U1G llU11UlGCU111~' SCGJUf1 (generally September 1 to January 31), a 150-foot buffer zone, within which no new project-related activity will be permissible, shall be maintained around the occupied burrow(s). During the breeding season (generally February 1 to August 31), a 250-foot buffer, within which no new project-related activity will be permissible, will be maintained between project activities and occupied burrows. Owls present at burrows on the site after February 1 will be assumed to be nesting on or adjacent to the site unless evidence indicates otherwise. This protected area will remain in effect until August 31, or at the discretion of the CDFG and based u on monitorin V 15 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cn ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation evidence, until the young owls are foraging independently. Ifground-disturbing activities will directly impact occupied burrows, eviction outside the nesting season may be permitted pending evaluation of eviction plans by, and receipt of formal written approval of the relocation from the CDFG. No burrowing owls shall be evicted from burrows during the nesting season (February 1 through August 31) unless evidence indicates that nesting is not actively occurring (e.g., because the owls have not yet begun nesting early in the season, or because young have already fledged late in the season). A report on the results of the pre- construction survey(s) for burrowing owls, including any required buffer zones or protection measures shall be submitted to the Community Development Director prior to the start of grading or other ground disturbance. 16 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cn ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation Impact BIO - 2: The proposed MM BIO - 2.1: The project shall At the final design The Director of project, with the implementation implement the recommendations outlined in phase, the project recommendations Community of the identified mitigation the tree report prepared by Arbor Resources proponent shall be from the tree Development measure, would reduce impacts to in July 2008 including the following responsible for printing report shall be trees to a less than significant measures: the recommendations in printed on all level. the Arbor Resources construction Less Than Significant Impact July 2008 tree report on documents, with Mitigation Incorporated • Site plans shall be reviewed by the City construction documents, contracts, and arborist to ensure tree protection and to contracts, and project project plans and minimize tree impacts in conformance plans. shall be reviewed with the recommendations inthe tree by the Duector of report by Arbor Resources in July 2008. Community - T---,. ~.. L..-.......] .L71 L. ___7___] _• • ucc~ w uc iciuuvcu nano uc ic~iaucu a~ At the construction hase the ro ect p p ~ Development prior to issuance the following ratios per City Municipal proponent shall be of permits. Code Section 14.18.185: responsible for ensuring the recommendations in Tree Re placement Ratios the tree report are Trunk Size of implemented. Removed Tree Replacement Trees (measured at 4.5 feet above de U to 12 inches One 24-inch box tree Over 12 inches and Two 24-inch box u to 18 inches trees Over 18 inches and Two 24-inch box up to 36 inches trees or one 36-inch box tree Over 36 inches One 36-inch box tree A W 17 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Ca ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation • An ISA certified arborist andlor a member of ASCA (American Society of Consulting Arborists) - to be named the "project arborist" - shall be retained by the applicant or owner to assist in implementing and achieving compliance with all tree protection measures. • Prior to any demolition or site clearing work, apre-construction meeting shall be held on-site with the project arborist and contractor to discuss work procedures, protection fencing locations, limits of grading, tree removals, staging areas, routes of access, removal of existing hardscape, supplemental watering, mulching, locations for equipment washing pits, relocation of trees, and any other applicable tree protection measures. • For trees to be preserved, a minimum tree protection zone (TPZ) shall be established. The TPZ shall be seven times the diameter of the tree to be preserved. • Tree protective fencing shall be installed around the TPZ prior to any demolition, 'a grading, surface scraping or heavy ~ e ui ment arrivin on site, and its 1R Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementatian Compliance Implementation precise location and placement approved by the project arborist (in the form of a letter submitted to the City Duector of Community Development) prior to the issuance of any demolition, grading or construction permit. The protective fencing shall becomprised ofsix-foot high chain link mounted oneight-foot tall,two-inch diameter steel posts that are driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart. Once established, the fencing must remain undisturbed and be maintained thrnnnhnnt rnneMir4inn until finol .... ..b.. ». .......,.. ».,..~.. ....w. ....... inspection. • Unless otherwise approved, all development activities must be performed outside the designated fenced areas and off unpaved areas beneath the existing tree canopies. These activities include, but are not limited to, the following: demolition, grading, stripping of topsoil, trenching, equipment cleaning, stockpilingldumping of materials, and equipmentlvehicle operation and parking. • The following shall be displayed on 8.5- by 11-inch signs (minimum) and attached to the tree protective fencing ' every SO feet on the side facin 19 Mitigation Monitoring and Reportiing Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation conshuction activities: "Warning -Tree Protecfion Zone -this fence shall not be removed. Violators are subject to a penalty according to Cupertino Municipal Code." These signs shall be posted prior to conshuction. • Removal of existing pavement beneath canopies must be carefully performed so no soil cuts and roodtrunk damage occur during the process. In doing so, the hardscape surfaces shall, with a jackhammer or pick, be broken up into manageable sections that can be manually lifted and loaded by hand into the bucket of a small tractor (e.g. a Bobcat). Any tractor or heavy equipment used during the process must remain on pavement at all times and off unpaved areas or exposed soil, base rock and roots. • Throughout conshuction during the months of May thru October, supplemental water shall be supplied to retained trees. The specific trees, methodology, frequency, and amounts shall be prescribed by the project arborist. • All equipment shall be positioned to A avoid the trunks and branches of trees. N Where a conflict arises, the ro'ect ~n Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation arborist must be contacted to help address the situation. • The relocation of trees shall be performed according to the standards set forth in American National Standards h-stitute (ANSI) A300 (Part 6)-2005 Transplanting, and also by a company that has an ISA ce~ified arborist in a supervisory role, holds a current California state-licensed contractor's license, carries General Liability and Worker's Compensation insurance, and abides by ANSI 2133.1-2006 (Safety Operations). • All tree pruning shall be performed in accordance with the most recent ANSI standards, and by a California state- licensedtree service company that has an ISA certified arborist in a supervisory role. • The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil and gasoline) is prohibited beneath canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage beneath canopies. Herbicides should not be used beneath the trees' canopies; where used on site, they shall be labeled for safe use near trees. A 21 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Timeframe and Method of Oversight of Impact Mitigation and/or Avoidance Measure(s) Responsibility for Compliance Implementation Im lementation MM BIO - 2.2: The structural integrity of existing trees that will be preserved and retained on-site shall be evaluated by a certified azborist to ensure public safety. Cultural Resources Impact CUL -1: The proposed MM CUL - l.l: A program of During site excavation, All Director of project, with the implementation archaeological monitoring shall be adopted the project proponent archaeological Community of the identified mitigation for portions of the project site that require shall be responsible for monitoring and Development measures, would not result in deep excavation for foundationsand/or implementation of reporting significant impacts to cultural underground pazking facilities. Monitoring archaeological measures shall be resources. shall be done at the discretion of a qualified monitoring. Monitoring printed on all Less Than Significant Impact azchaeologist until it is evident that shall be conducted construction with Mitigation Incorporated additional earthmoving will not affect either during earthmoving documents, prehistoric or historic deposits. activities by a qualified contracts, and archaeologist. project plans and shall be reviewed MM CUL - I.2: In the event of the by the Director of discovery of either prehistoric or historic During construction, the Community archaeological deposits, work shall be project proponent and Development halted within 50 feet of the discovery and a contractor shall be prior to issuance qualified professional archaeologist shall responsible for of permits. examine the find and make appropriate notification of any recommendations regazdingthe discoveries. significance of the find and the appropriate mitigation. The recommendation shall be implemented and could include collection, recordation, and analysis of any significant cultural materials. 22 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation MM CUL -1.3: In the event that human remains and/or cultural materials are found, all project-related construction shall cease within a 50-foot radius of the find in order to proceed with the testing and mitigation measures required. Pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code and Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code of the State of California: • In the event of the discovery of human remains during construction, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains. The Santa Clara County Coroner shall be notified and shall make a determination as to whether the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his authority, he shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission who shall attempt to identify descendants of the deceased Native American. If no satisfactory agreement can be reached as to the disposition of the remains pursuant to this State law, then the land owner ~ shall re-inter the human remains and ~o items associated with Native American 23 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation burials on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance. • A final report summarizing the discovery of cultural materials shall be submitted to the Director of Planning prior to issuance of building permits. This report shall contain a description of the mitigation program that was implemented and its results, including a description of the monitoring and testing program, a list of the resources found, a summary of the resources analysis methodology and conclusion, and a description of the disposition/curation ofthe resources. The report shall verify completion of the mitigation program to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. Geology and Soils Impact GEO -1: The proposed MM GEO -1.1: Buildings shall be Prior to the final design The Director of Director of project, with the implementation designed and constructed in accordance phase, the project Public Works and Public of the identified standard with a fmaldesign-level geotechnical proponent shall be City Geologist Works, City mitigation measure, would not investigation to be completed for the project responsible for having a shall review the Geologist result in significant soil impacts by a qualified professional. The final qualified professional design-level related to the undocumented fill design-level geotechnica] investigation complete afinal-design geotechnical and expansive soils on-site. shall identify the specific design features level geotechnical analysis and that will be required for the project investigation for the conshuction ' including measures addressing clearing and project. documents, 24 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Maiu Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation Less Than Significant Impact site preparation, removal, replacement, contracts, and with Mitigation Incorporated andlor compaction of existing fill, At the final design project plans abandoned utilities, subgrade preparation, phase, the project prior to issuance material for fill trench backfill tem o ' p ~ proponent shall be of permits. slopes and trench excavations, surface responsible for ensuring drainage, foundation design, and that the pavements. recommendations inthe final-design level geotechnical investigation are incorporated into the final project design. These recommendations shall be printed on all construction documents, contracts, and project plans. At the construction phase, the project proponent shall be responsible for ensuring that the recommendations inthe final-design level geotechnical report are implemented. V 25 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation .Compliance Implementation Impact GEO - 2: The proposed MM GEO - 2.1: The project shall be At the final design The Director of Director of project, with the implementation designed and constructed in conformance phase, the project Public Works Public Works of the identified standard with the Uniform Building Code guidelines proponent shall be shall review the mitigation measure, would be not for Seismic Zone 4 to avoid or minimize responsible for ensuring construction result in significant seismicity or potential damage from seismic shaking and the project is designed documents, seismic hazard impacts. seismic-related hazards on the site. in conformance with the contracts, and Less Than Significant Impact Uniform Building Code project plans with Mitigation Incorporated guidelines for Seismic prior to issuance Zone 4. All measures of permits. shall be printed on all construction documents, contracts, and project plans. At the constuction phase, the project proponent shall be responsible for ensuring that the project is constructed in conformance with the Uniform Building Code guidelines for Seismic Zone 4. A ~~ Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation Hydrology and Water Quality Impact HYD-1: The proposed MM HYD -1.1: The project shall At the final design Improvements Director of project, with the implementation incorporate measures, such as berms, phase, the project related to these Public Works of the identified mitigation modified garage ramps, and placing proponent shall be measures shall be measures, would not be subject to residential floor elevations above flood responsible for printing printed on all significant flooding or drainage level, in the final design of the residential all improvements construction impacts. area. related to these documents, Less Than Significant Impact measures on contracts, and with Mitigation Incorporated construction documents, project plans and MM HYD -1.2: The commercial area of contracts, and project shall be reviewed the project site shall be graded and designed plans. by the Director of to accommodate the flood waters in the Public Works parking iot andlor streets. prior to issuance At the conshuction of building phase, the project permits. MM HYD -13: The final design of the proponent shall be project site shall be reviewed by the responsible for Department of Public Works prior to completing all issuance of building permits. improvements related to these measures. AM HYD -1.4: The project shall be designed to detain water on-site (e.g., via buried pipes) as necessary to avoid an increase in the one percent flood water surface elevation of the culvert to the satisfaction of the Duector of Public Works. A 27 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation Impact HYD -2: The proposed Construction Measures At the final design Improvements Director of project, with the implementation ~ IiYD _ 21: The project shall comply Phase, the project related to this Public Works of the identified mitigation ~~ the NPDES General Construction proponent shall be measure shall be measures, would not result in Activity Storm Water Permit administered responsible for filing an printed on all significant water quality impacts. by the Regional Water Quality Control NOI and preparing a construction Less Than Significant Impact Board. Prior to construction grading the Storm Water documents, with Mitigation Incorporated applicant shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) Management Plan that contracts, and to comply with the General Permit and includes BMPs. The project plans and prepare a Storm Water Management Plan project proponent shall shall be reviewed that includes storm water quality best be responsible for by the Director of management practices (BMPs). The Storm p~~g all Public Works Water Management Plan shall detail how improvements on prior to issuance runoff and associated water quality impacts construction documents, of building resulting from the proposed project will be contracts, and project permits. controlled and/or managed. The Plan shall ply' be submitted to the Duector of Public Works for review and approval. During the construction and post-construction Post Construction Measures phases, the project proponent shall be MM HYD - 2.2: The project shall comply responsible for with Provision C3 of NPDES Permit completing all Number CA50299718, which provides improvements related to enhanced performance standards for the these measures. management of storm water for new development. Prior to issuance of building and grading ermits, each base of develo ment shall ~Q Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation include provision for post-construction structural controls in the project design in compliance with the NPDES C.3 permit provisions, and shall include BMPs for reducing contamination in storm water runoff as permanent features of the project. The project includes the incorporation of bioretention areas, bioswales, porous concrete, and infiltration planters to reduce the amount of runoff from the site. The stormwatet management plan shall be consistent with the landscaping plan and trees to be preserved. The specific BMPs to be used in each phase of development shall be determined based on design and site-specific considerations and will be determined poor to issuance of building and grading permits. MM B3'D - 2.3: To protect groundwater from pollutant loading of urban runoff, BMPs which are primarily infiltration devices (such as infiltration trenches and infiltration basins) must meet, at a minimum, the following conditions: • Pollution prevention and source control 'a BMPs shall be im lemented to rotect 0 29 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and RespoasibiGty for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation groundwater; • Use of infiltration BMPs cannot cause or contribute to degradation of groundwater; • Infiltration BMPs must be adequately maintained; • Vertical distance from the base of any infiltration device to the seasonal high groundwater mark must be at least 10 feet. In areas of highly porous soils andlor high groundwater table, BMPs shall be subject to a higher level of analysis (considering potential fot pollutants such as on-site chemical use, level of pretreatment, similar factors); • Unless storm water is first treated by non-infiltration means, infiltration devices shall not be recommended for areas of industrial or light industrial activity; areas subject to high vehicular traffic (25,000 or greater average daily trafl`ic trips on main roadway or 15,000 or more average daily haffic trips on any intersecting roadway); automotive repair shops; car washes; fleet storage azeas (bus,lruck, etc); nurseries; and other land uses and activities considered by the 'a City as high threats to water quality; and ° • Infiltration devices shall be located a zn Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation minimum of 100 feet horizontally from any water supply wells. MM HYD - 2.4: Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be selected and designed to the satisfaction of the Duector of Public Works in accordance with the requirements contained in the most recent versions of the following documents; • City of Cupertino Post-Const<uction BMP Section Matrix; • u~ r viu i a uuwauw iii Implementing Storm water Regulations for New and Redevelopment Projects;" • NPDES Municipal Storm water Discharge Permit issued to the City of Cupertino by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region; • California BMP Handbooks; • Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA) "Start at the Source" Design Guidance Manual; • BASMAA "Using Site Design Standards to Meet Development Standards for A Storm water Quality - A Companion a Document to Start at the Source;" and 31 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation and/or Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation • City of Cupertino Planning Procedures Performance Standard. MM HYD - 2.5: To maintain effectiveness, all storm water treatment facilities shall include long-term maintenance programs. MM HYD - 2.6: The applicant, the project azborist and landscape azchitect, shall work with the City and the SCWRPPP to select pest resistant plants to minimize pesticide use, as appropriate, and the plant selection will be reflected in the landscape plans. Noise Impact NOI -1: The proposed MM NOI -1.1: Specific determination of At the final design All attenuation Director of project, with the implementation noise insulation treatments necessary shall phase, the project measures shall be Public Works of the identified mitigation be completed on a unit-by-unit basis during proponent shall be printed on measures, would not result in detailed project design of the hotel. A responsible for having a construction significant interior noise impacts design-level noise assessment of the final design-level noise documents, to the hotel use. site plan shall be completed for the project assessment completed contracts, and Less Than Significant Impact by a qualified acoustical consultant. by a qualified acoustical project plans and with Mitigation Incorporated Results of the design-level noise consultant and printing reviewed by the assessment, including the description of the all attenuation measures Director of Public necessary noise control treatments, shall be on construction Works prior to A submitted to the City along with the documents, contracts, issuance of building plans and approved prior to and project plans. building permits. 3~ Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation issuance of a building permit. At the construction MM NOI-1.Z: Building sound insulation Phase, the project requirements shall include the provision of proponent and forced-air mechanical ventilation for the contractor shall be hotel so that windows could be kept closed responsible for at the occupant's discretion to control noise. completing all improvements. MM NOI -1.3: Special building techniques (e.g., sound-rated windows) may be required to maintain interior noise levels »t Qr belo:v »eee^twhle 1e~~ei~ Th,.~ e ~~~ treatments shall include, but are not limited to, sound rated windows and doors, sound rated wall constructions, acoustical caulking, protected ventilation openings, etc. Preliminary calculations indicate that hotel rooms nearest Stevens Creek Boulevard would require sound rated windows and doors with ratings ranging from STC 26-28 to achieve the 45 dBA DNL indoor standard. Impact NOI - Z: Construction of MM NOI - 2.1: Pursuant to the Municipal Prior to construction, All measures Duector of the proposed project (under either Code (Section 10.48.053), noise-generating the project proponent shall be printed Community scheme), with the implementation activities shall be restricted at the shall be responsible for on construction Development of the identified mitigation construction site to daytime hours only. printing these measures documents, $~easures, would not result in Construction within 750 feet of residences on all construction contracts, and 33 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lemeutation Compliance Implementation significant short-term shall be prohibited on Saturdays, Sundays, documents, contracts, project plans and construction-related noise impacts. holidays. and project plans. reviewed by the Less Than Sign>ficant Impact Director of with Mitigation Incorporated MM NOI - 2.2: All construction During construction, the Community Development equipment shall conform to the following project proponent and prior to issuance standards: l) no individual device produces contractor shall be of building a noise level more than 87 dBA at a responsible for permits. . distance of 25 feet; or 2) the noise level on implementing these any nearby property does not exceed eighty measures. dBA (Cupertino Municipal Code Section 10.48.053). MM NOI-2.3: Fquip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. MM NOI - 2.4: Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines is prohibited. MM NOI - 2.5: Stationary noise generating equipment such as air compressors or portable power generators shall be located as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Temporary noise A barriers shall be constructed to screen stationa noise eneratin a ui ment when ~~ Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation located near adjoining sensitive land uses. Temporary noise barriers could reduce construction noise levels by five dBA. MM NOI - 2.6: "Quiet" air compressors and other stationary noise sources shall be utilized by contractors where technology exists. MM NOI - 2.7: Route all construction traffic to and from the project site via desimated truck routes where nnssihle --- r--'-'°' Prohibit construction related heavy truck traffic in residential areas where feasible. MM NOI- 2.8: Noise from construction workers' radios shall be controlled to a point that it is not audible at existing residences bordering the project site. MM NOI - 2,9: The contractor shall prepare and submit to the City for approval a detailed construction plan identifying the schedule for major noise-generating construction activities. A O V 35 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation and/or Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation MM NOI - 2.10: Notify all adjacent businesses, residences, and other noise- sensitiveland uses of the construction schedule in writing. MM NOI - 2.11: A "disturbance coordinator" who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise shall be designated by the project applicant. The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and will require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. The telephone number for the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuouslyposted at the construction site and included in notices sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule. MM NOI- 2.12: If pile driving is required, multiple-piledrivers shall be considered to expedite construction. Although noise levels generated by multiple piledrivers would be higher than the noise 'a generated by a single pile driver, the total duration of ile drivin activities would be ~~ Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Project Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation reduced. MM NOI - 2.13: If pile driving is required, foundation pile holes shall bepre- drilled tominimizethe number of impacts required to seat the pile. Pre-drilling foundation pile holes are a standard construction noise control technique. Pre- drillingreducesthe number of blows required to seat the pile. MMNOI-2.14: ifniledrivinaic _ r -- -- ~ --o -- required, shroud the impact hammer with noise control blanket barriers. Impact NOI - 3: The proposed MM NOI - 3.1: Project-level acoustical At the final design All attenuation Director of project, with the implementation analyses shall be completed where phase, the project measures shall be Public Works of the identified mitigation stationary noise sources are located proponent shall be printed on measures, would not result in adjacent to existing or proposed noise- responsible for having construction sigai6cant noise impacts between sensitive land uses (e.g., residential uses). project-level acoustical documents, the proposed uses on the site. Exterior noise levels at residential land uses analyses completed by a contracts, and Less Than Significant Impact m the vicinity shall be maintained in qualified acoustical project plans and with Mitigation Incorporated accordance with the standards presented in consultant that reviewed by the the City's Municipal Code. addresses stationary Director of Public noise sources adjacent Works prior to to existing or proposed issuance of MM NOI - 3.2; Cleaning activities in noise-sensitive land building permits. A parking lotslgarages shall be limited to uses. The project daytime hours only (8 AM to 8 PM on proponent shall be weekdays and 9 AM to 6 PM on weekends) 37 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Main Street Cu ertino Pro'ect Impact Mitigation andlor Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation consistent with the City's Community responsible for printing Noise Ordinance 10.48. all attenuation measures on construction documents, contracts, MM NOI - 33: Trash compactors and and project plans. dumpsters shall be located away from adjacent residential receivers or shielded with noise barriers or other enclosures. At the construction phase, the project proponent and MM NOI - 3.4: Commercial deliveries or contractor shall be pickups shall be prohibited between the responsible for hours of 8:00 PM and 8:00 AM weekdays completing the (Monday through Friday) and 6:00 PM and attenuation measures 9:00 AM on weekends (Saturday and identified in the project- Sunday)and holidays (Cupertino Municipal level acoustical Code 10.48.062). analyses. 'tR' Additional Avoidance Measures In addition to the miti ation and avoidance measures listed above, the followin avoidance measures are conditions of roject a royal. Environmental Issue Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementation Compliance Implementation Construction-related traffic Pdor to issuance of building permits, a Prior to issuance of All measures Director of Construction Management Plan shall be building permits, the in the Plan Public Works submitted to the Director of Public Works project proponent shall be for review and approval. The Plan shall shall be responsible printed on all include, at minimum, a traffic management for completing a construction plan and designated truck routes and Construction documents, conshuction parking areas. Management Plan. contracts, and The project project plans proponent shall be and be responsible for reviewed by printing all measures the Director in the Plan on all of Public construction Works prior documents, to issuance of contracts, and project building plans. permits. Parkland The project shall comply with the Municipal Prior to issuance of The project Director of Code requirements for parkland dedication building permits, the proponent Community andlor payment of in-lieu fees (Section project proponent shall provide Development 18.24.060), shall be responsible proof of for complying with compliance the Municipal Code with the requirements for City's parkland dedication Municipal and/or payment of Code in-lieu fees (Section requirements 18.24.060). for parkland dedication 39 Additional Avoidance Measures In addition to the miti anon and avoidance measures listed above, the followin avoidance measures are conditions of ro'ect a royal. Environmental Issue Avoidance Measure(s) Timeframe and Responsibility for Method of Oversight of Im lementatiou Compliance Implementation and/or payment of in-lieu fees (Section 18.24.060) to the Duector of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. Source: City of Cupertino. Final Environmental Impact Report for the Main Street Cupertino Project. January 2009. A N an Exhibit C CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: U-2008-01, ASA-2008-06, TM-2008-O1, Agenda Date: January 6, 2009 TR-2008-08 Applicant (s): Kevin Dare, Sand Hill Property Company Property Location: APN#s: 316-20-078, 079, and 085 -North of Stevens Creek Boulevard and south of ~Tallco Parkway between the Metropolitan mixed-use retail/condominium development and Tantau Avenue (Continued from December 9, 2008) APPLICATION SUMMARY The proposed project will require the following approvals with either option: L MASTER USE PERMIT (U-2008-01) to allow for the mixed-use development within a P (CG, O, ML, Hotel, Res) Planned Development zoning district. 2. ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL (ASA-2008-06) -for the architecture of the individual buildings and overall sate layout of the mixed-use development project. 3. TENTATIVE MAP (TM-2008-01) to subdivide 3 parcels into 5 parcels. 4. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT (TR-2008-OS) t.o remove a total of 84 trees and relocate 13 trees if Scheme A is chosen, or to removE~ 74 trees and relocate 8 trees if Scheme B is chosen. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission should do the following: 1. Recommend approval of the Master Use Permit, Architectural and Site Approval, Tentative Map and Tree Removal Permit to the City Council, subject to the model resolutions. 2. Recommend that the City Council certify the Final Enviroilrnental Impact Report, including a Statement of Overriding Consideration. BACKGROUND On December 9, 2008, the Planning Cointni:ssion considered the proposed project and provided preliminary comments and suggestions for the applicant to consider. The Commission also sent a minute order to the City Council requesting that the Council consider the project as "information only" at its December 16, 2008 meeting. The Planning Commission comments are summarized as follows: Preserve the park and provide additional buffer between the Metropolitan residents and the project Move the loading dock to face Vall~ro Parkway, away from the Metropolitan residents, or as far east as possible Support parking along Stevens Creek Boulevard is - ~ ~s Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8s TR-2008-08 Page 2 Supportive of either Scheme A or B, but concerned about Option C - Town square is central to the project - Retain maximum surface parking, including facing Vallco Parkway, on site as it is needed to support retail - Concern about surface parking lot facing Vallco Parkway - Concern about site supporting proposed office and consider reducing office, or replacing office with some appropriate residential such as two-bedroom units - Support no more than 100,000 square feet of office on site - Concern about retail on Vallco Parkway - Supportive of creating retail presence on Vallco Parkway - Support retail across from the hotel if it can be successful - Should be designed as a multi-age destination - Keep the European square parking plaza - Construct a "jewel box" building along Finch Avenue facing the town square - Align Finch Avenue with the future creek trail head along Vallco Parkway - Provide more details on senior housing - Create a prominent gateway corner During the public hearing, the Commission also heard from members of the public, including residents within the neighborhood and the adjacent Metropolitan mixed-use condominium project. Public comments received include: - Retain the park along Stevens Creek Boulevard next to the Metropolitan condominium project - Maintain the mature ash trees along the streetscape - Supportive senior housing - Supportive of pedestrian-friendly connectivity of the project - Provide additional details on senior housing - Supportive of the hotel, particularly suzce it is reversed with courtyard facing Stevens Creek Boulevard aimed preservation of the Aleppo pine tree - Have a construction management plan - Concern about traffic impacts onto Calvert Drive - Not supportive of assisted senior living since these senior cannot benefit from the mixed-use project - Oppose Plan C because it removes the park and buffer between Metropolitan condominiums and the project site - Supportive of moving the loading dock facing Vallco Parkway, away from the Metropolitan condominiums - Pull buildings back away from Metropolitan condominiums ~a - pia Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Maim Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 '1"M-2008-01 8L TR-2008-08 Pane 3 On December 16, 2008, the City Council w;as introduced to the project_ The Council opened the public hearing to take public testimony, but made no comments or recommendations during the meeting in consideration of the Planning Commission's minute order request. DISCUSSION Alternative Components In response to the Planning Commissions suggestions, the applicant has provided alternative development options to the proposed project in either Scheme A or B that the Commission may consider. These alternative development options are not anticipated to create any additional environmental impacts than the original schemes in order to stay within the scope of the Environmental Impact Report: Major Retail on Corner of Vallco Parkway and Finch Avenue The existing Schemes A and B show approxximately 17,000 square feet of retail shops lining Vallco Parkway on the northwest corner of the Vallco Parkway and Finch, ~vith a 40,000 square foot major retail building behirid it facing the town square. The applicant has provided two alternative options that could replace this corner: 1. A 30,000 square foot major retail buildin;~ facing Vallco Parkway, two "jewel box" buildings and surface parking facing Vallco Parkway with the loading dock facing Finch Avenue. 2. A 40,000 square foot major retail buildini; and approximately 21,000 square foot of retail shops lining Vallco Parkway with the loading dock facing Vallco Parkway. ~. r_ ,' f =`_ x C~- Al 1 ~~~~~ -..~` Staff is supportive of any of these options, with the provision that if the Alternative Option 1 is implemented by the applicant, theiz there must be a retail storefront provided along the northwest corner of the major retail building faciuZg Vallco Parkway adjacent to the truck loading dock area_ n~ Scheme A or B __ --__ I !_=.~ 14 - 115 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 TM-2008-01 8z TR-2008-08 Page 4 Corner of Vallco Parkway and Tantau Avenue The existing Scheme A incorporates the 145,000 square foot athletic club at this corner. Option B includes a 3-story, 205,000 square foot office complex. The applicant has provided an alternative component with a 30,000 square foot major retail building and 6,000 square foot attached retail or restaurant tenant space facing Stevens Creek Boulevard. 'This option also includes 162 surface parking stalls bellied the building and a truck loading area along N. Tailtau Avenue. s t --___~__~- 3 ~ ---- ~,~ Staff is supportive of either the athletic club in Option A or the major retail building in the alternative option because both of these uses support the retail commercial vision for this area iu1 the South Vallco Master Plan aimed the City's General Plan. The South Vallco Master Plait envisions this area as apedestrian-oriented, regional commercial and eittertai*~**~ent center. Staff believes the athletic club and retail commercial option are ii keeping with this vision. Staff is not supportive of the office use in Option B given that office use should be ancillary and complementary to the predominaizt com~-r+ercial uses on this site. Add Retail along Vallco Parkway -The parking garage will be constructed to allow for conversion of the ground floor area of the parking garage facing Vallco Parkway to retail shop area in the future. The applicant has provided an alternate option indicating that 9,000 square foot of retail shop area could be incorporated into the ground floor parking garage that would result in the removal of 43 parking spaces. Existing Scheme B Alternate Option is-pis Existing Scheme A Applications: LT-2008-01, ASA-2008-06 Main_ Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8s TR-2008-08 Page 5 Alternative Option _ - j- . ~._ - ~ ~ - _, ~`~~ TXEW RETAIL ~C 1.Y00 EF '~~ . Hotel Both existing options include a hotel on the project site. Scheme A includes a 3-story, 150 room hotel. Scheme B includes a 5-story, 250 room hotel The applicant is requesting approval of either Scheme .A or Scheme B. Staff supports the implementation of either scheme. Scheme A Scheme S "European 'Plaza The applicant is proposing a square "European" parkiulg plaza to the east of the towiz square. Staff and the Architectural Advisor, Larry Cannon, believe that this concept reduces the functionality and the potential for outdoor pedestrian-oriented plaza space adjacent to the retail shops. Staff is also concerned about t11e inefficient and conflicting vehicular/parking movements that this compact square plaza may present. Therefore, staff recommends that this area be modified to incorporate a more standard linear street that allows for the outdoor pedestrian plaza space to be expanded to the north and the south creating a more continuous acid coherent pedestrian experience. This approach has been used successfully at Santana Row in San Jose. The area by Maggiano's Restaurant is an example. 14 - 117 Existing Scheme A or S ApplicaHonsc U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino TM-2008-01 8z TR-2008-08 December 9, 2008 Page 6 Street parking could still be accommodated by 90 degree aizgled parking. Staff is presenting two alternative options. One alternative shoves 90 degree angled parking only within the area of the square plaza. The other alternative shows the extension of 90 degree angled parking along the street to the east. European Square Parking Plaza - i ~JttTf fir{-f~l,.L *w aa..~... ..v .. - G*~.`FR r2£T/iLL St40PS 3J ~ Sf 44 i ~ 3 ` l _ c v ... i ~ ~ - . ~ ~~... _~_ i -~ Z k - e ~ ~1 ._ _ ! _ ,~_ - ' z {- _ ~==-s ~Y _, Architectural Advisor's Comments f 1 ---- ~ T ty ~_ ~_ + _ - -- - ~, ~ `~ 7 '' --r _ i-- 6 _ ---~~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~- - C`.rcf1 at'cn and parking is very ~ __ at°: k:°: and in th s _ -. _ - - area and reta shops are very ~,~F.Fv far apart ~Y Y ~. • ~..~ ~ QIOI 2. --E. ~_ . ~ ~_ -.- ~~ HOTEL ~~:~ _ ~~ SHOPS -- I . - - -- Courtyar~teza Shops 14 - 118 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Maim Street Cupertino TM-2008-01 8z TIZ-2008-08 December 9, 2008 Page 7 Metropolitan Condom;r,;um 8s Senior Housn~g Interface The applicant has provided a cross section of the interface between the Metropolitan condominium site and the senior housing building with the following features: - Minimum 20-foot landscape buffer between the Metropolitan condominiums and senior housirig buildng - Terraced upper levels to provide greater setbacks from the Metropolitai~ condominiums - Roof-top garden. Please see the ciiagram below: Site Plan of Senior Housing L = _- ~.~- ~ { '~ - ' ~ ~.~ ~., >b+>S~: t ('.'t C•EC1 I i +- , ~~ Section Ir~terface between 1Vletropolitan 8c Senior Housing _~ - _ .r,b, ..o.....,~ ~ t~,.~l__n ti~ - - -- -' _ _ a:sap Et~Amq W~Ik Intvier 4~rOeru on i[ TT: lAeTOpOl~tan yeluty SvunuR Even though a substantial amount of the senior housuzg building has been set back from the Metropolitan condominium building, there are still portions of the upper floors (at the north a11d south wilgs) taller than the Metropolitan condom;nium building that are only 50 feet away. If the P1a1u1iiZg Commission finds additional relief is warranted, the Commission may consider they following options: 1. Further cascade the upper floors of the senior housing buildu1g to provide greater setbacks to mitigate impacts orito the adjacent Metropolitan complex. 2. Increase the side yard setback from 2:0 feet to 25 feet and consider requiring a green screen trellis feature that can soften the impact of the upper floor walls facing the Metropolitanz complex. 14 - 119 Alternative Option 1 Alternative Option 2 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino TM-2008-O1 8z TR-2008-08 December 9, 2008 Page 8 Office Allocation The applicant is requesting at least 100,000 square feet of office development over retail adjacent to the "town square." Staff originally supported only 60,000 square feet, but can support the higher 100,000 square foot figure if sufficient office allocations are added in conjuinction with a General Plan Amendment recently authorized by the City Council. The added office square footage will ensure that this project does not diminish the office space available for other major corporate interests. Submitted by: Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developmen ENCLOSURES Model Resolutions Original Plan Set Plan Set w/Alternative Options 8i Cross Section between Senior Housing and Metropolitan Condominiums Exhibit A: City Council Report of December 16, 2008 w/ attachiilents (including previous Planning Co*~n*~'+ission reports) Exhibit B: October 28 and December 9, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes Exhibit C: Final Environmental Impact Report G:\Plarxrring\PDREPORT\pcUser-epor-ts\20QSure}rorts\LI-2008-OZ, Jar: 6 2009, Firtal.doc 14 - '120 U-2008-O1 CITY OF CiJPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 MODEL RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A 1~LASTER USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT FLEXIBLE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT Ol?TIONS CONSISTING OF A 4-STORY, 160- UNIT SENIOR HOUSING BUILDING, UP TO A 5-STORY HOTEL WITH 250 ROOMS, UP TO 166,800 SF OF RETAIL SHOPS, UP 7'O A 145,000 SF ATHLETIC CLUB, 100,000 SF OF OFFICE BUILDING, A 5-LEVEL PARKING GARAGE AND 4 ACRES OF PUBLIC SPACE ON A 17.4 ACRE SITE LOCATED NORTH OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD BETWEEN FINCH AVENUE (INCLUDING THE WEST SIDE OF FINCH AVENUE) AND N. TANTAU AVENUE, SOUTH OF VALLCO PARKWAY SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Plann;ng Comm;ssion of thc: City of Cupertino received an application for a Use Permit, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices :have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Comm;ssion has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the btLrden of proof required to support said application; and has satisfied the following requirements: 1) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; and 2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of the Conditional Use Permits Chapter of the Cupertino Muiucipal Code; and 3) The proposed development is consistent with the South Vallco Special Center and South Vallco Master Plan; and 4) The proposed development is consistent with the Heart of the City Specific Plan, except for the proposed 5-story hotel for which an exception may be required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for a Use Permit is hereby recommended for approval, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application is-~2~ Model Resolution U-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 2 No. U-2008-01 as set forth in the Minutes of the Plann;ng Commission Meeting of January 6, 2009, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: U-2008-01 Applicant: Kevin Dare of Sand Hill Property Company Location: North of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Finch Avenue (including the west side of Finch Avenue) and N. Tantau Avenue, south of Vallco Parkway SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is based on Exhibits titled: "Main Street Cupertino Zoning Permit Package ' consisting of 75 pages labeled Title Sheet, AO through A53, Landscape Plan A, and CO.O through C5.3., parking garage elevations, tree disposition plan, section drawings, options plans, except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 2. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Approval of a Master Use Permit is granted for a period of five (5) years following issuance of the Master Use Permit to allow the construction of interchangeable mixed-use development options in accordance with the approved exhibits consisting of a 4-story, 160-unit senior housing building; up to a 5-story, 250 room hotel; up to 166,800 square feet of retail shops; up to a 145,000 square foot athletic club, 100,000 square foot office building; a 5-level, 1,288 space parking garage; and 4 acres of public open space consisting of a town square, plaza areas, park, and green landscaped area. The ground floor level of the office building and senior housing building will accommodate retail shops facing the town square. 3. TENTATIVE MAP Approval of a Tentative Map is granted to subdivide the property from three parcels into five parcels in accordance with the Tentative Map submitted in the approved exhibits, except as amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 4. COVENANT OF RECIPROCAL INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record a deed restriction for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between each lot created by the new development. The applicant shall also record appropriate deed restrictions for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between the adjacent properties to the west, to be implemented at such time that the City can require the same of adjacent property owners. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City 14 - 122 Model Resolution U-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 3 Attorney. The covenant of easement shall be recorded prior to final map approval. 5. PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT' Public access pedestrian easements through the interior pedestrian paths and plazas, the town square, and park area shall be required. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by t:he City Attorney prior to recordation of the easement on the project site with the final map approval. 6. COVENANTS. CONDITIONS AND1 RESTRICTIONS The project CCBzRs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation with the final map approval. The conditions of approval for the project shall also be recorded on the properties and incorporated into the CCBsRs. 7. TOINT USE AGREEMENT Prior to recordation of the final maap, the applicant shall submit a joint use agreement between the City and t)he applicant to be reviewed by the City Attorney and the Director of Parks :and Recreation, and approved by the City Council, which permits the City to use the town square and park area for public use for community events or other similar City-approved events or activities, such as, but not be limited to a farmE~rs' market, holiday activities, and summer events. The joint use agreement shall be recorded and incorporated into the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictioris (CCBtRs) of the project site. The joint use agreement shall govern the public use, prograrruning, public access and percentage of time available for tike allowable public activities and events for which the town square and park may be used. The agreement shall also make available publicly identifiable restroam facilities for public use at all times. No structures will be constructed on the town square area without the approval of the City of Cupertino. The prograrru_ning provisions of the joint use agreement shall be administered between the applicant and the Parks and Recreation Department. S. GROUND FLOOR RETAIL Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate the ground floor retail functionality for buildings proposed at heights over 45 feet in accordance with the City's General :Plan, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The ground floor retail shall be of substantial and appropriate size to accommodate the functionality of retail uses. The building frontages of all buildings facing the town square, including the senior housing building, the retail shops, and the office building, shall have ground floor retail as illustrated by the plans in the approved exhibits. The athletic club shall provide a floor plan to demonstrate the inclusion of ground floor retail along at 14 - '123 Model -Resolution U-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 4 least 50 percent of the exposed building frontages visible along Stevens Creek Boulevard. 9. DISCLOSURE CLAUSE TO THE FUTURE PROPERTY OWNERS The applicant/ developer shall inform the future owners through the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCBsRs) of the surrounding projects. The CCBsR language shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. 10. BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING PROGRAM The applicant shall participate in the City's Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing program by dedicating 15% of the total number of senior housing units at below market rates. The applicant shall record a covenant, which shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney, to be recorded prior to issuance of building permits for the planned senior housing building. 11. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM The project shall adhere to all of the mitigation measures identified ixi the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) of the Environmental Impact Report prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009. 12. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION The applicant shall receive an allocation of up to 166,800 square feet of retail commercial square footage; up to 145,000 square feet of commercial for the athletic club; 160 units of residential units; and up to 250 rooms of hotel rooms, depending on the build out options chosen. The applicant is also authorized up to 100,000 square feet of office space if a General Plan Amendment is approved by the City Council to increase the office allocations by the 100,000 square feet requested. 13. CONSTRUCTION PROTECT PHASING The applicant shall prepare a construction phasing schedule, demonstrating completion of the project within 5 years of this approval. The construction phasing schedule. shall detail critical- milestones of the construction. Critical milestones of the construction shall include but not be limited to the following: A. The town square, park area, and the four retail buildings adjacent to the town square and directly fronting Stevens Creek Boulevard, the street and pedestrian infrastructure around these portions of the project site, and sufficient parking to support these uses, shall be constructed together as part of the first development phase, if the project is developed in phases. B. The major retail tenant buildings, the mixed-use office and retail building, senior housing, hotel, athletic club and parking garage may be developed following the first development phase of the project. 14-'124 Model Resolution U-2.008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 5 C. Adequate parking shall be provided on the project site during phased development of the project. The :applicant will be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director e~f Community Development that adequate parking is provided for the development of each building on site. 14. PARKING The applicant shall comply with the m~n~*~-~um parking requirements for the project per the parking analysis in the Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers dated Septerr~ber 5, 2008 and incorporated into the Environmental Impact Report. 15_ PARKING LOT LIGHTING Lighting in the parking lots shall be approved by the Director of Community Development for compliance with ~~pplicable regulations prior to issuance of building permits. 16. BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL The Director of Community Development shall review the final building permits for full conformance with this approval and the design approval prior to issuance of building permits. 17. SIDEWALKS/CROSSWALKS A. The fi.ila.1 sidewalk plan shall be required to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the final map. B. The applicant shall provide decorative crosswalks with decorative semi- pervious pavement treatment across Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The decorative pavement materials shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and the Public Works Department, and shall be consistent with the recommendation of the traffic analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers in the Transportation Impact Analysis dated September .~, 2008 on p. 48. 18. SIGNAGE Signage is not approved with this application. Signage shall conform to the City's Sign Ordinance, Heart of the City Specific Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to final occupancy and approval of any individual signs on site, a detailed master sign program shall be submitl:ed for review and approval by the Design Review Committee. 19. ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL A. The building and architecture shill substantially conform to the elevations and details as shown in the approved exhibits, unless otherwise noted below. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of separate Architectura]i and Site Approval application(s) for each is-~zs Model Resolution U-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 6 of the buildings on the project site. Building colors and materials shall be reviewed and approved in conjunction with the Architectural and Site Approval. A. For buildings in which full elevations have been provided in the approved exhibits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of Architectural and Site Approval applications by the Design Review Committee. B. For buildings in which full elevations have not been provided in the approved exhibits, such as the athletic club, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of Architectural and Site Approval applications by the City Council. B. The applicant shall address the following issues as part of the separate Architectural and Site Approvals: Town Sduare 1. The town square area shall be designed as a "flexible" public area space that may be expanded or shifted by the temporary closure of one or more of the surrounding "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets 2. The town square area will be developed to be flush with the grade of the surrounding "Finch Avenue" private drive streets to allow for a seamless expansion or shifting of the town square area. 3. The applicant shall provide decorative semi-pervious pavement treatment in the town square and plaza areas to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. 4. Parking on the circular "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets shall be delineated by decorative semi-pervious paving rather than painted stripes. 5. Final design and landscape of the town square area shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. 6. Temporary closure of any portion of the private drive streets, including methods used to temporarily close the street(s), will require approval of the Director of Community Development. Corner Building Any building(s) proposed at the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue shall have prominent architectural design enhancements to emphasize the importance of this corner as the eastern gateway entry to the City including: 1. Identifiable street frontage public entrances along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue 2. Glass storefronts to allow for the visibility of activities along the street frontages is-~2s Model Resolution U-2008-O1 January, 6, 2009 Page 7 3. Interesting and unique architectural features to enhance the gateway entrance into the City Cupertino 4. Corner building architectural and site features Street Furniture The applicant shall provide street furniture along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vallco Parkway. Prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the street furniture sYiall be reviewed and approved by the City Council in conjunction with the a~~proval of the public improvement plans. Garage 1. The parking garage shall be designed and constructed to allow conversion of the ground floor area along -Vallco Parkway to retail shop areas. 2. The parking garage shall provide architectural details and "designs along the ground floor facing Vallco Parkway to promote pedestrian orientation along the street. 3. When the ground floor of the parking garage is converted to retail shop area, the ground floor area shall have storefront windows facing Vallco Parkway. 20. GATEWAY ENTRY The applicant shall be required to construct and install a gateway entry feature on the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue that will be consistent with the policies of~ the General Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. The gateway entry feature shall be a prominent design that may fulfill the public art requirement and could include a decorative monument feature that spans over Stevens Creek Boulevard, or vertical structural elements on both sides of Stevens Creek Boulevard and on the median to announce entry. Also, this corner shall include a community banner and enhanced pedestrian crossings that may include crosswalk lighting, special paving materials and/or prominent art or architectural feature announcing the entry to the City, such as a wrought iron element, subject to review and appro~~al by the City Council. 21. LANDSCAPE PLAN The applicant shall submit detailed landscape and irrigation plans to be reviewed and approved by the Desi~m Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. The landscape plan shall provide the following: A. The landscape plan shall include water conservation and pesticide reduction measures in conformance with Chapter 14.15, Xeriscape Landscaping, and the pesticide control measures referer-ced in Chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. B. Landscaping along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue in accordance with the streetscape design requirements of the Heart of the City Specific Plan. ia- iz~ Model Resolution U-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 8 C. Planting of two specimen oak trees flanking entrance to the development on the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Finch Avenue as replacements for the removal of the existing dead specimen oak tree. 22. TREE REMOVAL A. The applicant is approved to remove a total of up to 84 trees and relocate 13 trees on site per Option A in accordance with the City Arborist's report prepared by David Babby and dated April 30, 2008. Although the applicant is requesting approval to remove these trees in accordance with the City Arborist's recommendation, the intent is to retain as many of the existing perimeter street trees for the remaining life of such trees where they are not considered dead or do not require immediate removal. B. The Aleppo Pine tree (Tree No. 113) shall be preserved on site. C. For any trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions, are considered dead, or die as a result of relocation, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. 23. TREE REPLACEMENTS Final approval of the required tree replacements shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Comm;ttee in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. The applicant may be able to reduce the number of replacement trees on site, if larger size trees are proposed, in accordance with the tree replacement standards of the ordinance. For any additional trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions or are considered dead, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. Species and size of replacement trees shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. 24. TREE PROTECTION As part of the building permit drawings, a tree protection plan shall be prepared by a certified arborist for the trees to be retained. The applicant shall be required to install tree protection measures before and during development in accordance with the City Arborist's report dated April 30, 2008, and in accordance with requirements of the Public Works Department for the preservation of existing street trees. In addition, the following measures shall be added to the protection plan: A. For trees to be retained, chain link fencing and other root protection shall be installed around the dripline of the tree prior to any project site work. B. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under 'root zones, unless using buffers approved by the project arborist. C. No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City Arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. 14 - 128 Model Resolution U-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 9 D. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers. E. Retained trees shall be watered to maintain them in good health. 25. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in an amount determined by the City Arborist to ensure protecti~~n of trees slated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, subject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. 26. TREE REPLACEMENT IN-LIEU FEI's The applicant shall pay an in-lieu f~~e in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance for any trees that cannot be replaced on site. 27. HEART OF THE CITY DESIGN GUIDELINES A. The project shall comply with the :Heart of the City design guidelines. B. If any portions of the buildings on the Master Use Permit site plan do not meet the minimum setbacks per the Heart of the City Specific or Conceptual Plan, the applicant must either modify the building setback as part of the Architectural and Site Approval for the building, or obtain approval of an Exception application to the Heart of the City Specific or Conceptual Plan. 28. SOUTH VALLCO MASTER PLAN The project shall comply with the South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to release of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the final boulevard plan along Vallco Parkway shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council. The applicant shall demonstrate that they have pro~~ided sufficient outreach to the stakeholders with input including, but not limited to the specific lighting, sidewalk furniture, and landscaping treatments to be coivsistent with the vision of the South Vallco Master Plan. 29. CREEK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS The applicant shall contribute an amount not to exceed $96,000 to the improvements of a trail connection along Calabazas Creek from Vallco Parkway to I-280. This contribution shall be used by the City to adm;n;ster a creek trail plan and necessary approvals and improvements. The applicant shall coordinate with the ownership of properties on both sides of the exposed Calabazas Creek. If this fund is not used within five years of the project completion, then it shall be returned to the applicant. 30. PARK AREA ALONG METROPOLITAN A .46 acre park area shall be maintained along the western property line adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development. The design of the park area shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council and shall incorporate a tot lot ia- izs Model Resolution iJ-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 10 adjacent to the senior housing building. The green space park buffer shall be installed prior to issuance of building occupancy permits. 31. SECURITY PLAN FOR PARKING GARAGE The applicant shall develop a comprehensive private security plan for the entire development encompassing patrol hours, manning levels and frequency, closed circuit cameras in the parking garage, adequate lighting levels, and individual safes in the housing units and hotel rooms. The plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Sheriff's Department prior to final occupancy. 32. PARKING GARAGE NOISE MITIGATION The parking garage floors shall be treated/coated with materials as deemed appropriate by the City to lessen the noise impacts of vehicle movements. 33. RESTAURANT ODOR ABATEMENT All restaurants shall install odor abatement systems to be incorporated into the air handling systems to reduce the odor impact from the restaurants to the adjacent community. Detailed plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. 34_ SCREENING All mechanical and other equipment on the buildings and site shall be screened so they are not visible from public street areas or adjoining developments. Screening materials/colors shall match building features and materials. The height of the screening shall be taller than the height of the mechanical equipment that it is designed to screen. The location of equipment and necessary screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. 35. TRASH AND DELIVERY ACTIVITIES A. A detailed refuge and truck delivery plan must be prepared by the applicant. The plan shall specify locations of trash facilities, refuge pick up schedules and truck delivery schedules and routes. All trash facilities must be screened and enclosed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. The final plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. B. All deliveries shall comply with the mitigation measures provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009. 36. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN A construction management plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by staff prior to issuance of building permits. Staging of construction and equipment shall not occur within 250 feet of any residential property. Said 14 - '130 Model Resolution U-2.008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 1l plan shall provide the following A. Construction Vehicle Access and 1Z'.outing B. Construction Equipment Staging Asea C. Dust Control (Best Management Practices) D. Hours of Operation E. Street Cleaning Schedule and Program 37. GREEN BUILDING The applicant shall obtain LEED Silver certification designation for all buildings in accordance with the U.S. Green ]3uilding Council standards and the City's Green Building policies. 38. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT A. The applicant shall create an Improvement and Maintenance District to maintain the sidewalks and landscaped park strips along Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Cree7<: Boulevard. Said district shall be part of the Covenants, Codes and Restrictior~s of the project and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to approval of the final map. B. The applicant shall record a mair~tenance agreement subject to the approval of the City Attorney for the maintenance of the shared driveways by the property owners of each of the lot:~. 39. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND ME~I~TAGEMENT The applicant shall cori-m;t to :implementing a transportation demand management (TDM) plan incorporating solutions as indicated in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting (MMR) Program prepared by David . J. Powers and Associates, dated January 2009 that may include parking cash-out and eco passes for employees, valet for customers azd off-site parking options. The TDM plan including the projected funding shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Com*~*~~ttee prior to issuance of building permits. 40. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS All demolished building and site m:~terials shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible subject to the Building Official. The applicant shall provide evidence that materials will be recycled prior to issuance of final demolition permits. 41. NOTICE OF FEES. DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified 14 - 131 Model Resolution U-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 12 that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(x), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. 42. PUBLIC ART The applicant shall provide public art in accordance with General Plan policy 2- 66. Public art selection will be reviewed by the Fine Arts Co*n~-r+;ssion. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 43. STREET WIDENING Street widening and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 44. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer. 45. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as approved by the City Engineer. Lighting fixtures shall be positioned so as to preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining properties, and shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site is located. 46. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. 47. GRADING Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required. Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/ or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. 48. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Hydrology and pre- and post-development hydraulic calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be constructed or renovated. The storm drain system may include, but is not limited to, subsurface storage of peak stormwater flows (as needed), bioretention basins, vegetated swales, and hydrodynamic separators to reduce the amount of runoff of the site and improve water quality. The storm drain system shall be designed 14 - '132 Model Resolution U-2~D08-01 January 6, 2009 Page 13 to detain water on-site (e.g., via buried pipes) as necessary to avoid an increase of one percent flood water surface elevaizon of the culvert to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 49. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer. 50. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees;, park dedication fees and fees for under grounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits Fees: a. Checking 8s Inspection Fees: $ 6%> of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $3,847.00 minimum b. Grading Permit: $ 6% of Site Impro~~ement Cost or $2,239.00 minimum c. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 2,000.00 d. Storm Drainage Fee: $ TBD e. Power Cost: *~* f. Map Checking Fees: $3,638.00 g. Park Fees: N/ A h. Street Tree By Developer '~* Based on the latest effective PGBzE rate schedule approved by the PUC Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements b. Labor 8z Material Bond: 100'% of Off-site and On-site Improvement c. On-site Grading Bond: 100%~ of site improvements. -The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final Wrap or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. 14 - '133 Model Resolution U-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 14 51. TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. The transformer shall- not be located in the front or side building setback area. 52. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading and street improvement plans. 53. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with California Water Services Company for water service to the subject development. 54. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT The developer must obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) from the State Water Resources Control Board, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), use of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control storm water runoff quality, and BMP inspection and maintenance. 55. C.3 REQUIREMENTS The developer shall reserve a m;,,;,,,um of 4% of developable surface area for the placement of storm water treatment facilities on the tentative map, unless an alternative storm water treatment plan to satisfy c.3 requirements is approved by the City Engineer. The developer must include the use and maintenance of site design, source control and storm water treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs), which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. A Storm Water Management Plan, Storm Water Facilities Easement Agreement, Storm Water Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement, and certification of ongoing operation and maintenance of treatment BMPs are required. 56. EROSION CONTROL PLAN The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. 57. WORK SCHEDULE Every 6 months, the developer shall submit a work schedule to the City to show the timetable for all grading/erosion control work in conjunction with this project. 14 - 134 Model Resolution U-2:008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 15 58. TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENT:i The developer shall agree to fund up to $250,000 for the purpose of installing a traffic signal at Finch Avenue and Vallco Parkway. The developer shall submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 59. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT WOLFE ]CZOAD AND VALLCO PARKWAY The developer shall mitigate for traffic impacts at Vallco Parkway and Wolfe Road by implementing one of the options stated in the Environmental Impact Report for Main Street Cupertino per the approval of the City Engineer. 60. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT HOMESTEAD ROAD AND LAWRENCE EXPRESSWAY The developer shall agree to submit their fair-share cost of $334,100 to improve Homestead Road at Lawrence Expressway according to the direction of the City Engineer. The cost shall be submitted to the County of Santa Clara in the form of a bond or cash deposit prior to the City issuing building permits, with the proviso that the funds be commuted to this specific improvement in accordance of section 66000 et. seq. of the California Government Code. 61. PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS The developer shall provide pedestrian crosswalk improvements at Finch Avenue and at the project's eastern driveway. Final crosswalk improvement plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City En;~ineer. 62. BUS STOP LOCATION The developer shall relocate bus steps on Stevens Creek Boulevard to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 63. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The developer must submit a traffic control plan by a Registered Traffic Engineer to be approved by the City. The plan shall include a temporary traffic control plan for work in the right of way as well as a routing plan for all vehicles used during construction. All traffic control signs rnust be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of work. TIRe City has adopted Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards for all signage and striping work throughout the City. 64. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City. 65. TRAFFIC CALMING 14-~35 Model Resolution U-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 16 The developer shall agree to fund up to $100,000 for the purpose of mitigating traffic impacts in the adjacent neighborhoods resulting from the project for a period of 5 years following project occupancy. The developer shall submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 66. BICYCLE PARKING The developer shall provide bicycle parking consistent with the City's requirements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 67. OPERATIONS 8z MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT The developer shall enter into an Operations 8z Maintenance Agreement with the City prior to final occupancy. The Agreement shall include the operation and maintenance for non-standard appurtenances in the public road right-of-way that may include, but is not limited to, sidewalk, pavers, and street lights. 68. TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Manager. Clearance by the Public Works Department is needed prior to obtaining a building permit. 69. REFUSE TRUCK ACCESS The developer must obtain clearance from the Environmental Programs Manager in regards to refuse truck access for the proposed development. 70. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125. ' 71. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 72. SANTA CLARA WATER DISTRICT CLEARANCE Provide Santa Clara water district approval before recordation of tentative map. The developer shall pay for and obtain .Water District permit for activities or modifications within the District easement or fee right of way or affecting District facilities. 73. SANITARY DISTRICT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Cupertino Sanitary District prior to issuance of building permits. 14 - '136 Model Resolution U-?_008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 17 74. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. 75. UTILITY EASEMENTS Clearance approvals from the agencies ..with easements on the property (including PGBtE, PacBell, and California Water Company, and/or equivalent agencies) will be required prior to issuance of building; permits. 76. CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COAiIPANY CLEARANCE Provide California Water Service Company approval before recordation of tentative map. CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF ENGINEERING/SURVEYING CONDITIONS (Section 66474.18 of the California Government Code) I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV. Of this resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices / s /Ralph Qualls Ralph Qualls, Director of Public Works Cite Engineer CA License 22046 14 - 137 Model Resolution U-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page i s PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6~ day of January 2009, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: Steve Piasecki, Director Community Development Department APPROVED: Marty Miller, Chair Planr,;ng Commission G: \ PZanning \ PDREPORT \ RES \ 2007 \ LI-2008-01 res.doc 14-'138 ASA-2008-06 CITY OF Ci1PERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 MODEL RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TI3E CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT FLEXIBLE MIXED-USE 7JEVELOPMENT OPTIONS CONSISTING OF A 4-STORY, 160-UNIT SENIOR HOUSIPIG BUILDING, UP TO A 5-STORY HOTEL WITH 250 ROOMS, UP TO 166,800 SF OAF RETAIL SHOPS, UP TO A 145,000 SF ATHLETIC CLUB, 100,000 SF OF OFFICE B1;JILDING, A 5-LEVEL PARKING GARAGE AND 4 ACRES OF PUBLIC SPACE ON A 17.4 ACRE SITE LOCATED NORTH OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD BETWEEN FINCH AVENUE (INCLUDING THE WEST SIDE OF FINCH AVENUE) AND N. TANTAU AVENUE, SOUTH OF VALLCO PARKWAY SECTION I: FINDINGS WI3EREAS, the Plann;ng Com*r;ssion of the City of Cupertino received an application for an Architectural and Site Approval, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and WIdEREAS, the necessary public notices :have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the bixrden of proof required to support said application; and has satisfied the following r..quirements: 1) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; and 2) The proposed use will be located and. conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General flan and the purpose of the Architectural and Site Review Chapter of the Cupertino Municipal Code; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, f~>.cts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for Architectural and Site Approval is hereby approved, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concealing Application No. ASA-2008-06 as set forth in the Minutes of the Plana;ng Com**'+;ssion Meeting of January 6, 2009, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. 14 - '139 Resolution No, ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 2 SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: ASA-2008-06 Applicant: Kevin Dare (Sand Hill Property Company) Location: North of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Finch Avenue (including the west side of Finch Avenue) and N. Tantau Avenue, south of Vallco Parkway SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is based on Exhibits titled: "Main Street Cupertino Zoning Permit Package ' consisting of 75 pages labeled Title Sheet, AO through A53, Landscape Plan A, and CO.O through C5.3., parking garage elevations, tree disposition plan, section drawings, options plans, except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 2. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Approval of a Master Use Permit is granted for a period of five (5) years following issuance of the Master Use Permit to allow the construction of interchangeable mixed-use development options in accordance with the approved exhibits consisting of a 4-story, 160-unit senior housing building; up to a 5-story, 250 room hotel; up to 166,800 square feet of retail shops; up to a 145,000 square foot athletic club, 100,000 square foot office building; a 5-level, 1,288 space parking garage; and 4 acres of public open space consisting of a town square, plaza areas, park, and green landscaped area. The ground floor level of the office building and senior housing building will accommodate retail shops facing the town square. 3. TENTATIVE MAP Approval of a Tentative Map is granted to subdivide the property from three parcels into five parcels in accordance with the Tentative Map submitted in the approved exhibits, except as amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 4. COVENANT OF RECIPROCAL INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record a deed restriction for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between each lot created by the new development. The applicant shall also record appropriate deed restrictions for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between the adjacent properties to the west, to be implemented at such time that the City can require the same of adjacent property owners. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. The covenant of easement shall be recorded prior to final map approval. 14-~40 Resolution No.. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 3 5. PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT' Public access pedestrian easements through the interior pedestrian paths and plazas, the town square, and park area shall be required. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation of the easement on the project site with the j"final map approval. 6. COVENANTS. CONDITIONS ANIr~ RESTRICTIONS The project CCBsRs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation with the final map approval. The conditions of approval for the project shall also be recorded on the properties and incorporated into the CCBsRs. 7. TOINT USE AGREEMENT Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit a joint use agreement between the City and the applicant to be reviewed by the City Attorney and the Director of Parks and Recreation, and approved by the City Council, which permits the City to use the town square and park area for public use for comr+'+unity events or other similar City-approved events or activities, such as, but not be limited to a farmers' market, holiday activities, and summer events. The joint use agreement shall be recorded and incorporated into the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCBsRs) of the project site. The joint use agreement shall govern the public use, programming, public access and percentage of time available for the allowable public activities and events for which the town square and park may be used. The agreement shall also make available publicly identifiable restroom facilities for public use at all times. No structures will be constructed on the town square area without the approval of the City of Cupertino. The programming provisions of the joint use agreement shall be administered between the applicant and the Parks and Recreation Department. 8. GROUND FLOOR RETAIL Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate the ground floor retail functionality for buildings proposed at heights over 45 feet in accordance with the City's General Plan, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The grouind floor retail shall be of substantial and appropriate size to accommodate the functionality of retail uses. The building frontages of all buildings facing the town square, including the senior housing building, the retail shops, and the office building, shall have ground floor retail as illustrated by the plans in the approved exhibits. The athletic club shall provide a floor plan to demonstrate the inclusion of ground floor retail along at least 50 percent of the exposed building frontages visible along Stevens Creek Boulevard. is - iai Resolution No. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 4 9. DISCLOSURE CLAUSE TO THE FUTURE PROPERTY OWNERS The applicant/ developer shall inform the future owners through the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCBsRs) of the surrounding projects. The CCBsR language shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. 10. BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING PROGRAM The applicant shall participate in the City's Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing program by dedicating 15 % of the total number of senior housing units at below market rates. The applicant shall record a covenant, which shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney, to be recorded prior to issuance of building permits for the planned senior housing building. 11. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM The project shall adhere to all of the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) of the Environmental Impact Report prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009. 12. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION The applicant shall receive an allocation of up to 166,800 square feet of retail commercial square footage; up to 145,000 square feet of commercial for the athletic club; 160 units of residential units; and up to 250 rooms of hotel rooms, depending on the build out options chosen. The applicant is also authorized up to 100,000 square feet of office space if a General Plan Amendment is approved by the City Council to increase the office allocations by the 100,000 square feet requested. 13. CONSTRUCTION PROTECT PHASING The applicant shall prepare a construction phasing schedule, demonstrating completion of the project within 5 years of this approval. The construction phasing schedule shall detail critical milestones of the construction. Critical milestones of the construction shall include but not be limited to the following: A. The town square, park area, and the four retail buildings adjacent to the town square and directly fronting Stevens Creek Boulevard, the street and pedestrian infrastructure around these portions of the project site, and sufficient parking to support these uses, shall be constructed together as part of the first development phase, if the project is developed in phases. B. The major retail tenant buildings, the mixed-use office and retail building, senior housing, hotel, athletic club and parking garage may be developed following the first development phase of the project. C. Adequate parking shall be provided on the project site during phased development of the project. The applicant will be required to demonstrate to 14 - '142 Resolution No. ASA-2008•-06 January 6, 2009 Page 5 the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development that adequate parking is provided for the development of each building on site. 14. PARKING The applicant shall comply with th.e minimum parking requirements for the project per the parking analysis in th.e Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers dated September 5, 2008 and incorporated into the Environmental Impact Report. 15. PARKING LOT LIGHTING Lighting in the parking lots shall be approved by the Director of Community Development for compliance with ~ipplicable regulations prior to issuance of building permits. 16. BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL The Director of Community Development shall review the final building permits for full conformance with .this approval and the design approval prior to issuance of building permits. 17. SIDEWALKS/CROSSWALKS A. The final sidewalk plan shall be reequired to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the final map. B. The applicant shall provide decorative crosswalks with decorative semi- pervious pavement treatment across Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The decorative pavement materials shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and the Public Works Department, and shall be consistent with the recommendation of the traffic analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers in the Transportation Impact Analysis dated September 5, 2008 on p. 48. 18. SIGNAGE Signage is not approved with this application. Signage shall conform to the City's Sign Ordinance, Heart of the City Specific Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to final occupancy and approv~il of any individual signs on site, a detailed master sign program shall be submitted for review and approval by the Design Review Committee. 19. ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL A. The building and architecture shall substantially conform to the elevations and details as shown in the approved exhibits, unless otherwise noted below. Prior to issuance of building perrrlits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of separate Architectur~il and Site Approval application(s) for each of the buildings on the project site. Building colors and materials shall be 14 - '143 Resolution No. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 6 reviewed and approved in conjunction with the Architectural and Site Approval. A. For buildings in which full elevations have been provided in the approved exhibits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of Architectural and Site Approval applications by the Design Review Committee. B. For buildings in which full elevations have not been provided in the approved exhibits, such as the athletic club, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of Architectural and Site Approval applications by the City Council. B. The applicant shall address the following issues as part of the separate Architectural and Site Approvals: Town Square 1. The town square area shall be designed as a "flexible' public area space that may be expanded or shifted by the temporary closure of one or more of the surrounding "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets 2. The town square area will be developed to be flush with the grade of the surrounding "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets to allow for a seamless expansion or shifting of the town square area. 3. The applicant shall provide decorative semi-pervious pavement treatment in the town square and plaza areas to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. 4. Parking on the circular "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets shall be delineated by decorative semi-pervious paving rather than painted stripes. 5. Final design and landscape of the town square area shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. 6. Temporary closure of any portion of the private drive streets, including methods used to temporarily close the street(s), will require approval of the Director of Community Development. Corner Building Any building(s) proposed at the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue shall have prominent architectural design enhancements to emphasize the importance of this corner as the eastern gateway entry to the City including: 1. Identifiable street frontage public entrances along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue 2. Glass storefronts to allow for the visibility of activities along the street frontages is - iaa Resolution No. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 7 3. Interesting and unique architectural features to enhance the gateway entrance into the City Cupertino 4. Corner building architectural and site features Street Furniture The applicant shall provide street furniture along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vallco Parkway. Prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the street furniture shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council in conjunction with the approval of the public improvement plans. Garage 1. The parking garage shall be designed and constructed to allow conversion of the ground floor area along Vallco Parkway to retail shop areas. 2. The parking garage shall provide architectural details and designs along the ground floor facing Vallco Parkway to promote pedestrian orientation along the street. 3. When the ground floor of the parking garage is converted to retail shop area, the ground floor area shall have storefront windows facing Vallco Parkway. 20. GATEWAY ENTRY The applicant shall be required to construct and install a gateway entry feature on the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue that will be consistent with the policies o1~ the General Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. The gateway entry feature shall be a prominent design that may fulfill the public art requirement and could include a decorative monument feature that spans over Stevens Creek Boulevard, or vertical structural elements on both sides of Stevens Creek Boulevard and on the median to announce entry. Also, this corner shall include a community banner and enhanced pedestrian crossings that may include crosswalk lighting, special paving materials and/or prominent art or architectural feature announcing the entry to the City, such as a wrought iron element, subject to review and appro~~al by the City Council. 21. LANDSCAPE PLAN The applicant shall submit detailed landscape and irrigation plans to be reviewed and approved by the Desilm Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. The landscape plan shall provide the following: A. The landscape plan shall include ~;~vater conservation and pesticide reduction measures in conformance with Chapter 14.15, Xeriscape Landscaping, and the pesticide control measures referericed in Chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. B. Landscaping along Stevens CreE~k Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue in accordance with the streetscape dl~sign requirements of the Heart of the City Specific Plan. 14 - '145 Resolution No. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 8 C. Planting of two specimen oak trees flanking entrance to the development on the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Finch Avenue as replacements for the removal of the existing dead specimen oak tree. 22. TREE REMOVAL A. The applicant is approved to remove a total of up to 84 trees and relocate 13 trees on site per Option A in accordance with the City Arborist's report prepared by David Babby and dated April 30, 2008. Although the applicant is requesting approval to remove these trees in accordance with the City Arborist's recommendation, the intent is to retain as many of the existing perimeter street trees for the remaining life of such trees where they are not considered dead or do not require immediate removal. B. The Aleppo Pine tree (Tree No. 113) shall be preserved on site. C. For any trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions, are considered dead, or die as a result of relocation, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. 23. TREE REPLACEMENTS Final approval of the required tree replacements shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. The applicant may be able to reduce the number of replacement trees on site, if larger size trees are proposed, in accordance with the tree replacement standards of the ordinance. For any additional trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions or are considered dead, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. Species and size of replacement trees shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. 24. TREE PROTECTION As part of the building permit drawings, a tree protection plan shall be prepared by a certified arborist for the trees to be retained. The applicant shall be required to install tree protection measures before and during development in accordance with the City Arborist's report dated April 30, 2008, and in accordance with requirements of the Public Works Department for the preservation of existing street trees. In addition, the following measures shall be added to the protection plan: A. For trees to be retained, chain link fencing and other root protection shall be installed around the dripline of the tree prior to any project site work. B. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the project arborist. C. No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City Arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. 14 - 146 Resolution No. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 9 D. Tree protection conditions shall bps posted on the tree protection barriers. E. Retained trees shall be watered to maintain them in good health. 25. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in an amount determined by the City Arborist to ensure protection of trees slated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, subject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. 26. TREE REPLACEMENT IN-LIEU FEI; The applicant shall pay an in-lieu fire in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance for any trees that caiulot be replaced on site. 27. HEART OF THE CITY DESIGN GUIDELINES A. The project shall comply with the :Heart of the City design guidelines. B. If any portions of the buildings on the Master Use Permit site plan do not meet the min;mum setbacks per the Heart of the City Specific or Conceptual Plan, the applicant must either modify the building setback as part of the Architectural and Site Approval for the building, or obtain approval of an Exception application to the Heart of the City Specific or Conceptual Plan. 28. SOUTH VALLCO MASTER PLAN The project shall comply with the South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to release of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the final boulevard plan along Vallco Parkway shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council. The applicant shall demonstrate that they have provided sufficient outreach to the stakeholders with input including, but not limited to the specific lighting, sidewalk furniture, and landscaping treatments to be consistent with the vision of the South Vallco Master Plan. 29. CREEK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS The applicant shall contribute an amount not to exceed $96,000 to the improvements of a trail connection along Calabazas Creek from Vallco Parkway to I-280. This contribution shall be used by the City to adm;,,;ster a creek trail plan and necessary approvals and uprovements. The applicant shall coordinate with the ownership of properties on both sides of the exposed Calabazas Creek. If this fund is not used within five years of the project completion, then it shall be returned to the applicant. 30. PARK AREA ALONG METROPOLITAN A .46 acre park area shall be maintained along the western property line adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development. The design of the park area shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council and shall incorporate a tot lot 14 - 147 Resolution No. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page io adjacent to the senior housing building. 'The green space park buffer shall be installed prior to issuance of building occupancy permits. 31. SECURITY PLAN FOR PARKING GARAGE The applicant shall develop a comprehensive private security plan for the entire development encompassing patrol hours, manning levels and frequency, closed circuit cameras in the parking garage, adequate lighting levels, and individual safes in the housing units and hotel rooms. The plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Sheriff's Department prior to final occupancy. 32. PARKING GARAGE NOISE MITIGATION The parking garage floors shall be treated/coated with materials as deemed appropriate by the City to lessen the noise impacts of vehicle movements. 33. RESTAURANT ODOR ABATEMENT All restaurants shall install odor abatement systems to be incorporated into the air handling systems to reduce the odor impact from the restaurants to the adjacent community. Detailed plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. 34. SCREENING All mechanical and other equipment on the buildings and site shall be screened so they are not visible from public street areas or adjoining developments. Screening materials/colors shall match building features and materials. The height of the screening shall be taller than the height of the mechanical equipment that it is designed to screen. The location of equipment and necessary screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. 35. TRASH AND DELIVERY ACTNITIES A. A detailed refuge and truck delivery plan must be prepared by the applicant. The plan shall specify locations of trash facilities, refuge pick up schedules and truck delivery schedules and routes. All trash facilities must be screened and enclosed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. The final plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. B. All deliveries shall comply with the mitigation measures provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009. 36. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN A construction management plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by staff prior to issuance of building permits. Staging of construction and equipment shall not occur within 250 feet of any residential property. Said ~a - ias Resolution No. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 11 plan shall provide the following A. Construction Vehicle Access and ICouting B. Construction Equipment Staging p.rea C. Dust Control (Best Management Practices) D. Hours of Operation E. Street Cleaning Schedule and Program 37. GREEN BUILDING The applicant shall obtain LEED Silver certification designation for all buildings in accordance with the U.S. Green Building Council standards and the City's Green Building policies. 38. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT A. The applicant shall create an Improvement and Maintenance District to maintain the sidewallcs and landscaped park strips along Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Cree]c Boulevard. Said district shall be part of the Covenants, Codes and Restrictioivs of the project and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to approval of the final map. B. The applicant shall record a maintenance agreement subject to the approval of the City Attorney for the maintenance of the shared driveways by the property owners of each of the lots. 39. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT The applicant shall com*r+~t to implementing a transportation demand management (TDM) plan incorporating solutions as indicated in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting (MMR) Program prepared by David j. Powers and Associates dated January 2009 that may include parking cash-out and eco passes for employees, valet for customers and off-site parking options. The TDM plan including the projected funding shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. 40. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS All demolished building and site materials shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible subject to the Building Official. The applicant shall provide evidence that materials will be recycled prior to issuance of final demolition permits. 41. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified ia- ias Resolution No. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 12 that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. 42. PUBLIC ART The applicant shall provide public art in accordance with General Plan policy 2- 66. Public art selection will be reviewed by the Fine Arts Comm;ssion. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 43. STREET WIDENING Street widening and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 44. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer. 45. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as approved by the City Engineer. Lighting fixtures shall be positioned so as to preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining properties, and shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site is located. 46. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. ' 47. GRADING Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required. Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/ or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. 48. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Hydrology and pre- and post-development hydraulic calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be constructed or renovated. The storm drain system may include, but is not limited to, subsurface storage of peak stormwater flows (as needed), bioretention basins, vegetated swales, and hydrodynamic separators to reduce the amount of runoff of the site and improve water quality. The storm drain system shall be designed is-~so Resolution No. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 13 to detain water on-site (e.g., via buried pipes) as necessary to avoid an increase of one percent flood water surface elevation of the culvert to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 49. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The de~~eloper shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the C=ity Engineer. 50. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for under grounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits Fees: a. Checking 8r Inspection Fees: $ 6°'6 of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $3,847.00 miiunlum b. Grading Permit: $ 6% of Site Improvement Cost or $2,239.00 minimum c. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 2,000.00 d. Storm Drainage Fee: $ TBD e. Power Cost: ** f. Map Checking Fees: $3,638.00 g. Park Fees: N/ A h. Street Tree By Developer ~~ Based on the latest effective PC~BsE rate schedule approved by the PUC Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements b. Labor 8z Material Bond: 100 % of Off-site and On-site Improvement c. On-site Grading Bond: 100°.0 of site improvements. -The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final reap or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. 14 - 151 Resolution No. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 14 51. TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible from. public street areas. The transformer shall not be located i1z the front or side building setback area. 52. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board; for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading and street improvement plans. 53. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with California Water Services Company for water service to the subject development. 54. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT The developer must obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) from the State Water Resources Control Board, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), use of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control storm water runoff quality, and BMP inspection and maintenance. 55. C.3 REQUIREMENTS The developer shall reserve a minimum of 4% of developable surface area for the placement of storm water treatment facilities on the tentative map, unless an alternative storm water treatment plan to satisfy c.3 requirements is approved by the City Engineer. The developer must include the use and maintenance of site design, source control and storm water treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs), which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. A Storm Water Management Plan, Storm Water Facilities Easement Agreement, Storm Water Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement, and certification of ongoing operation and maintenance of treatment BMPs are required. 56. EROSION CONTROL PLAN The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. 57. WORK SCHEDULE Every 6 months, the developer shall submit a work schedule to the City to show the timetable for all grading/erosion control work in conjunction with this project. 14 - 152 Resolution No. ASA-2008-06 Page 15 January 6, 2009 58. TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS_ The developer shall agree to fund up to $250,000 for the purpose of installing a traffic signal at Finch Avenue and Val co Parkway. The developer shall submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 59. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT WOLFE 7CZOAD AND VALLCO PARKWAY The developer shall mitigate for traffic impacts at Vallco Parkway and Wolfe Road by implementing one of the options stated in the Environmental Impact Report for Main Street Cupertino per the approval of the City Engineer. 60. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT HOMESTEAD ROAD AND LAWRENCE EXPRESSWAY The developer shall agree to submit their fair-share cost of $334,100 to improve Homestead Road at Lawrence Expressway according to the direction of the City Engineer. The cost shall be submitted to the County of Santa Clara in the form of a bond or cash deposit prior to the City issuing building permits, with the proviso that the funds be com,,,;tted to this specific improvement in accordance of section 66000 et, seq. of the California Governntent Code. 61. PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS The developer shall provide pedestrian_ crosswalk improvements at Finch Avenue and at the project's eastern driveway. Final crosswalk improvement plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City En€;ineer. - 62. BUS STOP LOCATION The developer shall relocate bus stops on Stevens Creek Boulevard to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 63. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The developer must submit a traffic control plan by a Registered Traffic Engineer to be approved by the City. The plan shall include a temporary traffic control plan for work in the right of way as well as a routing plan for all vehicles used during construction. All traffic control signs must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to .commencement of work. Tl>.e City has adopted Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) sta~zdards for all signage and striping work throughout the City. 64. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City. 65. TRAFFIC CALMING The developer shall agree to fund up to $100,000 for the purpose of mitigating traffic impacts in the adjacent neighborl-ioods resulting from the project for a 14 -'153 Resolution No. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 16 period of 5 years following project occupancy. The developer shall submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 66. BICYCLE PARKING The developer shall provide bicycle parking consistent with the City's requirements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 67. OPERATIONS 8L MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT The developer shall enter into an Operations 8s Maintenance Agreement with the City prior to final occupancy. The Agreement shall include the operation and maintenance for non-standard appurtenances in the public road right-of-way that may include, but is not limited to, sidewalk, pavers, and street lights. 68. TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Manager. Clearance by the Public Works Department is needed prior to obtaining a building permit. 69. REFUSE TRUCK ACCESS The developer must obtain clearance from the Environmental Programs Manager in regards to refuse truck access for the proposed development. 70. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125. 71. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 72. SANTA CLARA WATER DISTRICT CLEARANCE Provide Santa Clara water district approval before recordation of tentative map. The developer shall pay for and obtain Water District permit for activities or modifications within the District easement or fee right of way or affecting District facilities. 73. SANITARY DISTRICT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Cupertino Sanitary District prior to issuance of building permits. 74. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. ia- isa Resolution No. ASA-2008-06 January 6, 2009 Page 17 75. UTILITY EASEMENTS Clearance approvals from the agencies ~n~ith easements on the property (including PGBsE, PacBell, and California Water Company, and/ or equivalent agencies) will be required prior to issuance of buildin€; permits. 76. CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COA~IPANY CLEARANCE Provide Califorra Water Service Company approval before recordation of tentative map. CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF ENGINEERING/SU:RVEYING CONDITIONS (Section 66474.18 of the California Government Code) I hereby certify that the engineering and sv_rveying conditions specified in Section IV. Of this resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices / s /Ralph Qualls Ralph Qualls, Director of Public Works Cit3T Engineer CA License 22046 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6*h day of January 2009, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: Steve Piasecki, Director Community Development Department APPROVED: Marty Miller, Chair Planning Commission is-ass TM-2008-01 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 MODEL RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A TENTATIVE MAP TO CREATE FIVE NEW PARCELS ON A 17.4 ACRE SITE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD BETWEEN FINCH AVENUE (INCLUDING THE WEST SIDE OF FINCH AVENUE) AND N. TANTAU AVENUE, SOUTH OF VALLCO PARKWAY SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Tentative Map, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has satisfied the following requirements: 1) That the proposed subdivision map is consistent with the City of Cupertino General Plan. 2) That the design and improvements of the proposed subdivision are consistent with the General Plan. 3) That the site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of development contemplated under the approved subdivision. 4) That the design Qf the subdivision or the proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and unavoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. 5) That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements associated there is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 6) That the design of the subdivision and its associated improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for Tentative Map is hereby approved, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution begiiuuilg on Page 2 thereof; and That the subconclusiorvs upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. TM-2008-01 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Com~-~-+~ssion Meeting of January 6, 2009, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. 14 - 156 Model Resolution TM-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 2 SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: TM-2008-01 Applicant/Owner: Kevin Dare (Sand Hill Property Company) Location: North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Finch Avenue (including the west side of Finch Avenue) and N. Tantau Avenue, south of Vallco Parkway SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is based on Exhibits titled: "Main Street Cupertino Zoiung Permit Package" consisting of 75 pages labeled Title Sheet, AO through A53, Landscape Plan A, and CO.O through C5.3., parking garage elevations, tree disposition plan, section drawings, options plans, except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 2. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Approval of a Master Use Permit is granted for a period of five (5) years following issuance of the Master l;Jse Permit to allow the construction of interchangeable mixed-use development options in accordance with the approved exhibits consisting of a 4-story, 160-unit senior housing building; up to a 5-story, 250 room hotel; up to 166,800 square feet of retail shops; up to a 145,000 square foot athletic club, 100,000 square foot office building; a 5-level, 1,288 space parking garage; and 4 acres of public open space consisting of a town square, plaza areas, park, and green landscaped area. The ground floor level of the office building and senior housing building will accommodate retail shops facing the town square. 3. TENTAT]CVE MAP Approval of a Tentative Map is granted to subdivide the property from three parcels into five parcels irL accordance with the Tentative Map submitted in the approved exhibits, except as amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 4. COVENANT OF RECIPROCAL INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record a deed restriction for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between each lot created by the new development. The applicant shall also record appropriate deed restrictions for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements between the adjacent properties to the west, to be implemented at such time that the City can require the same of adjacent property owners. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. The covenant of easement shall be recorded prior to final map approval. 14 - 157 Model Resolution TM-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 3 5. PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT Public access pedestrian easements through the interior pedestrian paths and plazas, the town square, and park area shall be required. The easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation of the easement on the project site with the final map approval. 6. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS The project CCBzRs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation with the final map approval. The conditions of approval for the project shall also be recorded on the properties and incorporated into the CCBsRs. 7. TOINT USE AGREEMENT Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit a joint use agreement between the City and the applicant to be reviewed by the City Attorney and the Director of Parks and Recreation, and approved by the City Council, which permits the City to use the town square and park area for public use for community events or other similar City-approved events or activities, such as, but not be limited to a farmers' market, holiday activities, and summer events. The joint use agreement shall be recorded and incorporated into the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCBsRs) of the project site. The joint use agreement shall govern the public use, programm;ng, public access and percentage of time available for the allowable public activities and events for which the town square and park may be used. The agreement shall also make available publicly identifiable restroom facilities for public use at all times. No structures will be constructed on the town square area without the approval of the City of Cupertino. The progranun_ing provisions of the joint use agreement shall be administered between the applicant and the Parks and Recreation Department. 8. GROUND FLOOR RETAIL Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate the ground floor retail functionality for buildings proposed at heights over 45 feet in accordance with the City's General Plan, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The ground floor retail shall be of substantial and appropriate size to accommodate the functionality of retail uses. The building frontages of all buildings facing the town square, including the senior housing building, the retail shops, and the office building, shall have ground floor retail as illustrated by the plans in the approved exhibits. The athletic club shall provide a floor plan to demonstrate the inclusion of ground floor retail along at least 50 percent of the exposed building frontages visible along Stevens Creek Boulevard. ~4-158 Model Resolution TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 4 9. DISCLOSURE CLAUSE TO THE FL.TTURE PROPERTY OWNERS The applicant/developer shall inform the future owners through the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCBsR:;) of the surrounding projects. The CCBzR language shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to issuance of building permits. 10. BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING PROGRAM The applicant shall participate in the City's Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing program by dedicating 15% of the total number of senior housing units at below market rates. The applicant shall record a covenant, which shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney, to be recorded prior to issuance of building permits for the planned senior housing building. 11. MITIGATION MONITORING PRCJ~GRAM The project shall adhere to all of the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) of the Environmental Impact Report prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009. 12. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION The applicant shall receive an alloc<<tion of up to 166,800 square feet of retail commercial square footage; up to x.45,000 square feet of commercial for the athletic club; 160 units of residential units; and up to 250 rooms of hotel rooms, depending on the build out options chosen. The applicant is also authorized up to 100,000 square feet of office space if a General Plan Amendment is approved by the City Council to increase the office allocations by the 100,000 square feet requested. 13. CONSTRUCTION PROTECT PHAS][NG The applicant shall prepare a construction phasing schedule, demonstrating completion of the project within 5 years of this approval. The construction phasing schedule shall detail critical milestones of the construction. Critical milestones of the construction shall include but not be limited to the following: A. The town square, park area, and the four retail buildings adjacent to the town square and directly fronting Stevens Creek Boulevard, the street and pedestrian infrastructure around these portions of the project site, and sufficient parking to support these uses, shall be constructed together as part of the first development phase, if the project is developed in phases. B. The major retail tenant buildings, the mixed-use office and retail building, senior housing, hotel, athletic club and parking garage may be developed following the first development pYiase of the project. C. Adequate parking shall be provided on the .project site during phased development of the project. The ~ipplicant will be required to demonstrate to is-ass Model Resolution TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 5 the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development that adequate parking is provided for the development of each building on site. 14. PARKING The applicant shall comply with the minimum parking requirements for the project per the parking analysis in the Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers dated September S, 2008 and incorporated into the Environmental Impact Report. 15. PARKING LOT LIGHTING Lighting in the parking lots shall be approved by the Director of Community Development for compliance with applicable regulations prior to issuance of building permits. 16. BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL The Director of Community Development shall review the final building permits for full conformance with this approval and the design approval prior to issuance of building permits. 17. SIDEWALKS/CROSSWALKS A. The final sidewalk plan shall be required to be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the final map. B. The applicant shall provide decorative crosswallcs with decorative semi- pervious pavement treatment across Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The decorative pavement materials shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and the Public Works Department, and shall be consistent with the recommendation of the traffic analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers in the Transportation Impact Analysis dated September 5, 2008 on p. 48. 18. SIGNAGE Signage is not approved with this application. Signage shall conform to the City's Sign Ordinance, Heart of the City Specific Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to final occupancy and approval of any individual signs on site, a detailed master sign program shall be submitted for review and approval by the Design Review Comr,,;ttee. 19. ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL A. The building and architecture shall substantially conform to the elevations and details as shown in the approved exhibits, unless otherwise noted below. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of separate Architectural and Site Approval application(s) for each of the buildings on the project site. Building colors and materials shall be ia- Aso Model Resolution TM-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 6 reviewed and approved in conjunction with the Architectural and Site Approval. 1. For buildings in which full elevations have been provided in the approved exhibits, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of Architectural and Site Approval applications by the Design Review Committee. 2. For buildings in which full elevations have not been provided in the approved exhibits, such as the athletic club, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval of Architectural and Site Approval applications by the City Council. B. The applicant shall address the following issues as part of the separate Architectural and Site Approvals: Town Square L The town square area shall be designed as a "flexible ' public area space that may be expanded or shift~ad by the temporary closure of one or more of the surrounding "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets 2. The town square area will be developed to be flush with the grade of the surrounding "Finch Avenue' private drive streets to allow for a seamless expansion or shifting of the town square area. 3. The applicant shall provide decorative semi-pervious pavement treatment in the town square and plaza areas to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. 4. Parking on the circular "Finch Avenue ' private drive streets shall be delineated by decorative semi-pervious paving rather than painted stripes. 5. Final design and landscape of the town square area shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. 6. Temporary closure of any portion of the private drive streets, including methods used to temporarily close the street(s), will require approval of the Director of Community Development. Corner Building Any building(s) proposed at i:he northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue shall have prominent architectural design enhancements to emphasize the importance of this corner as the eastern gateway entry to the City including: 1. Identifiable street frontage public entrances along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue 2. Glass storefronts to allow for the visibility of activities along the street frontages 3. Interesting and unique architectural features to enhance the gateway entrance into the City Cupertir.~o is - isi Model Resolution TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 7 4. Corner building architectural and site features Street Furniture The applicant shall provide street furniture along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vallco Parkway. Prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the street furniture shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council in conjunction with the approval of the public improvement plans. Garage 1. The parking garage shall be designed and constructed to allow conversion of the ground floor area along Vallco Parkway to retail shop areas. 2. The parking garage shall provide architectural details and designs along the ground floor facing Vallco Parkway to promote pedestrian orientation along the street. 3. When the ground floor of the parking garage is converted to retail shop area, the ground floor area shall have storefront windows facing Vallco Parkway. 20. GATEWAY ENTRY The applicant shall be required to construct and install a gateway entry feature on the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue that will be consistent with the policies of the General Plan and South Vallco Master Plan. The gateway entry feature shall be a prominent design that may fulfill the public art requirement and could include a decorative monument feature that spans over Stevens Creek Boulevard, or vertical structural elements on both sides of Stevens Creek Boulevard and on the median to announce entry. Also, this corner shall include a community banner and enhanced pedestrian crossings that may include crosswalk lighting, special paving materials and/or prominent art or architectural feature announcing the entry to the City, such as a wrought iron element, subject to review and approval by the City Council. 21. LANDSCAPE PLAN The applicant shall submit detailed landscape and irrigation plans to be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Comm;ttee prior to issuance of building permits. The landscape plan shall provide the following: A. The landscape plan shall include water conservation and pesticide reduction measures in conformance with Chapter 14.15, Xeriscape Landscaping, and the pesticide control measures referenced in Chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. B. Landscaping along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue in accordance with the streetscape design requirements of the Heart of the City Specific Plan. C. Planting of two specimen oak trees flanking entrance to the development on the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Finch Avenue as replacements for the removal of the existing dead specimen oak tree. 14-162 Model Resolution TM-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 8 22. TREE REMOVAL A. The applicant is approved to remove a total of up to 84 trees and relocate 13 trees on site per Option A in ~iccordance with the City Arborist's report prepared by David Babby and dated April 30, 2008. Although the applicant is requesting approval to remove these trees in accordance with the City Arborist's recommendation, the intent is to retain as many of the existing perimeter street trees for the remaining life of such trees where they are not considered dead or do not requires immediate removal. B. The Aleppo Pine tree (Tree No. 113) shall be preserved on site. C. For any trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions, are considered dead, or die as a result of relocation, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. 23. TREE REPLACEMENTS Final approval of the required tree replacements shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. The applicant may be able to reduce the number of replacement trees on site, if larger size trees are proposed, in accordance with the tree replacement standards of the ordinance. For any additional trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions or are considered dead, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance wi'-th the Protected Trees Ordinance. Species and size of replacement trees shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. 24. TREE PROTECTION As part of the building permit drawuigs, a tree protection plan shall be prepared by a certified arborist for the trees to be retained. The applicant shall be required to install tree protection measures before and during development in accordance with the City Arborist's report dated April 30, 2008, and in accordance with requirements of the Public Works Department for the preservation of existing street trees. In addition, the followin€; measures shall be added to the protection plan: 1. For trees to be retained, chain lire: fencing and other root protection shall be installed around the dripline of the' tree prior to any project site work. 2. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the project arborist. 3. No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City Arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. 4. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers. 5. Retained trees shall be watered to maintain them in good health. 14 - '163 Model Resolution TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 9 25. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in an amount determined by the City Arborist to ensure protection of trees slated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, subject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. 26. TREE REPLACEMENT IN-LIEU FEE The applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance for any trees that cannot be replaced on site. 27. HEART OF THE CITY DESIGN GUIDELINES A. The project shall comply with the Heart of the City design guidelines. B. If any portions of the buildings on the Master Use Permit site plan do not meet the minimum setbacks per the Heart of the City Specific or Conceptual Plan, the applicant must either modify the building setback as part of the Architectural and Site Approval for the building, or obtain approval of an Exception application to the Heart of the City Specific or Conceptual Plan. 28. SOUTH VALLCO MASTER PLAN The project shall comply with the South Vallco Master Plan. Prior to release of building permits for Phase 1 of the project, the final boulevard plan along Vallco Parkway shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council. The applicant shall demonstrate that they have provided sufficient outreach to the stakeholders with input including, but not limited to the specific lighting, sidewalk furniture, and landscaping -treatments to be consistent with the vision of the South Vallco Master Plan. 29. CREEK TRAIL IMPROVEMENTS The applicant shall contribute an amount not to exceed $96,000 to the improvements of a trail connection along Calabazas Creek from Vallco Parkway to I-280. This contribution shall be used by the City to administer a creek trail plan and necessary approvals and improvements. The applicant shall coordinate with the ownership of properties on both sides of the exposed Calabazas Creek. If this fund is not used within five years of the project completion, then it shall be returned to the applicant. 30. PARK AREA ALONG METROPOLITAN A .46 acre park area shall be maintained along the western property line adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use development. The design of the park area shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council and shall incorporate a tot lot adjacent to the senior housing building. The green space park buffer shall be installed prior to issuance of building occupancy permits. ia- Asa Model Resolution TM-2008-I~1 January 6, 2009 Page 10 31. SECURITY PLAN FOR PARKING GARAGE The applicant shall develop a comprehensive private security plan for the entire development encompassing patrol hours, manning levels and frequency, closed circuit cameras in the parking garaf;e, adequate lighting levels, and individual safes in the housing units and hotel. rooms. The plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Sheriff's Department prior to final occupancy. 32_ PARKING GARAGE NOISE MITI=ATION The parking garage floors shall be treated/coated with materials as deemed appropriate by the City to lessen the Eloise impacts of vehicle movements. 33. RESTAURANT ODOR ABATEMEI~7T All restaurants shall install odor abatement systems to be incorporated into the air handling systems to reduce the odor impact from the restaurants to the adjacent community. Detailed plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. 34. SCREENING All mechanical and other equipment on the buildings and site shall be screened so they are not visible from public= street areas or adjoining developments. Screening materials/colors shall match building features and materials. The height of the screening shall be taller than the height of the mechanical equipment that it is designed to screen. The location of equipment and necessary screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. 35. TRASH AND DELIVERY ACTIVITIES A. A detailed refuge and truck delivery plan must be prepared by the applicant. The plan shall specify locations of trash facilities, refuge pick up schedules and truck delivery schedules and routes. All trash facilities must be screened and enclosed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. The final plan shall be submitted to the Cite for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. B. All deliveries shall comply with the mitigation measures provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 20051. 36. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT' PLAN A construction management plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by staff prior to issuance o:E building permits. Staging of construction and equipment shall not occur withvz 250 feet of any residential property. Said plan shall provide the following A. Construction Vehicle Access and Routing B. Construction Equipment Staging Area 14 - '165 Model Resolution TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 11 C. Dust Control (Best Management Practices) D. Hours of Operation E. Street Cleaning Schedule and Program 37. GREEN BUILDING The applicant shall obtain LEED Silver certification designation for all buildings in accordance with the U.S. Green Building Council standards and the City's Green Building policies. 38. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT A. The applicant shall create an Improvement and Maintenance District to maintain the sidewalks and landscaped park strips along Vallco Parkway, N. Tantau Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. Said district shall be part of the Covenants, Codes and Restrictions of the project and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to approval of the final map. B. The applicant shall record a maintenance agreement subject to the approval of the City Attorney for the maintenance of the shared driveways by the property owners of each of the lots. 39. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT The applicant shall commit to implementing a transportation demand management (TDM) plan incorporating solutions as indicated in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting (MMR) Program prepared by David J. Powers and Associates dated January 2009 that may include parking cash-out and eco passes for employees, valet for customers and off-site parking options. The TDM plan including the projected funding shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. 40. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS All demolished building and site materials shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible subject to the Building Official. The applicant shall provide evidence that materials will be recycled prior to issuance of final demolition permits. 41. NOTICE OF FEES. DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period 14 - '166 Model Resolution TM-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 12 complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such e~:actions. 42. PUBLIC ART The applicant shall provide public art in accordance with General Plan policy 2- 66. Public art selection will be reviewed by the Fine Arts CoT+-+*r~ssion. SECTION IV. CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 43. STREET WIDENING Street widening and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 44. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standarcLs as specified by the City Engineer. 45. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as approved by the City Engineer. Lighting fixtures shall be positioned so as to preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining pr~~perties, and shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site is located. 46. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. 47. GRADING Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required. Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/or Regional Water Quality Control Boa2•d as appropriate. 48. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Hydrology and pre- and post-development hydraulic calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm w:~ter control measures are to be constructed or renovated. The storm drain systeYn may include, but is not limited to, subsurface storage of peak stormwat~er flows (as needed), bioretention basins, vegetated swales, and hydrodynamic separators to reduce the amount of runoff of the site and improve water quality. The storm drain system shall be designed to detain water on-site (e.g., via buried pipes) as necessary to avoid an increase of one percent flood water surface elev~-tion of the culvert to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. is-ism Model Resolution TM-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 13 49. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES The. developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer. 50. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for under grounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits Fees: a. Checking Rc Inspection Fees: $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost or $3,847.00 minimum b. Grading Permit: $ 6% of Site Improvement Cost or $2,239.00 minimum c. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 2,000.00 d. Storm Drainage Fee: $ TBD e. Power Cost: ** f. Map Checking Fees: $3,638.00 . g. Park Fees: N/ A h. Street Tree By Developer *'~ Based on the latest effective PGBLE rate schedule approved by the PUC Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements b. Labor 8z Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement c. On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. -The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. 51. TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground ~a- iss Model Resolu_ tion TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 14 such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. The transformer shall not be located in the front or side building setback area. 52. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ' Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading and street :improvement plans. 53. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the Cite all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with California Water Services Company for water service to the subject development. 54. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAI, PERMIT The developer must obtain a Notice of l:ntent (NOI) from the State Water Resources Control Board, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), use of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control storm water runoff quality, a»d BMP inspection and maintenance. 55. C.3 REQUIREMENTS The developer shall reserve a minimum of 4% of developable surface area for the placement of storm water treatment facilities on the tentative map, unless an alternative storm water treatment plan to satisfy c.3 requirements is approved by the City Engineer. The developer must include the use and maintenance of site design, source control and storm water treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs), which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. A Storm Water Management Plan, Storm Water Facilities Easement Agreement, Storm Water Facilities Operation and Maintenance Agreement, and certification of ongoing operation and maintenance of treatment BMPs are required. 56. EROSION CONTROL PLAN The developer must provide an appr~~ved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. 57. WORK SCHEDULE Every 6 months, the developer shall submit a work schedule to the City to show the timetable for all grading/erosion control work in conjunction with this project. 58. TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS The developer shall agree to fund up to $250,000 for the purpose of installing a traffic signal at Finch Avenue and Vallco Parkway. The developer shall submit a is-ass Model Resolution TM-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 15 bond for this .purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. 59. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT WOLFE ROAD AND VALLCO PARKWAY The developer shall mitigate for traffic impacts at Vallco Parkway and Wolfe Road by implementing one of the options stated in the Environmental Impact Report for Main Street Cupertino per the approval of the City Engineer. 60. TRAFFIC MITIGATION AT HOMESTEAD ROAD AND LAWRENCE EXPRESSWAY The developer shall agree to submit their fair-share cost of $334,100 to improve Homestead Road at Lawrence Expressway according to the direction of the City Engineer. The cost shall be submitted to the County of Santa Clara in the form of a bond or cash deposit prior to the City issuing building permits, with the proviso that the funds be committed to this specific improvement in accordance of section 66000 et. seq. of the California Government Code. 61. PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS The developer shall provide ]pedestrian crosswalk improvements at Finch Avenue and at the project's eastern driveway. Final crosswalk improvement plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 62. BUS STOP LOCATION The developer shall relocate bus stops on Stevens Creek Boulevard to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 63. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The developer must submit a traffic control plan by a Registered Traffic Engineer to be approved by the City. The plan shall include a temporary traffic control plan for work in the right of way as well as a routing plan for all vehicles used during construction. All traffic control signs must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of work. The City has adopted Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards for all signage and striping work throughout the City. 64. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City. 65. TRAFFIC CALMING The developer shall agree to fund up to $100,000 for. the purpose of mitigating traffic impacts in the adjacent neighborhoods resulting from the project for a period of 5 years following project occupancy. The developer shall submit a bond for this purpose which will be released 5 years from the date of project occupancy. is-i~o Model Resolution TM-2008-O1 January 6, 2009 Page 16 66. BICYCLE PARKING The developer shall provide bicycle parking consistent with the City's requirements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 67. OPERATIONS 8s MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT The developer shall enter into an Operations 8s Maintenance Agreement with the City prior to final occupancy. The Agreement shall include the operation and maintenance for non-standard appurtenances in the public road right-of-way that may include, but is not limited to, sidewalk, pavers, and street lights. 68. TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Manager. Clearance by the Public Works Department is needed prior to obtaining a building pf~rmit. 69. REFUSE TRUCK ACCESS The developer must obtain clearance from the Environmental Programs Manager in regards to refuse truck access for the proposed development. 70. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125. 71. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 72. SANTA CLARA WATER DISTRICT CLEARANCE Provide Santa Clara water district approval before recordation of tentative map. The developer shall pay for and obt:~in Water District permit for activities or modifications within the District easement or fee right of way or affecting District facilities. 73. SANITARY DISTRICT A letter of clearance for the project shawl be obtained from the Cupertino Sanitary District prior to issuance of building permits. 74. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. ~a-n~ Model Resolution TM-2008-01 January 6, 2009 Page 17 75. UTILITY EASEMENTS Clearance approvals from the agencies with easements on the property (including PGBsE, PacBell, and California Water Company, and/or equivalent agencies) will be required prior to issuance of building permits. 76. CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY CLEARANCE Provide California Water Service Company approval before recordation of tentative map. CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF ENGINEERING/SURVEYING CONDITIONS (Section 66474.18 of the California Government Code) I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV_ Of this resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices /s/Ralph Qualls Ralph Qualls, Director of Public Works City Engineer CA License 22046 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6+h day of January 2009, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Steve Piasecki, Director Marty Miller, Chair Community Development Department Planning Commission 14 - 172 TR-2008-OS CITY OF CIJPERTINO 10300 Tone Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 MODEL RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF 1'HE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING THE REMOVAL OF UP TO 84 TREESAND RELOCATION OF UP TO 13 TREES ON A 17.4 ACRE SITE LOCATED NORTH OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD BETWEEN FINCH AVENUE (INCLUDING THE W1~ST SIDE OF FINCH AVENUE) AND N. TANTAU AVENUE, SOUTH OF VALLCO PARKWAY (MAIN STREET CUPERTINO) SECTION L• PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: TR-2006-08 Applicant: Kevin Dare (Sand Hill Property Company) Location: North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Finch Avenue (including the west side of Finch Avenue) and N. Tantau Avenue, south of Vallco Parkway SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application to remove up to 84 trees and relocate up to 13 trees; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; ~u1d NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, application for Trees Removal is hereby approved and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application TR-2008-08, as set forth in t]Ze Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of January 6, 2009 are incorporated'by reference herein. 14 - '173 Model Resolution TR-2008-08 January 6, 2009 Page 2 SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVAL ACTION The approval is based on Exhibits titled: "Main Street Cupertino Zoning Permit Package' consisting of 75 pages labeled Title Sheet, AO through A53, Landscape Plan A, and CO.O through C5.3., parking garage elevations, tree disposition plan, section drawings, options plans, except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 2. LANDSCAPE PLAN The applicant shall submit detailed landscape and irrigation plans to be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. The landscape plan shall provide the following: A. The landscape plan shall include water conservation and pesticide reduction measures in conformance with Chapter 14.15, Xeriscape Landscaping, and the pesticide control measures referenced in Chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. B. Landscaping along Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue in accordance with the streetscape design requirements of the Heart of the City Specific Plan. C. Planting of two specimen oak trees flanking entrance to the development on the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Finch Avenue as replacements for the removal of the- existing dead specimen oak tree. 3. TREE REMOVAL A. The applicant is approved to remove a total of up to 84 trees and relocate up to 13 trees on site per Option A in accordance with the City Arborist's report prepared by David Babby and dated April 30, 2008. Although the applicant is requesting approval to remove these trees in accordance with the City Arborist's recommendation, the intent is to retain as many of the existing perimeter street trees for the remaining life of such trees where they are not considered dead or do not require immediate removal. B. The Aleppo Pine tree (Tree No. 113) shall be preserved on site. C. For any trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions, are considered dead, or die as a result of relocation, the applicant shall be required to replace these trees in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. 4. TREE REPLACEMENTS Final approval of the required tree replacements shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance. The applicant may be able to reduce the number of replacement trees on site, if larger size trees are proposed, in accordance with the tree replacement standards of the ordinance. For any additional trees that are removed due to hazardous conditions or are considered dead, the applicant shall be requi;~cla~t4o Model Resolution TR-2008-08 January 6, 2009 Page 3 replace these trees in accordance with the Protected Trees Ordinance. Species and size of replacement trees shall be reviewed and approved by the Co*nmunity Development Director. 5. TREE PROTECTION As part of the building permit drawings, a tree protection plan shall be prepared by a certified aborist for the trees to be retained. The applicant shall be required to install tree protection measures before and during development in accordance with the City Arborist's report dated April 30,. 2008, and in accordance with requirements of the Public Works Department for t]Ze preservation of existing street trees. In addition, the following measures shall bc~ added to the protection plan: A. For trees to be retained, chain link fencing and other root protection shall be installed around the dripline of the tree prior to any project site work. B. No parking or vehicle parking shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the project aborist. C. No trenching within the critical root .zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City Arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. D. Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the tree protection barriers. E. Retained trees shall be watered to maintain them in good health. 6. TREE PROTECTION BOND The applicant shall provide a tree protection bond in an amount determined by the City Arborist to ensure protection of trees slated for preservation prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits. The bond shall be returned after completion of construction, subject to a letter from the City Arborist indicating that the trees are in good condition. 7. TREE REPLACEMENT IN-LIEU FEE The applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee in accordance with the City's Protected Trees Ordinance for any trees that cannot be replaced on site. ~a- ins Model Resolution TR-2008-08 January 6, 2009 Page 4 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of January 2009, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development APPROVED: Marty Miller, Chair Cupertino Planning Commission G: \ Planning \ PDREPORT \ RES \ 2008 \ TR-2008-08 res.doc 14 - '176 Exhibit B Cupertino Planning Commission 4 October 28, 2008 Planning Department, which includes information on the rules pertaining to tree removal and tree protection; such as if they are in a residential neighborhood that is not a planned development, single family home, these are the protected trees; if in a planned development such as Seven Springs, don't touch a tree; ii' you own a business don't touch a tree until you come in and fmd out if there is a landscape approval plan. Regardless if it applies or not, it appears to be the only way to close that loop and staff is encouraged to pursue it. The way we put the fee structure in place for applicants is; if you come in and you are in compliance and ask for a tree removal permit, you are charged one fee; but if you come in for retroactive tree permit as this applicant has, the fee is considerably higher; in essence we are penalizing them because we have levied .a higher fee for retroactive permit than in the beginning; because the city attorney advisers us that we could not put a penalty in place to pursue applicants who are out of compliance. We tried to build that into the policy; I don't know if it helps you out. Motion: Motion by Vice Chair Giefer, seco>trd by Com. Brophy, to approve Application TR-2008-13. (Vote: 3-0-0; Corns. Rose and Kaneda absent) U-2008-01 (EA-2008-07) Use Permit and Architectural and Site Approval for a ASA-2008-06, TM-2008-O1, master plan for amixed-use development consisting of TR-2008-08. Kevin Dare/ approxirnately: 147,000 sq. ft. of retail commercial; 500 Forbes, LLC (South 100,000 sq. ft. of office; a 150 room hotel; a 160 unit Vallco) Location: North Side senior (age restricted) housing facility; 145,000 sq. ft. Of Stevens Creek Boulevard athletic club; a four level parking garage and a 1.6 acre Between Finch Ave_ 8c Tantau parlc/tovt~rr square. (A project alternative consists of Ave. approx. 205,000 sq. ft. of office and a 250 room hotel ]n place of the athletic club). Tentative Map to subdivide 3 parcels (approx. 18.7 acres) into 5 parcels for a master plan for amixed-use development consisting of approx.: 147,000 sq. ft. of retail commercial; 100,000 sq. ft. of office/ a 150 room hotel; a 160 unit senior (age restri'.cted) housing facility; 145,000 sq. ft. of athletic club; a 4 level parking garage and a 1.6 acre park town square. (A project alternative consists of approx. 205,000 sq. ft. of office and a 250 room hotel in place of the athletic club). Tree Removal request to remove approx. 93 trees in conjunction with a proposed master plan for amixed-use developmen. Tentative City Council dates: December I6, 2008 and .Tanuary 6, 2009. Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner, presentedl the staff report: • Reviewed the application summary for a mixed use project on a 17.4 acre property incorporating a Main Street concept into t:he development including retail, office, senior housing, hotel, sports club and public parlt: in Town Square located on the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard, east of Wolfe Roaci and west of Tantau Avenue. • Originally Hewlett Packard owned the property and the site received approval for a residential condominium project with a retail shopping center and public park to be developed by Toll Brothers. However, the project approval was overturned by Cupertino voters on November 7, 2006 when Measure E failed to pass duririg the elections. Sand Hill Property Company subsequently acquired the property in 2007 and has submitted the proposed mixed-use development. • Reviewed the South Vallco Master Plan, Options A and B. Option A includes 100,000 sq. ft. of office space; a I50-room hotel; a 145,OOC1 sq. ft. sports club and a 5 level parking garage; whereas Option B includes 205,000 sq. ft. of office space, a larger hotel of 250 rooms; no sports club, and a 4 level parking garage. Option A is the applicant's preference. 14-'177 Cupertino Planning Coniniission 5 October 28, 2008 • She reviewed the General Plan development allocations for the project as detailed on Pages 9 and 10 of the staff report. She noted that staff is recommending reduction of the office space component to 60,000 sq. ft. because the development is intended to emphasize retail commercial development mixed-use, and rather than having an office component overwhelming the development, staff reconnnends reducing it down to 60,000 sq. ft. and then taking the 60,000 sq. ft. from the allocation from other neighborhoods and centers within the city that have available office allocation. The Planning Commission can look at this option or look at also possibly General Plan amendment or eliminating the office complex completely. • Regarding commercial allocation, Option A would need about 18,000 sq. ft. of commercial allocation from elsewhere in the city or from other means. Staff recoinniends that the proposed option A retail use with the retail shops and athletic club is preferred with the limiting of the athletic club membership to 9,000 members and using the Fehr and Peers traffic generation equivalent of 98,800 sq. ft. building and drawing this allocation of 18,000 sq. ft. from other neighborhoods and centers within the city. The Planning Comiiiission can recommend looking at that option or otherwise would have to consider a General Plan amendment to increase those numbers. • Relative to hotel allocations, Option A would need an additional 17 rooms over the available allocation, and Option B would need an additional 172 rooms over the available allocation. Some of the options that the Planning Commission can consider include working with the Cupertino Square Mall to release a portion of the earmarked hotel rooms from the mall, to reduce the number of hotel rooms or to redirect commercial retail space from other areas to hotel rooms as was done with the Oaks Shopping Center; and the Commission can also look at recommending a General Plan amendment. • She reviewed the staff concerns and comments relative to the senior housing pick up and drop off area, the lobby area of the senior housing; the loading dock along Vallco Parkway; the architectural design and garage elevation of the parking garage; and additional landscaping be provided along the frontage to soften the elevation as well. • Relative to the athletic club, they do not have the detailed elevations of the front and side of the athletic club, and because of that staff wants to emphasize the importance of this portion of the building facing the eastern gateway entrance to the city and would recommend that some thought and enhancements be given to that area to provide some good architectural enhancement. • Staff also points out that there are two buildings, the hotel and the athletic building that are proposed over the typical maximum height of 45 feet allowed in this area. However, the General Plan allows you to go up to 60 feet in excess of the 45 feet if you provide some retail along the frontage. These are the two buildings that will have to take that into consideration and also we will have to look at building setbacks as well. The building setback requirement along Stevens Creek Boulevard is 1-1/2 feet to 1 ratio, so that the building setback will have to be set back 1-1/2 foot for every foot of height of the building. We would need to ask the applicant to look at that as well. • As previously mentioned, the predominant element in this development to create a more pedeshian friendly environment, is the town square located in the center of the project. The city's azchitectural advisor has looked at the proposal and recommends that the town square be shifted to one side of the parking aisle. Presently the town square is proposed to have parking around the entire town square around the perimeter. What the city's architectural advisor is requesting is that the drive through be allowed only along one side of the town square and allow the retail and restaurant activities to spill out on the other side and to activate that town square area. • The Planning Conzniission can look at it to consider making one of those driveways a pedestrian only access and also to reduce the parking around the town square. is-ns Cupertino Planning Commission 6 October 28, 2008 • Briefly reviewed the proposed tree removal for the project which includes the proposed removal of 94 trees. • The Housing Commission, Senior Commission, Teens Commission and Environmental Review Committee have also reviewed the project. • Tonight's meeting is to introduce the Planning Commission to the project, staff answer questions about the project; the next meeting; is in early December after the Draft E1R public circulation has ended. At that time the Commission can make their recommendation. Com. Brophy: • Said he was puzzled about the list of staff recommendations; some of them appear to be design details such as where the lobby to the senior housing center is; which seem premature to decide now and possibly even in December; whereas they have slipped over the important question of General Plan allocation. When ;staff recommends that we not approve more than 60,000 sq. ft. of office space and possibly zero, you are essentially telling us that you want us to reject the developer's application. Gary Chao: • Said that was not what staff was saying; they support the project. Initially when the project was discussed with the applicant, staff was comfortable with 60,000 sq. ft. but mainly because they wanted the project to be synergistic and have the uses feed off each other; and based on the objectives specified in the General Plan and South Vallco Master Plan, this area is meant to be more of a regional commercial draw. So mainly retail and commercial predominant use with the other uses as ancillary and supplement to the retail use they thought that 60,000 sq. ft. seemed to be a good number. In terms of the options that were laid out, those are simply options for recommendation. • The Planning Commission has a variety of choices in their recormmendation; so does City Council; you could ask them to amend the General Plan to add more commercial; you can discuss amongst yourselves whether you are comfortable with 60,000 sq. ft. or you would like to recommend more or not, zero office alloca~~ion. Com. Brophy: • As I understand it, if you are saying that this should be predominantly a retail project, we are talking about a large scale retail project. Is there any sense either from this applicant or from anybody else you have talked to, that this site can support large scale additional retail above and beyond what is already in Cupertino. Steve Piasecki: • Staff is concerned that if you bring in 200,000 sq. ft. of office or 100,000 sq. ft. of office that the dynamics of the center starts to change and you probably would want to hear what the public testimony is and you could mix and match this project to suit what you think would be the best fit for Cupertino. • The applicant was put on notice from the beginning that we didn't want to see this turn into predominantly an office center which is why you are hearing those comments. The rest of the components, senior housing, we prefer the lairger hotel; we don't have a problem with some office component; we just don't want it to be a dominant component. Com. Brophy: • For this site, if both the applicant and staff aze willing to support the senior housing project at its current size and you are willing to support a hotel at either the current or larger size, the question is what else can be built there, and you would rather not see office space there and would like to see retail, but I am skeptical that there is a retail component that can be put there is-ins Cupertino Planning Commission October 28, 2008 that would fit into this town square appearance that is supportable in Cupertino. The history in this town is not very strong of small shops and to tell the applicant to go out and build it, and if he builds it, the tenants will come; there is nothing in terms of either planning theory or economic theory that would justify that position. Steve Piaseclii: • Said they were not asking that they put more retail in; simply reduce the office. Staff feels it is too ambitious on the office front, it is going to appear too dense and it is going to generate too much traffic. Staff approves of leaving the retail size as is, which is located in a way that is proximate to Cupertino.Square and the future Rose Bowl site. They are comfortable with those numbers and are comfortable with having non-retail uses on the far eastern side of the site; the hotel, either an athletic club or some degree of office. We are not asking that he convert; the numbers he is showing are fine and I think he is comfortable with those numbers from a market sense. Vice Chair Giefer: • Referring to the site plan, potential loading dock, with the previous Rose Bowl project, one of the things discussed was having an access road that would service a loading dock, and seeing that this project is not active, is that a potential for access for the loading dock so they are not coming from this area. Gary Chao: • It is a potential and is something staff has been discussing with the applicant; and Sand Hill has approached KCR, the owner of the Rose Bowl site to discuss that possibility. There is an access drive that connects to two parking lots, the surface perimeter of Rose Bowl to the driveway leading to the north elevation of the senior housing; to have that component in between the two properties, it would be more complicated, there are going to be some parking stalls that would have to be displays on the Rose Bowl site and potentially some noise impacts to the condos up above, therefore staff has approached the applicant. Vice Chair Giefer: • One of the big issues with the Rose Bowl project was compatibility and accessibility. On this project I would like to make sure we emphasize that both projects should be able to access one another both from apedestrian/vehicular fashion. On Page 2.8 of the document, there is a statement regarding building height and ground floor retail presence that the applicant must demonstrate they can create a strong retail base for ground floor. How do they demonstrate that to get that allocation? Gary Chao: • The genesis of that comment is from the General Plan's provision where in this area the height limitation is 45 feet, but it does say that you can go up to 60 provided that you show mixed use development. In this case we wanted to make sure that ground floor retail works were appropriately located; it does have the interfaces necessary to activate the spaces, the plaza and we are relatively comfortable with the retail space provided under the senior housing and also under the office. We are still unsure as to how the ground floor retail of the fitness club is going to work out in terms of how it relates to the rest of the shopping center and that could be for discussion at the next meeting for the applicant to address. is-iso Cupertino Planning Commission 8 October 28, 2008 Vice Chair Giefer: • in the EIR, one of the comments that is repeated over and over again is that transportation impacts aze significant and unavoidable based upon this development, but we are proposing that we remove the bike lane on Vallco Parkvray. Gary Chao: • The bike lanes are still going to be there; they are going to be relocated back of the diagonal stalls. Vice Chair Giefer: • I think that is a huge mistake; I forwarded some photos of bike lanes in Montreal where they have sheltered bike lanes between the sidewailk and parking spaces in the lane of traffic and I cannot imagine moving a bike lane behind cars that ate parked on potentially a heavy pedestrian mall. Steve Piaseclci: • One of the advantages of having this presented in a couple of hearings is that we can ask the applicant and the traffic engineer to identity alternatives to the conventional bike lane and angled parking space arrangement and bring those back to the Commission and the community. Gary Chao: • Said there will be a condition providing bike parking throughout the project. Vice Chair Giefer: • There was not a lot of detail about the se~aior housing project. Will that project include personal outside space balconies; is it the same requirement we currently have for high density housing. Gary Chao: • The senior housing is on the podium; partial]'.y the idea of putting the senior housing building there is for the seniors to be able to use that F~assive park. Also the podium level is designed to be a podium level courtyard where those are outdoor spaces serving two functions; one to provide the outdoor space necessary for th<: seniors; also to buffer the visual mass of the building from the Metropolitan condos so thsit they can cascade it back and set it back so you see that U shaped building on top of the podium with the interior courtyard being completely open for use. Vice Chair Giefer: • Another compliance requirement was related to using native plants and low water usage plants; it was marked "somewhat" as opposed. to "no issues". Gary Chao: • Said that staff supported that concept; the project landscape azchitect is present for further discussion if needed. Vice Chair Giefer: • Relative to the requested amount of office space, she questioned the compliance with the General Plan because the General Plan says it should be a predominantly retail area. is-isi Cupertino Plarming Commission 9 October 28, 2008 Steve Piasecki: • Said it is for the Commission to make a recommendation to the community to comment on. You could look at the project overall and if you look at it as a mixed-use development from a land area basis, it is still dominated by the retail hotel depending on which option. If you go to Option 2, then the office starts to become a dominant element. General Plan allows you to move allocations around so if you find through this process that that fulfills the intent of the General Plan and the South Vallco Plan, you could approve the 200,000 sq. ft. of office; you would have to move it from other areas. That was the biggest problem we had with the 200,000; even though the Council has authorized an evaluation of additional office within the General Plan it is provided that it doesn't require any additional housing above the General Plan. That may solve the issue if there is a ground swell support for the idea of a fairly significant office component here. If that doesn't happen, you could have aneither/or option. • Our feeling was that under the current General Plan it is too big of an allocation to commit to at this time; we were concerned about other businesses in the community that were relying on that and don't think it should be all concentrated here. Chair Miller: • Asked staff to clarify what they were trying to achieve with the project, from their point of view. Gary Chao: • Said a lot of the objectives of this area are already outlined in the South Vallco Master Plan and touched upon in the General Plan which is to create a development that would draw more of a regional crowd in terms of commercial product to activate the streets. The focus of this project in our mind is to how to activate Vallco Parkway as it transitions from the previously approved Rose Bowl site and also across the street north of Vallco Parkway, J. C. Penneys, retail fronts; how can we create and activate the Vallco Parkway so that it can become more of a mainstream type of feel and that is all consistent with the intent of the South Vallco Master Plan, and also connectivity of the project to the other developments is a top priority and how it relates from a massing perspective but also from a circulation perspective in terms of interface of pedestrians, bikes and vehicular; those are some of the focuses and objectives that we feel are important in this development. Chair Miller: • Asked if staff was saying there should be some synergies here between what we have and what we are proposing. Steve Piaseclci: • Said there should be some synergies; there is a struggling mall; Cupertino Square hasn't jelled yet for a variety of reasons. It is hoped that this becomes a bookend that attracts pedestrian traffic along Vallco Parkway, in front of the Rose Bowl project which also has ground floor .retail plan as well as on the north side of Vallco Parkway in front of Penneys parking garage which also has retail plans. The future retail roughly in the Rose Bowl is another 75,000 or so, so there is an opportunity to use this project, Rose Bowl, Cupertino Square to begin linking these projects together and causing the cross traffic that will make them all successful. Chair Miller: • Suggested further discussion on what the linkages are, both physically and functionally. to - taz Cupertino Planning Commission l O October 28, 2008 Gary Chao: • This is a plan that is put together by the applicant to show the enhancements that are going to be made to the roadway to achieve the comiectivity and circulation discussed. The concept with this diagram is to demonstrate that this development is going to be extremely walkable, it is going to be similar to the city block system with your Main Street arterials, Stevens Creek along the south end and Vallco Parkway and Tantau around the perimeters but within you also have the ability to access the site from different blocks to create an iritimate environment. Chair Miller: • Is there going to be any coordination of any nature in terms of the types of stores and shops that go on this side vs. those that go on the Rose Bowl, or is that just happen as a natural course of things as things get developed. Gary Chao: • Said it would be based on market demand. Alci Honda Snelling: • The parking shown on the south side of Arco Parkway does not exist. The idea is to modify Vallco Parkway has 6 lanes, 3 in each direction, so the proposal would have the south side, one lane going in each direction and the sotithside of Vallco Parkway having these diagonal parking spaces constructed with this project. We are going to narrow Vallco Parkway. Chair Miller: • Staff talked about the possibility of allowing a parking structure but the lower floor has to remain available for retail at some point. in the future but not today. Aki Honda Snelling: • Correct; basically the idea is to have the lower floors facing the ground floors facing the town square to be retail to really activate that site as a pedestrian friendly area. It is also consistent with the provisions of the South Vallco Master Plan as well. Gary Chao: • I think the concern is that if you look at the diagram now, there is a lot of parking stalls around that town square and obviously no point in putting a town square there so that space could be activated, it could be used frequently and could have a lot of pedestrian and community activities in there. With all the parking around, it is going to be intimidating for people to be able to walk through the cars to get to that particular plaza. Our city architect made some suggestions from other examples that exist iri adjacent cities; where one of the options is you probably don't have to shift it but you can do something to one of the drive where it is more predominantly closed off, bollard off with more pedestrian oriented activities. It may involve some shifting or deletion of parking stalls, maybe it is a combination of a couple of things, but it is just to ask the Commission to think about that concept and discuss it with the applicant to see if there are any solutions that free up that space more. Steve Piaseclci: • Said there was another iteration of this where you could have a hybrid where one of the streets or portion of the street could be convertible as demand exists, such as Castro Street in Mountain View where if the restaurant locates there and they wish to spill out into what is a parking space, they can do that; they put tYie bollards in so they have a convertible space. There are a number of different options and what the architectural advisor is saying is it might enhance the area if you had the opportunity for the retail uses to spill into the town square. 14 - 183 Cupertino Planning Coninzission 1 1 October 28, 2008 Chair Miller: • The reason for putting parking there in the first place is because we are short on parking spaces. What is the parking issue? Steve Piasecld: • The original direction was that if you look at conventional town squares, they tend to be ringed by the travel lanes as well as some kind of pazking arrangement; that this is going to be a pedestrian dominated street that the cars aze going to have to go slow; the theory was that by ringing it, it would not only serve the adjacent uses, the retail, but it would also dominate the area with the pedestrian movement and this is not a place you want to go speeding through. I think it was trying to reflect the old town squazes, and I know that the applicant's architect did quite a bit of research when we went through the South Vallco Master Plan and probably could relay different styles of town squares both with and without the parking. It works either way so it is an interesting choice the community gets to talk about. Chair Miller: • Santana Row has no parking on the streets that go through Santana Row and the traffic does not go through there very quickly. They have the green space in the center and no parking at all. Was a solution considered of not having any parking here; just putting it here in the structure. Steve Piaseclci: • The azchitectural advisor suggested looking at one option that would allow that to occur on one side of the town square. We would have to evaluate the pazking demand and supply to find out if eliminating the parking is an option. There are many variations on this theme with or without parking, lazger, smaller, Healdsburg, Sonoma have town squares that are surrounded by parking as well. It can be an enticement to shop there to just pull up and get your coffee and utilize the space. Chair Miller: • Another thought would be that this might be an area for perhaps some outdoor entertainment; was some thought given to allowing some area here that could be used for perhaps music or some other forms of outdoor entertainment. • The areas need to be planned for; some space has to be allocated and you need to put electricity to it so that you can hook in microphones. Steve Piasecki: • The applicant can explain how he would accommodate needs for microphones, electricity, etc. In a number of azeas, one of the things you are hearing from us is that we need to drill down on the details of the retail shops, of the town square, the details of the athletic club in Option A; there aze a number of interesting components to this. Chair Miller-. • Relative to the athletic club facility, he questioned why the developer would build a 145,000 sq. ft. facility if they aze going to use only 98,000 sq. ft. He expressed that the General Plan does not make any provisions for reducing square footage allocations based on anything, and he was concerned that could be viewed as an attempt to circumvent the General Plan and avoid a General Plan amendment. ia- ~s4 Cupertino Planning Commission ] 2 October 28. 2008 • If we are going to do this and this has come tip before, my preference would be that we change the General Plan to make it clear as to when we would allow these conditions to happen because I could see this spilling over into other areas of allocations such as housing. Steve Piasecki: • While it isn't explicitly stated in the Generai Plan, the city has a long history of allowing "amenity space" to be discounted in various projects, particularly relating to office. Following those precedents one could make a fording that this development or this project, you would have to be convinced by the applicant that this is amenity space; this is a very exclusive type of facility, so they think it is consistent with their marketing scheme; at the same time that they can live with the restricted membership numbers comfortably and still market this concept. It is a question of whether it goes above and beyond in terms of amenity space. Chair Miller: • Relative to allocation of office space, I know that we are talking about office space in connection with the housing element; there i:: probably going to be a General Plan amendment with regard to office space in any case, is that: true. Steve Piaseclci: • We are talking about it and the Council has authorized a discussion with the housing element. Chair Miller: From the allocation standpoint as opposed to whether it fits in the project or not, I want to separate the issues. I think the allocations are a separate issue that is going to be dealt with separately, and we should look at this projee:t as is, does 60,000 sq. ft. of office make sense there or 100,000 or zero regardless of what ttie allocation issue is, because I think that is going to be addressed separately. Is that a fair approach. Steve Piasecki: • I think that is fair; let me qualify that the Council's authorization to move ahead was the result of being approached by a couple of our larger corporate office developments, and they are seeking a long range assurance that there is some capacity in our General Plan and that would be probably earmarked for those larger office users in the community. It wouldn't necessarily be available to the other projects in the numbers we are talking about. • Said that subdivision of three to five; was not a substantive issue given the size of the property and the need to parcel out the sites so that the individual developments can occur, because there are separate and distinct uses occurring here. That doesn't mean that they will be independent of one another, they will be :highly dependent in terms of cross circulation easements, and parking agreements. This will function seamlessly as a shopping center would otherwise function; that doesn't go away, so the public interest is still preserved even though you are increasing the number of parcels slightly. Gary Chao: • Relative to parking, he said that currently both options have a surplus of parking. Steve Piaseclci: • In large portions of the parking garage on the: south end, to some degree the southwest side is masked by the retail and office building planned and they have 'seen recent examples in other communities where parking structures have been designed so that you can't tell they are not an office development, and there has been son-te desire to have that convertible space on the ground floor into retail should Vallco Parkway ever convert to a retail street. If the applicant 14 - 185 Cupertino Planning Commission 13 October 28, 2008 can be encouraged to come back and demonstrate or condition it in a way that requires they treat those exposed perimeters similar to some of these other developments seen, it would be a satisfactory solution. • Said it is not currently shown on the plans to have parking on Stevens Creek and the Council affirmatively took a position when they talked about the Heart of the City Plan that they don't want to see parking on Stevens Creek Boulevard. Com. Brophy: • I understand there are two options that deal with and without the health club, and I presume that the reason for this is that the applicant doesn't know whether or not he can conclude a deal with the health club. Assuming that is the case and there is an opposition to getting the office space up to 205,000 sq. ft., what use would you suggest to go for where the health club is currently shown. Steve Piasecki: • Said staff supports up to 60,000 sq. ft. office building with some ground floor retail on Stevens Creek or it could be a smaller format health club which has also been discussed. There was an iteration or version of the plan that talked about indenting in for onstreet parking and the applicant has since indicated that is not their desire. Ken Rodriguez, Architect for Sand Hill Property Company: • Reviewed a slide presentation outlining the various elements of the proposed project, including the elevations, landscape plan, retail spaces, plazas, and outdoor spaces. As a result of community input, staff input, Planning Commission and City Council input, the design team's input, they feel the proposed project is a downtown-type Main Street mixed-use project with incredible excitement. He reviewed their input on various issues which is outlined in the staff report and attachments. Kevin Dare, Sand Hill Property Company: • The project was shaped in many ways by the community and the community outreach that was performed and many of the comments created helped to form what is presented. If I were to describe some of the attributes or key themes that were discussed; one of those themes is that the conununity was looking fora `place' place, a place that would serve the community as a whole and that the community can be a place where they can come and gather and be very proud of. The second component is that they want to be representative of Cupertino itself, so Cupertino is not Santana Row, it is not other cities; they want to have something that is unique to Cupertino itself; and the last is that they want to have something that is very successful and is thriving. • The question was asked "why not retail?" To understand the context of our site itself, we are next to Valley Fair which is three miles away and they have over a million square feet of retail and are adding another 600,000 to 800,000 sq. ft. Stanford Shopping Center and Valley Fair are the number 1 and 2 malls throughout the Northern California area; and then there is Vallco or Cupertino Square. We recognize that we can add more retail beyond that 150,000 sq. ft. but it would be a very different type of retail than what we are proposing; more of a power center style retail with traditional parking in front and that is not something that the community voiced they were looking for. We believe the 150,000 sq. ft. of pedestrian oriented retail is the maximum we are going to be able to put and have it be there successfully. • Relative to the key themes, the community is looking fora `place' place; they are looking for Main Street style retail and a mix of uses. ~a-iss Cupertino Planning Co**+m;ssion 14- October 28, 2008 • Early on Sand Hill expressed to the community that we didn't want to impact the schools because the impacts to the schools were a hot: topic, and not something we wanted to step on those bounds. • Said they were working on creating something that has activity at different times of the day; not just busy at night or during the day; that is why they included the senior housing, the hotel, and the athletic club to bring out those different types of uses at different times during the day. • Specifically office for us in this plan is a viability driver; it is something that is crucial to not only generate traffic and people through the project itself, but also to be a fundamental piece of our puzzle. There are two different alternatives presented, and one of the questions was why do you have two different alternatives. Com. Brophy said is it because of the viability of being able to get the athletic club. That is one of the key pieces of why we are actually submitting two different plans. • The other component to that is that the athletic club has a higher traffic impact and also has more air quality impact. We think that we have Alternative No. 1 which is something we are extremely excited about; and a second alternative the office component is something else that would be something that we would support. • We can also look at other alternatives on the eastern portion of the site to have a different set of uses or a mix and match of different types cif different sized uses at that location also. More than anything we want to create a place that i:~ a diamond for the city that the community can be proud of, that they can point to this and say this is Cupertino; this reflects us and I think that is what we are irying to go for. Vice Chair Giefer: • Asked what the applicant's plan would be if they were limited to 60,000 sq. 8. of office space to be in greater compliance with the current General Plan. Kevin Dare: • Said that office was an important component to them; it is a major driver economically and also from an activity standpoint. Relative to Alternative No. 1 which is the athletic club versus Alternative No. 2, the traffic impacts and parking impacts are even much less with Alt. 2 than with Alt. 1. It is something they would have to consider in terms of what the other altemative uses would be or other types of mix and match of building sizes and product types. Ken Rodrigues: • From a planner's standpoint, look at the other downtowns mentioned, they typically had the office built there or have built office in downtown; they have now just added most of them a bunch of residential. We fortunately have projects that are approved here; I think with the senior use, with the Metropolitan and Rose Bowl site those are great starts to add to this foot traffic, but Santana Row is now adding 60,000 sq. ft. of office; that is phase one; the next phase for them is going to be triple that size. 'There is obviously the economics to that; from a planning standpoint it adds foot traffic all afternoon to the retail projects, so that the restaurants do really well, the retail shops should come out of your office, you want a 45 minute break, you go shopping, you sit down <ind have a cup of coffee, you meet people; all of those things that in the past we did in downtowns, but now these small projects that are trying to be a mixed use haven't thought about it azid I think what you are going to see at Santana Row is this new addition of office and I believe their daytime foot traffic is significantly going to improve in the week days. • Regarding some other possible uses for the sports facility site if it were changed in the future, he said that the Decathalon Club in the 80s had to have an alternative plan for the facility ia- ism Cupertino Planning Commission 15 October 28, 2008 • before they could get financing; each one of the tenants still has to go through that rigorous design element; it could be used for a lot of things such as office, retail on ground floor, office above; two story retail. Applicant: • Relative to the parcels owned by HP and Apple, those buildings are specifically dedicated for HP and Apple; there is a depth of market that continues to be at this type of location to be able to enjoy the amenities for the project itself. There is a different type of office user than just HP or Apple which is purely dedicated for their use and for that single tenant. Chair Miller: • There are two reasons for the office space; one to provide feet on the street to help make the retail successful; and whether it is HP or Apple or some other company.. The other thing you are saying is from a economic standpoint, there is going to be demand for office space right outside of HP and Apple and you want to capture that market. Applicant• • Correct, there is a trend as companies are looking to provide different amenities for their employees, the employees like to be in an environment that is very dynamic and has a mix of uses; such as restaurants or athletic clubs. He said they believe they can bring in Class A type of users to be able to draw on this type of environment. Chair Miller: • How did you anzve at the 100,000 sq. ft. number as opposed to 60,000 or 80,000 or 120,000. Applicant: • I think early on as we are working through our different permutations of the plan itself, we are looking for the types of users that are able to be substantial, whether it is a one user; so we want to have the flexibility to provide a different type of format for larger users, whether it is smaller accountants. One of the draws to this project, as some of the community members said we want a landmark site with landmark type of office. A Microsoft or large user are not going to necessarily come and take a 30,000 sq. ft. plate or 30,000 sq. ft. building; they are going to want a larger space, a larger footprint to maintain all their employees to be together. Those are the types of users we want to be able to attract and I think that having 100,000 sq. ft. minimum is something that can help us get to that goal. Those are elements; that is one example of why we are thinking of a floor of 100,000 sq. ft. Chair Miller: • Asked why they were proposing to build more than 98,000 sq. ft. if the limited membership of 9,000 equates to only 98,000 square feet. Applicant: • When we talked to the Lifetime Fitness, their point is that it is not driven by square footage, 24 hour fitness, they are driven by the number of members they have. Their goal is to limit the number of members, provide the highest quality and then equate the number of members to a traffic requirement. In effect, if you look at it from an ITE standpoint, it equates to a 98,000 square foot building. Said in terms of the physical layout of the facility, it is different from a retail store. They have an outdoor and an indoor swim pool, and an indoor pool takes up a lot of square footage, but bodies per square foot are significantly less than a retail component. They are overbuilding because their uses are bigger than they have within the space. is-iss Cupertino Planning Commission 16 October 28, 2008 Steve Piaseclci: • Said it would help to see the floor plans, and suggested that the applicants provide a layout of one of the buildings because they have rock_ climbing walls, day care centers and expansive spaces. Ken Rodrigues: • Relative to parking on Stevens Creels Boulevard, it was discussed a lot at the master plan stage. Said he would like to have some parking along Stevens Creek Boulevard; parallel parking that extends from Tantau down to Metropolitan. It would help the Metropolitan retail as it is still not leased and won't be until there is an adequate amount of parking and ease of parking. Chair Miller: • Another issue that came up along Stevens ~~reek was the setback requirements; if they are adjusted to the height of the building it is likely you will have some buildings set back further than other buildings; is that good or bad from an architectural standpoint. Ken Rodriques: • In the current Plan A which has a three story hotel component, we are at the 45 foot or lower, so we meet all the setbacks along there. The athletic club is still debatable now; we are trying to get some information from them on what their heights are. A varied setback, a taller building on the street; it can help to have a little more landscape. If we do a 5 story hotel which is Plan B, and the office building, we would have to have a greater setback or step the building is another alternative. It will be shovm in more detail at the next meeting. Kevin Dare: • Addressed the size of the senior housing units, which vary between 650 to 800 square feet and said they were in the process of creating more: detail to show at the next meeting. • We are looking at two kinds of senior; one is for active senior living, which is age restricted, whether for sale or rent has not been decided. The other component would be assisted living type of senior housing, with more services. We are willing to look at expanding the size and scope of the units themselves. The standard size in the industry is 500 to 600 square feet for senior housing. We are open to different concepts of making them larger. Ken Rodrigues: • Provided history on some other senior housing projects he has been involved in building in the past, where they range from 500 sq. ft. and 800 sq. ft. Chair Miller: • The target audience is critical. If talking about assisted living the numbers are accurate. If people are assisted living, they are not going; to be getting out to shop as often and won't be using the athletic club and doing a lot of the things that you want to have done there. IF you target the active senior adult community, that is a different market entirely. If you start going below 1200 or 1300 square feet, you are n•ot going to get people going there because it is typically two adults who are downsizing from larger units and I don't think they want to downsize from 3,000 square feet to 600 square feet. They will downsize to something less than they have and want to spend less money, but they are not going to go down to 600 square feet. You won't get that owner in there. • Recommended that the applicants take a more careful look at the demographics and where the demand is and how it better plays into their overall concept. He said that although more assisted living units are needed, he did not fecal they were appropriate for the proposed project. ~a- ass Cupertino Planning Commission 17 October 28, 2008 • Said the more upscale would probably fit in better with what is going on here. 7f you consider that people are working longer and age restricted starts at 55, I wouldn't be surprised if you got folks that worked at Apple and HP that met that age requirement that would be looking for a place just like that with all the amenities and walking or biking distance from the office. Please look at it carefully because it is an area where you can improve upon this. Kevin Dare: • Relative to the phasing of the project, he said they would prefer to have the entire project up and running at once, subject to the ability to obtain financing. If they had to phase it, they would start with the town square area and create that flame first; single level retail, and the components moving from west to east, and the parking garage to support the retail being created. Chair Miller declared a short recess. Upon reconvening the meeting, Chair Miller opened the public hearing. Al De Francesco, Cupertino resident: • The two parks individually are unusual, and don't understand why they are not combined into one bigger park. Said he was hesitant to give anyone the ability to phase the project because phase zero has been sitting dormant for 22 years and could have been farmed. I am not a proponent of parking on Stevens Creek Boulevard; I think if we ever had a more vibrant city, we would just have more accidents on Stevens Creek; and I don't think we should be parking on Vallco Parkway which would create a safety hazard. It is something that could be added at a future time if needed. What we are trying to do is bring the people into the main street off the park; you don't want people parking outside, you want them to pull in and park inside and walk down the main street. The circulation around the park should be circular, one way. It could be blocked off at any given time which has been discussed. Said he would prefer to have the hotel on the end. • My last comment is from a green perspective I would like to be sure that we plan the parking structure such that we could accept the solar panels on the roof. In general I like the concept, I think it has a lot of merit; I think we need to move on and not wait for the rest of the city to catch up to us. )f we wait for the other components of the city, we will be in trouble. Keith Murphy, Cupertino resident: • Expressed appreciation for all the public outreach done under very unusual circumstances for them being both an applicant and also somebody who had to develop a master plan for the city. Here is another case where unfortunately during the community outreach portion of the South Vallco Master Plan, allocations were never discussed. It is unfortunate that Apple and HP did not choose that opportunity to say there is an upcoming problem that has to be addressed and it is going to impact the South Vallco Master Plan area, and how are you going to address the office, the hotel, and the commercial allocations, and you discussed this tonight. This would have been something that would have been very helpful to the community to know what was going to be the future problems that would impact the community. All of those increases means there will be an equal housing demand on our city at some point and I really don't see how that is being addressed through any of these master plans we have seen. During the referendums, not only was the impact of schools an issue, but specifically in the South Vallco area it was park size and also parking, and people didn't want to have Vallco Parkway and Finch really altered in such a way that traffic would become an issue, and I don't think that has been fully addressed. We see that Finch will be given up for a park which is great, but we still have a problem with is traffic going to be affected and if speeds slow down to 15 mph 14-790 Cupertino Planning Commission 18 October 28, 2008 on Finch, and Vallco Parkway is decreased in size for diagonal parking, what is that going to do to traffic if you have a successful rejuvenation of this area, and maybe any diagonal parking should be considered provisional, as to if it is actually going to work or be needed in the future. It could become a provisional item. :ietbacks along Stevens Creek Boulevard; some of these buildings are big, and I think Mr. Rodrigues said they could be terraced; I think that should be considered. He pointed out that C:;labazas Creek could be included in some fashion in the South Vallco master plan area; I don't know how that would all be Apple or HP could talk about this and you could have a linear park concept which has been talked about many times during the community outreach. The senior housing, people were concerned about making sure there is maybe a zoning ordinance developed to address senior housing specifically, so that if you entitle the property that it will remain senior housing and that if it isn't developed or it is phased, that it will actually be senior housing in the future. Jennifer Griffin, Rancho Rinconada resident: • Thanked the project team for working with the community to come up with something that they will be proud to have there for many years to come. • Said it was important to ensure they keep the full 35 foot public right of way setback along Stevens Creek Boulevard from Finch down to Tantau and slightly beyond. It is important to the citizens of Cupertino to maintain the double row of Ash trees, lawn, and is what is seen as one drives along Stevens Creek Boulevard. • Another issue is the removal of the 95 trees on the property; there are 80 Ash street trees that rim the property now. She said she was worried that they would lose many of the trees; although the trees look much better than they did about six months ago. Do not remove the Evergreen Ash trees until an arborist report i:~ received; preserve the pine tree that is within the 35 foot right of way that was shown by Toll Brothers. The pine tree is a landmark for the people in the eastern end of town. • The hotel is too tall; we don't want 60 feet down there; we need to terrace it or flip the hotel around; no parking on Stevens Creek or Vallco Parkway and we need to protect the corridor of Calabazas Creek at all costs. • There needs to be security on site; and construction plans need to be known so that traffic is not tied up at that end of town. Robin Su, Cupertino resident/Metropolitan Board of Director: • Said the major concern of the Metropolitan community is security, because when the Metropolitan Condominiums were built, they did not foresee that there would be retail stores nearby. Presently there are three buildings, and foot traffic of non-residents causes security concerns. Non-residents enter onto the property and infringe upon the privacy of the neighbors, sometimes sitting on their outdoor furniture and leaving trash on the grounds. • Parking is an issue because we share the barking space with the office tenants and in the daytime the parking space is not adequate. [t would be good if we had the five story parking garage; in favor of the parking structure. Ken Wong, Metropolitan Condominium owner/Member of HOA of Metropolitan: • Said he was empowered by the HOA to foam a committee for the purposes of working with Sand Hill Properties as well as the Rose Bovvl site. Thanked Sand Hill Properties for the good work and time they spent listening to their concerns. • 7n the last six months the condominium units have experienced theft, crime, and vandalism and they feel that the proposed retail would bring in additional crime as a result of the foot traffic. As mentioned, they would prefer the Glow of traffic to go around the project rather than ~a - ~s~ Cupertino Planning Commission 19 October 28, 2008 directly through the Metropolitan project. Because of the theft, vandalism, etc. they would prefer to keep the general public and walkability of it to the outskirts of the project and try to keep the internal workings of their project secure. Presently there are no functional gates because the understanding is that the city did not want gates at these locations because they try to create connectivity. From our perspective, unless you live at the Metropolitan and have experienced the things that they have experienced, you would reconsider that particular entry or exit point from the Sand Hill Project. Parking - as indicated, we are an advocate for more parking, presently the parking situation is relatively tight and whenever someone tells us that there is surplus parking, that is a good thing, and trying to parking is not advisable from the Metropolitan. Tom Huganin, Cupertino resident: • Said he attended the meetings Sand Hill held regarding the project; one of the features that was looked for was a gateway feature for people coming into Cupertino up Stevens Creek Boulevard. It does not appear that they accomplished that objective; the feature is not a part of the project. • The other issue is the park along Stevens Creek seems out of place and there should be a way to take the park and spread it around and also to move the retail where that park is or put more retail irr that area; that may be a more effective design. Jennifer Chang, Metropolitan resident, expressed her concerns: • Truck docking area -Concerned about the noise from the trucks loading. If the truck loading area is moved and there is senior housing, it affects both the Metropolitan residents and the senior residents. Said she was also concerned about the hours the trucks unloaded. • Parking -Said she did not feel they had surplus parking, and parking was one of the issues. She expressed concern about having enough parking when the residents returned to their homes, and that the people shopping in the retail did not always take the residents' parking spaces. • What are the construction hours, the list of the projects and the noise level and traffic. How will this project affect Metropolitan homeowners. Jon Willey, Tilson Ave.: • Said he attended one of the focus sessions but left disappointed because it appeared the focus was more on Starbucks versus bagels as opposed to his concern about traffic. He said he was concerned about the magnitude of the project, which from a size standpoint was similar to Santana Row, and would impact their part of town. • He said there was no discussion about how they would deal with the traffic; and pointed out the traffic nightmare in the Valley Fair area. The city previously denied the Toll Brothers project because of the traffic impacts. He asked to see a traffic plan if there is one; one that deals with the traffic and how that is going to be handled. Chair Miller closed the public hearing. Staff answered questions from the speakers: Securityr • Relative to security concerns from the Metropolitan condominium residents, staff agreed that since it would be a secure center, the center itself will likely have some security and rather than a vacant lot where anyone can enter any time of the day, it will be more difficult for non- residents to enter the area. The residents can propose a low gate to hinder the non-residents from entering the condominium property. is-is2 Cupertino Planning Conunission 2.0 October 28, 2008 Truck Loading Areas: • Staff said they have gone through this on a number of other occasions on previous proposals. Staff would like to see enclosed truck docks, where the truck goes into the covered service area, shuts off their engines and unloads th<:m. They are designed in a way that minimizes noise. The Rose Bowl site has residential also adjacent to this location, about 40 or 50 feet away, this location is about 150 feet away. • If we are successful in finding a way to brin;~ a truck loading dock in, it will also be enclosed and there are hours of operation to adhere to, to minimize any of the offsite impacts as much as possible. • He encouraged the speakers to monitor the ~~rocess and ensure that this is happening to their satisfaction. Construction Hours: • Hours are limited by ordinance; weekday from 7 to 8; weekends more stringent; more accurate information will be provided at the next meeting. Traffic Impacts at Various Intersections: Gary Chao: • Said there was data available; copies of the draft EIR are available in the Planning Department and online at Cupertino.org/mainstreet. Sta;Pf is not prepared to talk about the details of the traffic because they are still getting input frorn adjacent jurisdictions, a lot related to mitigation measures, etc. Information on detailed trips being generated and mitigation measures will be available at the next meeting. Steve Piasecki: • There have been references to Valley Fair and Santana Row and I mentioned that we should get the numbers on Santana Row and Valley Fair because the orders of magnitude there are significantly greater than what has been proposed here; Valley Fair being in excess of 2 million square feet and Santana Row more than .5 million sq. ft. of retail. • Said they thought there should be a gateway feature, but does not know what that would be at this point. The General Plan talks about creating a gateway; we have talked with the applicant about designing the building to be the gatex~ay building as you enter from the east; I am not satisfied and I don't think staff is satisfied that we have accomplished or understand what that is going to be. It could be something both. in the right of way and/or in the building; the building should be a great looking structure and we are not convinced we are there yet. Senior Housiisg being converted in the future: Gary Chao: • Normally there is a covenant that would be recorded on the property that would restrict the type of use; in this case restricting it and limil:ing it to the usage of senior housing. Concerns about p7:asing the project: . Steve Piaseclci: • Said it was a good observation and comment because most every project they have is phased to some degree. We would ask the applicant to try to be more specific about when they visualize as the phasing, and present it to the ;public for a better understanding. 14-'193 Cupertino Planning Commission 21 October 28, 2008 Chair Miller: • Said that phasing was sometimes required by the lending institutions, and may be in many cases the driving factor. Steve Piaseclci: • Said that just the practical realities of obtaining loans and then having sufficient capital to write the loans against, requires that they do some degree of phasing. Cozscern about building con:zz:erciaLoffice space and not addressizzg tJse impact oz: Jsousiz:g: Steve Piasecki: • The numbers in this plan are within the current General Plan which does have sufficient housing to provide the offsets required by ABAG. Staff is comfortable that this project is not going to strain those numbers. • The Council has authorized an expansion within the parameters of the General Plan; if we go beyond that, Mr. Murphy's comment is appropriate; in either case, we should be looking at ways to balance the community and provide some housing opportunities along with non- housing opportunities. Question wJzy there was a park at tJze western part and perhaps it didn't fzt Steve Piaseclci: • The point was made by the applicant, and it was agreed that is where the housing is clustered, the Metropolitan condos, the senior units and the future Rose Bowl units; so while the Main Street plaza will belong to the entire community and will be utilized in a variety of forms, having some kind of open passive park facility that the residents in the area can use, seems to be a valuable concept. • The placement of it proximate to residential as well as using it as a buffer for the Metropolitan development and putting it in a location where it is highly visible to the general population was part of the motivation to put it there. It could possibly be shifted; but as you start to move it around, it starts to be in less desirable locations in our observation. Vice Chair Giefer: • Said she was concerned about the office square footage that is included in this plan because the General Plan is fairly specific on what type of activity goes in there, and does not want that comment to be misinterpreted. Said she was not referring to emphasizing additional retail, just that they need to consider what they would do with the plans as presented with reduced squares in terms of office space. There is a need within our city for some of our major corporate headquarters that are here in tenants, and I don't feel this is a strong enough case because it is not consistent with the General Plan. • Said in general it was a good start; she was not opposed to a larger scale hotel; liked the concept of being developed as city blocks; it has a comfortable distance; and has a good pedestrian circulation plan. • She pointed out that when they discussed the Heart of the City Plan at the previous Planning Commission meeting, they agreed that bicycle lanes and parking on Stevens Creek made sense; however the Council has directed that they don't want to see parking anywhere in the Heart of the City. She said that if they firmly believe in that concept, they should send it back to Council with that as part of their final recommendation. • Said she agreed that they needed teaser parking and many of the residents are not going to be happy with that comment. In general, it is a good start in the right direction and it will be interesting to see when we see more detail on the project, what comes back to us in December. ~a- isa Cupertino Planning Commission 22 October 28, 2008 • Said she looked forward to seeing their green building ideas as well as their native and drought tolerant landscaping and how they will keep the water on site. • Said she was concerned about the monolithic appearance of the parking structure on Vallco Parkway, and would expect that what gets presented is sufficiently screened so it doesn't look like a parking structure and then if the ground floor is converted to retail, it can be easily accomplished because the higher levels are already screened. Com. Brophy: • Said it was an interesting concept and he appreciated the amount of work that Mr. Dare and Mr. Rodrigues and the members of their team have put into the project. • The type of retail concept is an extraordinarily difficult concept to implement successfully. Any time you try to do retail projects that are different than the usual standard shopping center, big boxes or lifestyle centers, the proof is upon them to show that the concept will work. • If we want to see a concept like this, the first thing we need to do, is resist the micromanagement of the design. The concept of the town square as currently implemented is great; trying to take away parking by moving it would be a mistake. • For this retail to be successful retail, retail that has a lot of business has to have a fair amount of convenient parking to get the initial customers there. The rest of them will go to the parking garage, but you need more than the kind of teaser parking that people have talked about. • Notwithstanding what has been said earlier, the office use will not provide the support for retail in a sense that the workers in that office building will support a significant amount of retail space. They will probably support between 4,000 and 6,000 sq. $. only. What the office does is it provides a sense of place, it provides a gateway that this project would provide not as some type of sculpture but rather the fact that it is a unique concept and that having a few larger buildings will give it a sense of place. • The problem we have with the office space is pressure we are under in the General Plan where we have a limited amount of space to give, especially if for any reason the difference between 100,000 feet that the applicant is asking ur.~der Option A and 60,000 sq. ft. that the staff is recommending, I think that is a workable number. We can come up with a number somewhere between those two numbers that we can live with anywhere in that range. I think the concern is if for any reason the athletic club deal does not come through and then the applicant wishes to ask for additional office space there, we would have a problem. What we need to think about is an alternative use that would be acceptable to both the city and the developer. There are several possibilities, but I think it would be difficult to do Plan B. • Relative to the hotel, General Plan allocatioris, that doesn't bother me; the reality is we are not going to have four hotels built, there will be :at most two, more likely just one. • I do have questions about that second park; I know that we had this discussion when I first came on that parks equals good; therefore, we should put that in. But when I look at that park, I see no functional purpose and the only possibility I think is a greater possibility that you will have aRer school kids hanging out there and creating more problems for the Metropolitan condos. 7f we keep that park, I would prefer that space converted to retail. A lot of good points have been made by our residents; I think we have to work through it. • I would like to see this project go through i:Epossible and I think we, as the Commission, and staff, and city have to work with the applicant to not overburden them with our laundry list of what should be done; but at the same time I think we need to recognize the constraints that the city is under. Chair Miller: • I have similar questions whether the park makes sense or is that the best place for it. Also the discussion of the housing and what type of senior housing; whether it should be larger or not; but there is another issue of other property ~~wners in town proposing more office space. Said 14 - '195 Cupertino Planning Coirunission 23 October 28, 2008 he was unsure whether it will be required to do more housing allocations, but use the ones already in the General Plan; the question is where in the city would it be best to put some of that housing which is in the General Plan at the moment, and this might be a good location for two reasons. Firstly, some higher density housing, perhaps two bedroom units for older residents looking for entertainment aspects; or younger couples or persons working at Apple or HP who don't have children or just starting a family. It is located in the school district where Fremont and Cupertino High School are slated for an increase and expansion in the number of students they can support. It is a possible site where the applicant might want to consider not an over-burdening amount of housing, but some additional housing if it works and perhaps as an alternative to the office space. Said he did not see a great difference between 60,000 and 100,000 and agreed with Com. Brophy that it gives a sense of place; however, as an alternative, you might want to consider some two bedroom condos that would work very well for people. ~ Said he agreed with the overall concept, but felt they need to think about the element more and see more detail as to how they are going to work together and how they work with the other projects in the area. We look forward to our next meeting in December. Steve Piaseclci: • Noted for the record that Corns. Kaneda and Rose would review the meeting tapes, and if they have any questions, the applicant would receive those questions as well. OLD BUSINESS• None NEW BUSINESS• None REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Environmental Review Committee: • Chair Miller reported that the topic of the meeting was the project discussed tonight, the key issues being traffic and air quality. Housing Commission: No report. Mayor's Monthly Meeting with Commissioners: Meeting was cancelled. Economic Development Committee: Meeting will be held next week. Report of the Director of Community Development: • Steve Piasecki corrected for the record that the community meeting with LeHigh, formerly Hansen Permanente Quarry, was attended by 150 persons, not 50. Adiournment: The meeting was adjourned to the next regular Planning Commission meeting. Respectfully Submitted: /s/Elizabeth Ellis Elizabeth Ellis, Recording Secretary Approved ws prese~:ted: November 25, 2008 ~a- iss CTTY OF CUPERTINO ; ~ ~~~~~ 10300 Torre Avenue i ~ 1 Cupertino, CA 95014 ` _`-_. _ _ _-_--_.: --- :_ . _._._.._ ~ CITY OF CUPERTINO PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT MINU'T'ES 6:45 P.M. December 9, 2008 TUESDAY CUPERTINO COMNIL7NI'TY HALL The regular Planning Commission meeting of December 9, 2008 was called to order at 6:45 p.m. in the Cupertino Coimiiunity Hall, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, by Chairperson Marty Miller. SALUTE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Chairperson: Marty Miller Vice Chairperson: Lisa Giefer Commissioner: Paul Brophy Commissioner: David Kaneda Commissioner: Jessica Rose Staff present: Conmiunity Development Director: Steve Piasecki City Planner: Gary Chao Senior Planner: Aki Honda Snelling Public Works: David Stillman APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None CONSENT CALENDAR: None PUBLIC HEARING- None OLD BUSINESS• - 1. U-2008-O1 (EA-2008-07) Use Permit and Architectural and Site Approval for a ASA-2008-06, TM-2008-O1, master flan for amixed-use development consisting of TR-2008-08. Kevin Dare/ approximately: 147,000 sq. ft. of retail commercial; 500 Forbes, LLC (South 100,000 sq. ft. of office; a 150 room hotel; a 160 unit Vallco) Location: North Side senior (:age restricted) housing facility; 145,000 sq. ft. Of Stevens Creels Boulevard athletic club; a four level parking garage and a 1.6 acre Between Finch Ave. 8c Tantau park/to~vn square. (A project alternative consists of Ave. approx. 205,000 sq. ft. of office and a 250 room hotel In place. of the athletic club). Tentative Map to subdivide 3 parcels (approx. 18.7 acres) into 5 parcels for a master plan for amixed-use development consisting of approx.: 147,000 sq. ft. of retail commercial; 100,000 sq. ft. of office/ a 150 room hotel; a 160 unit senior (age restricted) housing facility; 145,000 sq. ft. of athletic club; a 4 level parking garage and a 1.6 acre park/town square. (A project alternative - 14 - 197 Cupertino Planning Commission 2 December 9, 2008 consists of approx. 205,000 sq. ft. of office and a 250 room hotel in place of the athletic club). Tree Removal request to remove approx. 93 trees in conjunction with a proposed master plan for amixed-use development. Continued from the October 28, 2008 Planning Commission: meeting. Tentative City Council dates: Dec. 16, 2008 and Jan. 6, 2009. Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner, presented the staff report: • Reviewed the background and summary of the application as outlined in the staff report. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project on October 28, 2008 and expressed support for the project and provided preliminary comments and suggestions for the applicant to consider. At that time the Commission did not discuss any of the potential environmental impacts since the draft EIR was being circulated for public comment. • She reviewed the Option A and Option B development options to be considered that provide a variation in the mixture of uses. Details of the options are outlined in detail in the staff report. She then discussed parking and tree removal; it has been determined that both Option A and B provides sufficient parking for the project. Traffic Impact Analysis, Air Quality Analysis and environmental impacts were reviewed as outlined in the staff report. • Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the plans and consider the following options: ^ Review the proposed development options and discuss which option is preferred; ^ Provide direction and coninients on the project; ^ Consider a special meeting on January 6, 2009 to allow the project to remain on schedule. The applicant is requesting the special meeting. • She noted that the Connnission cannot make a formal recommendation to the City Council tonight because the final EIR has not yet been prepared and circulated. The Commission cannot make a formal recommendation until after the January 2, 2009 circulation period. • Staff answered Commissioners' questions relating to the proposed project, Chair Miller: • In considering Option C, what impact does that have on the EIR. Staff: • Option C was not analyzed in this document; it would have to go through its own review process; you can also do a supplemental environmental review for it, but it hasn't been analyzed at all in this document. Steve Piasecki: • Staff feels it is less than an impact on the surface but it hasn't been analyzed. Staff: • Referred to Table on Page 81, regional air quality impacts discussion; based on the project's vehicle miles traveled, the BAAQM District sets up a threshold of 80 pounds per day of certain vehicle emissions including reactive organic gases, nitrogen oxide and PM 10 and the project trip emissions plus that threshold of 80 pounds per day, then it is considered a significant impact. Based on discussions with the air district, it is calling it out as a significant impact; it is not really meant to deter the lead agency to not approve a project. Most infill projects have significant regional air quality impacts; it just wants to call that impact out and require the lead agency to mitigate it as much as possible. The district would normally be supportive of a project like this because it is infill, it is near transit, it's pedestrian and bicycle oriented. 14 - 198 Cupertino Planning Conmiission 3 December 9, 2008 David Stillman, Sr. Civil Engineer, Public Works Dept. • Said with the loading dock, to enhance safety, the key is to avoid as many conflicts as possible. The point was brought up earlier where putting the loading dock facing the plaza would potentially cause conflicts with pedestrians; by placing the loading dock on Vallco Parkway, it ads to that potential conflicts with vehicles and also potentially bicycles, if there is bike traffic along Vallco Parkway. The best way to minimize the number of conflicts is to not have the loading dock facing on public street, but instead into the plaza. As much as an out of the way location as can be found on the site with respect to pedestrian or vehicle travel, would be best from staff s point of view. Ken Rodrigues, Project Architect: • Reviewed a slide presentation showing a series of images and design concept for the master plan application. Said they were attempting to create a pedestrian friendly outdoor retail shopping and office mixed use environment; a mixed use of retail, office, senior housing, retail would include restaurants and the office would be of a size and scope large enough to not only attract a major corporate user to the site, that is the goal of the developer vs. a series of small office users. Discussed changes and updates; the hotel was flipped to save the existing pine tree; any of the existing trees that can be saved is our goal We were also asked to look at the senior housing dropoff and entry point; creating a strong entry off Stevens Creek; town square area with flexible areas, and strong pedestrian circulation through the site. • Trees on the property are also being transplanted as part of the plan. Ken Rodrigues and Gary Lieman responded to comments: • Save the pine tree along Stevens Creek B'~oulevard: The hotel has been flipped, creating a U-shaped courtyard which could be a very nice space to dine outdoors; the goal is to save the existing tree. • The exterfor elevations of the parking gsirage: Shown in the presentation; added that the exterior landscaping along the Vallco eleva~~on enhances what is already a nice architectural treatment on the building. There are some existing trees that occur all along Vallco; we are going to enhance those, as will be shown in ~~n upcoming photo. • Can the lower level of the garage be converted to retail along Vallco Parkway which both the Commission and Council asked at earlier meetings: Responded that they could; they feel that as Vallco Parkway matures and starts to absorb the square footage on the project, it is a natural location to add some additional retail; adding approximately 9,000 more square feet of retail, losing 43 parking stalls. Activating Vallco Parkway over time is important. • Redesign the garage to be flexible both fcrr garage and for retail: Said they punched out the retail elements and extended them 10 feet out in front of the garage. They would all be normal glass storefront that could be added to the existing garage, signage bands would occur up above; it would occur all along the pedestrian walkway along Vallco Parkway. • Optional parking on Vallco; could it be phased? As retail might get built, and then later add parking in phases; it doesn't necessaril:~ have to go in at once. If Public Works and the developer feel it is the best way to go, the plain is flexible to allow that. • Senior housing lobby dropoff: He illustrated the location of the dropoff in the upper comer; opening up to the courtyard separating the retail from housing. is-iss Cupertino Planning Commission 4 December 9, 2008 • Mitigation of the major retail loading space: Should the loading space be located inboard or outboard. We have had thousands of elements we have worked on with staff, stakeholders, the public; I think from my standpoint this is one where I may deviate slightly from staff. I also feel that having the retail out on Vallco can be mitigated; it can be screened and it could be handled very nicely architecturally. I can't speak to the safety issues; the Public Works rep already did; I would like to be able to work with them to see if we could get that to work. The loading zone could be well screened to work. • Members of the Metropolitan complex discussed a security gate for their project. The plan allows a potential location for them where they could add some security to allow entrance at off-times in the evening appropriate, either with card key access or similar. This is a major circulation corridor for them; I understand their concern about security; it was always everyone's direction in both the public hearings and workshops held to enhance this walkway piece across here, which would give the opportunity for Rose Bowl to have access; it would give metropolitan access and get you out to Vallco Parkway. • Possible parking along Stevens Creek Boulevard: It would work out there; I don't want to go up against City Council, from that standpoint; you asked me to look at it; I did. Here you could see we would have a series of parallel parking stalls that would fit within the right-of- way and be located in front of our project. Would it help our project? Absolutely; would it activate the Metropolitan retail project -without question; it would be a big help to their retail now which is still not leased. It is something worth discussing; I do believe that it is something we should think about. • Look at additional senior housing: Where would that be located if we were to remove the park area? He illustrated an enlarged area of parking could be created and screened effectively within a parking court that would activate all of the retail shops. He illustrated where there would be retail on the ground floor, which is consistent with the Master Plan and other design elements up and down Stevens Creek; there would be a series of pedestrian connections. He showed where there would be 30 units of senior housing above retail, which would increase the senior housing unit count from 160 to 190. • Alternative uses on the athletic club: Besides the office, as Gary mentioned underground parking would be accessed via Vallco Parkway; there. would be two buildings with additional parking located across the street being created, that you would walk across for the office. • What would happen if there was no athletic club or office project in that area: Considered adding retail, which the Commission, Council and members of the public asked for. This is a plan that would continue the retail edge along Stevens Creek Boulevard; it would have a small restaurant pad, outdoor dining as well as potential for large major user. It is great from a parking standpoint, because it provides some surface parking. • Consideration of green building ideas: It is the client's goal to have the project a LEEDS certified project. He said that the recent Sand Hill Properties Sunnyvale downtown project is 6 blocks of LEEDS certified. Also water efficiency, energy and atmosphere efficiency; looking at materials and resources and indoor environmental quality. • Use of drought tolerant materials: Use of drought tolerant and native type plant materials and incorporating sustainable landscape principles and create exciting environments, such as butterfly gardens, and introduction of elements of ecology. Also looking at sustainable strong water treatment, permeable pavers, and water purification. 14 - 200 Cupertino Planning Conmiission 5 December 9, 2008 Tree disposition: There are currently 146 trees identified as part of the tree inventory. Of those existing trees, 86 will be preserved and'. 17 trees will be transplanted, including redwood and palm trees onsite. 60 trees aze scheduled to be removed as part of the project. How many trees will be incorporated into the final plan; 445 new trees, replacing them on a 7:1 ratio. With respect to Ash trees along the street, some changes evolved; we have been able to preserve more of the existing Ash trees; double row of Ash trees will be continuous along Stevens Creek Boulevard, creates a buffer and pedestrian experience and an identity to that part of town which is important. We are also looking at increasing the number of ash trees along Vallco Parkway, creating double rows where there are currently single rows, and filling in gaps in other parts of the project. Said they have worked with staff for about a year now; and agree with staff on most of the items, with the exception of those following. • The first is the comment regarding the reduction of office square footage to 60,000 square feet. Said they disagreed, and said that office is a crucial, integral part of their overall plan. The plan as proposed provides them with the ability to have landmark style office buildings that will avail the opportunity to speak with and. work with landmark quality office users. This would be a classy office, top tier tenants needing larger format style squaze footage floor plates and also square footage. They don't want t~~ be in multiple buildings, there are multi-tenant buildings up and down Stevens Creek presently; but cutting our ability to provide the larger format users, we are cutting our ability to work with a larger pool of potential tenants. • The other element regarding the office square footage, what we aze building here is a true mixed use project; we need a balance of uses and a balance of scale of those uses also. We are looking for each component to be properl:~+ represented and 60,000 square feet does not properly represent this particulaz type of use. If the issue is the available office square footage, City Council has initiated the process about the housing element to potentially incorporate and increase the amount of square footage in conjunction with the housing element. Another possible solution is as Apple suggested to corisider transferring commercial square footage and applying that to our site so that we can use that and apply that toward professional office as described in the project. • Said they disagreed with Planning staff about incorporating retail on the ground floor of the parking garage across from the hotel. Their main concern is the lack of visibility along Stevens Creek to that edge; they do not want to build retail just for the sake of building retail, that is not what the plan is about. They are looking to bringing in quality retailers that can work together synergistically and come together on line at the same time and they do not feel they will be able to do that if that requirement: for retail is implemented. • The issue of the loading dock and retail configuration as ascribed in the recommendation from Planning staff; the first recommendation was putting a loading dock off the town square, and secondly the retail line to extend the retail line from the western portion of the property to Finch itself. Regarding the loading dock, we believe that a loading dock is better served on Vallco Parkway. We agree with Metropolitan that this is going to be an impact to their lifestyle because of the noise impacts early in the morning. One suggestion was made to move the loading dock more eastern portion of the site. Our concern with that is that if you look at where the entrance to the property is in terms off Stevens Creek, if you move the loading dock any more easterly it will line out and when you enter, you will see the loading dock; your line of sight will be toward that azea; we are concerned about that. There are numerous issues with the loading dock on that corner edge. • Another issue is the question about enough sufficient parking for retail along for these users (Site Plan C). We believe that providing sufficient parking for these users is a valid point and we think that providing parking outside the fI'Ont edge of the building alleviates that concern. is -ZOi Cupertino Planning Commission December 9, 2008 We have a lot of street parking that can be used for multiple different users and it alleviates that issue. We believe that the configuration associated with Site Plan C makes sense; the retailers we are working with are requiring that we have parking outside the front door. We have to set the table correctly for the right retailers to come. What they are saying to us and we are getting the direct feedback is that we have to give them every reason to come, if they don't have parking outside their front door, it is anon-prototypical type of format; the Best Buy was a non-prototypical format and it didn't work. Retailers see that and say they are not going to get themselves into that situation. What they are looking for is something that makes sense as a whole for our project but will still work for them and something they can be confident, because given the state of the economy, they know that they have to go to something that makes sense, while they love Cupertino, they are not willing to put their neck out and say they will try something new where in reality they know that this is not necessarily going to work for them. I cannot emphasize enough how important this edge for these types of retailers we are working with, that is their voice. If we don't have it, they won't come. I ask you to consider that; we are looking for this format to be implemented in all three of our plans. Regarding the passive park, our original submittal shows our park space between Metropolitan and our site; the idea was to create a buffer between the properties. Also it creates green space for us to be able to use for this retail. At the previous Planning Commission meeting, we heard suggestions for alternative uses at that park space; that is what we did. We came up with Site Plan C. The reason why they asked for it was, they asked how the passive park fit into the rest of the plan itself. As defined by the General Plan, this is supposed to be a regional oriented commercial center. After analyzing the plans and comments we think that there is merit to this concept; it activates the entire street edge and makes it more consistent with the General Plan. We understand there are concerns from Metropolitan, but we also think there are benefits. In association with the overall plan, it does fit, taking this format into more of a commercially oriented center and we think this should be implemented not only in this plan, but also the other plans. Another issue is eliminating the square parking plaza to the east of the town square; the concept is to remove all the parking. This is an element to the plan that we think would be very special and be removing the parking spaces, it will kill that. The vision behind the area is it will be a European auto court, with pavers that will close off the entrance and in the evening have valet parking. By making it a street, it becomes just a street, whereas we are looking at it becoming something very unique. Relative to the requested January 6, 2009 meeting, keeping to a 12 month schedule is imperative from a standpoint of success and also from our financing partners' standpoint. Project delays out of our control pushed the schedule back. We are asking that the Planning Commission consider the items discussed, provide recommendation for approval of three plans with changes discussed. Corn. Kaneda: • Relative to outdoor seating for restaurants and creation of a lively outdoor dining experience, in some areas it appears to be a 15 foot setback. Is there something magic about the 15 feet that has to include sidewalk and beyond that a private patio area for the restaurants. Ken Rodrigues: • Referred to Santana Row, which he said began as a fashion concept with 8 to 10 feet of sidewalk in front of most of the retail spaces; it has now evolved into entertainment center, restaurants in particular. The tables are crowded; they had to remove some parking which was on the street, which is always a mistake, and it doesn't feel comfortable there. We studied that dimension and said if we had our way the minimum dimension here is 15 feet and 20 feet ~ 4 - 202 Cupertino Planning Commission December 9, 2008 between these towers, 20 feet here, and there we have gained large plaza areas that are in the neighborhood of 30 to 50 feet that occur along other restaurant areas. We have so much more outdoor dining area and we specifically tried to address that. Com. Kaneda: • The town square has double loaded parking, there is parking along the town square and then parking along the perimeter of the buildings; my sense is to put that double loaded parking that is a lot of parking almost blocking off the town square if it is all being used and I am uncomfortable with just lining that town square with angled parking, and I would like to hear your thoughts. Ken Rodrigues: • Said staff came up with some interesting challenges that we are trying to address; the plaza has to be flexible, be a people space, it should tie a circulation space because it is Finch Avenue and should have parking to support some of the retail, but it has to work for any one of those three or all of them at the same time which i:: a difficult design challenge; which we may have accomplished together. The entire plaza area will have no curbs; it will truly be a European plaza. He said the Euro pavers used in Europe would work well in the project. I concur with staff on how to make the parking stalls not look like parking stalls; I would not want to paint the Euro pavers, but use contrasting colors to line them; I think they will look like a joint in a sidewalk anyway. It is flexible. I think we have solved the issue in this case; Healdsburg and downtown Sonoma have double loaded parl~dng around their town square. It is a way to get more cars there, and easier to back out. Steve Piaseclci: • One of the thoughts we have had in_talking with this applicant is this is unique and we don't know how this is going to function in the fuh~re; we-will know when it is installed and we may find that we don't need one row of parking, or that it is a barrier; in which case the bollards might be yet placed, and the parking is modified to accommodate however the world wants to use this fairly unique space. We need to be flexible, not unlike when this building was built and this dais rolls back and this becomes a stage or the front plaza area, it should be flexible enough to accommodate whatever the community ends up doing with the space in the future; that is actually a positive. Com. Kaneda: • Said he liked the idea of using controllable bollards, because it can make a big difference. Ken Rodrigues: • The dimension of 20 feet, plus a 20 foot stall would have a 40 foot seating area. All are big bonuses; it could be spectacular if we don't need those cars; at least it is flexible enough to work either way. Com. Kaneda: • The original design was for an athletic club; presently it is for an office and potentially retail. What are the triggers that would push a change from the athletic club to office space. Ken Rodrigues: • Originally we submitted two plans; one for the office and one for the athletic club. We were supportive of either plan; it is a Planning Conunission or City Council decision, which is better for the community. Com. Brophy asked if we don't support the office because it is too much office square footage; let's say you can't ,given the state of the economy, you can't get 14 - 203 Cupertino Planning Commission December 9, 2008 Lifetime Fitness, what do you do. That is a fair question; and is why we came up with Site Plan C. What we were looking for formally was that we have before you two formal plans, one with the athletic club and the other is the office building. We believe that going forward and asking for formal approval of these two plans, makes sense. If we cannot get Lifetime Fitness, then we will have to re-submit for the change of that as use. That is why, as part of this discussion, we are bringing it before you now, what is your feedback and is this something you can support. Applicant: • Added that staff has a condition in there, whether it is office or retail, that the design of that corner at Stevens Creek and Tantau be a gateway element with some architectural feature; we agree with that. • The streetscape down at the pedestrian level has some type of plaza, with bench seating, artwork; we agree with that. We would work in any case to zone in or condition in these elements now so that whichever plan the market drove, we had the basis of good design elements. We agree with staff in that condition. Steve Piaseclci: • We agree with Mr. Rodrigues that this needs to be a gateway building, use some of the artwork, depending on whether we include the open space on the west end; put some of the open space into a plaza on the east end; there are a number of options. I think it is important, the use should be less important than the form in this case, where the form is, this is the gateway to your community, it needs to pop and be exciting. Now the fitness building does not seem like it is achieving any of that yet, but they are willing to have the conversation; I would suggest if you allow that option or even the office building would be easier to design, but either one that you have a condition that says the proof is going to have to be in the pudding; show us why this is going to be a great building and a great gateway; we haven't seen that yet. I don't think they have really performed to that level yet. Applicant: • Said he agreed with the condition; we think that going forth through the process, the gateway features are an important element, but we would ask for approval with conditions as Mr. Piasecki mentioned. Ken Rodrigues: • The last thing I would like to add to that is that we typically come before you with a project; there is so much uncertainty in the marketplace presently, I am grateful for Sand Hill Properties to do this project. I think we need to allow the developer some flexibility; one great thing about Cupertino, Kelly understands her stuff; she knows what she is talking about and it is great to work with a city who is sympathetic to not only just design and planning, but also the economics. It is prudent on Sand Hill's point to look at all the uses, so that we have a project that is full and thriving. Jim Randolph, Project Leasing Agent: • Said it was his responsibility to ensure that the buildings were leasable; he has been involved with the components of the site plan from the beginning and seen the evolution. I was the one who warned Sand Hill Properties and Ken Rodrigues that the space was his biggest concern, in Schemes 1 and 2 it is unleasable; I can't get a tenant in there. I understand what staff wants to do but when we start to break down the project and come up with who are the anchor tenants for this center, how is it going to work; we looked at that area as being a prime spot for a specialty market, who could probably live with the lack of identity to Stevens Creek i a - zoa Cupertino Planning Conm~ission S December 9, 2008 Boulevard, but the accessibility to that site is very good. You have to be able to accolnniodate a shopping cart and the fact that the density eve had before made you cross Finch Avenue and go into that parking structure. A tenant is going to turn us down on that; they will not look at that. Personally I believe the solution on the: loading dock off Vallco Parkway is a good one and would be one that works for t he tenant also, because it is not only that they have some surface parking; it is important to realize it, this is sometimes referred to this type of parking as teaser parking; it is not enough, but is enough to get enough customers in the store and at the same time people who could use the parking garage, can. When you make the comment about when you enter Stevens Creek and you see the parking lot; one of the things you would see is; you see the town square; it depends on the trees and the architectural elements you have but I also think your eyesight would focus on architectural elements of the build designed there. There is gateway entrance function that you can see from the street. I feel comfortable with this layout; that it is leasable and we can attract a very high end market user there. I already commented that we are thinking of a specialty market type of use and that is a good location for it, because it would energize the town square. Commented on the plan; when we went out and tested the plan with some major users, one comment we received was that if we go o1i this project, we have to be on Stevens Creek otherwise we loose a competitive advantage to our competitors up and down this street. That is why we put this major retailer on the corner with the parking field behind it and we think that is what will be successful in finding a major retailer for that position. Steve Piasecld: • This was focused on again by the architectural advisor in our discussions with him, could the specialty market be in this location. Jim Randolph: • Said yes, it could be in that location, but he v~ouldn't advise it because it is a waste of that use; because the alternative is to support this amount of retail and when you deal with a tenant that is 25 or 35,000 feet or above because you cannot just keep filling it up with small tenants, the only place that a regional or national type store is going to go with visibility to Stevens Creek Boulevard. That's why it is the best of both worlds because a specialty market, would be easily to get to; it would have some teaser parking, it still could access the garage, and it spills over into the town square. Vice Chair Giefer: • With regard to LEEDS certification, what level of certification is the goal? Applicant: • Because this is a campus style setting, we: cannot necessarily pinpoint each of the buildings right now; for example we built the Apple building down the street and we ended up with LEEDS silver certification. In this campus style setting, we were going for a threshold of certification and then will take on a building by building basis, what we can maximize and implement all the green building initiatives and concepts and get as high as we can get. Vice Chair Giefer: • Can you refresh my memory, how many square feet is the building that is leased to Apple? (answer 60, 000 square feet) 14 - 205 Cupertino Planning Commission 10 December 9, 2008 Jim Randolph: • Said that Apple takes a lot of small square footage up and down that area because it is across from their campus. It is a unique situation and why they are seeking to consolidate into their other campus. Vice Chair Giefer: • I don't know if this is for you or staff; with the proposed senior housing, we do require 6 square feet of personal outdoor space. I am not seeing that in any plans, and would like clarification on that. Com. Brophy: • Asked 1VIr. Date what they were being asked to approve. Mr. Dare: • The request is for formal recommendation to the three site plans proposed this evening, and subject to other comments made, in particular walk through them briefly, the first being the office square footage; that it doesn't get reduced down to the office square footage and some of the other comments. Com. Brophy: • Said his understanding was that they could not even consider Option C; are you asking us to approve more or less either Option A or Option B depending on what happens with the fitness center. Mr. Dare: • If we cannot submit a formal request for approval of Site Plan C, at least provide some substantial comments to which we can then subject to later and come back with an approval around that; at least we will have received your comments. Com. Brophy: • Can we in January recommend approval for the developer to do either A or B; how would there be a change if the modifications that Mr. Randolph says is required in order to lease that space; how is that perceived? Staff: • Said it depends on which component C that you are going to incorporate into the plans. If you were to just take the one component that deals with the north, piece we are discussing along Vallco Parkway and Rose Bowl. It is correct that if the square footage is less than what was originally proposed, it is the same use; you might be okay in terms of pulling it off as an appropriate modification to the plans, which you could always tweak within reason within the scope of the EIR. We might have to look at circulation, traffic and get back to you and have Fehr and Peers take a look and Public Works take a look as they haven't really evaluated the circulation aspects of this parking lot relevant to everything else, with pedestrian safety and bicyclists and all that staff, so we have to look at that and come back with recommendation on those aspects. Applicant: • To provide some context, with the evolution of the plan itself, initially the plan as you see proposed, in Site Plan A and B originally was driven by the request to include retail along the entire edge from where our property started on the west side to Finch itself. 7ri doing so, we have received comments from the community about having sufficient parking for retail area, i a - zos Cupertino Planning Commission 11 December 9, 2008 along with saying they understand the city's request is to make this a pedestrian oriented edge along Vallco Parkway; is this really feasible'? It is sequential in a sense that we have to come up with a plan that makes sense to staff and also to the city and then we can take to market. What we are getting feedback from is that is why this is a very organic process and that is why we are reaching the conclusions we are reaching. Com. Brophy: • Does the staff s idea of putting retail along Vallco Parkway, in your experience as a leasing agent; does that make any sense? Chair Miller declared a recess. Upon reconvening, Chair Miller opened the public hearing. Chair Miller: • There has been a discussion about housing v s. office space; what is happening in town is two of our major corporate citizens are asking for more office space. What happens when you build more office space, Sacramento says you have to build more housing to house the people who are going to be working in the office space. Part of the discussion that has been going on here tonight has been about whether there should be more housing on this site, perhaps and less office space perhaps to offset some of 'the office space that we are going to provide for others in the community. If any of you have a conuiient on that, we would certainly welcome it because we are always having this discussion about housing and the potential impact it has on the schools. Christine Kennedy Pierce, Senior Commission for City of Cupertino: • Applauded the presentation and development: as I saw it this evening. Many of the elements of it, the pedestrian focus, the mixed use development; they meet many of the criteria of an aging friendly community, the curbless approach works for all the age spectrums from strollers to wheelchairs. I am appreciative that the senior housing has been located in the area with good access to transit and I do want to suggest that the developer provide additional details about the proposed housing, I am grateful to hear being addressed. From comn--ents made, at the Senior Commission there is an interest in looking at a spectrum of housing for seniors in Cupertino and personally I want to point out that seniors going forward are going to look very different than we have known seniors to bc; in the past; the aging boomers are going to be hitting 78 million of them and different configurations of housing are going to be of interst including live/work space and lofts. I suggest that we look at a spectrum of housing that accommodates people 50 years and older. Jennifer Griffin, Rancho Rinconada resident: • Commended Sand Hill Properties for their work and their outreach to the community. It is a What a extraordinary time for the residents of Cupertino to be able to master plan one of the last remaining holdings in the city. We didn't have that ability through the history of the city for the last 70 years. Let's hope that this thing that is going to be on this site is going to be something that lasts, it is beautiful, it's a benefit to the community; it is going to make people in the eastern areas want to shop there, take their relatives to, etc. • Said she favored Plan A; and was grateful for the attention given the trees; there are a number of very hardy Ash trees that have survived a~:-ound the perimeter of the property, they look like they are in good shape. I think the commtmity is hopeful, there will be no clear cutting of those Ash trees on the perimeter of th<; property; there is a great sensitivity to the neighborhoods; that is the only landscaping we have to look at day in and day out over there. If we have to replace any of them, make sure they are 36 inch box, maybe 48 inch box. She expressed appreciation for attempting to preserve the Allepo pine tree; it is within 20 feet of i a - 20~ Cupertino Planning Commission 12 December 9, 2008 the sidewalk. The hotel looks fantastic; thank you for stepping the front of it. Traffic is a problem; I think we are going to need to look at the 280/Stevens Creek/Lawrence interchanges. Make sure there is a construction management plan in place during construction. Jeff Schulken, Calvert Drive: • Expressed concern about the traf£c impact to Rancho Rinconada and Loree Estates neighborhoods based on limited access via Tantau and Finch to the south areas of Stevens Creek. There are numerous accidents at Stevens Creek and Calvert Drive; although it is in San Jose's sphere of influence it impacts the neighborhood; we are Cupertino residents and something needs to be done especially with this new development. There will be a lot of cut- through traffic. We cannot prevent them from coming into the neighborhood, but we expect it to be safe; no worse than it already is. It is important that steps are taken to ensure the neighborhoods are safe and protected. Stephen Lim, Cupertino resident: • Relative to Plan C, removal of the park area will not serve the benefits of having Metropolitan homeowners to be able to look at a big parking lot. It doesn't fit in with the town atmosphere of the development. I strongly advise the Planning Commission to make sure that Metropolitan homeowners property values are not devalued. There is a solution that will benefit both; Sand Hill Properties their retail as well as Metropolitan users. I don't think that we have fully explored all the different uses of that space outside of Metropolitan. • The lack of focus that Chair Miller brought up earlier to several properties on the senior residential housing and that they didn't know if it was going to be active or assisted living. Given the fact that we want it to be an upscale area and we also want to attract a higher level of clientele who can spend money and revitalize the economy. I am sure everyone's property values go up and we need to ensure that we have a good revenue base that we can charge out of the project. We want to have units that reflect that; having assisted unit living, only about 600 sq. ft., is not in line with what the Slivision of this project is. Emily Shieh, Cupertino resident: • Said that she was a Metropolitan owner and also architectural designer. She said she was concerned about what is going to be next door to her. She suggested some grid changes for a more workable arrangement. Jennifer Chang, Metropolitan resident: • Supports Sand Hill's position to put the loading dock on Vallco Parkway, since it will affect the Metropolitan residents and the future residents of Sand Hill Properties and Rose Bowl residences. • Shared some experience about noise; last year when Cupertino Square was built we had AMC they were building an underground sewage system; truck loading noise at 3 a.m. Make sure it will not occur again. Robin Su, Cupertino resident: • Propose to put the park back. • Keep truck loading dock on Vallco Parkway. • Referring to Plan C, they don't have any green space, except for town square. Elaine Chong, Metropolitan resident: • On the board of the Metropolitan homeowners. • It is fine to follow the application mechanism to try to remove the easements along pathways through their community. i a - 2os Cupertino Planning Comm;ssion ].3 December 9, 2008 • Said it would be good to follow the application mechanism to try to remove those easements; it would be good to tie the removal of the easements the approval of the plans, because we would hate for the plans to move forward anti not have the easements removed. Terry Lydon, Cupertino resident: • Metropolitan resident: • Divider between the Metropolitan and remainder of the unit; there wasn't much discussion on it; there are a lot of units facing out to the complex and as somebody brought up earlier, there are stairways and steps right out of their units. One thing being the park. • The other side is keeping the park in place; keeping the people in the park longer, probably get them to shop more. Theodore Hwa, Metropolitan resident: • Reiterated the importance of keeping he park at its present location; it is of benefit not only to the residents of the Metropolitan, but to all of the future residents of the Rose Bowl project, proposed senior housing. • It may be important to the success of the project as a whole because people may be attracted to the area by the presence of a park there. Winston Chen, Metropolitan resident: • Suggested that they keep the park, in the spirit of more green, for Rose Bowl and senior housing and surrounding neighborhoods. Ron Jou, Metropolitan resident: • Home overlooks Sand Hill development and windows in his house face that way. T'he Planning Co**~m;ssion likes alternatives and you like more than one option. Keeping the park might be a solution, but an alternative might be what Chair Miller described to pull back the buildings away from Metropolitan so it doesn't feel like urban jungle, with buildings up against buildings, looking at the back of retail space. Angeline Lim, Metropolitan resident: • The park is a good idea to serve as a buffer for the Metropolitan and remainder of the units west of the development. Public green space and urban parks have demonstrated again and again what a positive impact they have oi- the physical and mental health of community residents. Forwarded a copy of a magazine article discussing health benefits of parks and green space. Ken Wong, Board member of Metropolitan: • Agreed with many things Sand Hill Properties said today, particularly as it relates to the loading dock. The safety concerns discussed earlier are significant, the trucks come in early morning and late evening. • Truck deliveries are better served on the Vallco Parkway streets instead of the town square. • Shared other residents' concerns. Shawn Kim, Metropolitan resident: • Reiterated that the park should be preserved. • Make parking spaces under the retail spaces ~mderground. Kent Vincent, Cupertino resident: • Expressed concern that much of the retail built in Cupertino has been unsuccessful. One thing i a - 2os Cupertino Planning Co*n**>;ssion 14 December 9, 2008 to consider with the Main Street property is to make sure it is very competitive with other retail establishments like Santana Row and Valley Fair. The place needs to be a `happening' place where people go for the experience; go to shop and be entertained. Attracting the best restaurants and night clubs are important. It needs to be a festive place to attract people to. Rachel Yuen, Metropolitan resident and board member: • The town square attracts families and the park area is needed. The following persons completed speaker cards, but did not speak: Ming Li, James and Rene Yeh, Gun Turi, and Gene Sonu. Chair Miller closed the public hearing. Staff responded to concerns stated by the speakers: Jason Nesdall, Fehr and Peers: • Relative to cut through traffic, he said they conducted the traffic study for the project and analyzed locations down to Miller, Bollinger, Tantau as well as the Calvert area. Conducting the study of roadways, resulted in 1 O peak hour trips per hour on any one roadway, which is not a significant impact to the roadway system. Parking right up against Metropolitan: • Steve Piasecki said the concern spoke for itself; if there is parking across from one's front door, there could be some disturbances. References were made to plugging the park back in or some type of buffer area to soften it. Shifting the grid for a different arrangement: • Ken Rodrigues said the grid was established on a wallcable block between 280 and 300 feet, which is a normal city block. There were about 10 meetings which laid out the various uses and the pedestrian connectivity in the block. Said he was comfortable with the current design; and would not favor moving or shifting the blocks. Putting back the park area: • Steve Piasecki said the pazk was originally placed in this project along with the town square because with the RoseBowl and Metroplitan and senior units being added into the project, there is a larger population occurring in a neighborhood that doesn't have any parking. • The General Plan calls for a park standard of 3 acres per 1,000 population; staff felt it was a necessity; if it as to be relocated, reformed into plazas at the corners or green spaces elsewhere, it could also be a buffer zone as described. Request from Metropolitan to remove public easements: • Would have to be handled through separate application; although one board member asked if it could be included as part of this project. This project the use. permit deals only with this particular property. If Metropolitan wants to request removing those public easements, they would have to modify their use permit. • Steve Piasecki pointed out there was a conscious reason to have those in their location since it was believed that Metropolitan and whatever happened on this property should be integrated with one another and they should not exclude people or not have that kind of integration. If people are seeking to achieve a greater level of security, they can provide that at their balcony, and they could have a gate they control access to. is-zio Cupertino Planning Commission 15 December 9, 2008 Truck loading dock located on Vallco Parkway/: • Both the applicant and a number of Metropc~litan residents have suggested that it might make more sense on Vallco Parkway. The concern for safety, during the middle of the day there may be an issue, but if truck loading and unloading hours were restricted, it could mitigate the concerns. Staff said the applicant could explore other options including limited hours for that particular loading dock if it is off Vallco Parkway; and show a diagram to show truck turning movements. • The other concern was that there is a driveway serving the Rose Bowl, and even if it is empty most of the time serving the truck loading dock, it creates a 50 of 60 foot wide gap that a pedestrian would have to walk past to go from the shops at the Rose Bowl to the shops fronting on Vallco Parkway which is not good retail design. • The other option is the loading dock could tie designed similar to some in San Francisco that are well hidden. The applicant could also co~~sider an east side loading dock or front loading if there is a specialty market designed. Putting- Senior housing next to town square would potentially create a noise issue for the seniors residing there. • Staff said the Commission should scrutinize the conditions carefully to make sure that if there are highly active evening uses located not too proximate to any of the living quarters, including the living quarters associated with the Rose Bowl, Metropolitan and the seniors. • The applicant said they would not have food uses in the retail directly underneath the seniors' housing. Putting parking under the retail, which would allow more green space on top: • Staff said that it would be a question for the applicant since it is a large money factor to build over parking. • The applicant said they would not consid~~r doing it as it doesn't work from a security standpoint. Dealing with retail during inclement weather: • Said there were arcades designed into the building, as well as canopies. Importance of having the retail contiguous: • The applicant said that they have a series of retail components by block, which will start to evolve about types of uses, one that work:> well next to other uses. Restaurants would be grouped and other areas could be soft goods or fashion. He said he was comfortable with the walkability of the plan. Chair Miller: • Referred to past discussion of a pedestrian path between North Vallco and South Vallco, and questioned if it was in future plans. Steve Piasecki: • Said it was considered and is still in the plan for the long term. That particular site is not part of this parcel; we could ask staff to contribute their proportionate share to whatever that might be in the future. Since Apple has purchased. the two adjacent properties and the properties to the north, they have security concerns about having the public access Calabazas Creek. They may have some comments about implementing that at this stage. • Provided a summary of the Rose Bowl site, ~,vhich is immediately to the west that is 4+/- acres that Evershine group has purchased as part of the out parcels including the Rose Bowl site, the two sites next to Highway 280 they currentl~~ own. They are actively developing the plan sets ~a-Zip Cupertino Planning Commission 16 December 9, 2008 for development of the Rose Bowl site; made some modifications to address some of the issues that Mr. Randolph raised earlier about the earlier plan being too ambitious and they scaled it back to make it more conventional retail depths. They fully intend to move ahead with it in 2009. Com. Brophy: • Said that they need to save the park; the residents expect that from the applicant. • The square is the central part of the project; the project needs to have as much surface parking as possible if retail is to work. Said he was opposed to reducing the amount of surface parking as proposed by the city's architectural advisor. • Given the demand for future office space, he said he was concerned that office space is inappropriate for the site because of the state requirements that we produce yet more housing to support the additional office. Said he hoped that they could look at the possibility of replacing some or all of the proposed office space with appropriate residential structures, no more than an average of 2 bedrooms per unit, and square footage equivalent to the proposed office space. • Relative to the loading dock issue, said it made no sense either from a safety or aesthetic perspective why the loading dock would come through the square where there is a large number of pedestrians. There would be less of a problem having it on Vallco Parkway, although there are questions as to whether or not Mr. Randolph's comments were not sufficiently pessimistic. He said he had doubts whether retail could work on Vallco Parkway given the lack of traffic there. • The easement for Metropolitan that is not part of this issue, but I disagree with Mr. Piasecki, we should look at eliminating that easement if and when Metropolitan proposes it, I don't see how having that easement, it creates a problem for Metropolitan without producing any offsetting public benefit. • Senior Housing on the square; there is a large living facility adjoining Santana Row on Winchester that is up against a parking lot and there are no problems there. Com. Rose: • Said she supported keeping the park and would like to have it be a multi-age designation, not just grass with park benches. It will be a magnet toward the retail that isn't going to be in that area as well. • Move the loading dock over to Vallco Parkway; not opposed to parking on Stevens Creek. • Regarding the use of the Tantau/Stevens Creek corner, I don't have a strong opinion about what goes in there, but I think I would lean towards either something retail or a health club. • Regarding the proposed major retail on Vallco Parkway, in the third plan it includes a better parking scheme. My concern is that it eats away at the whole idea of having Vallco Parkway be some of the Main Street feel itself. The final plan eliminates some retail that was going to be on the Parkway. Corn. Kaneda: • Said he liked Plan A and B; Plan C is questionable with the chief concern being with putting parking lots along Vallco Parkway as opposed to keeping it fairly contiguous retailing. • The concept of taking out all the office spaces and converting it to residential is interesting, and if a developer was interested in entertaining that, it has merit. I presume that a significant amount of office space is one of the key parts of this project and I do not feel it is critical. • A comment was made about not having green space for the retirement community. In addition to the town square, the architects designed a green roof structure on the top of the podium, so that people living in the units will have access to and would be able to see out their windows if is-2~2 Cupertino Planning Commission 17 December 9, 2008 they are facing the west. I am also in favor of keeping the park but have a concern because I feel that the park is for public use and one of the chief beneficiv-ies I would have thought are the residents of Metropolitan. I am concerned that they want to have that public access to the park, but they don't want to give public access to the other parts of the community for the right-of--way which connects as part of this design where :is a master plan there is connections between this project and the Rose Bowl and the Metropolitan and other areas. The right-of--way and park should stay there. Said he was in favor of parking along Stevens Creek. Also comfortable with the truck loading dock as seen onto Vallco Parkway. I have heard some comments about how retail can't survive in Cupertino and I think it is rubbish. I think retail can survive easily in Cupertino; it is a matter of the quality of the buildings and design of the buildings. There is thriving retail in different areas and everyone has the potential to do well. Vice Chair Giefer: • Supports a major retailer on the Vallco side vrith surface parking. • With Apple's acquisition of properties across the street, I don't know that it will become a long term retail. I don't see the entire street Irrogressing into a flow of retails. • Supports truck loading dock, either loading a.s far east along Vallco Parkway from Rose Bowl or if it is a specialty market, we can front load off Finch through the surface parking area. • Supports the street parking along Vallco Parkway. The park should remain where it is; it makes sense to group residential and recreati~~nal spaces in the same area. It is a good valuable noise buffer. • With regard to Stevens Creek Boulevard, have always supported having parking on Stevens Creek; in order to have successful mixed use, there needs to be teaser parking or some amount of parking available to the retailers up and down Stevens Creek. • Would prefer to see the three story athletic club on the corner in Option A, or the retailer in Option C. Relative to Com. Rose's comment about having the vista of that retailer, that needs to happen and be presentable. My earlier comment about Finch Avenue, I would not want to look across town square and see a loading tray or parking lots; there would need to be some screening. I like the idea of the jewel box building at the edge of the town center. • No opinion about the European auto court; it appears to be a good idea and look forward to seeing more on that. • Expressed concern about the ABAG number, our housing to commercial square footage and would not want to invest our commercial balance in this project. If we go with office, I would prefer smaller proportion of office space in this project. I feel we should be adding more professional townhouses and condos in this area to have a true mixed use type, which is not being presented to us tonight. • Would like to see Finch Avenue aligned with the creek trail head across the street; realign Finch Avenue over the box culvert. • Would like to see senior housing adjacent to the residential use, but need to see more detail on that in terms of unit size; if the units get bigl;er, do the quantity of units available get smaller; we wouldn't want to see that reduction either. • In thinking through the hotel use in/and the adjacency to the parking structure, if the developer is okay and whoever they are approaching with the hotel is okay, I am alright not having token retail facing the hotel, because when you stay at a hotel and there is no specific parking for that use, you want to have proximity to your parlang as close as possible; I was trying to visualize fmding the entrance into the parking structure and what type of retail might be there. I think that the parking structure is adequately screened now and I am comfortable with what is being proposed. 14 - 2'13 Cupertino Planning Commission 18 December 9, 2008 Chair Miller: • Said he was sensitive to the applicant's comments and Mr. Randolph's comments that if they want retail in town and we want it to be successful, so we should within reason be doing everything we can to make it successful. 1f it makes this project more successful to have parking on both Stevens Creek and Vallco Parkway, it makes sense. • There were comments about not having it facing the hotel, and if it is not going to be successful there, I would rather not have it there; we have enough examples in town of retail that is sitting vacant. • The comments about Plan A, the retail structure 11,564 feet at the southwest comer of the project which was pointed out would be a problem. That needs to be reworked in Plan A. The rework for Plan C puts the parking structure; the retail is parallel to the other retail in Metropolitan; however, the parking surface area comes too close to the retail. I think there should be more effort put into, can we put some park in that corner, even is smaller than initially designed and still have some parking and keep the buffer between the Metropolitan and this project in tact and still have some amount of park area there. • In Plan A, the large 40,000 square foot retail is not going to be very attractive on Vallco Parkway, and perhaps a specialty market might be given that we put some parking over there; I would ask that staff and the applicant retook at that piece and see if there is some way to accommodate some parking and provide an attractive walkway through the area from the Rose Bowl into the rest of this project. • In terms of the amount of office space, putting 200,000 square feet of office here and not an accompanying amount of housing to me is the wrong way to go. I would not support more than 100,000 square feet. • It is important we put more housing here; if the number of bedrooms is limited to 2 bedrooms, it will not generate a karge number of children going to our schools; it is not a conducive area for children. In this particular project, I would look at the number of students that are being generated and see if that fits in with the numbers that the school system is projecting. I would look at those numbers again and see if and where we could put some housing; everybody wants office and nobody wants housing and the State says we cannot do that. • Asked the applicant to consider putting more housing in, perhaps it would be a mix of housing that has some lofts and studios, or some other version of housing. I believe that 2 bedrooms is not going to generate a lot of kids in the middle of a shopping mall. • I like the European auto court concept; it has varied uses. I would not be opposed to either the athletic club or a major retail tenant on the corner of Tantau and Stevens Creek as emphasized by Plans A and C. Applicant: • Said they would take the comments into consideration. Said he understood there was a concern about having office space at this location. There was a discussion about the special January 6, 2009 meeting. Gary Chao noted that no special notice was required for the special meeting. Jennifer Griffin, Rancho Rinconada resident: • Expressed concern that the application was not ready to go forward to the City Council and her objection to scheduling a special meeting during the holiday season. Chair Miller closed the public hearing. 14 - 214 Cupertino Planning Commission 19 December 9, 2008 Motion: Moved by Vice Chair Giefer, second by Com. Kaneda, to send City Council a Minute Order regarding the Sand Hill project, suggesting that the next City Council meeting be informational only since the Planning Commission has not completed their deliberations or re~eommendation on the project. (Vote: S-O-O) Chair Miller expressed his appreciation for the weal attended meeting, and thanked the speakers for their input, and their patience with the lengthy process. Motion: Motion by Vice Chair Giefer, second by Com. Kaneda, to schedule a special Planning Commission meeting on January 6, 2009. (Vote: 4-0-1, Com. Brophy abstain) The application was continued to the January 6, 2009 Planning Commission meeting. REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Environmental Review Committee: Chair Miller reported that the topic of the meeting was the Sand Hill project. Housing Commission: No meeting. Mayor's Monthly Meetint? with Commissiioners: Report given at previous Planning Commission meeting. Economic Development Committee: No report. Report of the Director of Community Development: Mr_ Piasecki reported on his attendance at a League of Women Voters meeting. Adiournment: The meeting was adjourned io the special Planning Commission meeting on January 6, 2009 at 6:45 p.m. There will be no Planning Commission meeting on December 23, 2008. Respectfully Submitted: Elizabeth Ellis, Recordvag Secretary 14 - 2'15 Exhibit A City of Cupertno 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3251 FAX (408) 777-3333 SUMMARY Agenda Item No. Coniniunity Development Department Agenda Date: December 16 2008 Application: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06, TM-2008-01, TR-2008-08 Applicant: Kevin Dare, Sand Hill Property Company Property Location: APN#s. 316-20-078, 079, and 085 -North of Stevens Creek Boulevard and south of Vallco Parkway between the Metropolitaiz mixed-use retail/condominium development and Tantau Avenue Application Summary: 1. Master Use Permit - for a mixed-use development within a P (CG, O, ML, Hotel, Res) Planned Development zoning district 2. Architectural and Site Approval - for the architecture of the individual buildings and overall site layout of the mixed-use development project 3. Tentative Map - to subdivide three parcels into five parcels 4. Tree Removal Request - to remove a total of 94 trees RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission adopted a minute action (See Exhibit A) recommending that the Council consider the project only as an introductory "information item" at this time until the Plann;ng Commission is able to make a formal recommendation to the Council Based on the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City cannot render a decision on a project until the Final Enviroiznlental Impact Report (FELR) circulation period ends. The city wide postcard originally noticed the project to be heard by the City Council for the first time on December 16, 2008, with the Planning Commission making their formal recommendation at their December 9, 2008 hearing. However, due to changes to the environmental documents, the final public circulation period was delayed. Consequently the Planning Commission was not able to make a final recommendation at their December 9, 2008 meeting. Due to the complexity of the project, it is adva~ztageous for the City Council to be introduced of the various facts of the project and take in public testimony. However, the Council is not ivz a position to make a decision without having the benefit .~f ~e Planning Commission's recommendation. Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Maul Street Cupertino December 16, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8s TR-2008-OS Page 2 BACKGROUND: The proposed project is planned to be developed on a vacant portion of property previously owned by Hewlett-Packard. The site previously received approval of a 400 unit residential condominium project with an 115,000 square foot retail shopping center and 3.5 acre public park that was to be developed by Toll Brothers. The residential condominium/retail shopping center project was approved by the City Council on March 21, 2006. However, the project approval was overturned by voters in Cupertino on November 7, 2006 when Measure E failed to pass during the elections. Sand Hill Property Company subsequently acquired the property in 2007 and has submitted the proposed mixed-use development DISCUSSION: Project Summary Sand Hill Property Company is requestutg approval of a Master Use Permit and associated applications to construct amixed-use retail, office, senior housing, hotel and a sports club development on a 17.4 acre site located on the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard, east of Wolfe Road and west of Tantau Avenue. The project will abandon Finch Avenue as a public street and is proposing to include a "Main Street" that will start from Vallco Parkway and run through the development with a series of plaza areas leading to a 1.64 acre town square ar,d park. The applicant will allow full public access over the newly configured private street network. The concept of the "Main Street" is to promote the vision for thi&: area within the South Vallco area as a pedestrian-oriented, vibrant "downtown-ish" gathering place to serve Cupertino residents and hold a regional appeal to visitors. Development OptiorLS A 8s B The applicant has submitted two development options for the City to consider that provide a variation in the mixture of uses: ~a-Zip Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino December 16, 2008 TM-2008-01 8~ T12-2008-08 Page 3 Pro osed Develo ment O tions Retail (sfl OO t 15 Athletic Office (sfl Senior Club Housing (sfl (units) *14 100,000 160 Hotel Open Space with a On-site (rooms) Public Easement Parking (ac) (stalls) 150 1.63 1,520 ~ ~ ~ ~~ O tion B 146,500 ~ 205,000 160 250 1.63 1,830 * A membership restriction of 9,000 is applied to the athletic club (equivalent to 98,800 sf of commercial use based on vehicle tri eneration) Note: sf= s care foota e, ac= acres Site Plan Alternative Develovment Plan C In response to comments by the Plaruling Co*rmission and the public, the applicant is contemplating a third development alternative (Alt. C), which will essentially replace the athletic club in Option A or the three-story office buildings in Option B. The Alt. Plan C incorporates the following features: ~ 30,000 square foot major tenant with adjacent 6,000 square foot additional retail pad on the corner of Stevens Creek Blvd and N. Tantau (in lieu of the athletic club or additional office buildings). Retail commercial buildings fronting Stevens Creek Blvd. in lieu of the park A 30,000 square foot major retail tenant building facing Vallco Parkway, in lieu of a 40,000 square foot major retail building. Surface parking between the retail shop in the former park location and the senior housing building Surface parking facing Vallco Parkway Fully enclosed loading dock facing Vallco Parkway 191 senior housing units, instead of the previous 160 proposed is-2~s Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino December 16, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8z T7Z-2008-OS Page 4 Please note that in order to approve Alternative Plan C, the environmental impact report would have to be revised and recirculated. Planning Commission The Planning Commission reviewed the project on October 28th and December 9~, and listened to public comments during the public hearing. The Commission expressed thoughts on the project, but was not able to make a recommendatiotz on the project because the Final Environ.iilental Impact Report (FIR) has not yet been prepared and circulated. The Commission will not be able to make a formal recommendation on the project to the City Council until after January 2, 2008, at which time the circulation period of the Final EiR will end. The Commission is not forwarding its preliminary thoughts at~d comments on the project at this time until the Commission cant complete their review of the project and the environmental reports and then make a :Formal recommendation to the City Council after considering all elements and public input. As a result, the Commission sent a minute order to the City Council requesting that the Council consider the project only as an introductory "information item" at thin time. The Commission also voted to hold a special Planning Commission public hearv1g on January 6, 2008 to allow the Commission the ability to make a formal recommendation on the project before the January 12, 2008 City Council meeting. Public Outreach The applicant cot ducted extensive public outreach in preparation of submitting the project application. The concept of the project was discussed in advance of the application submittal during community meetings as part of the public outreach for the South Vallco Master Plan. The following is a list of the public outreach that was conducted: o First community workshop -April 10, 2008 a Second community workshop -April 23, 2008 is-zis Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino December 16, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8~ TR-2008-08 Page 5 o Citywide community meeting -July 10, 2008 o Additional meetings with community groups, adjacent property owners 8s stakeholders iri the area o City wide post card mailed out v Project details posted on the web Submitted by: Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner Gar Chao, City Planner Submitt d b Approved by: ~~~~~ Steve Piasecki David W. Knapp Director of Community Development City Manager Attachments: Plan set Exhibit A: Minute Order of the Planning Commission, December 9, 2008 Exhibit B: P1ani1ulg Commission staff report of December 9, 2008 w/attachments i a - Zso CITY OF CIUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6536 (MINUTE ORDER) Exhibit A OF TI-IE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TI iE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING THAT THE COUNCIL CONSIDER THE MAIN STREET PROJECT AS AN INTRODUCTORY "INFORMATION ITEM" ONLY UNTIL THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS ABLE TO MAKE A FOR1vIAL RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-OEi (EA-2008-0~, TM-2008-01, TR-2008-08 Applicant: Kevin Dare/ 500 Forbes,. LLC (Main Street) Location: North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Finch Avenue and Tantau Avenue PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9~ day of De-cember 2008 at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Chairperson Miller, Vice-Chair Giefer, Rose, Brophy, Kaneda NOES: COMMISSIONERS: none ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: none ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: none ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/Steve Piasecki /s/ Marty Miller Steve Piasecki, Director Marty Miller, Chair Community Development Department Plann;rig Com„-+;ssion ~a-ZZi Faci~ibit B CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: U-2008-01, ASA-2008-06, TM-2008=01, Agenda Date: December 9, 2008 TR-2008-08 Applicant (s): Kevin Dare, Sand Hill Property Company Property Location: APN#s: 316-20-078, 079, and 085 -North of Stevens Creek Boulevard and south of Vallco Parkway between the Metropolitan mixed-use retail/condominium development and Tantau Avenue (Continued from October 28, 2008) APPLICATION SUMMARY The proposed project will require the following approvals with either option: 1. MASTER USE PERMIT (U-2008-O1) to allow for the mixed-use development within a P (CG, O, ML, Hotel, Res) Planned Development zoning district. 2. ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL (ASA-2008-06) -for the architecture of the individual buildings and overall site layout of the mixed-use development project. 3. TENTATIVE MAP (TM-2008-01) to subdivide 3 parcels into 5 parcels. 4. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT (TR-2008-08) to remove a total of 89 trees if Option A is chosen, or 73 trees if Option B is chosen. The project will also need follow-up architectural and site approvals for the design details of buildings including the sports club, the parking garage, and the interior elevations of the retail center. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission should consider the following options: - Review the proposed development options - Provide comments and direction on the project - Discuss which option is preferred - Consider holding a special meeting on January 6, 2009 to wrap up the project recommendations and to allow the project to stay on schedule 'The Planning Com~-+~ission may make a formal recommendation after the public circulation of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EiR) on January 2, 2009. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant has submitted two development options for the City to consider that provide a variation in the mixture of uses: is - zzz Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Maui Street Cupertino T1VI-2008-O1 8t TR-2008-08 December 9, 2008 Page 2 Pro osed Uses Retail Athletic Office (sfl Senior Hotel Open Space with a On-site (sfl Club Housing (rooms) Public Easement Parking (sfl (u:nits) (ac) (stalls) O lion A 150,000 *145,000 100,000 C_60 150 ~ 1.63 ~ 1,520 tion B 146,500 ~ 205,000 7.60 250 1.63 1,830 * A membership restriction of 9,000 is applied to the athletic club (equivalent to 98,800 sf of commercial use based on vehicle tri eneration) Note: sf= s uaze foota e, ac= acres Option A Option B Project Data: General Plan Designation: Comiizercial/Office/Residential Specific Plan: Subject oily to Heart of the City design guidelines Zoning Designation: P (CG, O, ML, Hotel, Res) Acres (Net): 16.1 acre:; Town Square 8t Parlc: 1.64 acre:; Project Consistency with: General Plan: Yes (w/revisions) Zoning: Yes South Vallco Master Plan: Yes (w/conditions) Heart of the City Specific P1an:Yes (design guideliu~es only) Environmental Assessment: Final E1R is currently being drafted 14 - 223 Please refer to the October 28, 2008 staff report for a detailed description of the project. Applications: U-2008-01, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8z T I2-2008-08 Page 3 . _~, .. _ . , R ~_ . _ ..., :, ~ _ ._ Total Biiildig Area ~ 544,168 square feet 540,500 square feet Bildmg Height) 30 feet (Retail) 30 feet (Retail) '~Gerieral Plan perriits x'60 feet (Office, w/ground '~47 feet (Office, w/ground build nag heights up to = floor retail) floor retail) bO ft w~°ground floor 41 feet (Hotel) *60 feet (Hotel w/ round ~ retail f ~ h ~ '~49 feet (Athletic Club, w/ , g floor retail) fi~ ~ j S ground floor retail) '~53 feet (Senior Housing 53 feet (Senior Housing , w/ground floor retail) =~~"' ~ 'zed '~~ , w/ground floor retail) 34 feet (Parking structure ...,t~~~; ~ ~ _-e~_~_ ~.~, - 44 feet (Parkin structure) Floor Area Ratio 72% 71 Lo~ Coves" "e 39% 42% Landsca a ~ogera' e"._ 42% 39% Parking 1,523 spaces (on-site only) 1,833 spaces (on-site only) 94 s aces (on-street onl ) 89 s aces (on-street onl ) BACKGROUND On October 28, 2008, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project. The Commission expressed support for the project and provided preliminary comments and suggestions for the applicant to consider. A number of public comments were also expressed during the meeting. The Planning Commission (See Exhibit G) and public (See Exhibit H) comments and suggestions are attached as exhibits. Comments from Metropolitan condominium residents are included as Exhibit B. The Planizi-izg Commission did not discuss any of the potential environmental impacts since the draft EIR was being circulated for public comments. The public circulation period for the draft EIR ended on November 24, 2008. Therefore, discussions of the environmental impacts of the project have been included in this report. DISCUSSION General Plan Conformity The project is consistent with the General Plan with the exception of required setback to height plane along Stevens Creek Boulevard. The General Plan includes the setback ratio requirements based upon setback to street and building height. For the Vallco area, a primary building bulk below a 1.5:1 slope line from Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue curb lines is required (See Exhibit I). Additionally, building heights may exceed the 45 feet height limit to a maximum of 60 feet with ground floor retail. Based upon these General Plan policies, the applicant states that the retail, senior housuZg, hotel and town square office buildings can comply with these standards. However, it appears that the athletic club or office buildings at the corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and Tantau Ave exceed the maximum building envelope. i a - zza Applications: U-2008-O1, AS.-~-2008-06 Main Street Cuperrino December 9, 2008 T'M-2008-O1 8z TR-2008-08 Page 4 Staff recommends: - That the applicant demonstrate substantial and appropriate ground floor retail uses on buildings over 45 feet. "Chic may include, but not be limited to, appropriate plate height, store depths, appropriately located outdoor seating area, etc. - 'The hotel/office buildings shall be redesigned to fit within the required building envelope along Stevens Creek Blvd. South Vallco Master Plan Conformity The application generally complies with the South Vallco Master Plan. However, a condition of approval will be added to address working with stakeholders to develop details of the Vallco Parkway treatment and public amenities. Development Allocation The proposed project is located within the Vallco Park South commercial center and will require allocation for the retail, hotel, office, and senior housing uses. Additionally, for Option A, the project will require addiitional commercial allocation for the athletic club. Below is a table that outlines the existing development allocations for the Vallco Park South center and the allocations needed for both Option A and Option B: Available (Jption A Option B Allocation in South Vallco area per the General Plan Commercial 231,270 sf ].50,168 sf (retail shops) 146,500 sf *98,800 sf (sports club) Total: 248,968 sf Office O 700,000 sf 205,000 sf Hotel **78 rooms 150 rooms 250 rooms Residential 400 units 160 units 160 units * A membership restriction of 9,000 is applied to the athletic club (equivalent to 98,800 sf of commercial use based . on vehicle trip generation) **686 rooms of the 764 are committed to Cupertino Square through a Development Agreement Note: Numbers in red exceed the General Plan available allocation Based on the General Plan allocations, Sand Hill is requesting redistribution of available allocation for office aild co**~mercial (Option A) from other geographical areas. The applicant is also requesting that the allocation required from the commercial pool for the athletic club be based upon a 98,800 square foot facility, as opposed to the proposed 145,000 square foot facility. An analysis was conducted by Fehr 8~ Peers to calculate the traffic 8z parking impact of the athletic club with a membership restriction of 9,000 members. Based upon this membership limit, it was determined that the 14 - 225 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8z TR-2008-08 Page 5 athletic club would generate traffic equivalent to a 98,800 square foot facility. Therefore, staff suggests that the sports club be required to draw down only 98,800 square feet from the commercial allocation. Although this still leaves a deficit of 17,698 square feet, staff recommends that the additional commercial allocation needed be drawn equally from other commercial centers in the City. Both options propose hotels with rooms that exceed the available number of hotel rooms in the South Vallco area. A total of 78 rooms are available for this area due to the fact that 686 hotel rooms are earmarked for Cupertino Square through a development agreement. There are no available hotel allocations u1 other geographical areas within the City. Therefore, the applicant would have to obtain additional allocation of hotel rooms through other options. The following options are available: 1. Reduce the number of hotel rooms 2. Sand Hill may communicate with Cupertino Square to release some of their earmarked hotel rooms. 3. Convert commercial/retail space to hotel rooms (this was recently done with the approval of a hotel at the Oaks Shopping center), since hotels generate fewer peak hour trips than standard commercial uses and are unlikely to be converted to a more intensive use. 4. Request a General Plan Amendment to increase the hotel allocation There is the possibility that additional hotel rooms will be added to the General Plan or that some of the hotel rooms committed to Cupertino Square/Evershine properties in the development agreement will be available in the future. Whichever of the above options is chosen, the conditions of approval should reflect that the reduction of commercial space be readjusted at the time that additional hotel rooms become available in the General Plan. Parking Both options propose shared parking throughout the development site, including both surface parking lots and parking garages (both subsurface and above groLUld). A parking analysis was conducted by Fehr and Peers (included in the draft EIR as Appendix C) using a shared parking analysis with ULI (Urban Land Institute) standards and found that the proposed parking in both options exceeds the anticipated parking supply needed for the project. Option A is proposing a total of 1,523 spaces. The estimated shared parking supply needed u1 Option A is 1,450 spaces, resulting in a surplus of 73 parking spaces. The estimated shared parking supply needed in Option B is 1,541 parking spaces, resulting in a surplus of 292 parking spaces. Below is a table that illustrates the proposed parking in both options will satisfy the parking needs of the development. i a - 22s Applications: U-2008-01, ASA-2008-06 Manz Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 'I1VI-2008-01 8~ TI2-2008-08 Page 6 3'iq p s don, ' s ~ ~~Off site~pa=king<°' ~ l ° ` l c "~~ Total Pro used ~ ~ " Pa " Parkan Sn 1 ~ ~ "~ Nee £~ S lus '~ ~ ~ ae ar aaag~ ~ a i V a l o ~ g'` rkan g ded ~,. ~.~ ,. « ., ~ r ~ ~ - _.. .._. ~wQ~~ti m 1,523 spaces 94 spaces 1,617 spaces 1,450 spaces +167 Qtlp~~~„=; 1,833 spaces 89 spaces 1,922 spaces 1,541 spaces +381 In addition to this on-site parking, the project will also provide additional on-street parking along Vallco Parkway that will consist of an additional 94 parking stalls in Option A and 89 parking stalls in Option B. The Planning Commission also recommended that the applicant consider providing on- street parking along Stevens Creek Boulevard. This issue was proposed to the City Council during discussions on the Heart of the City Specific Plan, at which time the Council indicated that they would not be supportive of on-street parking on Stevens Creek Boulevard. Therefore, the applicant has not incorporated this concept into the plan- Restaurant Use The draft Environment Impact Report (I'sII2) states that up to 10% of the retail commercial square footage could accommodate restaurant use without impacts to the proposed parking. A recent supplemental study was conducted by Fehr 8z Peers (see Exhibit C) evaluating the parking demand if restaurant use is increased to 30%. According to this study, the proposed parking in both options could provide sufficient parking to allow for this additional restaurant use as part of the retail commercial area based upon the on-site and street parking to be provided for the project. Staff Recommendations If the Plann;ng Commission finds merit in the project, staff reco*n*rends the following changes/conditions be incorporated into the approval. Staff will distribute a summary list of conditions of approval titles at the meeting. Site Plan Options - Option A as a preferred development scheme for the site - Reduce the office square footage to 60,000 square feet Option A is consistent with the intent of the South Vallco Master Plan in that it emphasizes the regional commercial nature of the area, and facilitates active, pedestrian-oriented developments, while keeping the office component ancillary/complimentary to the rest of the project. Gateway EntrX - Ensure any building(s) on the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and N. Tantau Ave. is significantly architecturally enhanced - Require a "gateway entry" on the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and N. Tantau Ave. is - 2z7 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8z TR-2008-08 Page 7 - Consider incorporating a pedestrian-oriented plaza at the corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and N. Tantau Ave. The northwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue is a critical focal point or "gateway" entry to the City of Cupertino on the eastern edge of the City and staff believes this corner should be developed with particular prominence. The South Vallco Master Plan states as an objective to require signage or monuments to delineate this area as unique to the rest of the City. Currently, the elevations of the athletic club and office buildings have not yet been submitted; therefore, staff is not able to recommend particular architectural details aimed features at this time. Parking Garage - Incorporate the proposed conceptual parking garage elevations as part of the project approval (See Plan Set). PARKING GNRAGE EI.EVATON- LGOgNG SGV,Ii 1 S ~~ ~j 'r PARKING GMAGE ELEVATKN'!-LOOKING WEST `~ Q. • Q ~ . ' f . ~ - _ ~ ... 1 _e _.. `_ _ ~ _: _ t ~. _ The proposed parking garage indicates use of textured concrete or precast panels, architectural metal frames or glass window walls, and a mix of vertical and horizontal elements to soften the massing and length of the garage. Additionally, artwork and architectural metal frames are included to give the building interest from a pedestrian level hz response to staff and the Commission's concerns about designing the ground floor of the garage to be pedestrian-friendly for the future possible conversion of the ground floor to retail commercial, the applicant has provided a series of "storefront" sections that would, at the present time, be screened with architectural frames or glass window walls, and could be replaced with storefront windows in the future. The City's Architectural Advisor has reviewed these plans and is supportive of the design. Hotel - Support turning the hotel to face Stevens Creek Blvd. to provide greater setbacks along Stevens Creek Blvd. and retain the Aleppo Pine tree 14 - 228 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Mai» Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8z 'T12-2008-08 Page 8 The footprint of the hotel has been flipped'. so that the "courtyard" appearance faces Stevens Creek Boulevard to provide greater setback and open space in front of the hotel site. This also allows the existing Aleppo Pine tree on site to be preserved. Staff is supportive of this modification and feels treat it provides better articulation along the Stevens Creek Boulevard street frontage. Town Sciuare/Park and Square Plaza Parking Area - Require the use of interesting and decorative semi-permeable paving materials for the town square - Modify the square plaza to allow for flexible uses/activities and enhance pedestrian connections Staff suggests that interesting and decorative semi-permeable paving materials be used for the town square to delineate it from other "street" areas of the project and that decorative pavers could be used to delineate the parking spaces, rather than the use of painted stripes. Staff also recommends that t:he town square and surrounding proposed parking loop be flush so that there is a seamless transition between the town square and the parking loop. The intent is to allow for flexible use of the town square by providing the ability to temporarily close off one or both sides of the loop street with removable bollards. These uses might include community events, a farmer's market or additional retail commercial uses such as outdoor seating for restaurants. Staff also believes that the square plaza parking area to the east of the town square is less critical and may not be conducive to a pedestrian or traffic-friendly parking situation. Therefore, one option is to modify the square plaza area by either eliminating the easterly loop or turn it into apedestrian/bicycle only path (see illustration below). -ar - t° The Grove (Los Angel~sJ 'c ~~.. '~ isl . _ 3y 7,)-~y~ link to parker ~ ' Th G (Los A m snows a.eiesw~s.. sw ~ -- edasb5an wr oT t-< ~a $ P I , ~nle rvle.muwsvp .~u one ~ Ys= - ~ ff y ._.. _... _.. r ~ ` ~ lY _ ~ -_-- - = _ _. _ _. .3,~..;~ _ -- r r "~ 4owtt . t 4, _ } ~~~ ,,, g- r- _ _ ~f . _ ,_ r ~y ~. ~. - 'Another Streets and Town Square Approach MAIN STREET CUPERTINO CuperLno CANNON DESIGN GROiIP Oclaber l5, 2008 ~ 4 - 229 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8z 'I'I2-2008-08 Page 9 Retail Frontages Staff recommends the following: - Incorporate retail on the ground floor of the southern elevation of the parking garage across the street from the hotel - Require the major retail building along Vallco Parkway to extend frontage all along Vallco Parkway to the driveway entrance - Require a retail storefront presence on the southern elevation of the major retail builduzg on Vallco Parkway that faces the town square Retail commercial uses, particularly on this development site as the "Downtown/Main Street" area per the South Vallco Master Plan, serve as the principal driving force to ensure the project functions as a regionally commercial area that provides for connectivity aizd synergy with the adjacent retail uses in the Cupertino Square Mall, and achieves the characteristics of a "downtown-ish," pedestrian-oriented, family- friendly and accessible gathering place. Therefore, staff recommends requiring the major retail building to extend its frontage along Vallco Parkway to the driveway entrai~ce. Staff believes that the liuzear retail presence along Vallco Parkway is important to connect to the future retail uses of the Rosebowl site and the future conversion of ground floor parking garage space to retail use. Also, there are additional locations in which retail uses should be emphasized. Staff recommends that the southern elevation of the parking garage across the street from the hotel should incorporate ground level retail commercial uses to help activate the street and connect pedestrians from east to west through the project. Additionally, attention should be given to the south elevation (rear) of the 40,000 square foot major retail building facing the town square area. A retail storefront presence should be incorporated along this southern elevation to enhance the visual aesthetic appearance of the town square and promote pedestrian activity and connection to the town square. ~_ - - -_ _ Retain linear retail frontage ~~ w~xo ~x rnu~eci Require retail storefront presence facing town square - ~~'~- -~_ Require ground floor _~~ ~~ _ ~`~p''~ .. retail below parking - -~~' - -- garage a ~t m.~ ~~ ~ ""~ N~ a'-~a Y _' _ J ~ ~ . ~ ~~~ ~ 4 - 230 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 TM-2008-01 8z TR-2008-08 Pare 10 Truck Loading Area Staff recommends the following: - Enclose the truck loading area at tlae rear of the major retail building along Vallco Parkway to provide noise and visual impact mitigation The applicant has modified the truck loading area per staff's recommendation to place it behind the 40,000 square foot major retail building and have access for it provided through Finch Avenue. This will achieve the objective of maintaiiziilg a continuous retail commercial frontage along Vallco Parkway and reduce the unsightly aspect of a truck loading dock facing the street. Additionally, it will reduce a potential safety impact of trucks backing out into a future pedestrian sidewalk and the street. Staff is aware of the objections raised by the Metropolitan residents and recommends that the mitigation measures recommended in the draft EIR be required pertaining to mitigation of noise impacts. The loading dock area in the plan is approximately 200 feet to the east of the Metropolitan property line closest residential unit. Alternatively, the Planning Co~-r+m;ssion may explore the option of realigning Finch Avenue to contour with the box culvert. T]us would allow the potential to move the loading dock area further to the east and enhance the buffer between the loading dock and the residential properties to the west_ Tree Removals The applicant is requesting approval of a Tree Removal permit to remove a total of 76 trees in Option A, and 65 trees in Option B. Additionally, the applicant is requesting to relocate 13 trees in Option A and 8 trees in Option B. The trees proposed to be relocated in both options include coast redwoods and canary island date palms. A tree survey (see Exhibit E) has been prepared by City Arborist David Babby that reviewed all 146 trees existing on site. The City's Arborist .is generally supportive of removing these trees, with the exception of trees 1 and 11 (Shamel Ash and Elm, respectively) because they do not appear to be in conflict with the development. In addition, the City Arborist recommends removing additional shamel as:h trees based upon their close proximity to the proposed buildings that would require uievitable removal, and the dechn;ng health of these trees. The majority of these trees are the double row of street trees along Vallco Parkway and N. Tantau Avenue. The applicant would like to retain as, many •of the mature shamel ash trees as possible along the street frontages that are not considered dead by the City Arborist. The reason for preservation of these trees is to maintain the existing streetscape character of the already mature double row of street trees. The tree survey has also determined that the valley oak tree along Finch Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard is dead and will require replacement. The replacement of this particular tree will involve the planting of two specimen size oak trees to flank the Finch Avenue entrance to the development. New streetscape trees in compliance with 14 - 231 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8z TR-2008-08 Page 11 the Heart of the City street tree requirements will be planted. Existing healthy Ash trees along the street frontages are intended to remain. In response to a comment at the Planning Commission meeting and Enviroizmental Review Committee meeting, the existing Aleppo Pine tree is now proposed to be retained. The applicant has flipped the hotel around allowing the pine tree to remain a part of the_ project site landscaping. Alternate Plan C In response to the Planning Co~-~-+**~+ission suggestion to consider alternative uses for the project if the developer is unable to secure the athletic club in Option A or the additional three-story office buildings in Option B at the corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and N. Tantau Avenue, the applicant has provided an Alternate C site plan. Although the City at this time cannot make a recommendation or approval on this Alternate C until further environmental review is conducted, the applicant would like to uztroduce this plan in the event they cannot secure the athletic club or additional office buildings. Therefore, the applicant is requesting that the City make a determination on the existing Option A or B, with the ability for the applicant to come back to the City to modify the approval with this Alternate Plan C if needed. The new Plait C incorporates the following: - 30,000 square foot major tenant with adjacent 6,000 square foot additional retail pad on the corner of Stevens Creek Blvd and N. Tantau (in lieu of the athletic club or additional office buildings). - Retail commercial buildings fronting Stevens Creek Blvd. in lieu of the park - A 30,000 square foot major retail tenant building facing Vallco Parkway, in lieu of a 40,000 square foot major retail building. - Surface parking between the retail shop in the former park location and the senior housing building - Surface parking facing Vallco Parkway - Fully enclosed loading dock facing Vallco Parkway - 191 senior housing units, instead of the previous 160 proposed e~--- % ~ ~^ s - - ~- '? ~~+.. ° i .yIii lilt{ f :f~7.~ { 1~ ~` s - t ~~7 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 'TM-2008-O1.8z TR-2008-08 Page 12 Staff and the City's Architectural Advisor have reviewed this plan and recommend the following additional modifications: - Align the major retail commercial building along Vallco Parkway along the street frontage, eliminating visible surface barking along Vallco Parkway - Align Finch Road north of the town square over the historical pathway of Calabazas Creek 8s provide an enhanced pedestrian crosswalk over Vallco Parkway that aligns with the future creek trail head planned on the north side of the street - Eliminate the square parking plaza to the east of the town square - Incorporate retail on the ground floor of the south elevation of the parking garage across from the hotel - Provide details on the "gateway" corner retail building on Stevens Creek Blvd and N. Tantau Avenue - Create a stronger town square defir~ing edge along the south side of the retail commercial building adjacent to Vallco Parkway - Provide high ceiling heights for rei:ail uses in the ground floor of the senior housing and office buildings to acconlxnodate a better mix of retail businesses - Provide landscape islands between diagonal parking spaces along Vallco Parkway - Detail the truck loading area - Enhance the plaza areas and create open space areas at key locatioizs to replace the displaced park Traffic Impact Analysis The draft EIR (See Exhibit F) lists the traffic-related environmental impacts for the project and mitigation measures associated with those impacts. Impacts that can be mitigated to a less than significant level include the impacts at the intersection of Wolfe Road and Vallco Parkway, bike lane and bicycle parking impacts, bus-stop impacts, and restaurant use impacts. Impacts that are considered "significant and unavoidable" are impacts on the Lawrence Expressway intersections and I-280 intersections listed in the draft EIR that are near the project site. Detailed information on the impacts and mitigations are included in the draft EIR. The significant and unavoidable impacts will require the City Council to approve a Statement of Overriding Consideration. -Air Quality Analysis Aside from construction-related impacts th<<t can be mitigated to a less than significant level, the draft EIR also lists air quality unpacts that are considered significant and unavoidable. The project will result in significant regional air quality impacts related to emissions of ROG (reactive organic gases), NOx (oxides of nitrogen), and particulate matter; however, mitigation measures are recommended to provide some effort to reduce impacts, including promoting use of other modes of transportation, including transit, bicycle and pedestrian use. The significant and unavoidable impacts will require the City Council to approve a Statement of Overriding Consideration. 14 - 233 Applicationsc U-2008-01, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino December 9, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8~ "IT2-2008-08 Page 13 Environmental Review Committee On October 22, 2008, the Environmental Review Committee reviewed the draft EIR. Comments provided during the meeting pertained to proposed tree removals, adequacy of utility services and storm drainage systems. On December 4, 2008, the Environmental Review Committee again reviewed the draft EIR and recommended approval. The Committee raised questions about traffic impacts, traffic mitigation measures, utility services, and the proposed truck loading area for the project, and responses were provided during the meeting. Environmental Schedule/Review Rc Approval Process The project will require certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to address the environmental impacts that were deemed "potentially significant" in the initial environmental review (Initial Study) of the project. These "potentially significant impacts focus on the subject areas of transportation and air quality. The project impacts on all other subject areas of the Initial Study were deemed to be "less than significant." A Draft Environmental Impact Report was prepared iuz October and was routed. for a 45-day public circulation and commenting period that ended on November 24, 2008. The City is working with the environmental consultant to review and respond to these comments so that they may be incorporated into the Final EIR. At this time, the City has received comments from CalTrans, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, Apple, Santa Clara Valley Water District, and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (See Exhibit D). The Final EIR is anticipated to be completed on December 22, 2008; however, a 10-day circulation period of the Final EIR is required before a project approval may be granted by the City. Therefore, the City may not render a decision on the application until this 10-day circulation period has ended, which is January 2, 2008. As a result, staff is outlining the following schedule of dates to explain the time frame in which the approval process for the project may take place: December 9 Planning Commission public hearing (continued). December 16 First City Council public hearing to introduce the project. December 22 Final EIR is completed and circulated fora 10-day period. January 2 Final EIR circulation period ends. City may hold public hearings to render a decision on the project. January 6 Planning Commission public hearing (continued). A recommendation may be rendered at this meeting. January 12 City Council public hearing (continued). Council may render a decision on the application. If approved, the Council must certify the Final E1R. January 13 Plaxuzing Commission public hearing (continued), if needed January 20 City Couizcil public hearing (continued), if needed 14 - 234 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Manz Street Cupertino TM-2008-O1 8z TR-2008-08 December 9, 2008 Page 14 The applicant has stated that it is imperati~>e to receive entitlements for the project by January 2009 in order to meet their critical financial milestones for the project. Submitted by: Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner Gary Chao, City Planner ~~ _ S. ~_ Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developme ENCLOSURES Plan Set Alternate Plan C Draft EIR Exhibit A: October 28, 2008 P1aT,T,;r,g Com,n;~sion stal`f report w/attaclnilents Exhibit B: Letters received from Metropolitan residents Exhibit C: Fehr 8z Peers restaurant use study Rxfi;bit D: Draft EIR comment letters Exhibit E: City Arborist Tree Survey Exhibit F: Draft E1R Exhibit G: Planrung Comm;csion comments from 10/ 8/08 Exhibit H: Public comments from 10/28/08 Exhibit I: General Plan Setback 12atio policy G.\Planrting\PDREPORT~pcilserepor-ts\2008ureports\LZ-2008-0Z, Dece~n6er 9, Final .doc 14 - 235 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Exhibit A Application: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06, TM-2008-O1, Agenda Date: October 28, 2008 TR-2008-08 Applicant (s): Kevin Dare, Sand Hill Property Company Property Location: APN#s: 316-20-078, 079, and 085 -North of Stevens Creek Boulevard and south of Vallco Parkway between the Metropolitan mixed-use retail/condominium development and Tantau Avenue APPLICATION SUMMARY: Sand Hill Property Company is :- __ „_ -_ ~,.~- - requesting approval of a Master Use Permit and associated applications to construct a mixed-use retail, office, senior housing, hotel and a _. sports club development on a 17.4 acre site located on the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard, east of Wolfe Road and west of Tantau Avenue. The project will abandon - Finch Avenue as a public street and is proposing to include a "Main Street" that will start from Vallco Parkway and run through the development with a series of plaza areas leading to a 1.64 acre town square and park. The applicant will allow full public access over the newly configured private street network. The concept of the "Main Street" is to promote the vision for this area within the South Vallco area as a pedestrian-oriented, vibrant "downtown-ish" gathering place to serve Cupertino residents and hold a regional appeal to visitors- The applicant has submitted two development options for the City to consider that provide a variation in the mixture of uses: ,. Pro osed Uses. Retail Athletic Office (sfl Senior Hotel Open Space with a On-site (sfl Club Housing (rooms) Public Easement ~ Parking (sfl (units) (ac) (stalls) O tion A 150,000 *145,000 100,000 160 150 1.63 1,520 O tion B 146,500 ~ 205,000 160 250 1.63 1,830 * A membership restriction of 9,000 is applied to the athletic club (equivalent to 98,800 sf of conmlercial use based on vehicle tri eneration) Note: sf= s uare foota e, ac= acres 14 - 236 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Mani Street Cupertino October 28, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8z TTZ-2008-08 Page 2 The proposed project will require the following approvals: 1. Use Permit - as a Master Use Permit for the mixed-use development within a P (CG, O, ML, Hotel, Res) Planned Development zoiiiizg district. 2. Architectural and Site Approval - for the architecture of the individual buildings and overall site layout of the mixed-use development project 3. Tentative Map - to subdivide 3 parcels into 5 parcels 4. Tree Removal - to remove a total of S~4 trees The project may need follow-up architectural and site approvals for the design details of buildings including the sports club, the parking garage, and the interior elevations of the retail center. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the proposed development options and provide preliminary comments relating to the site plan options. This report does not address the environmental impacts of the project at this time, such as traffic, parking and air quality, since the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIIZ) prepared for this project is still currently being circulated for public review. The project will require a recommendation by the Environmental Review Committee after the public circulation period ends on November 24, 2008. Following circulation of the environmental impact report, the Planr,;ng Commission will be able to make a recommendation on the entire project. BACKGROUND The proposed project is planned to be developed on a vacant portion of property previously owned by Hewlett-Packard. The site previously received approval of a 400 unit residential condominium project with an 115,000 square foot retail shopping center and 3.5 acre public park that was to be developed by Toll Brothers. The residential condomuuum/retail shopping center project was approved by the City Council on March 21, 2006. However, the project approval was overturned by voters in Cupertuzo on November 7, 2006 when Measure E failed. to pass during the elections. Sand Hill Property Company subsequently acquired the property in 2007 aizd has submitted the proposed mixed-use development. . Project Data: General Plan Designation: Specific Plan: Zoning Designation: Acres (Net): Total Building Area: Option A: Option B: Town Square 8z Park: Commerr_ial /Office /Residential Subject only to Heart of the City design guidelines P (CG, O, ML, Hotel, Res) 16.1 acres 544,168 square feet 540,500 square feet 1.64 acres 14 - 237 Applications: U-2008-01, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino October 28, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8z TR-2008-08 Page 3 Building Height: Option A: 30 feet (Retail) 60 feet (Office, with ground floor retail) 41 feet (Hotel) 49 feet (Athletic Club, with ground floor retail) 53 feet (Senior Housing, with ground floor retail) 44 feet (Parking structure) Option B: 30 feet (Retail) 47 feet (Office, with ground floor retail) 60 feet (Hotel, with ground floor retail) 53 feet (Senior Housing, with ground floor retail) 34 feet (Parking structure) Floor Area Ratio: 72% (Option A)/71 % (Option B) Lot Coverage: 39% (Option A)/42% (Option B) Landscape Coverage: 42% (Option A)/39% (Option B) Parking: 1,642 spaces (Option A, including on-street) 1,947 spaces (Option B, including on-street) Project Consistency with: General Pian: Yes, with revisions Zoning: Yes Heart of the City Specific Plan: Yes (design guidelines only) Environmental Assessment: EIR is currently under public circulation South Vallco Master Plan The project site is located within the South Vallco Master Plan area and has been designed to incorporate the vision of the master plan. In March 2008, the City Council authorized Sand Hill Property Company, as a major stakeholder u1 the South Vallco area, to develop the South Vallco Master Plaice aild to submit for their site specific development project concurrently for review and approval. The objective of the South Vallco Master Pian was to carry out the 2005 General Plan goal of developing the Vallco South area as a regionally oriented commercial district with emphasis on connectivity and cohesiveness. 'The South Vallco Master Plaice (Exhibit C) was adopted by the City Council on September 16, 2008, and pro~Tides a policy framework to coordinate developments within the plan area. The concept of "Maui Street" was incorporated into the master plan to reflect the vision of a "downtown-ish", pedestrian-oriented, family-friendly, accessible and well-landscaped area. The proposed project is consistent with the South Vallco Master Plait. 14 - 238 Applications: U-2008-01, ASA-2008-06 Mai~~ Street Cupertino October 28, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8z T'R-2008-08 Page 4 DISCUSSION Site Layout The proposed project consists of both horizoiztal and vertical mixed-use developments that incorporate a variety of land uses including retail shops and restaurants, office development, a hotel, senior housing units, and a town square and park. 'The concept is to create a "lifestyle" center that promotes a sense of place, and achieves the master plan vision of a downtown-like commercial development that is pedestrian- and family- friendly for residents and visitors. Although two options have been submitted for review, the common components of both options include the following: • A 4-story senior housing building with ground floor retail shops on the west side of the development site adjacent to the Metropolitan mixed-use condom;T,;um project and future Rosebowl development site; • An assembly of retail buildings along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vallco Parkway within the center of the site :arouizd the perimeter of the town square; • A hotel along Stevens Creek Boulevard; • A multi-story office complex with ;~ multi-level parkuzg garage along Vallco Parkway; • A .75 acre town square in the center of the development site connected by a "Main Street" with plaza areas; and • A .89 acre park along Stevens Creek Boulevard oiz the southwest corner of the site. The key differences between the two option:; are illustrated as follows: O tion A O Lion B Office 100,000 sf 205,000 sf Hotel 150 rooms 250 rooms S orts Club 145,000 sf NA Gara e ( arkin ) 5 levels (1,100 stalls) 4 levels (1,120 stalls) ~ 4 - 239 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino October 28, 2008 7"M-2008-01 8~ T'I2-2008-08 Page 5 Parking and Circulation Parking for the project will be accommodated primarily by shared parking throughout the development site with the parking garage accommodating parking for the retail, office and hotel uses. Parking for the senior housing building will be provided by a subsurface parking garage below the building. 'The applicant is considering reserving portions of the garage parking to the sports club members (Option A); however details have not yet been submitted for review. Additionally, surface parking will be provided around the town square area and parallel parking spaces along the interior street network. Further, Vallco parkway will be reconfigured to facilitate diagonal on-street parking along the south side of the street. - ~ --- ..: ___ _ ~,..a ~ ~ ---- _ . . • `A _ ~ i _ t _ • ~ .\ ~ ?. ':. ~ . J a ~ :. i 11 ~ i ~ - Ei --^°rsv.r ~ r ~r 1 f :~ ~ 3 l ~ - : • The development will be accessible from the newly configured private "town square" drive from Steveizs Creek Boulevard and Vallco Parkway, through the town square area. Additionally, there will be two driveways leading to "Main Street" from Stevens Creek Boulevard alzd two driveways from Vallco Parkway. The parking garage will be accessible from both the Stevens Creek Boulevard entrances aizd directly from Vallco Parkway. Staff concerns/co~mnents: If the PlaiZning Commission finds merit in the project, staff recommends that the followuzg issues be addressed: Identifiable entry and lobbv area for the senior housing: The project has not yet provided a defined. entrance for the senor housing building indicating appropriate pick up and drop off area. Staff recommends that the applicant provide a conceptual plan to incorporate this element unto the plan. 14 - 240 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino 77VI-2008-O1 8z T12-2008-OS October 28, 2008 Page 6 Loading dock along Vallco Parkway_ One of the goals of the South Vallco Master plan is to create a seamless pedestrian and retail experience alorig Vallco Parkway. In addition, any trucks backing out onto Vallco Parkway •would potentially create traffic and safety concerns. The project proposes a truck loading dock that is accessed from Vallco Parkway for the major retail building adjacent to the Rosebowl site. Staff recommends the loading dock be relocated to the interior of the project accessed from the south side of the retail building. Town Square: Staff supports the town square concept. However, sufficient and safe pedestrian connections must be provided iuz order to facilitate uzviting and usable open space and activate the commercial experience along its perimeter. Currently, the town square is surrounded by parking aizd there is no definable connection to the adjacent plazas or retail spacer. The City's Architectural Advisor has reviewed the project and recommends shifting the town square to one side to allow the retail and restaurant activities to spill out into the town square (see diagram below). Alternatively, one of the perimeter drives may be designated for pedestrian access only to achieve the same purpose. Consequently, the number of parkiuzg stalls around the town square .should be reduced or rearranged to lessen the parking inte~tsity. is - zai Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino October 28, 2008 'I'M-2008-O1 St TI2-2008-OS Page 7 Architectural Design The architectural design of the project incorporates a variety of architectural styles that draw from Cupertino's agrarian and farming history, but also includes an appealing and interesting mixture of modern architectural features to create an engaging and inviting pedestrian-scale setting. The retail buildings along Stevens Creek Boulevard are proposed at a pedestrian-scale and include exterior building materials such as vertical wood board and batten and stucco plaster wall exteriors, and standing seam metal and slate the roofing that are representative of the agrarian and farming history of Cupertino. The multi-story office/retail building in Option A is comprised of a stucco exterior with exposed timber and wood truss elements under the roof, stone veneer finish, and slate the roofing. The hotel is designed with a more modernized design including semi arched roofing systems, standing metal seam roofing, and a stucco plaster exterior. The detailed architectural designs for the parking garage facing Vallco Parkway, the building elevations facing the interior private driveways and the sports club in Option A have not yet been submitted. Additionally, the detailed architectural design of the office building in Option B has not yet been submitted. Staff conce~•ns/comments: Gara~;e elevation: .Staff is concerned about the parking garage elevation facing Vallco Parkway due to its significant linear length, and the fact that the elevation along Vallco Parkway should accommodate future ground level retail uses in order to be consistent with the master plan vision to promote pedestrian-scale commercial in this area. Staff recommends that the ground floor space of the parking garage facing Vallco Parkway be constructed to allow. for future conversion of this parking level to retail commercial space. The City's Architectural Advisor recommends that the parking garage provide design treatments to mitigate the massing of the structure. Staff also recorrunends that the parking garage elevation facing Vallco Parkway be designed to include architectural elements such as glazing along the street frontage, ,,,zdulation in the wall length to break up the massing of the linear length of the garage, and appropriate landscaping features and tree placement. Office and sports club: According to the City's Architectural Advisor, the office building is the weakest in terms of architectural design. Further, the sports club needs to mitigate the massing volume of the building with smaller volumes to further articulate the buildu1g. T'he sports club Uuilduzg must also enhance its east and south elevations to respect the eastern gateway to the City of Cupertino at Tantau Ave. and Stevens Creek Boulevard i a - Zan Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2.008-06 Main Street Cupertino 11VI-2008-O1 8t T12-2008-OS October 28, 2008 Page 8 Building height and ground floor retail presence: The maximum building height is 45 feet. The General Plan allows buildings to go up to 60 feet if there is a retail component on the ground floor. The General Plan also requires buildings along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau Ave. to be under a maximum building setback to height ratio of 1.5: 1 feet and 1: 1 feet, respectively. The intent of this rule is to minimize .mass and visual intrusion along Stevens Creek and Tantau. Staff recommends that the applica~lt demonstrate that there are strong and appropriate ground floor retail uses on the ground floor of all of the proposed buildings that exceed 45 feet in height. In addition, buildings along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Tantau Aver_ue must be revised to accorr+rr,odate the required setback to height ratio. Tentative Map The Tentative Map involves three existinf; parcels on the property between Vallco Parkway and Stevens Creek Boulevard between the Metropolitan mixed-use development site and North Tantau Avenue. The applicant is proposing to subdivide these three parcels into a total of five parcels to accommodate the various buildings proposed. The parcels will allow for the park, senior housing building, hotel, and athletic club to be located on separate parcels from the retail shops/restaurants and office building surrounding the town square. Landscaping and Tree Removals The' conceptual landscape plan includes tree-lined streets throughout the entire development and around the perimeters of each of the buildings, a .89 acre public park at the southwest corner of the site along Stevei~s Creek Boulevard, and a .75 acre town square that is connected to the "Main Street." Additionally, the applicant is proposing aroof-top garden on top of the senior housing building for use by the residents of the building and also to soften the visual impact of the development for residents living in the Metropolitan condominium site and future Rosebowl development. The applicant is requesting approval of a Tree Removal permit to remove a total of 94 trees. A tree survey has been prepared by David Babby that reviewed all 146 trees existing on site. The tree survey has determined that the Oak tree along Finch Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard is dead and will require replacement. The replacement of this particular tree .will involve the planting of two specimen size Oak trees to flank the Finch Avenue entrance to the development. New streetscape trees uz compliance with the Heart of the City street tree requirements will be planted. Existing healthy Ash trees along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vallco Parkway are intended to remain. 14 - 243 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino October 28, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8z TR-2008-08 Page 9 Commercial and Office Allocation The City of Cupertino recognizes that there i a finite amount of new development that can occur within the City before traffic levels exceed the City's desired transportation level of service. This finite amount is defined as the City's "build out" development potential. The City's General Plan outlines the "build out" potential for various neighborhoods and centers within the City through an allocation of square footages for commercial and office uses, and of number of units for residential and hotel developments: The General Plan requires that developments not exceed the development "build out" allocation for the neighborhood or centers in which the developments are located based upot2 the type of use of the development. The proposed project is located within the Vallco Park South commercial center and will require allocation for the retail, hotel, office, and senior housuzg uses. Additionally, for Option A, the project will require additional commercial allocation for the athletic club. Below is a table that outlines the existing development allocations for the Vallco Park South center and the allocations needed for both Option A and Option B: Available Option A Option B Allocation per the General Plan Commercial 231,270 sf 150,168 sf (retail shops) 146,500 sf 'F98,800 sf (sports club) Total: 248,968 sf Office O 100,000 sf 205,000 sf Hotel **78 rooms 150 rooms 250 rooms Residential 400 units 160 units 160 units " A membership restriction of 9,000 is applied to the athletic club (equivalent to 98,800 sf of commercial use based on vehicle trip generation) *"686 rooms of the 764 are comr,,;tted to Cupertino Square through a Development Agreement Note: Numbers in red exceed the General Plan available allocation Based on the available allocations per the General Plan, Sand Hill is requesting redistribution of available allocation for office aizd commercial (Option A) from other geographical areas. There are no available hotel allocations in other geographical areas within the City. Office: Staff is concerned with the amount of office space (100,000 to 205,000 sf) being requested u1 both options. The General Plan aizd the South Vallco Master Plan designate the Vallco South area as the City's regional commercial area with emphasis on facilitating active and retail friendly developments. Office uses should be ancillary and complimentary to the predominant commercial uses. ~ a - 2aa Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino October 28; 2008 TM-2008-O1 Sz TR-2008-OS Page 10 Further, two of the City's largest corporate citizens (HP and Apple) are also located in the Vallco area. Both companies have expressed plans to add onto their respective facilities in the near future; and in Apple's case, build a new corporate campus. Staff is concerned that the amount of office space being requested by Sand Hill for the Main Street project would significantly diminish the current office space allocation, and thereby undermine the ability of major corporations such as HP and Apple to grow and develop their respective corporate campuses. On October '21, 2008, Apple and HP formally requested that the City Council increase office space allocation. The City Council agreed to discuss and study the possibility of increasing office space as part of the Housvzg Element process. However, the Housing Element process will not conclude before Sand Hill proceeds with this application. Staff recommends that the proposed office component for both plan options be reduced to no more than 60,000 square feet in order to be consistent with the intent of the General Plan and to achieve appropriate project synergy and balance. Hotel: Currently, 686 hotel rooms are earmarked for Cupertino Square through a Development Agreement. This only leaves 78 rooms available for this project. Depending on which site option the Commission ultimately decides to recommend, the amount of available hotel allocation is short by 72 to 172 rooms. The following options are available: 1. Reduce the number of hotel rooms 2. Sand Hill may communicate with Cupertino Square to release some of. their earmarked hotel rooms. 3. Redirect coin-tnercial/retail space to hotel rooms (this was recently done with the approval of a hotel at the Oaks Shopping center) 4. Request for a General Plan Amendment to increase hotel allocation Commercial /retail: Fehr and Peers, the traffic consultant that prepared the traffic impact analysis for. the project, has calculated the traffic and parking impact of the athletic club with a membership restriction of 9,000 members. Based upon this limit, the club would generate traffic equivalent to a 98;800 square foot facility, as opposed to the proposed 145,000 square foot facility. Therefore, staff suggests that the sports club be required to draw down only 98,800 square feet from the commercial allocation. With this adjustment, the total commercial allocation needed for Option A would be 248,968 square feet. Although this still leaves a deficit of 17,698 square feet, staff recommends that the additional commercial allocation needed be drawn equally from other geographical areas within the City that have available commercial allocations. 7 4 - 245 Applications: U-2008-O1, ASA-2008-06 Main Street Cupertino October 28, 2008 TM-2008-O1 8z TIZ-2008-08 Page 11 Public Outreach A City wide community meeting was conducted by Sand Hill on July 10, 2008. Please refer to Exhibit G for the detailed summary of the meeting. A citywide postcard was mailed out for the Planning Commission public hearing. In addition, detailed project information and public hearing information was posted on the City's webpage. Housing Commission The Housing Commission reviewed the project on September 11, 2008. Key comments are summarized as follows: • Retail should be provided along Vallco Parkway to activate the street; • The garage elevation facing Vallco Parkway is lengthy and should be broken up; • Senior housing should have an identifiable entrance and sufficient area for pick up and drop off (shuttle service). Senior Commission The Senior Commission reviewed the project on September 18, 2008. The Commission inquired about the proposed senior housing and requested project details such as pricing, operation, unit types and programs. Teens Commission The Teens Commission considered the project on October 8, 2008. Key comments are summarized as follows: • Provide retail and restaurants along Vallco Parkway; • The project should be opened up more to Stevens Creek Boulevard; • The project should have on-street parking along Stevens Creek Boulevard to slow down traffic and activate retail experience; • The more retail the better; • Preferred Option A since it is a better use of the site, more attractive to high school students, the sports club will provide more draw to the town square and is a more appropriate use adjacent to the gateway of the City. Submitted by: Aki Honda Snelling, Senior P1ai2ner Gary Chao, City Planner .Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development ENCLOSURES Exhibit A: Plan set Exhibit B: Draft Environmental Impact Report Exhibit C: Draft South Vallco Master Plan Exhibit D: Current Development Allocation Matrix Exhibit E: General Plan Policy Relating to South Vallco Area Exhibit F: City Wide Post Cards Exhibit G: Conmlunity Meeting Sunzmai-y, July 10, 2008 Exhibit H: Email correspondences from residences G: \ Planzzing \ POREPORT \ycUser-eports \?OOSurcymYS \ iZ-2008-1.doc 14 - 246 ESTIMATED EIR SC)EIEDULE -undated 10/1 O/OS DJPBcA proposes the following optimum schedule for preparation of an EIR. DJPBcA can conzniit to maintaining the schedule in the areas which aze within our control. Completion of the EIR, as described in the schedule below, is based upon receipt of all necessary project information upon receiving authorization to proceed. Delays in receiving requested information or responses by others will result in at least day-for-day delays in the overall schedule. The below schedule also assumes that no substantial cotments are received during the circulation of the EIR that raise any new issues, or require additional technical studies. Estimated Task at Actual Duration Elapsed Time Completion Date Com l ton Authorized: Mazch 10 Received all DJPBcA receives authorization to proceed and required project details: information outlined in the sco a of work - --- Febru 29 Jul 25 Tree surve com leted and rovided to DJPBcA 4 weeks 4 weeks March 28 Ma 13 Biotic evaluation completed (assuming field survey completed in mid A ril 2 weeks 10 weeks Ma 5 Aril 21 Tree survey addendum that analyzes Scheme 3 completed and rovided to DJPBcA 2 weeks 14 weeks ~ June 4 Jul 1 Transportation impact analysis completed and provided to DTPBcA ~ - 10 weeks 18 weeks June 30 Jul 1 Noise anal sis com leted 2 weeks 20 weeks Jul 14 7u1 17 DJPBcA receives approval of contract amendment request dated Ma 21, 2008 22 weeks - Jul 29 DJPRcA receives traffic memo regarding reduced scale alternative that would avoid project intersection and freeway im acts ---- 23 weeks Au ust 4 Au st 5 Air uali re ort com leted ~- 23.5 weeks Au st 6 Au ust 5 DTPBcA drafts Notice of Pre azation (NOP 1 vveek 23 weeks Au st 4 Au st 4 Ci reviews NOP 1 vveek 24 weeks Au st 1 1 - DJPBcA revises NOP 2 da s 24.5 weeks Au st 13 DJPBcA receives water supply assessment from CalWater via the Ci re uest sent Ma 13 2008 12 weeks 24:5 weeks Au ust 13 Au st 13 DJPRcA receives revised traffic re ort from Ci /Fehr 8c Peers 27 weeks Se [ember 2 Se tember 5 DJPBcA com letes Administrative Draft EIR 3.5weeks 28 weeks Se tember 8 Se tember 8 NOP ublic circulation ends 4 H•eeks 28.5 weeks Se tember 11 Se tember 11 City provides DJPBcA final approved South Vallco Master Plan -~-- 29 weeks Se tember 12 Au ust 18 City completes review of Administrative Draft E1R and - rovides DJPBcA with a consolidated set of comments 1 week 29 weeks Se tember 15 Se tember 16 U dated air uali re ort com leted ~ 29 weeks Se tember 15 Se tember 15 Public Works completes review of Administrative Draft EIR and rovides DJPBcA with a consolidated set of comments 2 ~w•eeks 30 weeks Se tember 22 Se tember 18 DJPBcA revises document and prepares "Screencheck" EIR assumin comments from Public Works are minor 2 weeks 31 weeks Se tember 26 Se tember 26 City meets with adjacent jurisdictions and County regazding traffic im acts Se t. 29 -Oct 3 City completes review of "Screencheck" EIR and provides - DJPA with final comments, including language for traffic im acts to CMP intersections 1 week 32 weeks October 3 October 7 DJPBcA revises document and prepares Drag EIR for public circulation 1 week 33 weeks October ]O October 10 Public Circulation of Drag EIR 45 da s 7 ~•eeks 39 weeks November 24 November 24 Environmental Review Committee meetin 1 da 37.5 weeks November 12 Plannin Commission heazin s if Burin circulation eriod 1 da 33-39.5 weeks Oct. -Nov. DJPBcA drafts the Final EIR, City reviews Final EIR, DJPBcA revises Final EIR based on City comments and prints Final EIR for circulation* 4 weeks 43 weeks December 22 Final EIR Circulation eriod 10 da s 1.5 •weeks 45 weeks Janu 2 Ci Council hearin 1 da 45 weeks Janu 6 TOTAL +/-45 weeks Notes: * Assumes that no new technical analysis is required and that a substantial amount of public comments are not received. 14 - 247 Exhibit C ~' CONCEPrl`LTAL GiTII]ELINE i s - zas VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN 1 of 28 A CKNO~'~'LE;D GEMENTS Community and Neighborhood Groups City of Cupertino residents Concerned Citizens of Cupertino (CCC) Cupertino Against Rezoning (CARe) Metropolitan Home Owners Association and residents Rancho Rinconada Recreation Association City Council Dolly Sandoval, Mayor Orrin Mahoney, Vice Mayor Kris Wang, Council Member Gilbert Wong, Council Member Mark Santoro, Council Member Planning Commission Lisa Giefer, Chairperson Jessica Rose, Planning Commissioner Marty Miller, Planning Co*nm~ssioner David Kaneda, Planning Commissioner Paul Brophy, Planning Commissioner City Staff David Knapp, City Manager Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development Kelly Kline, Redevelopment and Economic Development Manager Gary Chao, Senior Planner David Stillman, Senior Civil Engineer Consultants Ken Rodrigues, Kenneth Rodrigues and Partners Gary Laymon, The Guzzardo Partnership Paul Downs, Paul Downs Consulting Scott Schork, BKF Engin_ Bering Jason Nesdahl and Todd Henry, Fehr and Peers South Vallco Property Owners Apple Inc. Cupertino Property Development, LLC Hewlett Packard Menlo Equities Metropolitan Home Owners Association Orbit Resources Rockwood Capital 500 Forbes, LLC (an affiliate of Sand Hill Property Company) _- is-gas VA7 7 r0 SOUTH MASTER PLAN L 2 Of 2$ Santa Claza Valley Water District TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................•----• . ........._.1 -3 PLAN AREA ....................... ..................•----..........-•-----..._..................-----••---- ........._.1 -3 RELATIONSHIP TO THE CTTY'S GENERAL PLAN ................•--°---............--- ___.._.._.,1-4 THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH PROCESS .............................................•_____ __________.1-4 GOALS AND GUIDING PRII~TcIPLES------------------•---.....---•-------..._____________...._. ...........1 -4 CHAPTER 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS LAND USE........----° ...............................................................................^--- -°--..... ?- 1 CII2CULATION .......••• ............................................•-•------........--------._.........•• °•-°•-• 2- 1 CHAPTER 3 VISION AND OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVES IMPROVE AREA IDENTITY AND CHARACTER ..........--•---------------- -•••••••• 3-2 IMPROVE CIRCULATION AND CONNECTIONS ,•-__-_--•••••••••••••••••_-_-__••_•••••••••• •••••••-.3-2 PROMOTE COMPATIBILI'I-Y WITH EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS 3-2 CHAPTER 4 COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND AESTHETIC LANDSCAPE ................•--................ ..--° 4- 1 DESIGN FEATURES-••••••,•-••••-•-• ...........................................................•---._.. .........4-1 CHAPTER 5 CIRCULATION FUTURE PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION FUTURE VEHICULAR CIRCULATION ............................................... ........... .........5-1 CIIAPTER 6 LAND USE FUTURE LAND USES AND SERVICES ..................................... 6-1 SUSTAJNABILTTY AND ENERGY EFFTCIENCY........-' ................................•----•--•-•- 6-2 CHAPTER 7 IMPLEI~~NTATION - IMPLEMENTATION STEPS__________________________•_•-_°__-_°_..........__... ---_-7, 1 APPENDIX 14 - 250 VALLCO SouTx Mns-rER PLAN - 3 of 28 OUTREACH SCHEDULE CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On March 4, 2008, the City of Cupertino City Council initiated the South Vallco Master Plan process. The City Council defined this plan as a blueprint or "focused" Master Plan ("Plan") to provide guidelines and a fi-amew~ork primarily dealing t~vith the coordination and interface of the properties in the area commonly referred to as South Vallco ("plan area") (see Figure 1.1). The impetus of this action stemmed from the City of Cupertino General Plan Policy 2-30, Strategy 1 Prepare a Master Plan for this area to ensure continuity of mass, scale, connectivity and adequacy of infrastructure :ind services, including schools." While the focused Master Plan will. not study or re:conztnend changes within property lines, coordinating connections between the properties in this area will improve the overall character and identity of the South Vallco area. The City Council -also directed Sand Hill Property Company, operating as 500 Forbes, LLC, to manage the Master Plan process, community outreach, and creation of the Master Plan document. Additionally, it was directed that the City Council be provided a progress report during the process. The project team has worked closely with City of Cupertino Planning Staff, adjacent property owners, and the community to establish the goals for this area and an actionable plan to achieve those objectives. The South Vallco Master Plan reflects collaborative coniniunity involvement, provides and analyzes existing and future land uses, vehicular circulation patterns, and pedestrian circulation patterns. Additionally, the Plan -includes reconzniendations to promote the creation of streetscape, crosswalk enhancements, landscaping, lighting, way finding, signage, and street furniture. Implementation of this plan will bring several. long-term benefits to the City of Cupertino and the community at large; including • Area revitalization • Aesthetic coordination • Property connectivity • Roadway infrastructure optimization • Identity recognition PLAN AREA Figure 1.1 is an aerial photograph, showing the boundary of the plan area. The development framework of the area has already been established with commercial uses such a regional shopping center, office buildings, and high-density residential. 14 - 251 V,~.uo Sovrx MASTER Plan 4 of 28 Additional commercial and residential uses have been entitled, pending construction on two properties at the corner of Wolfe Road and Vallco Pazkway. It is anticipated that improvements to existing properties and development of unimproved properties in the plan area will also occur, further spurring the revitalization of this area. South Vallco is aregionally-oriented commercial district supported by its accessibility to Interstate 280, Stevens Creek Boulevazd, Wolfe Road and Tantau Avenue. South Vallco is bounded by Interstate 280 to the north, Stevens Creek Boulevard to the south, including Cupertino Square shopping center (formerly known as Vallco) along the east and west side of Wolf Road and the office development along the east side of Tantau Avenue. The commercial nature of this area is evident by the types of existing and approved uses along with roadway infrastructure that supports high traffic volumes. RELATIONSHIP TO THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN The City of Cupertino General Plan includes a requirement that a Master Plan be created for the South Vallco area. While this document fulfills that requirement, the plan is intended to provide a framework for discussion and may evolve over time. The General Plan acknowledges in Policy 2-30 that South Vallco is a regionally oriented commercial district and expresses the need for a Master Plan to ensure that the plan area is well connected and cohesive. 14 - 252 VALL.COSOUTH MASTER PLAN S'Of 28 FIGURE 1. 1: SOUTH VALLCO PLANNING AREA This plan addresses the Master Plan requirement to ensure continuity of mass, scale, connectivity and adequacy of services. Additionally, this plan recommends a program to continue and enhance the streetscape along Vallco Parkway and Wolfe Road as articulated in the second strategy in Policy 2-30. An implementation program highlighting specific improvements and actionable steps is also included. THE COA'IlVIUNITY OUTREACH PROCESS The community outreach process encompassed a series of meetings with adjacent property owners, community action groups, neighborhood associations, community members and the City of Cupertino Community Development Department. The project team held two community workshops that were open to the general- public to discuss the vision and desired aesthetic qualities for South Vallco. There were over twenty (20) separate meetings with community groups, property owners, and City representatives: City of Cupertino City Council Community Development Department Master Plan Area Property Owners Apple Inc. Cupertino Property Development, LLC Hewlett Packard Menlo Equities Metropolitan Home Owners Association Orbit Resources Rockwood Capital 500 Forbes, LLC (an affiliate of Sand Hill Property Company) Santa Clara Valley Water District Community Groups City of Cupertino residents Concerned Citizens of Cupertino (CCC) Cupertino Against Rezoning (CARe) Metropolitan Home Owners Association and residents Rancho Rinconada Recreation Association The Community Development Department was involved throughout this process and provided input into City goals and values as expressed in the General Plan and municipal ordinances. 14 - 253 VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN G Of:2S The project team included a community outreach consultant, a Project Manager from 500 Forbes, LLC, a Principal from architecture firm Ken Rodrigues Partners, a Principal from landscape architecture firm The Guzzardo Partnership, and a Principal from civil engineering firm BKF. The project team collaborated with adjacent property owners Orbit Resources and Cupertino Property .Development, LLC for the initial planning effort- Neighboring property owners Apple Inc., Hewlett Packard, Menlo Equities, and Rockwood Capital were also contacted. GOALS AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES South Vallco is an important district of Cupertino by virtue of its position as an eastern gateway of the City. The goals of the South Vallco Master Plan are to: • Clarify and enhance the identity for this area • Ensure that the community design and aesthetics of South Vallco are consistent and coordinated • Improve flow and connectivity between planned projects • Ensure consistency with Cupertino's general plan • Involve the community A guiding principle is that the Master Plan balances the goals of the many stakeholders for the plan area including the City, the community, and the various ownership groups within South Vallco. CHAPTER 2 EXISTING CONDITION LAND USE The largest and most visible property in this azea is Cupertino Square, formerly Vallco Fashion- Park. The enclosed regional shopping center is shown in Figure 1.2. Several parking garages cater to mall visitors. Office buildings comprise a large portion of the plan azea uses and are controlled by several ownership groups, see Figure 1.3. These buildings are functional and service local technology companies. Buildings in this area maintain a variety of setbacks, styles, and scale. The office buildings are automobile-oriented serviced by parking fields and have different levels of pedestrian access. 14 - 254 VALLCO SOU-rx MASTER PL.n1V 7 of 28 Currently, the only residential property in the plan area is the Metropolitan condominiums that front onto Stevens Creek; Boulevard. The Metropolitan is an urban mixed-use, high-density project as demonstrated by its scale and limited setbacks. 14 - 255 VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN - 80828 FIGURE 1.2 CURRENT LAND USE FIGURE 1.3 SOUTH-VALLCO OWNERSHIP GROUPS CIRCULATION Existing Street Network The plan area accessible to Highway 280, and crossed by major arterials Wolfe Road and Stevens Creek Boulevazd, as shown in Figure 1.4. ~ a - 2ss vALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN 9 OP 28 The following provides a brief summary of key streets in the plan area. I-280. I-280. is a north-south, eight-lane freeway with one lane in each direction designated as a high occupancy vehicle (HO V) lane. HOV lanes, also known as carpool lanes, are .restricted for use by vehicles occupied by two or more persons per vehicle or motorcycles, as well as select alternative fuel vehicles, between 5:00 am and 9:00 am and between 3:00 pm and 7:00 pm. The freeway extends from San Francisco, in the north, to San Jose, in the south. Near the planning area, I-280 runs ui a northwest to southeast direction and is the northern boundary of the planning area. Main access from I-280 to the plan area is provided by an interchange at Wolfe Road. Northbound on-ramps have active ramp-metering during morning peak period and southbound on-ramps have active ramp-metering during the afternoon peak period. Typically, northbound traffic is heavier in the morning peak period and southbound traffic heavier in the evening. Stevens Creek Boulevard. Stevens Creek Boulevard is a six-lane, east-west arterial with a landscaped median that forms the southern boundary of the plan area. It extends from the western boundary of the City of Cupertino into the City of San Jose to the east. Stevens Creek Boulevard is fronted primarily by commercial land uses, including retail, restaurant, and office uses near the site. In the study area, there are four (4) signalized intersections along Stevens Creek Boulevar3 - at Perimeter Road, Wolfe RoadlMiller Avenue, Finch Avenue, and Tantau Avenue. In the study .area, traffic is primarily westbound in the morning peak hour and eastbound in the evening peak hour. This broad i a - zs~ VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN I O Of 28 FIGURE 1.4 EXISTING S'I'F[RRT NETWORK road is fronted by commercial uses of all types. Stevens Creek Boulevard is lined by relatively narrow, but continuous sidewalks. Wolfe Road. Wolfe Road is afour-to-six-lane, north-south arterial located west of the planning azea. South of Stevens Creek Boulevard, this street is designated Miller Avenue. Within the plan area, Wolfe Road has a landscaped median that restricts some movements from driveways along the roadway. It functions as an important link between neighborhoods and districts, and Interstate 280. There are a wide range of uses fronting the road including shopping centers, service businesses, single and multi-family homes. Although the street is lined with sidewalks, pedestrian use is limited based on the traffic volumes. Vallco Parkway. Vallco Parkway is a six-lane, local roadway that connects Wolfe Road in the west to Tantau Avenue in the east and bisects the plan area. Currently, the roadway is fronted by office buildings and a parking garage to the north and apark-and- ride lot and vacant land to the south. Thereis a landscaped median running the length of Vallco Pazkway. The intersections of Vallco Parkway with Wolfe Road, Perimeter Road and Tantau Avenue are fully signalized; the intersection of Finch Avenue is stop- controlled at Vallco Parkway. Vallco Parkway has tree-lined sidewalks, but the interface between the walkways and the six-lane roadway makes the environment uninviting to pedestrians. Tantau Avenue. Tantau Avenue is a north-south roadway located east of the planning area. Tantau Avenue extends from Homestead Road in the north to Bollinger Road in the south. North of Stevens Creek Boulevard, Tantau Avenue is a four-lane roadway; south of Stevens Creek, Tantau Avenue is a two lane roadway with on-street parking. In the plan area, this roadway has signals at Vallco Parkway and Stevens Creek Boulevazd. A median/bollazd prohibits southbound vehicular through movements at the intersection with Stevens Creek Boulevazd. Finch Avenue. Finch Avenue is a two-lane north-south roadway extending south from Vallco Parkway towards Phil Lane. There is a landscaped mediazi dividing the roadway within the planning area. At Stevens Creek Boulevard, Finch Avenue is signalized; however, northbound and southbound tlu•ough movements are prohibited. Perimeter Road. Perimeter Road is a two-lane roadway extending around Cupertino Squaze Mall. There aze signals at both the Stevens Creek Boulevard and Vallco Parkway intersections. Right-turn-only driveways on Wolfe Road north of Vallco Parkway provide access to parking areas behind the mall. Perimeter Road is b -ade separated at Wolfe Road with no direct access between the t~vo roadways at that location. Existing Pedestrian Circulation VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN 14 - 258 1 1 of 28 Current pedestrian access in the plan azea is not well delineated. Main pedestrian access points are along public right of ways and into Cupertino Square. While the sidewalks through the plan azea technically make the area "walkable", the lack of relief from the intensity of the roadways, on-street pazki;ng, and street furniture does not make it pedes trian-friendly. FIGURE 1.5 EXISTING PEDESTRSAN CIRCULATION CuiTently, sidewalks are constructed on both sides of Wolfe Road, Stevens Creek Boulevard, and Finch Avenue. Along Vallco Pazkway, Tantau Avenue, and Stevens Creek Boulevard; sidewalks have been constructed adjacent to developed parcels (i.e. along the office developments north of Vallco Parkway and east of Tantau Avenue). No sidewalks exist along Vallco Parkway east of the park-and-ride lot or along Tantau Avenue between Stevens Creek Boulevazd acid the Highway 280 overpass. A pedestrian walkway exists between the north side of the Metropolitan condominium development and Wolfe Road. The existing sidewalks vary in design -those along Wolfe Road, Finch Avenue, and Stevens Creek Boulevard west of the Metropolitan condominium development are separated from the roadway by a grass planting strip; other sidewalks are located adjacent to the roadway with no buffer between the roadway and walkway. 14 - 259 VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN I2 Of'28 Pedestrian facilities include sidewalks, crosswalks, and pedestrian signals at signalized intersections, as well as multi-purpose trails and other dedicated pedestrian right-of-ways. All of the signalized intersections in the plan area are equipped with pedestrian activated crossing signals, except for the I-280 ramps at Wolfe Road where traffic must yield to pedestrians using the crosswalks. There are no marked crosswalks at the unsignalized and stop-sign-controlled intersections along Vallco Parkway. Existing Bicycle Facilities Bicycle facilities include bike paths, bike lanes, and bike routes. Bike paths (Class 1 facilities) are pathways, separate from roadways, designated for use by bicycles. Often, these pathways also allow pedestrian access. Bike lanes (Class 2 facilities) aze lanes on roadways designated for use by bicycles with special lane markings, pavement legends, and signage. Bike routes (Class 3) are existing right-of-ways that acconuilodate bicycles but are not separate from the existing travel lanes. Routes are typically designated only with signs. Bike lanes aze provided on Wolfe Road, Vallco Parkway, and Tantau Avenue near the site. Existing Transit Operations The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) operates bus service in Santa Clara County= Other transit agencies, such as Caltrain and ACE transit, operate shuttles within the County. Currently, VTA express bus routes 101 and 182 and VTA local bus routes 81 and 23 serve the plan area. Caltrain offers a shuttle from Lawrence Caltrain Station to employment centers in the area. There is cuiTently a pazk-and-ride lot located south of Vallco Parkway at Perimeter Road. CHAPTER 3 VISIONS AND OBJECTIVES OVERALL VISION Through the community outreach process, the project team received a wide array of comments and input providing a broad perspective of the community's vision for South Vallco. Certain comments were consistently voiced that collectively form major themes. As an overall vision, the South Vallco area serves as a gathering place, a gateway, and a focal point for Cupertino residents ~~vhile holding regional appeal to visitors. Characteristics of this gathering place are best described as "downtown-ish" or, a Main Street-style setting that is pedestrian oriented, family-friendly, accessible, and well landscaped. OBJECTIVES The objectives help define input from the conununity, property owners and City into concepts that can be built upon and eventually turned into physical form. These 14 - 260 VALI.CO SoU`rr-r MasTER Pi.nrr - ' ~ 13 of 28 objectives are categorized into three major topic areas and form the basis for the recoiiuizendations in this Plan: Improve area identity and character Improve circulation and connections Promote compatibility with existing developments 1. Improve area identity and character Objective (A) Downtown/Main. Street Character-Support the creation of a Main Street style environment with a downtown feel. This includes planning pedestrian oriented connections with good accessibility and attractive, high-quality design. The interfaice and streetscape between the properties should be inviting and have clear connections through the plan area. It is not anticipated nor contemplated that the area look identical,, but the quality of the area should reflect the chazacter of the City. A Main Street style setting that is eclectic in nature with varying azchitectural styles, massing, scale, and uses :should be embraced. Objective (B) Aesthetics-Improve the plan area aesthetic The area should be cohesive in terms of the "look, and feel". It should draw upon high quality materials and iriteresting design. The aesthetic should be consistent throughout the plan area and should address streetscape, landscaping, street furniture, lighting, signage, and street treatment. There are a wide range of styles that can address the appropriate "look and feel" of the azea inchiding aesthetics that draw upon Cupertino's history. Objective (C) City Gateway-Identify the area as an gateway to the City It should be clear that this azea is a specific district of the City. District gateways require signage or monuments to delineate this area as unique to the rest of the City. Objective (D) Quality Landscaping-Encourage quality landscaping through the plan area The overall landscape plan should be consistent in the plan area incorporating existing landscaping areas_ Maintain tree-lined character of area and support new tree planting if existing trees need to be removed or are no longer alive. 11. Improve circulation and connections Objective (E) Pedestrian Connection -Improve pedestrian and bicycle environment on Vallco Parkway and Stevens Creek with accessibility to on-street parking. 14 - 261 VALI~GO SOUTH MwsrEx P[..nN 14 of.28 Fostering safe pedestrian walkways and convenient on-street parking along Vallco Pazkway are critical to making the area welcoming and supporting retail viability. Pedestrian and bicycle connectivity must be enhanced to provide improved access between properties. Objective (F) Vehicular Connection - Improve connections for vehicular access Create logical, safe, and attractive automobile connections within the plan area: Both existing and new streets should be visually appealing and inviting. Traffic calming elements that slow traffic to promote pedestrian and bicycle safety should be supported. Objective (G) Traffic - Minimize traffic impacts on local neighborhoods.. Seek to minimize impact on adjacent neighborhoods by optimizing vehicular circulation plan. 111. Promote compatibility with existing developments Objective (Ii) Development Compatibility -Promote compatibility with existing and new developments Proposed projects should be compatible with uses as described in the General Plan and it would be preferred that buildings in the plan area engage the street. Objective (I) Services - Ensure adequacy of services Proposed projects should analyze existing service levels to ensure service networks are adequate to support a respective project or require enhancement. Objective (J) Sustainability - Encourage and support sustainability and energy efficiency Proposed projects should study opportunities acid constraints to implement sustainability and energy efficiency measures. CI~IAPTER 4 CO1VIrzUNITY CHARACTER AND AESTHETIC It is anticipated that changes to the plan area may occur in the near-term based on the number of properties under redevelopment, cooperative ownership groups, and the community's desire for an improved pedestrian environment. The character and vitality of the plan area is and will be influenced by many considerations, including the existing street experience, buildings, and open space areas along with the desired "look" and "feel" defined by the community. ~ a - 2s2 VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN - - .` 15 Of 28 The purpose of this chapter is to express policies to ensure that the character and objectives for the area are realized. The following policies and guidelines are intended to define the design style and aesthetic quality, and should be used as a general reference as the guiding concepts for the proposed implementation plan. Policy 4.1 Establish consistent, pedestrian friendly landscape and streetscape to promote a downtown and Main Street style setting. Policy 4.2 Identify the style and design features for lighting, street furniture, and way finding to promote a consistent aesthetic. Policy 4.3 Enhance and supplement current landscaped areas with quality landscaping. Policy 4.4 Support a variety of architectural styles, heights, massing, and uses to create an eclectic Main Street style character. Policy 4.5 Support gateway features, sigriage, and/or monuments. Policy 4.6 Include native vegetation and drought tolerant landscaping The community was involved is defming the "look and feel" of this area. Qualitatively, the area needs to be high in quality, safe, pedestrian-friendly, tree-lined, and attractive. No one style embodies the entire plan area aesthetic and there aze many ways to appropriately address the chazacter of the area including drawing upon Cupertino's agrarian history. Practically implementing an area-wide plan that addresses overall landscaping, street treatment, lighting, signal;e, way finding, street furniture, and district monuments is an effective strategy to achieve the desired qualitative outcome. Landscape Figure 1.5 describes the overall landscape plan for the plan area. An existing feature is the ash trees that line the major arterials traversing the azea. While some of these trees are in poor health or are no longer alive, the tree lined setting establishes an important tone for the area. The plan is to maintain the tree lined character of the area and enhance it by providing secondary street trees where possible. Tn addition, the area should include California native plantings and drought tolerant trees and landscaping to reduce water usage and encourage sustainability. All existing and new streets in the plan area should be lined with continuous sidewalks and street trees in order to provide a comfortable and attractive walking environment. 14 - 263 VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN - _ 1G Of 28 FIGi7RE 1.6 OVERALL LANDSCAPE PLAN `~ ~§~ .~^-j '. Z ~_ ~~ --, i KEY 5 P ~J k`a~ .. ~°° muni.m • '~ ' m~ ,~ ~. ~ ® ~ ~, ~ . ~ ~ ~. ~ , ~~ ~~. The Master Plan recommends design features that serve two purposes. First to serve as a use, whether in lighting, way finding, benches, but also to serve as a design aesthetic that sets the tone for the area. The Plan recommends blending existing modern-oriented design elements with "old-world" design elements that allude to Cupertino's agricultural history. This approach can serve as a template that can transition well into adjacent neighborhoods and districts. VAI.,LCO Sovrr3 MASrex PL.arv '. 17.,of 282sa Design Features The imagery shown in Figure 1.7 demonstrates the "look and feel" of the lighting, street furniture, walkway features, and way finding. The design features are the basis of setting the quality and tone of the plan area. For this to be considered a Main Street style setting, the design needs to be of high quality and lend itself to be "pedestrian-scale," warm, and inviting. Current design features in the area are industrial and utilitarian in nature as exemplified by the lighting along Stevens Creek. FIGURE 1.7 DESIGN ELEI~~NTS o~.a t ~ Collectively, the plan area needs to have various design elements to create an interesting pedestrian experience. Typical Main Street style environments change organically over time and are eclectic in nature with varying styles, heights, massing, and uses. This will also hold true for the plan area as much of the area is already established. Supporting new gateway features to promote: plan area businesses and/or community and city events will further help identify South `Tallco as a vibrant district within Cupertino.. Gateway features may include Cupertino monuments, banners, and signage. CHAPTERS CIRCULATION The character of an area is influenced by the scale and quality of its street system. The existing roadway network in the planning area was developed with little emphasis placed on the non-vehicular elements of a roadway. The Plan calls for creating a more interconnected and pedestrian-friendly circulation system by scaling streets appropriately for the future uses expected to develop on the suiTOUnding parcels. To accomplish these goals, individual projects will make focused improvements to the local roadways that connect the planning area. This chapter describes the automobile anct pedestrian circulation system, as well as design and access considerations for roadways within the plan area. Emphasis is placed -- - 14-265 VALLCO SOUTH I~4ASTER PLAN ~ 18 Of 28 on creating safe, effective, and attractive streets. It should be noted that existing roadway elements, crosswalks, setbacks, and sidewalks are constraining factors affecting the degree of change that can be implemented. It is anticipated that circulation improvements will be proposed in conjunction with property redevelopment. Policy 5.1 Establish consistent, pedestrian and bicycle friendly streetscape improvements throughout the plan azea. Policy 5.2 Develop an area-wide pedestrian circulation network including enhancing existing, and future crosswalks to promote safe pedestrian access FUTURE PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION The connections shown in Figure 1.8 demonstrate a connected network of pedestrian and bicycle paths along public right of ways and within private developments. FIGURE 1.8 Fti7T'CTRE PEDESTRIAN CII2CULATION PATTERNS VALILO SOUTH MASTER PLAN - 14 - 266 19 of 28 This section describes the location of new and existing pedestrian and bicycle connections in the plan area and identifies how the pedestrian network touches the public right of ways. For South Vallco to have more downtown-like attributes, consistency for pedestrian and vehicular use is necessary. Connections between properties and to offices, shopping, neighborhoods, and schools will enhance the accessibility, usability, and viability of this area: Bike paths that connect South Vallco to neighboring districts, in particulaz the major employment centers, will greatly aid in reducing vehicle trips and serve to enliven South Vallco with greater pedestrian activity. There are opportunities ~to develop bike paths within the plan area and they may be studied including contacting the Santa Clara Valley Water District to discuss potential opportunities. It is intended that improvements to existing and future crosswalks will improve the overall pedestrian circulation in the plan are~i. Desirable characteristics for safe, marked pedestrian crossings include: Convenient locations to cross Slow or controlled vehicle speeds Excellent visibility for both pedestriatts and drivers Signage directing pedestrians to the s<-fest and most adequate crossings Signage alerting drivers to~pedestrian right-of-ways where appropriate Appropriate striping patterns or pavennent Informational signs, signals or markings- ADA accessibility Creative options should be explored for pedestrian activity and flow when the district activity warrants analysis. Items that can be studied include: Lighted cross walks Countdown pedestrian heads Diagonal crosswalks Calabazas Creek is an important element to the plan area. in identity and connectivity. There may be opportunities within the plan area for nevv developments to connect to and support the implementation of pedestrian and bicycle connections along the Calabazas Creek trail. Subject to input front various community stakeholders and surrounding landowners, and evaluating flood protection, security, and liability issues, the trail implementation may provide access to Vallco Parkway, Highway 280 underpass and Tantau Avenue. FUTURE VEHICULAR CIRCULATION The Plan calls for the creation of an interconnected street system that will allow for convenient access throughout the plan area and into adjacent areas. The appearance and character of these streets should be equally attractive and designed considering their surroundings. The streetscape plan includes locations of vehicular ingress and egress access points. The Plan includes street treatments at select locations tluough the plan area, not only to signify and mark where the area begins, but also to make the area more 14 - 267 VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN ~ a. 20 of 28 visually appealing and updated. If possible the streets in the plan area should be lined with tree shaded sidewalks, allowing safe and convenient walking opportunities. FIGURE 1.9 FYITC7RE VEHICULAR CIRCULATION PATTERNS Wherever it is safe and appropriate, as determined by professional traffic consultants on a project specific level, the Plan calls. for on-street parking along Vallco Parkway accommodated by narrowing the roadway. The proposed modification, in conjunction with intersection-level improvements, will facilitate apedestrian-friendly environment by slowing down traffic on the street. The on-street parking will accommodate the demand for parking and the future planned retail developments along Vallco Parkway. On-street parking will help slow traffic which translates into a safer pedestrian environment and promotes viability for retail shopping along street frontages. While the design of some streets in the plan area are not oriented towards pedestrians due to a lack of on-street parking to shield pedestrians from traffic, there is an opportunity to improve the interaction between motorists and pedestrians in the plan area. This can be achieved by implementing several design solutions that more effectively delineate i a - zss VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN 21 bf 28 Policy 5.3 Support street front retail and street designs to enhance pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular circulation and parking access Policy 5.4 Modify or enhance existing streets to create an interconnected and cohesive street system in the plan area Policy 5.5 Modify or enhance existing public streets to create pedestrian friendly and retail serving street systems in the plan area crosswalk azeas and increases on-street parking along Vallco Parkway to transform the street into something that is more approachable and accessible to pedestrians. Additionally, when appropriate new and existing properties should share ingress and egress access between properties to facilitate greater connections and cohesiveness throughout the plan area. Professional traffic consultants will need to verify the feasibility on a project specific level. CIIAPTER 6 LAND USE The General Plan describes South Vallco as an area to be retained and enhanced as "lazge-scale commercial area that is a regioal commercial (including hotel), office and entertainment center with supporting residential development." Cupertino Square, the regional mall fronting both sides of North '~TJolfe Road, and the office buildings lining Vallco Parkway comprise the predominant uses in this azea. While the commercial tone of this area is set by the mall and office buildings, greater development intensity is also demonstrated by Metropolitan condominiums, a high density residential project which has frontage on Stevens Creek Boulevard (see Figure 1.10). Policy 6.1 Support proposed projects that conform to the General Plan and that fit with the character of the plan ,area Policy 6.2 Ensure the adequacy of core :infrastructure and services for the plan area; evaluate additional impacts associated with specific projects on a case-by- case basis. Policy 6.3 Explore methods to ensure riew buildings on the South side of Vallco Parkway that do not propose :retail shall demonstrate that those building's frontages along Vallco Parkway can be converted to accommodate future ground floor retail (e. g. adequate ceiling heights, access etc.). In the event that there is significant redevelopment and use conversion to retail of the existing office developments located on the North side of Vallco Parkway, South Vallco Parkway property owners shall either implement the conversion or provide City Council the status of the market feasibility. The community voiced their desire for the plan area to serve as a positive focal point for the City, appeal to a regional audience and have Main Street type characteristics. Planning for a setting that addresses these goals starts with creating apedestrian-friendly and accessible area and continues with creating a dynamic and complementary mix of uses that holds regional appeal. FUTURE LAND USES AND SERVICES Future South Vallco land uses are depicted in Figure 1.10 which shows how the envisioned uses are complementary and serve various purposes. Cupertino Square is the regional mall for the area and because of its size and location has the potential to be an agent of change. Offices in the plan area create a tremendous base of patrons requiring ~a - 2ss VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAhi ~" 22 of 28 community-serving retail, restaurants, and services. Existing residential and future housing uses generate evening and weekend activity. Zn order to achieve the community's goals and "complete the picture", the area needs a high quality mixed use project that sets the standard and spurs plan area improvement. The center would create amixed-use, pedestrian-oriented shopping experience with main street style retail, office, senior housing, hotel, and possibly an athletic club. 14 - 270 Vat.uo SovS'x Mas-cEx Pi..4rt 23'of 28 FYGiTI2.E 1.10 FUTURE LAND USES Retail uses along Vallco Parkway, from Wolfe Road to Tantau Avenue, are encouraged in future significant redevelopments. The opportunity to place retail along all of Vallco Parkway is subject to each proposed project a_nd will most likely depend on the amount of vehicular and pedestrian activity, parcel configuration, and site accessibility- There is an existing infrastructure and services network that supports the plan area including, but not limited to sewer, water, eaectricity, gas, fire, police, and schools. As ne~v projects are proposed, associated impacts compazed to the baseline should be assessed and determined if the service and infrastructure networks are adequate or needs enhancement. Studying the impacts to existing service and infrastructure networks on a case-by-case basis enables more accurate assessment and better data to manage actual impacts to the azea. VALL.CO SOUTH MASTER PLAN - - ~4 - 27'1 24 of 28 Collectively, the plan area serves a diverse scat of purposes. The housing work balance is addressed through existing and future residential and office. There is a wide range of retail uses that. are supported in the plan azea including a traditional mall experience in Cupertino Square and community-serving retail and restaurants in pedestrian-friendly, open-air formats along Vallco Pazkway and Finch Avenue. Hotels, athletic clubs, and parks complement the other uses offering a wide range of coinnzunity serving services and activities. SUSTAINABILITY AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY Sustainability and energy efficiency are increasingly becoming important elements when evaluating a project and its impact on the community, the city, and the environment. While further Stuay and analysis will be required to establish and implement a citywide environmental certification system and standazd, the goal is to encourage and support sustainability and energy efficiency. Policy 6.5 Implement sustainable and energy efficient measures within individual developments and address the level of green building certification goals. Policy 6.6 Promote recycling by installing receptacles to collect recyclable-and non recyclable trash. Each project within the plan area will have a different set of opportunities to reduce its environmental impact and implement sustainability and energy efficiency measures based on location, product type, and project scope. Project sponsors will need to study their respective opportunities, constraints, and methods to incorporate sustainable measures. CHAPTER 7 IIVLPLEMENTATION This chapter provides implementation steps district. The implementation of the Master between the properties including streetscape, furniture. to help weave the plan area together as a Plan is focused on the connective tissue lighting, way finding, signage, and street IMPLEMENTATION STEPS Sidewalk Lighting Supplement existing lighting elements with new pedestrian-scale lighting for Stevens Creek Boulevard, Tantau Avenue, Vallco Parkway and Wolfe Road. The cuiTent lighting program works for vehicular traffic, but the large scale canopy shields the .light from illuminating the pedestrian areas making the area feel inactive and foreboding. New fixtures would add light to the ground and pedestrian activity area which would create a distinctive upscale look to these major streets. The light source would be shielded to prevent glare and light pollution. Median Improvements Enhance landscape design in medians to create a strong fresh landscape presentation. Existing planting looks dated, is not consistent in theme and scale. Specific improvements include: • Keep existing trees of value • Enhance slu-ub planting to provide color and interest • Reduce paved areas in left turn lane pockets i a - 2~2 VALL..CO.SOiJTH MASTER PLwN ~ 25 of 28 • Develop new paved material palette unique to this district. • Add uplighting to median trees. FIGURE 1. 1 1 IL~~ROVEMENTS - LIGI-I'I'ING, MEDL4N, CROSSWALKS aning PsF Svee[Trees unmunlry Daaaative llgM1t vaiN Banner wing Cobra Neae SvretligM Meeian Planting wltb Cobblclone5 ScarM Concrete Gosswelt VeM1icular 4cmnt pavers si.n,bs ane e.n..nesn.e., - mtor.na cabbie-an..e wrong I Pbn ~ _ ~ _ PeeeArian SStery Paving- ~J ~fiLr[[ ~j nnweting 4cccnt Slr~nTiYb~,i'~~ ~~i: - -...g..~~i~ 'm.: ~ EaG+YYZ 8s~ Sec4on Stevens Creek Median Intersection at Stevens Creek and Wolfe 14 - 273 VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN 26 Of 28 Stevens Creek Sec[ion Gateway Features Create new gateway features on Stevens Creek and Wolfe that identify entrance into this new district of town. It is anticipated that the gateway feature be managed by plan area property owners contributing to the Plan improvements. This could include: • Cupertino monuments (replace entry sign on east median) • Community banner presentation- (replace current banner location west of district border near Portal) • A textured roadway pavement "threshold". EaiRinq +^d Nety Olive Treci AsM1 Sveet bec (In Bac4.groundj Cemmunip~ Banner Gareway Column (In Had~ground) Cupertino Slgn Annual Color Flotrer nisplay Gateway Median Sec[ions on Stevens Creek '< ~ _ t #• X '.~ - Ealm^q atl, sr.eet rree: _ ~ ~ -- _ ^ecoratiw PI Lt9ttti ~ _ r , ' MU) ewvn arnc ~. ~l Raisetl Conmefe Plenty '~ Section at Vallco Parkway Plaza Intersec[ion New Street Tree Planting Draw upon Cupertino's history as an agrazian community with orchards and wineries, by planting new flowering pear trees to extend and fill in the existing tree canopy; this will build upon the tree-lined nature of the plan area which is a distinguishing design element in this district. New trees should complete the block between the Metropolitan and Finch Avenue and along Vallco Parkway and Tantau Avenue where applicable. Incorporating the flowering pear trees allows for transitions of scale at these activated frontages and further beautifies the area with a common tree feature that is more "pedestrian scale". Crosswalk Treatment Provide improved crosswalks at select intersections along Stevens Creek Blvd., Wolfe Road, Vallco Parkway and Tantau Avenue to enhance pedestrian crossings into the Master Plan area. These improvements will need to support high intensity vehicular use. The material may be stamped or colored textured concrete. ~a - 2~a VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN - 27 Of 2S FIGURE 1.12 LIVLPROVEMENTS -GATEWAY, LIGHTLi~TG APPENDIX PLANNING AND OUTI2EAC13 SCxEDULE MARCH 4, 2008 CITY COUNCIL MARCH 5, 2008 COMMUNI'T'Y DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MARCH 13, 2008 ORBIT RESOURCES 8~ C'UPERTINO PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT, LLC MARCH 17, 2008 COMI~NNTI'Y DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MARCH 20, 2008 MENLO EQUITTEs MARCH 24, 2008 ORBTT RESOURCES 8L CUPERTINO PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT, LLC MARCH 28, 2008 CONCERNED CTITZENS OF CUPERTINO APRIL 1, 2008 RANCHO R.IIVCONADA F:ECREATION BOARD ASSOCIATION APRIL 1, 2008 CUPERTINO AGAINST REZONING (CARE) APRIL 7, 2008 HEWLETT PACKARD APRIL 7, 2008 COMMUNI"I"Y DEVELOP:YIENT DEPARTMENT APRIL 10, 2008 FIRST COMMUNI'T'Y WGRKSHOP APRIL 14, 2008 APPLE INC. APRIL 18, 2008 ROCKWOOD CAPITAL APR.II.. 21, 2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOP7VIENT DEPARTI~~NT APRIL 23, 2008 SECOND COMMUNTTY `VORKSHOP APRIL 24, 2008 RANCHO RINCONADA RESIDENTS APRIL. 29, 2008 METROPOLITAN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AI~TD RESIDENTS MAY 9, 2008 ORBIT RESOURCES ~ CUPERTINO PROPERTY DEVELOPA~NT, LLC MAY 12, 2008 COMMUATTTY DEVELOPIVTENT DEPARTMENT MAY 13, 2008 METROPOLITAN HOMEOVdNERS ASSOCIATION BOARD MEA~LBER MAY 20, 2008 CITY COUNCIL 14 - 275 VALLCO SOUTH MASTER PLAN 28 Of 28 Exhibit D CITY OF CUPERTINO 2005 General Plan Development Allocation System: Retail Commercial Development Revised 10/21/08 Monts Vista Approved Allocation Allocation/ Balance (sq.ft) Approving Application Applicant Adoption Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date 10,882 557/PC U-2006-08/ 21761 Granada Ave./ Terry 8/22/06 ASA-2006-11 357-17-055, -056 Brown 10,325 1,082/PC U-2006-14/ 10056 Orange Avenue/_ Terry 3/13/07 ASA-2006-25 357-17-058 Brown 9,243 Heart of the Approved City Allocation/ Allocation Approving Application Applicant Adoption Balance s .ft Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date 281,951 37,233/CC U-2005-20 20955 SCB/APN 326- Peter Ko 1/17/06 ASA-2005-18 31-018, -020 244,718 19,000/CC U-2005-09 19620-19780 SCB/ Todd Lee 2/07/06 ASA-2005-06 APN 369-06-008, -009, -010 225,718 428/DCD DIR-2006-15 20955 SCB/APN 326- Peter Ko 5/05/06 3i-018,-020 225,290 Hotel: 61,822* U-2007-04, 21265 SCB/326-27-035 Karen Ngo 9/2/08 Mixed Use: ASA-2007-06, 56,194 TM-2007-09, EXC-2008-07 107,274 " Hotel building area underestimated -closer to 79,000+ s.f. Vallco Park Approved South Allocation/ Allocation Approving Application Applicant Adoption Balance (s .ft Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date 250,414 19,114 U-2007-06, Cup. Village/316-OS- Brian 4/15/08 (partial)/CC ASA-2007-10 050,-051,-052,-053,- Replinger 056,-072 231,270 14 - 276 Homestead Approved Road Allocation/ Allocation Balance s .ft Approving Bod Application File Number Pro a Location/APN Applicant Name Adoption Date - 45,057 CITY OF Ct[JPERTINO 2005 General Plan Development Allocation System: Retail Commercial Development Revised 4/15/08 Other Approved Conuiiercial Allocation/ Centers Approving Application Applicant Adoption Allocation Body File Number Property Location/APN Name Date Balance (s .ft - 986. North De Anima Blvd. Allocation Balance (s .ft) Approved Allocation/ Approving Bod Application File Number Pro a Location/APN Applicant Name Adoption Date 14,867 City Center Approved Allocation Allocation/ Balance (sq.ft) Approving Application Applicant Adoption Bod File Number Pro e Location/APN Name Date 14,867 Vallco Park Approved North Allocation/ Allocation Approving Application Applicant Adoption Balance (s .ft) Bod File Number 1?ro a Location/APN Name Date 5,341 5,341(partial)/ U-2007-06, Cup. Village/316-OS- Brian 4/15/08 CC ASA-2007-10 050,-051,-052,-053,- Replinger 056,-072 O 14 - 277 2 Bubb Road Approved Allocation Allocation/ Balance (sq.ft) Approving Application Applicant Adoption Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date O CITY OF CUPERTINO 2005 General Plan Development Allocation System: Retail Commercial Development - Revised 4/06/06 Other Approved Employment Allocation/ Centers Approving Application Applicant Adoption Allocation Body File Number Property Location/APN Name Date Balance (s .ft O '143 278 CITY OF CiTPERTINO 2005 General Plan Development Allocation System: Office Development Revised :S/20/07 Monta Vista Approved Allocation ~ Allocation/ Balance (sq.R) Approving Application Applicant Adoption Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date 38,584 525/PC U-2006-08/ :? 1761 Granada Ave./ Terry 8/22/06 ASA-2006-11 357-17-055, -056 Brown 38,059 1,264/PC U-2006-14/ 10056 Orange Avenue/ Terry 3/13/07 ASA-2006-25 357-17-058 Brown 36,795 11,015/CC M-2008- it Results Way Tim Kelly 03/ASA-2008- OS 25 780 Heart of the City Allocation Balance s .ft Approved Allocation/ Approving Bod Application File Number ro a Location/APN Applicant Name Adoption Date 1 1,456 Vallco Park Approved South Allocation/ Allocation Approving Application Applicant Adoption Balance s .ft Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date O i a - z~s 4 Homestead Approved Road Allocation/ Allocation Approving Application Applicant Adoption Balance s .ft Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date O CITY OF CUPERTINO 2005 General Plan Development Allocation System: Office Development Revised 1/OS/OS Other Approved Commercial Allocation/ Centers Approving Application Applicant Adoption Allocation Body File Number Property Location/APN Name Date Balance (s .ft) -18,131 North De Anna Approved Blvd_ Allocation/ Allocation Approving Application Applicant Adoption Balance (s .ft Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date 218,185 10,000 (Actual U-2006-03 20565 Valley Green Tim 7/18/06 sf is higher- Dr./ APN 326-10-044 Reeves warehous in 208,185 33,000/CC U-2006-06 10495 N. De Anza Cliff 8/15/06 Blvd./ ~ Chan 175,185 City Center Approved Allocation Allocation/ Balance (sq.ft) Approving Application Applicant Adoption Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date O Vallco Park Approved North Allocation/ Allocation Approving Application Applicant Adoption Balance s .ft) Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date 101,532 6,000/CC* U-2007-09 10900 N. Tantau Ave_ Tantau 1/08/08 APN 316-09-029 Investments 95,532 '145 280 '"94,000 sq. ft. was built into the base for this propert}` when the 2005 General Plan "Existing Built" calculations were determined. For the 100,000 square: foot building, only 6,000 square feet needed to be allocated. CITY OF CUPERTINO 2005 General Plan Development Allocation System: Office Development Revised 4/13/06 I-IP Approved Development Allocation/ Agreement Approving Application Applicant Adoption FAR Potential Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date 7,786/staff Bldg. Permit # 19091 Pruneridge Ave. HP 9/12/06 (Manzanita Cafe 06090069 Conversion Approved Bubb Road Allocation/ Allocation Approving Application Applicant Adoption Balance s .ft) Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date 15,790 Major Approved employers with Allocation/ sales office &c Approving Application Applicant Adoption corporate Body File Number Property Location/APN Name Date head uarters 150,000 Other Approved Employment Allocation/ Centers Approving Application Applicant Adoption Allocation Body File Number Property Location/APN Name Date Balance (s .ft) O 14 6281 CITY OF CUPERTINO 2005 General Plan Development Allocation System: Hotel Development. - Revised 2/6/08 Vallco Park Approved South Allocation/ Allocation Approving Application Applicant Adoption Balance s ft) Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date 764* oao notet rooms or the 764 are commtttea to Cupertino Square/Vallco Fashion Park CITY OF CUPERTINO 2005 General Plan Development Allocation System: Residential Development Revised 9/12/08 Monta Vista Approved Allocation Allocation/ Balance Approving Application Applicant Adoption (DU's Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date 87 2/PC M-2005-03 10075 Granada Ave/ Terry 9/13/05 Brown 85 2/PC U-2006-08 21761 Granada Ave./ Terry 8/22/06 357-17-055, -056 Brown 83 2/PC U-2006-14/ 10056 Orange Avenue/ Terry 3/13/07 ASA-2006-25 357-17-058 Brown 81 Net +1/PC U-2007-OS/ 10217 Pasadena Ave./ Terry 8/14/07 TM-2007-10 357-18-025 Brown 1/CC appeal TM-2007-03 21871 Delores Ave/ Tracy Hsu 10/2/07 357-14-026 81 1/PC TM-2007-11 10121 Pasadena Ave/ Chang 11/13/07 357-17-045 80 Other Approved Neighborhoods Allocation/ - Allocation Approving Application Applicant Adoption Balance Body File Number Property Location/APN Name Date DU's 200 19/CC U-2006-13, 10855 N. Stelling Rd./ Lawrence 7/17/07 ASA-2006-22 326-07-037 Gu 181 1/PC EXC-2008-14 San Juan Rd/ 342-22- Amy 8/26/08 078 Chen 180 '14,~ 282 Heart of the Approved City Allocation/ Allocation Approving Application Applicant Adoption Balance DU's) Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date 309 CL"1'Y VF CUPERTINO 2005 General Plan Development Allocation System: Residential Development Revised 8/23/07 Vallco Park Approved South Allocation/ Allocation Balance Approving Body Application File Number Property Location/APN Applicant Name Adoption Date (DU's) - 400 Homestead Approved Road Allocation/ Allocation Approving Application Applicant Adoption Balance Body File Number Property Location/APN Name Date (DU's 300 1 16/CC ASA-2007-03 20800 Homestead Rd./ Michael 7/3/07 329-09-029; 047,-048,-056 Ducote 184 Other Approved Conmzercial Allocation/ Centers Approving Application Applicant Adoption Allocation Body File Number Property Location/APN Name Date Balance (DU's) 300 North De Anza Blvd_ Allocation Balance U's Approved Allocation/ Approving Body Application File Number Property Location/APN Applicant Name Adoption Date 100 3 /CC TM-2004-OS ~3reenleaf Ct./ APN 326-3 3 -107 Wayne Aozasa 1 1/29/05 97 148 283 City Center Approved Allocation Allocation/ Balance Approving Application Applicant Adoption (DU's) Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date 100 CITY OF CUPERTINO 2005 General Plan Development Allocation Systems Residential Development Revised 3/24/07 Vallco Park North Allocation Balance (DU's Approved Allocation/ Approving Body Application File Number roperty Location/APN Applicant Name Adoption Date 300 PC/3 U-2007-01, TM-2007-01 10630 Linnet Lane/ 316-47-017 Frank Ho 3/24/07 297 Bubb Road Approved Allocation Allocation/ Balance Approving Application Applicant Adoption (DU's Bod File Number Pro a Location/APN Name Date 94 Other Approved Employment Allocation/ Centers Approving Application Applicant Adoption Allocation Body File Number Property Location/APN Name Date Balance s .ft 100 t a - 2s4 9 EXHIBIT E COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2-ZS hborhood commercial component. ect-specific development allocations be determined on a case-by-case basis- 2. 3. West Stevens Creek Boulevard (from ighway 85 to Anton Way): This a a includes the Oaks Shoppin C ter and the De Anza Communi Co ege campus. New development n this area should incorporate r~I' ed com ercial/residential uses. Centr Stevens Creek Boulevard om De An Boulevard east to Per' eter Road): ew development shall c ist of commerc 1/commercial office ses on the first flo r. Office uses are pe it[ed on the second oor. Residential an residen- tial mixed u are allowed. East Stevens Creek Boul and (from Perimeter Ro d to east n City lim- its): New deve pment all consist of commercial/co ercia offices uses on the first floor. O 'ce u es are permitted on the second fl or. Residential and residential mixed s are allowed. Development In intensity shall be d~ with specific deve commercial and I may be allowed if vide an incentiv t. development i w beneficial to peg ry amenities d is ins t Development er ine in conjunction > ment eview. Mixed idential development Ie resident al units pro- develop ret it use, if the 1 designed, financially ino, provides ommuni- Up to 25 dwelling units p~r acre. Design lements: Buildings shall be to ted at the -ont setback line defined in the H art oft Ciry Specific Plan. Parking shall e loc ed to the side or rear of the buildings. , Heights: Maximum height of 45 Vallco Park South -- - _ j _ ~ ' -- Policy 2-30: Va//co Park South r_. --- >- - ___ _ - ;. Retain azzd el~ha-nce _. --------- Vallco Park South as -. _- a large-scale commer- - --- cial area that is a regional commercial (including hotel), office and entertailment center with supporting residential development. Strategies 1. Master Plan. Prepare a Master Plan for this azea to ensure contiriuity of mass, scale, connectivity and adequacy of infrastructure and services, including schools. 2. Vallco Parkway. Continue the Vallco Parkway streetscape, which was approved as part of the Vallco Rosebowl mixed-use development, along the entire Parkway. Development Activities A regional shopping mall and office and industrial buildings are the main features of this area. Hotels are also allowed iIZ the Vallco Pazk azea. Daytime and nighttime regional entertainment activities, such as a movie theatre complex, are highly encouraged in the mall area. As part of the development agreement, office and industrial uses are also allowed. -The precise mix of land uses shall be determined via a master plan and an approved use permit. The City has formed a redevelopment proj- ect area encompassing the regional mall proF>erties. The redevelopment area allows for most of the fiuzds derived from the "tax increment financing" to go to the redevel- opment area. "Tax increment" refers to the amcunt of the property tax value increase _ ...'~-. ~. ~ r ~--- -- i, CITY OF CUPERTINO GENER4L PLAN 'A?-' ` =` -_~4--~----._- _- 2-26 LAND USE~COMMUNITY DESIGN Office (sq. ft.) 2000 Built 708,057 Buildout 708,057 Hotel (rooms) 2000 Built - Buildout 2000 764 Residential (DU) 2000 Built - Buildout 7I 1 above the property tax value at the time of the redevelopment area approval. The regional -mall site has a development agreement with the City to allow an addition- al 535,000 sq. ft. of commercial area above the 1,110,700 sq. ft. of space, which existed on July 1, 1991. The development agreement expires in 2006. This area can be used as additional commercial, office, industrial and/or hotel building space- "I'he development agreement ties many of the mall's future development activities to the regulations and policies in effect at the time of its adoption- Development Intensity: Development intensity shall be determined in conjunction with specific development review. Mixed commercial and residential development may be allowed if the residential units pro- vide an incentive to develop retail use, if the development is well designed, financially beneficial to Cupertino, provides communi- ty amenities and is pedestrian-oriented. Residential: Up to 35 units per acre- Commercial (sq. ft.) 2000 Built 1,110,700 "" == Buildout 1,902,564 z A f is ;~ "~-' ~~~. =- -f GI-T-Y-OF~-GUPERT-INO-GEN EF2AL-P-LAN -- Design Elements: To better integrate the shopping mall with the surrounding commu- nity, encourage any new retail development to provide outdoor shopping experiences in continuity with the present indoor shop- ping. New office development should also be pedestrian-oriented. To achieve this, pro- posed projects should: 1. Parking Services: Avoid pazking struc- tures along the Stevens Creek Boulevard frontage, and minimize the height and bulk of parking structures visible from public streets. 2. Linkages: Develop pedestrian linkages between the industrial park and the regional mall. 3. Active Retail: Provide active retail uses facing the street or outdoor pedes- trian cotTidor with connections to the interior mall area, residences and industrial park. 4 . Barrier-free Parking: Design parking azeas relatively free of pedestrian barri- ers and shopping islands. 5. Street Presence-: Site buildings to cre- ate astrong street presence- Buildings facing the street shall be designed in consideration of the scale of the build- ings across the street. 6. Development Next to Residential Areas: Reduce heights and increase setbacks for new development pro- posed adjacent to residential areas. 7: Pedestrian Amenities: Include pedes- trian amenities: landscaping, furniture, lighting, fountains, canopies, special paving materials and other features to enhance pedestrian activity. 8. Trees: Retain the trees along the I-280 frontage, Wolfe Road and Ste~•ens Creek Boulevard as much as possible when new development is proposed. Building Heights: Maximum of 60 feet if there is a retail component and 45 feet if Izot. Homestead Road \ / . Po/icy 37: H estead Road Create a in grated, mixed-use com- mercial an ousing village along Homestea oad, consisting of three integrat are s. Each area ts~ill be mas- ter plat ed, wi special attention to the i erconnect ity of these areas. Develop ent Activities: commercial area will b located at the so east confer of Hon stead Road and elling Road. Residential uses are encouraged ong with the c mercial component. A med m-density sidential area will be located in the zid-block area between the t~vo commercial ar s. The residential area will iliclude a new public park. COMMTJNI"I'1' evelopment Intensity: Developme ' tensity shall be determined in conjuncti n w th. specific development review_ Mi ed co mercial and residential develop ent ma be allowed if the residential uni pro- vid an incentive to develop retail use if the deve opment is well designed, fin cially bene 'cial to Cupertino, provides co muni- ty aIn Izities and is pedestrian-oriel ted. C mmercial (sq. ft.) 2000 Built 2 8,735 Buildout 3,678 Offi e (sq_ ft.) 000 Built 69,550 uildout 69,550 Hotel Built 126 aut 2000 126 Residenti 1 (DU) 2000 wilt 484 Buildo t 784 Design Element Buildings facing the street shall consi e the scale of the build- ings across the s ee Building Heig ts: M 'mum height of 45 feet Strategy a concep al plan for the 3 Road Pl ink Area. Remain er Of Neighborhood Comore cial Areas o/icy 2-32: Remainder of eighborhood fommercia/ re Retain and enhance neighborh c commercial areas, which provide and services to neighborhood res alzd visitors. These areas include: -27 ~._ ~~ t ~~ _ ,, /~ ~- '~ - ~~ .:` CITY OF CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN --~F'E=.<x . --. --_._ 44 X87 ___ ___ i 2-28 t l «~ ;~.^ LAND USE~COMMUNITY DESIGN • South De Anza Boulevard. • West side of Stevens Canyon Road across from McClellan Road. • Intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Creek Boulevard. • Homestead Road neaz Foothill Boulevard. • North~a~est comer of Bollinger Road and Blaney Avenue. • Southeast comer of Homestead Road and Blaney Avenue. • North side of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Highway 85 and Mary Avenue. • All other non-residential properties not referenced in an identified com- mercial area. Development Activities: Developments are encouraged to include a neighborhood com- mercial presence along the street. Developments may be occupied solely by neighborhood commercial or residential uses, but not solely by office, commercial-office or general commercial uses. Buildings may be one or nvo stories in height, to be determined on a case-by-case basis. Ground-level uses neaz the .street must be neighborhood com- mercial uses with a traditional storefront appearalzce. Second-level areas may be com- mercial office or residential Residential uses should be used as a buffer between commer- cial uses and neighboring lo~v-density resi- dential properties. Lazidscaping may be used as a buffer in smaller developments. CITY OF CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN Development Intensity: Development intensity shall be determined in conjunction with specific development review. Mixed commercial and residential development may be allowed if the residential units pro- vide an incentive to develop retail use, if the development is well designed, financially beneficial to Cupertino, provides communi- ty amenities and is pedestrian-oriented. Residential: Residential density is depend- ent on the neighborhood context, with a maximum density of 15 dwelling units per gross acre. Commercial (sq. ft.) 2000 Built 494,576 Buildout 495,415 Office (sq. ft.) 2000 Built 268,735 Buildout 250,604 Hotel (rooms) 2000 Built - Buildout 2000 - Residential (DU) 2000 Built 6 Buildout 306 Strategy Neighborhood Commercial Zoning. Develop a Neighborhood Commercial Zoning OrdinalZCe that defines the uses and development regulations for this zone. Rezone .appropriate areas to this zanit~g district. 14 - 288 ~~~ 1,~~~,~,~ ~ rS'f l~'~JC~~ CUPERTINQ We invite you to attend a community meeting to learn about and discuss "Main Street Cupertino", anew mixed-use project including a lifestyle retail center, hotel and fitness club, office space and senior/age restricted housing on a 17:4 acre site ocated at Finch and Stevens Creek Boulevard. This will be a great opportunity to meet the 500 Forbes, LLC, an affiliate of Sand Hill Property Com- pany,project team and provide us your feedback to help us create a vibrant and distinct mixed-use community. Thursday July 10, 2008 6:30-8:30 PM Cupertino Community Hall 10350 Torre Avenue . Cupertino, CA 95014 *The project site is Master Plan area. N W included within the South Vallco The City Council initiated the planning process for the area in March 2008 and the Planning Commission is scheduled to review the draft master plan document on July 8, 2008 and tentatively City Council on August 5 or 19, 2008 (depending on Planning Commission action). Please RSVP by. July 4 to Vanessa Guardado at vguardado@shpco.com. ~ ~!q!u~ Sand Hill Property Company (operating ~as 5001'orbcs, L LC) h;is submitted a development proposal for a new mired-use project at a 17-acre parcel bordered by Stevens Creels Boulevard, Tantau Avenue, V,dlco Pu~kway and Pinch Avenue, The proposal includes approximately 150,000 square feet of lifestyle retail spacc,100,000 square feet of office, a 150-room high-end hotel, a 145,000 square foot fitness club, u 1G0-unit senior/age-restricted housing ftcility and a five level parlting garage along Vallco Parkway. There is one project alternative that replaces the fitness club with a 205,000 square foot office building and a 250-room hotel. The project site is includeil within the South Vdlco Masher Plan area, wlvcla was adopted by the City Council on 5cptcmber 1G, 2003.'lhe project is currently under- goingenvironmental impact analysis, which is anticipated to be completed in the 4tlr quarter of 2008, The following public hearings have been scheduled to receive your input and comments on the projecC Applications: U-2008-O1, )/A-2008-07, ASA-2003-06,TM-2008-O1 Date: October 23, 2008 (preliminary review) & December 9, 2003 - °Plan- ningCommission December 16, 2003 &, Januuy 6, 2003 - °City Council Location: City of Cuperthto Community Hall,10350 Torre Avenue (next to the Cupertino Library) Time: 6;45 PM ''Ihe above public hearing dates are tentative and subject to change. In addi- tion,there may be additional follow-up meetings or changes to the agenda, so please check with the City of Cupertino's wcbsite at rvrvw.cupertino,org/mainstreet or contact G<uy Chao, Senior Planner at (403)777-3247 or garycC~cupertino.org for the latest meeting schedule. Exhibit G MAIN STREET CUPERTINO Summary of Comrunity Workshop Community Center, Cupertino, California July 10, 2008 Community Meeting Format Tlie public vas invited to learn about, review, and discuss the proposed plans for Main Street Cupertino, the project located at Stevens Creek Boulevard and Finch Avenue. The project sponsor made a citywide notification and more than 50 people participated in the community workshop. The meeting was held at the City of Cupertino Community Center and attendees included the Community Development Director Steve Piasecki, Senior Planner Gaxy Chao and Cupertino residents. The project team included Paul Downs -Paul Downs Consulting, meeting moderator; Ken Rodrigues -Ken Rodrigues Partners Architects, Architect; Gary Laymon - Guzzardo Architects, Landscape Architect; and Kevin Dare - 500 Forbes, LLC (an affiliate of Sand Hill Properties), Project Manager. After the presentation, the presenters held a question and answer session with all of the attendees. This document sumrr,arizes the main themes that emerged at the meeting. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Overall Concept Participants discussed the overall identity and character they would like to see at the site. Some participants voiced their desire for a downtownish and Main Street style pedestrian environment. While participants recognize Main Street Cupertino is not an official downtown they realize this site can provide apedestrian-oriented downtown feel while balancing a mix of uses that serve and represent Cupertino as whole through a mix of uses. The group expressed that the plan focuses on creating pedestrian wal.kvvays and attempts to connect with neighboring properties. Also, the plan focuses on creating a Main Street with a town square with the intent to create a "place." Overall, the coxnrnunity voiced support of the concept and design and believed this to be a benefit to the community as a whole. Areas tha _ will continue to be studied will be fine tuning the site plan along with studyizig sustaina~ility and energy efficiency through the site. Additional coxnnients/suggestions: • Like the general location of elements 8~ F,ast to West walkability through site • Better than old Toll Bros Project • LEED LEED LEED!!I • Phenomenal attention to cormunity input, just add cross streets if possible for roa m i rig • Can you satisfy the i,r,hmited wants Sc dcsires of the public? It seems well thought out. Realistic ratios being used. Good attempts to work with surrounding areas. ~a -2s~ Architecture The group reviewed and discussed the architecture, design, scale, and elevations. It was explained that the basis of the plans drew from the cotziiiiunity feedback that was pre~>iously received through the South Vallco Master Plan process and through individual community input In short, community had previously expressed the desire to have architecture that drew upon Cupertino's rich agrarian and winery history. The architecture and landscape architect had reviewed several books that described Cupertino's history. The group developed specific ideas for how to achieve a small town/old town look and feel: • Rural look that relates to local history such as orchard • Winery Additional comments/suggestions: • For senior housing the community appreciated the U shaped building 8L garden space facing metropolitan. • Multiple individuals agreed with the idea of mixed styles Sc heights • Support of arched windows, lots of trees, low profile Sc mixed but integrated architecture • Something traditional fits with existing tasteful designs in use in the town • No architectural symmetry, want a downtown, eclectic feel with various heights, masses, and architecture styles that still flow well together. • Encourage sustainability Park and Gathering Spaces The community has voiced its desire to have park space that can be utilized and integrated well into the overall development The site plan shows to main park areas, one along Stevens Creek Blvd that abuts to Metropolitan and in the Town Square area along Finch Avenue. The plan also recognizes the Calabazas Creek trail by having additional landscaping with orchard-like trees, flowering pear, at the corner of Finch Avenue and Vallco Parkway. A fundamental request was for quality landscaping and the inclusion of California native vegetation and drought resistant plants. There were a range of opinions on the park setting, location, and size. Integrating quality landscaping and park space that can be used was voiced. Additional comments/suggestions: • Include nature plants and public restrooms • Use "Healdsburg" park as a model • Avoid trees that have droppings • Hope it will include some of those trees on the site • Include fountains in plaza • Use permeable surfaces • Don't build over the boxed culvert • Pay attention to the creek i a - 292 Uses The community reviewed the types of uses proposed including retail, office, hotel, senior housing, and possibly an athletic club. An important quality of the uses proposed is that they foster opportunities to allow visitors to mix, mingle, and interact. The uses need to balance being ~ destination and draw for visitors outside of Cupertino to spend their money in Cupertino while also being community-serving offering dining and shopping that Cupertino currently doesn't offer. It is also important that the quality and nature cf the development address needs of Cupertino's socio-economic population ranging; from developing Senior Housing that Cupertino residents would consider, namely that they are larger and high-end. Additional comments/suggestions: • Larger Senior Housing units • Create something that is child-friendly vrith public restrooms • Sufficient parking to service the uses is paramount • Incorporate a gym with a large pool like the Decathlon Club etc. • Have "eyes" on the park from retail 8c residents to dissuade loitering and encourage a sense of safe park space. • Use the size of the buildings as sound barriers Pedestrian and Vehicular Connections Safe vehicular, pedestrian, 8s bicycle travel is important to the community, the project sponsor, and is integral in Main Street Cupertino project_ Given that someone could conceivably ride a bike to this project from anywhere in town, accessibility and bicycle parking is also important. In terms of the pedestrian and vehicular circulation, the group was supportive of the pedestrian friendly concept_ But they also want good, intelligent traffic design, and thoughtful parking concepts, especially in particular areas. Additional comments/suggestions: • Slow traffic while coming into Main Street Cupertino • Provide sufficient parking • Insure public access with office patrons • Create safe connections within the project Traffic and Parking The community acknowledged that any successful project will generate traffic, but it is how traffic and parking needs are handled that make a difference in pedestrian and vehicular safety along with the quality of a visitor's experir_nce_ 14 - 293 The cotruz~unity referenced various projects within Cupertino and outside the city, citing examples of projects that for the most part haven't handled traffic and parking needs well. The consistent theme that was voiced was a need to mitigate traffic when possible along with providing sufficient parking to handle the needs of the uses proposed. The group recognized that the community wants a successful center, but also wants the center to be accessible and inviting- The traffic, parking, and other environmental studies are currently underway and will be available to the public for review as part of the entitlement process. Additional continents/suggestions: • Be transit friendly, pedestrian friendly, bicycle friendly. • Provide enough parking for retailers • Slow the traffic coming into the center to be safe and encourage pedestrian friendliness • Not in favor of adding additional parking beyond the current scope. "Timing -Estimated Schedule • Summer 2008 -Finalized South Vallco Master Plan • Sr+r,-,rr,er 2008 -Environmental Analyses • S»**+**+er-Winter 2008 -Public Hearings for site specific plan • 2009 -Construction to begin • Construction Timeline: 12-24 Months depending on uses ~ a - 2sa Garv Chao From: Bunninder F [bfalak@yahoo_com~ L~hibit H Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2008 5:39 PM To: Gary Chao Subject: Sand hill property company proposed project Hi Gary, I am a resident of Cupertino living on Cupertino Road. I got a postcard regarding the proposed project by Sandhill property company. Upon reviewing it - I am extremely concerned by the size of the project and it's impact to the residents of cupertino as well as the schools and the property prices. I would be interested in hearing your feedback as to why this is a good project for Cupertino. Also I would appreciate it if you can- let Dolly know about my concerns. I look forward to hearing from you as well as seeing you at the reviews- thx bunninder -- Bunninder Falak 14 - 295 Gary Chao From: jo Christie ~christie45us@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 8:48 PM To: Gary Chao Subject: development the proposed sand hill property co. development is too big and too costly._we do not need more "upscale" anything, traffic is not managed properly around whole foods, let alone adding more pavement and congestion_ cupertino square is deserted most of the time and a costly ghost town_._use what is already built properly._..homestead road is another congested, polluting nightmare with inadequate crosswalks and traffic control. jo Christie 22162 bitter oak cupertino i a - Zss Gary Chao From: Kent Vihcent [kentvincent@ymail.coml Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 4:02 PM To: Gary Chao Cc: Dolly Sandoval Subject: South Vallco Master Plan Dear Gary, In reading the South Vallco Master Plan preliminary review meeting announcement, I am astonished to see the kitchen sink approach that the City of Cupertino and Sand Hill Property Co. are taking to build-out the last remaining major parcel in Cupertino. By kitchen sink I mean that Main Street is being designed to meet a plethora of unrelated city and developer constraints -such as a need for senior housing, hotel and office space. In my view, this is not the Main Street that will define a :>uccessfial downtown Cupertino. It appears instead to be a condensed version of what the city already has with a fancy boulevard and parking. The key question is what will make this a magnet for ret~iil business for the South Bay Area in the sense that Santa Row does for San Jose, or other "downtowns" do for their respective cities? What will give our Main Street economic longevity? Why will this be a "happen'n" place. What is it about the enviroiunent of our Main Street that will attract people away from other cities and downtowns to dine, have business lunches and go out with friends. If we can't answer these questions then we don't have a valid plan for our Main Street and the last- chance parcel the city has for defining itself. As a quirk of fate, I have had conflicts with all other Main Street community meetings and will be out of the state for the upcoming October 28th preliminary review. I can only hope that you will see the wisdom of asking these questions as the City's Senior Planner. Best regazds, Kent Vincent Cupertino (408) 255-6075 14 - 297 Exhibit B 24 November 2008 Dear Sir or Madam, My name is Ronald Jou, and I am a homeowner living in Metropolitan at Cupertino. am writing to express my concern for the proposed changes to the Main Street Cupertino Master Site Plan. When the Sand Hill Property Company approached community members for input on the Main Street plan, I was encouraged. To the benefit of the City of Cupertino, community ideas were incorporated into the plan, including a proposed green space and considerations for the communities to the West of the development. Recently, I was surprised to hear that the City of Cupertino government has proposed to do away with the green space that was proposed by the homeowners. Furthermore, it is my understanding that the City of Cupertino government has proposed a truck lane and loading area directly adjacent to the development where I live. I believe that these changes would be a detriment to my quality of life and home value. Furthermore, I respectfully express my amazement that the government of the City of Cupertino Would impose their own wishes over the expressed wishes of families in the community who participated in a productive and open process. Please, reconsider your proposal to get rid of the park and create a truck loading zone amidst a residential area. Sincerely, Ronald Jou, M.D. ~ a - Zsa November 23, 2008 Dear Planning Commission Members, As a Cupertino resident and a homeowner at the Metropolitan at Cupertino, I am writing to you today with concerns about proposed changes to the Main Street Cupertino Master Site Plan. After being involved in several of the communit}~ meetings that helped to develop the Master Site Plan with Sand Hill Property Company and being surprisingly pleased by the obvious attention to community wants and needs incorporated into the initial Sand Hill proposal, I am alarmed at the number of changes that the City discussed For the Master Site Plan at the last meeting in October. I believe one of the most critical issues is the 0.9f. acre park along Stevens Creek Boulevard. In the initial town hall planning sessions with Sand Hill, the residents of Cupertino expressed a strong desire for green, open space within the Master r'lan. This is not only important as a nod to the proud history of Cupertino's roots in wide, rhythmic acres of fruit orchards, but also to the overall appearance and well-being of our community. Z understand that certain citizens want to exploit this last remaining open acreage in Cupertino for the promise of sales tax revenue from potential :retailers. Given the current economic climate of massive layoffs and retail bankruptcies as well as the vacanry rate in the available retail space in the vicuiity (Vallco Mall, anyone?), creating a long, unbroken expanse of concrete retail blight may not be in the city's best interests. Retai*+i*~g the 0.98 acre park, however, would create another asset for the City of Cupertino. Not only would it beautify the rapidly developing urban sprawl of Stevens Creek Boulevard, but it would also remind us of Cupertino's proud heritage and create a place for peace, renewal, nature, and community In addition, the attraction of a beautiful tree-filled space will encourage visits to the Main Street development by Cupertino residents and out-of-towners alike -drawn by a peaceful day at the park, many will round out their day by shopping at the exciting retail spaces and dining at the vibrant cafes and restaurants. In terms of preserving the park, I admit that I am personally vested as a homeowner and resident of the Metropolitan at Cupertino. The park would serve as a crucial buffer and quiet zone between our cotxuiiurlity and the sure-to-be-busy retail and noisy din of traffic flow that will be created by the Main Street Master Plan. I am not alone, however. I am speaking not only as one of the 107 homeowners and 260 residents of the Metropolitan at Cupertino, but I am also speaking on behalf of the 750 fixture homeowners and residents of the Rosebowl and Senior Housing projects. I believe that keeping the 0.98 acre park as initially described in the Master Site Plan for Main Street Cupertino would be the best choice for the City of Cupertino. Not only do we create a permanent living tribute to our city's proud heritage for our children and future residents, but we preserve the attractiveness of our city with a beautiful, family-friendly green space that everyone, rich ox poor, can enjoy. Res y pours, Angeline T.im, M.D. 19503 STEV ENS CREEK BOULEVARD, #155 CUPERTIN O, CA 95014 14-299 Page 1 of 1 Aki Honda From: Traci Caton on behalf of City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 8:33 AM To: Aki Honda; Gary Chao Cc: Steve Piasecki Subject: FW: Concerns of the Metropolitan HOA re: Sandhill Project /Main Street on Stevens Creek/Vallco Pkwy/Tantau -----Original Message----- From: Ken Wong [mailto:kensbizness@yahoo.comj Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 10:40 AM To: mmiller@interorealestate.com; igiefer@sbcglobal.net; dkaneda@ideasi.com; rosetracy3@sbcglobal.net; pauiborphy@yahoo.com; City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: Concerns of the Metropolitan HOA re: Sandhill Project /Main Street on Stevens Creek/Vallco Pkwy/Tantau All--After our most recent monthly Board Meeting at the Metropolitan this last week, I was asked by the Board to write a letter outlining those issues that were of most concerning to homeowners at the Metropolitan. We would appreciate taking time in reading my letter prior to the next Planning Commission meeting. Should you have any questions or would like to discuss further, please feel free to email me or call me at 415/640-8886. Best regards, Ken Wong 19503 Stevens Creek, #339 Cupertino, CA 95014 P.S. Can someone forward this to Aki Honda? Thank you. 14 - 300 1 1/26/2008 Generated by Foxit PD1= Creator O Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware,com For evaluation only. Saturday,.November 22, 2008 To: Planning Commission, City of Cupertino Planning Division, City of Cupertino Re: Sand Hill Property Company Project ("Main Street" or the "Project") 7 7-Acre Parcel Bordered by Stevens Creek Boulevard, Tantau Avenue and Vallco Parkway. Dear Planning Commission and Planning Division: First of all, I apologize for the lengthy letter, but I do appreciate your reading the entirety of this letter. 1 own a condominium unit at the community known :as the "Metropolitan," which is immediately adjacent to the Main Street Project. I attended and spoke at the Planning Commission meeting which was held on Tuesday, October 28"'during which the'iand Hill Property Company ("Sand Hill") presented two (2) versions of plans as part of their "Zoning Perrnit Package." Although there was limited time for parties to voice their concerns about information heard about the Project, there was no time and ability to review Sand Hill's Zoning Permit Package in great detail nor sufficient time to fully express the concerns of many of the homeowners of the Metropolitan to the Planning Commission as each speaker only had 3 minutes. Thus, I am writing my concerns and issues to you not only as a representative of 707 condominium residents (estimated to be 250 residents) of the Metropolitan Home Owners Association (the "HOA"), but also the future interest of homeowners of 204 condominium units (estimated to be 500 residents) and of 760 senior housing units (estimated to be 250 residents). It would be safe to estimate that my concerns below would be shared by as many as 7,000 Cupertino residents to Main Street (collectively, the "Local Resicients'~. The City promoted and directed that resident concerns be directly brought to the attention of the developer, Sand Hill. Our community has worked anti communicated frequently with Kevin Dare of Sand Hill and the project team voicing our concerns of the size of the Project and the impact the Project may have on our community. We believe that the plans submitted in the Zoning Permit Package has incorporated not only our concerns, but also the concerns from the broader community as communicated at the number of Community Workshops held by Sand Hilf throughout 2008. #1 -- Community Park During the October 28"' Planning Commission meeting, it was disturbing to hear that the Planning Commission had suggestions amongst the Commissioners as well as from other Cupertino residents to either (7) eliminate the park or (2) combine the park into the Town Square. Those who suggested this idea or proposal have severely overlooked the necessity in today's environment for the ever-increasing need for more separate and distinct "green" space. As you probably know, the Toll Brothers plan (December 2004) on this site called for a park as large as 3.5 acres. During the Community Workshops, our residents heard that the proposed park size was 14 - 30'I Generated by Foxit PDF Creator ©Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only. estimated to be 1.5 acres. With the submitted plans, the park in question is now 0.98 acres. Although we have seen the park size decrease due to the necessity to make the Project economical, the size and the current placement of the park is still highly desired. The necessity of the current location (immediately adjacent to the Metropolitan) and size is of utmost importance to the '1,000 or so residents as this will allow for (1) a natural "buffer" and an appropriate transition between the residents of the Metropolitan and the retail stores, (2) the ever increasing need. of contiguous open green space and (3) the leisure usage by not only Local Residents but other Cupertino residents and patrons of the Project. believe that although the discussion surrounding either eliminating or moving the park was in the exploratory context, the suggestion has significant and material negative consequences to local Residents, many of which one cannot appreciate unless a Local Resident. We respectfully ask that you not pursue any further suggestions to have the park eliminated or moved and keep the park in the location as originally submitted in the Zoning Permit Package. #2 -- Walkways and Connectivity Through the Metropolitan We understood from the City that it was the desire of the Planning Commission to create connectivity through pedestrian walkways through the Metropolitan. As much as the idea made good sense and looked fine on the paper plans, unfortunately, the idea of creating walkways through our community has had many negative effects, which we hope to rectify with our proposal below. With just a number of Cupertino High School students wondering around during and after school, our community has experienced incidents of theft of items off our balconies and from our cars, vandalism to our cars and to our building, trespassing onto private balconies and in our community swimming pool and damage to our property. With less than 50 students walking through our community on any given school day, we have experienced incidents that are clearly undesirable by any property owners. It should be noted that we are only surmising that those walking through our community are students, but it could be anyone. Now consider that the Project calls for over 150,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space, in addition to other buildings, operating not only during school hours but into the late evening and during all hours on the weekends. One can estimate the number of individuals walking through our community once the Project is completed, which is easily estimated to be exponentially more than 50 trips through our community. It is with any increase in the number of trips through our community that it is expected to bring an increasing number of undesirable incidents. In addition, direct walkways and the close proximity of our surface parking lot may promote the unauthorized parking in our surface parking lot for patrons to the retail stores and restaurants. We understand that a number of "public pedestrian easements" exists on our property for the purposes of creating connectivity between and through our community. In order to mitigate these undesirable incidents relating to foot traffic, we propose to install security gates at these walk ways and force foot 14 - 302 Generated by Foxit PDF Creator ©Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only. traffic walk around the Metropolitan and for the city to eliminate the "public pedestrian easements." The additional walking distance to walk around the IVletropolitan is not significant nor would it detract from the pedestrian friendliness of the Sand Hill Project. We believe that the re-routing of the walkways around the Metropolitan would also "rejuvenate" the 4 of the 5 retail suites at the Metropolitan, which have been un-leased now for 2 years. At the last meeting, it appeared that the Planning Commission nor the Planning Department Staff did not have any issues with respect to our proposal and that it is of great importance to the HOA that we provide confidence and security to homeowners before the approval of the Project. #3 -- Relocating Truck Dock at Vallco Parkway From the October 28`~ meeting, there were discussions of possibly moving the "Covered Truck Dock" from Vallco Parkway to the rear of the 40,000SF Major Retail building. Our residents do not understand the City's proposal as the current proposal (1) keeps noise and unsightly views away from Local Residents, (2) maintains truck presence on Vallco Parkway and keeps undesirable trucks access off the Town Square streets and (3) maintains maximum parking stalls for the use of the retail space, Town Square and other buildings. The current proposed location of the truck dock makes the most sense, both on the paper plans and for practicality purposes;, and works For both Local Residents and Sand Hill. #4 -- Available Parkins Lastly, our community has met with both Sand Hill and Evershine Group (Rosebowl Site). Each group claims that they have more than enough parking to support their projects. We are very concerned about the impact of their projects on our surface parking areas. We hope that their projects are all successful, but success comes at a price...namely many patrons and customers. When a project is successful, similar to Santana Row, parking becomes scarce and we would like to see that both Sand Hill and Evershine provide even more parking spaces than already called for in their plans. In the same vein, proposals to move the loading dock in #3 and proposals to shift the Town Square either left or right, thereby reducing a column of parking spaces, are not desirable from the perspective of Local Residents. The HOA advocates that there bean abundance of unrestricted parking spaces along the perimeter of the Town Square so that those spaces can serve the park, restaurants, retail shops and guest of the Senior Housing residents. Conclusion We do appreciate your listing and considering our concerns. As much as we have other concerns with Sandhill's Project, we believe that the Zoning Permit Package as provided at the October 28"' meeting is materially complete. In summary, the Metropolitan (1) does want the park adjacent to our property as provided in the Zoning Permit Package, (2) wants to eliminate the public easements going directly through our community and to install entry gates to prevent access through the center of our community, (3) support the placement of the loading dock for the Big Box Retail Space as provided in 14 - 303 Generated by Foxit PDF Creator ©Foxit Software http://www.foxitsoftware.com For evaluation only. the Zoning Permit Package and (4) keeping the drive through loop of the Town Square as provided in the Zoning Permit Package. Thank you for your time and consideration. Best regards, Ken Wong Metropolitan at Cupertino Enclosure: Circulation Chart of Main Street 14 - 304 ~.~wwaeaiunoll MASTER SITE PLAN SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY a CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA 0 N aRCUlATION FUW vr~esmrwcnauna~ ~^ '~CU+wc~nai ~auAaMawaunai wex M-r.,a„~ ms~ao -~,c~ woa non. so.o~aioo ~.~~ I a. . r w Q-~. Page 1 of 2 Aki Honda From: Gary Chao Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 8:06 PM To: Aki Honda Subject: FW: Main Street Cupertino by Sand Hill Property FYI... Gary Chao City Planner City of Cupertino 408.777.3247 (Direct) 408.777.3333 (Fax) From: Emily Shieh [mailto:emily Shieh@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 3:59 PM To: Gary Chao; mmiller@interorealestate.com; Igiefer@sbcglobal.net; dkaneda@ideasi.com; rosetracy@sbcglobal.net; paulborphy@yahoo.com Subject: Main Street Cupertino by Sand Hill Property Planning Commission, My name is Emily Shieh and I'm one of the homeowners in Metropolitan @ Cupertino complex on Stevens Creek Blvd. I'm writing this email to express my concerns over the new project, Main Street Cupertino, proposed by Sand Hill Property. As you all know our complex is right next door of this new project and whatever is being built there will significantly impact our living quality and property value especially for those units such as mine facing directly onto Main Street Cupertino. I arri strongly against eliminating park space, changing proposed loading deck location to be in between residential buildings, and reducing parking spaces at future Town Square. I had attended 2 early study sessions hosted by Sand Hill Property earlier this year and actively express the importance of creating park space as a buffer zone between residential and retail. I cannot imagine how bad the future living quality will be for total of 470 existing and new residential units (that's over 1,000 residents) without any park space on site. I strongly urge you all to rethink the possibility of reducing or even eliminate the only green space we will ever have. Please improve Cupertino's living quality, not make it worse. An other concern I have is about the city manager as well as members of the Planning commission wanting to relocate the proposed loading dock from the retail side to the proposed surface parking lot between Metropolitan, Rose Bowl, and proposed 4-story senior housing. By doing so, it will add substantial noise and unwanted view and trash right in the middle of residential zone and impact the health and safety of the residents. Not to mention it would also tighten up the already not enough parking spaces for the residents and their visitors. We all want the new retails around our new town square to be successful. And by eliminating parking spaces around town center will jeopardize their chances. Furthermore, shopper will end up parking their cars at the residential zone and effect our living quality. As an existing homeowner adjacent to Main 14 - 306 1 1 /26/2008 Page 2 of 2 Street Cupertino I feel I need to stand out and protect my rights. I feel our voice is not being heard or considered because we are the minority for being only 107 units. Metropolitan has already formed a special committee that works closely with San Hill Property. Please hear us out and help us make our community livable. Sincerely, Emily Shieh from Metropolitan 14-307 1 1 /26/2008 Page 1 of 2 Aki Honda From: Traci Caton on behalf of City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 8:41 AM To: Aki Honda; Gary Chao Cc: Steve Piasecki Subject: FW: Main Street Cupertino Master Site Plan -----Original Message----- From: angeline lim [mailto:angeline.f.lim@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 5:37 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: Main Street Cupertino Master Site Plan Dear Planning Commision, As a Cupertino homeowner and resident of the Metropolitan at Cupertino, I am writing you with concerns regarding proposed alterations to Sand Hill Property Company's site plan. I have four main concerns: 1. We all hope that this development plan is successful. However, with that success comes increased pedestrian and vehicular traffic, which can lead to increased crime for nearby residents, especially the homeowners at the Metropolitan at Cupertino. I feel that removal of the easements for walking paths through the Metropolitan complex would help protect our community. We have already experienced a number of problems with open access to our common areas (including litter, theft, and vandalism), and I fear it would worsen a thousandfold unless foot traffic through our homes is restricted. 2. Movement of the loading dock off Vallco Parkway makes little sense. Where the Sand Hill Company currently has the dock located, it makes perfect sense -easy access to a main road and freeway, close to the retail spaces that need the dock. Moving it to the residential area of the Master Plan would be unnecessarily ugly, noisy and disruptive. Besides the inconvenience to the voters of Cupertino and the potential retailers, why would you put a loading dock in the middle of the homes of 1000 current and future residents of the Rosebowl housing development, senior housing, and Metropolitan? 3. $y shifting the "Town Center'' either to the east or west, an enormous problem with parking would develop. As the residents of the Metropolitan, the tenants of the Metropolitan retail space, and the businesses and employees of the Menlo Equities office building who all share a surface lot have found over the past two years, parking is a huge issue. Shifting of the town center in any direction eliminates much of the open pazking incorporated into the Sand Hill plan. Without copious pazking along the town center, foot traffic will be nonexistent; and without plentiful storefront parking, retail will suffer enormously. 4. Perhaps the most critical issue to me is the proposed removal of the 0.98 acre park. The concerned citizens at the early planning meetings voiced over and over the desire for open, green space; the park in Sand Hill's plan is a perfect concession to this need. Not only is retention of green space a nod to the rich agricultural history of our proud city, but it keeps Cupertino attractive. A few blocks to the east in San Jose, Stevens Creek Boulevard has already succumbed to the ugliness of urban blight and sprawl. 14 - 308 1 1 /26/2008 Page 2 of 2 We do not want that for our town or our community. Please keep the park - it would become a delightful oasis of nature and calm in the midst of a bustling main street and a wonderful source of free, healthy entertainment for families -not only the soon to be 1000-strong mini-community of the Metropolitan, Rosebowl, and Senior Housing -but also for the city at large and out-of--town visitors. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. I look forward to seeing our city move forward in a way that is beneficial for all of its residents. Respectfully yours, Angeline Lim, M.D. 14 - 309 1 1 /26/2008 ~ ~u.:b:t c FENR Sz PEE[tS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Date: December 2, 2008 To: Gary Chao, City of Cupertino From: Todd Henry and Jason Nesdahl, P.E., Fehr & Peers Subject: ParKing Ana/ysis for Restaurant Uses at "Main Street Cupertino" SJ08-Y04> This memorandum presents a supplemental parking evaluation for the Main Street Cupertino development site. Fehr & Peers initially analyzed parking demand and supply of the project assuming that general retail and shopping center uses would be on the site. The project applicant requested the additional analysis to determine the effect that restaurant uses would have on effective shared parking supply. For this analysis, 30 percent of the space originally dedicated to general retail/shopping center in each site plan was reallocated for sit-down restaurants tenants. This percentage amounts to approximately 45,000 square feet of restaurant space in the project. The project applicant is currently analyzing two development schemes for the site. Scheme 1, which includes an athletic club, includes 1,520 on-site parking spaces. Scheme 2, which would replace the athletic club with additional office space, includes ~ ,830 on-site spaces. Both site plans include angled parking along Vallco Parkway (94 spaces in Scheme ~ and 89 spaces in Scheme 2). PARKING DEMAND AND SUPPLY RATE SOURCES AND ESTIMATES To estimate future parking needs for the two schemes, the following sources were reviewed: City of Cupertino's Shared Parking Municipal; Parking Generation (3rd Edition) by the Institute of Transportation Engineers; Shared Parking published by Urban Land Institute (ULI); and Lifetime Fitness Center Parking Design Rate Study by TRC Engineers (Scheme 1 only). Table 1 summarizes the parking supply rates used in this analysis. The rates presented for ITE reflect a 10 percent design factor that is applied to the demand rate to account for parking lot inefficiencies, such as vehicles circulating during peak parking periods, improperly parked vehicles, spatial demand characteristics, and duration of visits_ 160 West Santa Clara Street, Suite 675, San Jose CA 95113 (408) 278-1700 Fax (408) 278-1717 www.fehrandpeers.com 14 - 310 Mr. Gary Chao, City of Cupertino December 2, 2008 Page 2 of 4 Fella ~ Peefr_s TRNMSPORTATION C04511 LTNNTS TABLE 1 RECOMMENDED PARKING SUPPLY RATES ITEt ULI Use City Code Weekday Weekend Weekday Weekend Retail 1 per 250 s.f. 3.69 per k.s_f. 4.80 per k.s_f. 3.60 per k_s_f 4.0 per k.s_f_ Restaurant2 1 per 250 s.f_ 19.1 per k_s.f. 22.4 per k.s.f. 10.5 per k.s.f 15.0 per k.s.f. Office3 1 per 285 s_f_ 3.78 per k.s.f. 0.38 per k.s.f. 2.88 per k_s.f. 0.38 per k.s.f. 3 Hotel 1 per room + 1 per employee 1 25 per room 1 .OS er room P 1.25 per k_s_f. 1 .OB per k.s.f_ Senior Housing 1 per d.u. 0.5 per d.u. 0.5 per d.u. 1.85 per k.s.f. 1.85 per k.s.f. Athletic Club° 1 per 250 s.f 3.02 per k_s.f 3.52 per k.s_f. 3.02 per k.s.f 3.52 per k_s.f. Notes: 1 The 85°i percentile is defined as the point at which 85 percent of the values fall at or below and 15 percent of the values are above it. It is intended to provide decision makers with a guide to make parking supply decisions. 2 High-turnover, sit-down restaurant was 3 Weekend parking supply rates for hotel and oNice lane uses were taken from ULI because ITE does not provide rates for these land uses during the weekend. 4 Lifetime Fitness Center provided information about parking characteristics at faciilties surveyed In the Trip Generation and Parking Design Characteristics (TRC E=ngineers, 2007). Thls data was used in place of the standard ITE and ULI parking supply rates for athletic ~slubs. Source: Parking Generation (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 3rd Edition). Shared PaAcing (2nd Edition), Urban Land Institute, 2005; Trip Generation and Parking [Jessign (TRC Engineers, 2007) SUPPLEMENTAL SHARED PARKING ANALY£iIS The parking supply was evaluated using ashared-parking analysis since the proposed project contains a mix of uses, each with different parking characteristics. The shared parking analysis estimates the number of parking spaces needed to accommodate the overall peak demand of all the uses on the site. Since the shared parking analysis takes into account the unique time distribution and peaking characteristics of each use on the site, the resulting peak shared parking demand typically differs from the parking supply calculated using the parking rates required by the City Code for the individual land uses. A shared parking analysis using ULI methodology (temporal distributions, non-captive ratios) was completed using parking rates included in the City Code, ITE Parking Generation, ULI, and the Lifetime Fitness Center Study. The City's sharEad parking methodology is also presented. The methodology used in this analysis is the same methodology that was presented in the original parking analysis, but has been revised to reflect restaurant tenants occupying 30 percent of the site. Table 2 presents the various parking supply estimates for the two project assuming that parking on the site is share between the land uses. 14 - 311 Mr. Gary Chao, City of Cupertino December 2, 2008 Page 3 of 4 F E H li SL .PEERS ThT MS PORTAT{DM CO M54 LTAMTS TABLE 2 ESTIMATED SHARED PARKING SUPPLY FOR TYPICAL RESTAURANT SPACE City ITE ULI Land Use Weekday Weekend Weekday Weekend Weekday Weekend Schema 1 1,475 1,435 1,620 1,592 1,680 1,597 Scheme > Surp/us or Deficiency (based on +45 +85 (f00) (72) (160) (77) 1,520 spaces) Scheme 2 1,505 1,030 1,872 1,507 1,717 1,413 Scheme 2 Sutp/us or Deficiency (based on +325 +800 (42) +323 +1 >3 +4>7 1,830 spaces) Notes: 1 Peak parking demand based on the identified supply rates (City Code, ITE, or ULI) and temporal parking distributions. The City Code provides this distribution; ULI methodology was applied to ULI and ITE 85L" percentile parking rates. Source: City of Cupertino. City of Cupertino Municipal Code: Chapter 19.100 Par/dng Regu/atlons, 2005. Parking Generafion (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 3'd Edition); Tdp Generation and Parking Design Guidelines (TRC Engineers, 2007); Shared Parking (2nd Edition), Urban Land Institute, 2005. Scheme 1 provides 1,520 off-street parking spaces plus 138 on-street parking spaces (along Vallco Parkway and Stevens Creek Boulevard). Scheme 2 provides 1,830 parking spaces plus 133 on-street spaces. Scheme 1 would be deficient by 22 spaces if the ULI supply rates were recommended for the project and on-street parking spaces were included in the total parking supply. Scheme 2 would have sufficient parking if on-street parking is included in the site's overall parking plan. RETAIL VERSUS RESTAURANT COMPARISON The parking supply rates for shopping center land uses includes some restaurant uses on the site. In the original parking analysis, we recommended that the City monitor parking on the site if restaurant uses occupied more than 1 O percent of the shopping center/retail space since parking demand on the site will typically increase if a substantial number of restaurants are present. Table 3 compares the original analysis that assumed general shopping center land uses with less than 1 O percent restaurant space with the revised analysis results that assume 30 percent of the shopping center is occupied by restaurant tenants. As shown in the table above, dedicating 30 percent of the shopping center to high turn-over sit down restaurants would increase the overall parking demand on the site. PARKING SUPPLY RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the information above, the proposed project provides sufficient parking for the site even when additional restaurant uses up to 30 percent of the shopping center floor area are identified for the project description. If the project applicant wishes accommodate this intensity of restaurants on the site, then the number of spaces proposed by the project applicant should be sufficient to serve the expected parking demands on the site for both schemes. 14 - 312 Mr. Gary Chao, City of Cupertino December 2, 2008 Page 4 of 4 FEHR. ~ PEERS T[11NSPORTAT LON CO NSU LT[NTS TABLE 3 RETAIL VERSUS RESTAURANT PARKING SUPPLY COMPARISON City ITE ULI Land Use Weekday Weekend Weekday Weekend Weekday Weekend Scheme 1 30% Restaurant 1,475 1,435 1,620 7,592 7,680 1,597 Shop ing Center On/~ 1 ,457 1,435 1 ,326 1 ,266 1 ,450 1,312 Net Different +23 O +294 +326 +230 +285 Scheme 2 30% Restaurant 1,505 1,030 1,572 1,507 1,717 1,413 Shopping Center On/}f 1 ,454 1,084 1 ,521 938 1 ,541 960 Net Different +71 (54) +351 +569 +176 +453 Notes: 1 Peak parking demand based on the identified supply rates (City Code, ITE, or ULI) and temporal parking distributions. The City Code provides this distribution; LILI methodology was applied to ULI and ITE 85°i percentile parking rates. 2 The parking demand and supply rates for shopping centers typically assume that between 10 and 20 ercent of p floor area is occupied by restaurants. Source: City of Cupertino. City of Cupertino Munlclpa/ Code: Chapter 79.'!00 Par/cing Regu/ations, 2005. Parking Generation (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 3"' Edition); Trip Generation and Parking Design Guide/lnes (TRC Engineers, 2007); Shared Parking (2nd Edition), Urban Land Institute, 2005. 14-313 Exf~ibit D PLEASE RES)'Ot~ID TQ MORRISON FOERSTER P.o.BOxe13o - WALNUI'C1tEEK CALIFORNIA 945968130 ~ swN DIEGO, ®AS NING TO N, O.C. NORTHERN VIRGINIA, 10] YGNAQO VALLEY ROAD ORANGE COUNTY, DENVER, _ SUITE 450 SACRAMENTO, iCA LNUT CREEK WALNUI'CREEK TOKYO, LONDON, •EIJING, SHANGHAI, HONG BONG, - CALIFORNIA 945964094 SING ADORB, DRUSSELS TELEPI-IOI~:925.2953300 FACStRnrr u: 925.946.9912 W W W.MOFO.OOM November 24, 2008 Writer's Direct Contact 925.295.3310 DGold@mofo.com Gary Chao Department of Community Development City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Re; Apple Inc. Comments to Main Street Cupertino Project DFEIR (City File Nos_ U-2008-01 , TM-2008-01, ASA-2008-06, TR-2008-08, SCH#2008082058) Deaz Mr. Chao: This letter is submitted on behalf of our client, Apple Inc. ("Apple") to provide input regarding the Draft Focused Environmental Impact Report for the Main Street Cupertino Project dated October 2008 and prepazed by the City of Cupertino (the "DFE]R"). Apple owns significant properties in Cupertino, including approximately 56 acres intended for its new corporate headquarters (tile "New Campus Site") and its existing corporate headquarters at 1 Infinite Loop (the "]Z Campus"). The New Campus Site is bordered by Pruneridge Avenue on the north, N. Tantau Avenue on the east, Highway 280 on the south and the Hampton Apartments on the west. Both the New Campus Site and the Main Street Project site share eastern borders contiguous to N. Tantau Avenue. Apple also owns properties at 10300 and 10400 N. Tantau Avenue, and at 19191 Vallco Parkway. Apple recently acquired 19333 Vallco Parkway. The N. Tantau properties are located near Highway 280, and the Vallco Parkway properties are directly across the street from the Main Street project. Apple recognizes the substantial positive aspects of the Main Street Project proposal, and Apple supports the general direction of the various Main Street development scenarios. Apple would welcome the opportunity to work with the City and the project's developer, Sandhill Properties, to resolve its concerns in a timely manner. Apple's primary concerns with the DFEIR are as follows: I. The Masn Street DFEIR Should Properly Identify and Assume Apple's Proposal for the New Campus Sste, as Part of its Cumulative Impacts Analysis. As you know, a DEIR's discussion of cumulative impacts should include "past, present, and reasonably anticipated future projects." (Laurel Keigh[s Improvement Assn. v. Regents of Univ. of Cal, 47 Cal. 3d 376, 394 (Cal. 1988).) Similarly, the CEQA Guidelines provide that an adequate discussion of significant cumulative impacts should include a "list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts ...." (CEQA Guidelines §15130, subd. (b)(1)(A).) Apple's proposal to develop its future corporate headquarters on the New Campus Site meets the CEQA requirements for a cumulative project. On April 16, 2006, Apple announced to the Cupertino City Council that it had purchased the New Campus Site and intended to build a new corporate headquarters on it. Apple currently is in the early planning stages for this project. Apple also currently occupies 10300 and 10400 N. Tantau and 19191 Vallco Parkway, and it intends to renovate and occupy 19333 Vallco Parkway, within the next year or so. wc-139564 ~ 14 - 3'14 MORRISON I FOERSTER Gary Chao November 24, 2008 Page Two In view of the above, Apple expected that the DFE:Q2., at the least, would list Apple's sizeable new campus as a "reasonably anticipated future cumula~ive project" on its list of 34 cumulative projects. It didn't. We request that the FEIR expressly list the new campus on the cumulative list. Please also confirm that the City's General Plan already assumes that the Nc:w Campus Site will be rebuilt to at least replace the approximately 1 million sq. $. of existing office space. Also, Apple is uniquely positioned to qualify for a substantial portion of the City's retained pool Hof 150,000 sq. ft. of Existing Major Company Expansion allocations. As a result, it makes sense to assume the New Campus will be built out at a reasonable amount in excess of the existing development on the New Campus Site. It well may be the case that these assumptions were already factored urto the DFEIR analysis, and this request to list Apple's future campus as a cumulative project will not change the DFEIR's cumulative analysis_ 2. The Main Street DFEIR Does Not Adequately Address the Adverse Cons¢quences Related to Transferring Office Development Allocations ,From the City's Employment Centers. As background, the Cupertino General Plan (2000-2.020) established a Community Development framework directing various uses to particular Special Centers, such as Commercial Centers or Employment Centers. The General Plan further identifies "Development Allocations" for the City's commercial, office, hotel and residential build out. -Apple's IL Campus is within the N. DeAnza Boulevard Employment Center and the New Campus Site is within the Vallco Pazk North Employment Center. The Main Street Project site is located withvi the Vallco Pazk South area, which is a designated "Commercial Center." The following are our primary concerns with the manner in which the DFEIR addresses this Office Development Allocation and redistribution issue: • First, the DFEIR correctly acknowledges that Cupertino's General Plan allocates no new office space for the Vallco Park South Commercial Center. (DFEIR at p. 113-114.) Nevertheless, the Main Street project Scheme 1 proposes 100,000 sq. ft. of gross Office Development Allocations, and Scheme 2 proposes to absorb 205,000 sq. ft. of gross Office Development Allocations. At the same time, the DFEIR affirms that the project proponent did not apply for a General Plan Amendment or any other legislative act to add office space allocations to the Vallco Park South Commercial Center. Instead, in order to satisfy CEQA consistency requirements, the DFEIR attempts to reconcile this apparent general plan inconsistency by concluding- that transferring an Office Development Allocation of 100,000-205,000 sq. ft. from an Employment Center to a Commercial Center is - "insignificant". (DFEIR at p. 1 14.) To support [hi:s conclusion, the DFEIR cites Cupertino General Plan Policy 2-20, which allows some flexibility for assigning allocations to geographic areas "if necessary and if no significant environmental impacts, particularly traffic, are identified." The DFEIR then acknowledges that there are significant traffic impacts resulting from the project, but states that "These transportation impacts would no't be unique to this location". DFEIR at page 1 14. We respect that cities have latitude to construe theiir general plans. How-ever, this particular explanation and approach cannot withstand minimal scrutiny, since numerous significant traffic and other proj ect impacts are identified. In fact, the D7=EIR Table 6.0-1 checklist undercuts this consistency conclusion by acknowledging that the project is only "somewhat" consistent with the City's General Plan Allocation policies. We believe that a transfer of Office Allocation in the size proposed is inconsistent with the General Plan. Further, the DFEIR does not identify from which Special Center the Office Development Allocations will be transferred. From a CEQA standpoint, witL~out this basic information, Apple and the City's- wc-139564 14 - 315 MORRZSON ~ F'OERSTER Gary Chao November 24, 2008 Page Three decision makers will not be able to ascertain the extent to which the proposed transfer will trigger environmental impacts. The clear intent of the Generai Plan was to support the growth of the Employment Centers by assigning the majority of the new Office Development Allocations to these centers. When Cupertino's General Plan update was adopted in 2005, 94% of the newly created Office Allocations were specifically assigned to the Employment Centers. In fact, the Commercial Centers, including Vallco Park South, actually had Office allocations decreased by 6,675 sq. ft. in the current_ General Plan. The DFEIR should highlight that, if Scheme 2 is adopted, only 53% of the Office Development Allocations designated in the General Plan would remain for the Employment Centers. Apple is concerned that the proposed allocation transfer approach would be a fundamental shift away from the City's apparent intent to discourage office development within Vallco Park South_ Again, Apple generally is supportive of the Main Street•Project, and it strongly encourages the City to find a solution to the Office Allocation issue that does not require significant transfers of Office Development Allocations from Employment Centers. The City might consider the following. approaches: I) Apple would support a General Plan Amendment increasing the Office Development Allocations within the South Vallco Center, as well as in the designated Employment Centers. 2) In view of the Mixed Use characteristics of this proposal within South Vallco, perhaps the City could find that (a) South Vallco's "commercial" allocations can be utilized for the proposed office uses, without needing to obtain transfers of Office Allocations from Employment Centers, and/or (b) fractional Office Allocations, rather than full Office Allocations, would be appropriate by applying a different traffic equivalency factor to this area. Irrespective of which approach the City ultimately considers, Apple is more supportive of Scheme 1 (and its health club use) rather than Scheme 2. Also, Apple wants to ensure that the City fairly applies comparable exaction and mitigation requirements to the use of Office Allocations, whether existing or new, and whether utilized within a designated Employment Center, or within South Vallco. 3. Apple is Concerned lath the Proposed Reductions to Traffic Zanes on Vallco Parkway and Requests That the EIR Clarify its Analysis of This Proposal The Main Street Project proposes to reduce the existing width of Vallco Parkway from 6 traffic lanes dawn to 2 traffic lanes, and add angled parking on both sides of the street. (See DFEIR § 2.0, p. 55.) Apple requests that the City reconsider this proposed circulation modification for the following reasons: It is uncleaz whether the assumptions used by the DFEIR traffic analysis accurately reflect the capacity or user profile of the Apple stafy working at 19191 Vallco Parkway, or assume full occupancy of 19333 Vallco Parkway. PIease conf"uiri. • We request that the long-term suitability of the proposed Vallco Parkway reductions more fully consider the cumulative impacts and anticipated future growth within the properties abutting Vallco Parkway. Apple is concerned that ashort-term decision to narrow lanes within Vallco Parkway by 66% will have to be reversed a few years later. The Apple properties on Vallco Parkway have FARs of .39-.40, and similaz properties in the region are being redeveloped with FARs of .80. We request that the FEIR consider the extent to which the proposed modifications to Vallco Parkway could compromise the reasonable future expansion of the Apple properties and threaten future infill developments in the area. wc-139564 14 - 316 MORRISON I FOERSTER Gary Chao November 24; 2008 Page Four • The Main Street Project is an 18.7-acre site wiflt approximately 4,800 lineal feet of public street frontage. Due to Highway 280 and other fixed site constraints, the combined Apple properties (25.5 acres) on the north side of Vallco Parkway share only approximately 1,450 lineal feet of public street frontage, which translates to only 22% of the Main Street Project street frontage, based on site area. Apple is concerned that this roadway reduction will exacerbate the existing site access constraints of Apple's sites. We request that the: FEIIZ provide more comprehensive analysis as to the long-term site access impacts to these properties. • Apple is concerned that the proposed single lane: traffic and diagonal parking along Vallco Parkway likely will cause a significant level of service degradation and delays, particularly where there is only a single lane of traffic. Apple requests that the I%E1R include additional analysis concerning delays within affected intersections and the viability of accessing adjoining parking lots. These concerns should be fully addressed in the DFEIR's traffic analysis. Based on this expanded analysis, we request that the City establish a decision making process involving the multiple property owners potentially affected by this major propo::al to reduce the width of a public street. 4. Apple Requests That the FEIR Provide Additi'ona[ Aesthetic Analysis Concerning the Proposed S-Story Parking Garage Fagade Fronting on Ya[tco Parkway The northeast fapade of the Main Street Project's 5-story parking garage appears to be the dominant visual feature on Vallco Pazkway between North T:mtau Avenue and Finch Avenue. Moreover, directly in front of the proposed parking gazage, Vedlco Pazkway angles northward, thereby presenting the full length of the parking garage fapade into the field of vision for drivers and pedestrians approaching from the east. This visual dominance is further emphasized by the proposed 5-story garage height and by the minimal 25' setback of the: garage fapade from the street edge. We note that the other Main Street Project street setbacks are typically 35'. Apple is concerned that the DFEIR does not adequately address the far-reaching visual and aesthetic impacts on the Vallco Parkway streetscape. We request that the FEIR include elevations, renderings or massing studies enabling Apple to assess whether or not the garage's massing or fapade treatments are appropriate and will improve the visual environment, or detract from it. Apple is concerned that the garage design not contriibute to Vallco Parkway feeling like a lifeless "back alley," conflicting with the City's streetscape goals and policies. Byway of example, the proposed parking garage appears inconsistent with Policy 2-14, Strategy 3 of the General Plan, as indicated on page 1 12 of the DFEIR: "Buildine and Site Design StrateQV 3: Parking Placement in New Development. Place parking out of sight, behind or underneath buildings." The two development schemes propose a total of either 1,520 or 1,830 parking spaces, with the vast majority, or 1,100 of those spaces, in the 5-story parking garage fully visible above grade. Apple requests that the FEIR analyze whether a greater portion of the pazking can be sited below grade to make the project consistent with the City's General Plan Design Strategy 3. At a minimum, please consider whether two of the five stories of the parking garage could be located below grade. Below. grade parking "could extend beneath the retail-component adjoining the garage, and parking could also be located beneath the health club, similar to the office parking in Scheme 2. It also may be possible to develop the northeast garage fapade with a visually more attractive use to avoid a "blank garage fapade syndrome." We request that the FEIR consider the Main Street Project parking garage fapade in relation to the design treatment that was applied to the Stevens Creek Boulevard and Town Square fapades. At a wc-I39564 14 - 3'17 MORRISON I FOERSTER Gary Chao November 24, 2008 Page Five minimum, we request the FEIR provide the following additional information regarding the proposed 5- story garage (and an alternate garage that locates two of the garage's 5 levels below grade): • _ Massing Studies (as viewed from the street level); _ • Rendered Elevations (similar to the other elevations submitted); • Fagade Concept Drawing (similar to the other fagade concept drawings submitted); • Rendered perspective looking at the northeast garage fagade, viewed as one approaches from the Vallco Parkway/Tantau intersection; • Cross-section through the proposed garage, perpendicular to its northeast fagade, through Vallco Parkway to the face of the Apple office building on the north side of Vallco Parkway, showing the proposed street edge and streetscape design. S. Apple Proposes That Areawide Laridowners Join In a Vallco Parkway Streetscape Design Process, if a Single Streetscape Design is Intended for all of Vallco Parkway The DFEIR indicates that the Main Street Project is consistent with the Design Guidelines proposed by the South Vallco Master Plan for the Vallco Parkway streetscape. (DFEIR, p. 113.) Apple notes that these Design Guidelines are very conceptual in nature and do not identify specific plantings, signage, materials, street furniture or lighting. If the City intends for there to be a single streetscape design for all of Vallco Parkway established by the Main Street Project, then Apple requests that the City provide other Vallco Parkway landowners with the opportunity to provide input regarding streetscape design, including the landscaping, signage, street furniture or lighting elements. 6. Sewer Capacity. For both development schemes, the Main Street Project proposes to connect to existing utility (water, storm drain, and sewer) lines and install two new 24-inch storm drain lines to the existing Calabazas Creek culvert. Additionally, if a sanitary sewer flow test determines that the Main Street Project would exceed the capacity of the existing sewer lines at or downstream of the site, the Main Street Project would require larger sewer lines and connections downstream in Tantau Avenue from I-280 to Pruneridge Avenue. The New Campus Site is within the area between I-280 and Pruneridge Avenue and likely would also be served by this sewer line. Apple requests that the sanitary sewer flow test account for flow from the proposed Apple Campus, or at least treat the site as fully occupied rather than reflect existing vacant space. On behalf of Apple, we appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments on the Main Street Project DFEIIZ. ~y yours, ~ ~~~ David A. Gold cc: Steve Piaseck_i Kelly Kline Steve Cook Tim Fowler Mike Foulkes wc-139564 ~4 - 318 5750 ALMADEN EXP WY SAN JOSE, GA 957 1 6-3686 TELEPHONE (408) 265-2600 PAGSIMILE (d08) 266-0277 www.vQlleywater.org AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER File: 30774 Calabazas Creek Re: DEIR for the Main Street Cupertino Project November 24, 2008 Mr. Gary Chao Senior Planner Community Development Department City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Dear Mr. Chao: Subject: Draft Environmental Impact Repoli (DEIR) for the Main Street Cupertino Project Santa Clara Valley Water District (District) staff-rlsviewed_the-subject document for the proposed development on an 18.7acre site north of Stevens Creek Boulevard and west of Tantau Avenue, received on October 14, 2008. The DEIR describes the impacts resulting from the two development schemes for the proposed Main Street Cupertino Project, the difference being the area of retail and office uses between the two schemes. The project will ultimately result in the implementation of one of the two schemes considered in the document. The proposed development would increase the impervious surfaces on the site from 2.4 acres to 11.9 acres (Scheme 1) and 12.3 acres (Scheme 2), approximately 10 acres. The Initial Study states that the peak runoff from development during a 1 O-year storm event would increase from approximately 13.2cfs under existing conditions to approximately 23.6cfs under project conditions. The environmental documents should include hydrologic analysis to determine the impacts due to peak flows and volumes for not oinly 1 O-year but also fora 100-year flood event. Any increase in runoff-due to the proposed development must be mitigated such that there is no increase in the 1-percent flood water surFace elevation. Storm drainage from the site is proposed to be directed through new 24-inch and 18-inch storm drain lines, into Calabazas Creek. The document does not address the impacts to the receiving Calabazas Creek culvert as a result of the increased runoff due to the development. Conceptual Site Plans for both the schemes sho7nf that the retail shops located at the southern end and the northern end are located fairly close to the existing culvert. More specific detailed plans are needed to determine the distance to the culvert itself. However, the District recommends that the retail building structure be :setback further to the east to avoid any 14 - 3'19 The mission of the SOntQ ClorQ Vallev Woier District is o hPOlthv_ snfe nnrl Pn hn nrPrl nunlity of livinn in Snntn f Inrn Cni inf.. tF..n~ ~., F, .....,~o ~eF.o.~I Mr. Gary Chao Page 2 November 24, 2008 encroachment of foundation within the easement or on to the box culvert. A minimum distance of approximately 20 feet from the culvert edge to the building is requested to allow for reconstruction of the culvert should it be necessary in the future. Conceptual Site Plans for both the schemes show a town square, fountain and the parking for the site are proposed within the District's 32 feet wide easement right of way for Calabazas Creek. In accordance with the District's Water Resources Protection Ordinance, activities or modifications within the District easement or fee right of way or affecting District facilities require a permit. We look forward to the incorporation of these comments in the final EIR and the project plans. 1 can be reached at (408) 265-2607, extension 2731 or by a-mail at uchatwani@valleywater.org. Sincerely, Usher Chatwani, P.E. Associate Civil Engineer Community Projects Review Unit cc: B. Goldie, S_ Tippets, J. Christie, U. Chatwani, File 30774 51300us11-24 ~ 4 - 320 11f24/2008 .16:36 4083215?97 1lTA ENVIRCIN PI ^N PAGE 02f06 S A N T A C L A R A Valley Transportation Authority November 24, 2008 City of Cupertino Planxving Department 1.0300 Tone Ave»ne Cupertino, CA 95014 Attention: Gary Chao Subject: CiL•y File No.: U-2008-1 !Main Street Cupertino Dear Mr. C7xao: Santa Clara Valley Transportation 1•iuthori.ty (V'CA) staff have reviewed t11e Draft EIl2 for two development scexlarYOS for an I8.7-acre site at the nortlxwest corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard ar~d Tantau l~venue involving a miyc of retail, hotel, and housing uses. We have the following comments. Tr~ttsit Planning alti<d Site Design • .Land Use and Site Desian VTA supports the proposed land use max and site: design within walking distance e£ Stevens Creek Boulevard, a significant transit corridor. 7'he groposod mxx of land uses, the inclusion of a signifiicant resideratial componez>t, the pcdestcian orientation of tl-ie developxn.ent, and the inclusion of grouzxd-floor retail along many of the: building frontages are consistent with the pritzciplcs in VTA's Commur_ui-ty Dcsigri 8s Transportation (CDT) Manual of Best Pxactices for Integrating T.ransportatioJa and Laud Usa_ Intersection I.evol of Service Impacts and Miti atior> Measures - 7snpact~ on Bicvele Safety The Draft L1R text states that one of three measures could be used to mitigate the level o£ service impact of the project at the Wolfe Rosd/Va11co parkway iatexsection (MM IRAN - 7..1). VTA recommerids against itnplcmenting option 2 (adding a secozld, westbound right-turn Ianc) ' because it would adversely impact bicycle access and safety. TnCteads we suggest that the City require the adoption of option 1 or 3 as a zxii#igation measure. For more information on. best desigu practices to avoid coz>_tIicts between bicycles and vehicles at intersections, please refer Section 5.1.4 of VTA's $ieyele Technical Guidelines [BTG)_ This document may be downloaded fmm wwur.vta or news/vtaemnFBikes. For more information on bicycle systems anal parking, please contact Michelle DeRobertis, .Development anal Congestion Management pi.vision, at (408) 321-571 G. 14 - 321 3331 North First Street San Jose, CA 95134-1906 - Administrollon 408,321.5555 [~siomer Service 408.321.2300 11/24/2008 16:36 - 4063215?Fl7 ~ UTA ENVIR~N PL°N - .- PAGE 03/06 City of Cupertino Novevnber 24, 2008 Page 2 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilit~mpacts and Mityaatiozx Measures VTA supports requiring tl3e project applicant to provide pedestrian crosswalk improveaxlents at Fi_nclz Avenue 8z Vallco Parkway and at the project's eastern driveway 8c Va11co Qarkway, as discussed on page 6I of the DEIR. VTA. also supports requiring the project applicant to provide Class I and Cass II bicycle parking spaces per the City's ].Municipal Code. VTA supports bicycling as az~ ixzzportant transportatioz> >oaode and thus recom:onends inclusion of conveniently Located bicycle parking for the project. VTA's Birycle 2'echnical Guidelines provide guidance for estitnatizzg supply, siting and design for bicycle parking facilities. Transit Facilities Imnaets and Mitigation 1Vleasures The 'fraffiic Impact Ana.Iysi.s izx Appendix C motes that the proposed project may impact plans for a future transit corridor beiri.g planned for Stevens Creek Boulevard; however, this language i.s not included in the body of the DE1R. VTA requests that the DETR discussiozz on Transit Facilities Impacts (Mlv(. TRAN - 7.1) be znodi£cd to ineludB language about plans for enhanced transit services along Stevens Creek Boulevard. The DBIR should note that VTA is cuzxezxtly developing a stxa#egic plan for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service which could include service along Stevens Crcck Boulevard, and it should note that the City of Cupertino's General Plan and VTA have also identif-ted a potential transit station in the Vatlco area. We request that the City coordizzate with VTA to ensure that any changes proposed for the project's frontage on Stevens Creek boulevard do not coxztlict wittt future VTA plans along this cot7-idor. Current Bus Service There are two existing bus stops an Stevens Creek Boulevard located adjacent to this development. In order to provide convenierd access to transit service, VTA staff recomn~ezzds that the project include tl~e following improvements: Bus Ston on Stevens Creek Boulevard west of Ta~itau ~4venue + A 22-foot curb Lane or bus duckout (see attached-VTA standards for articulated buses) A large I O' X 75' PCC bus stop pavement pad for future articulated buses or BRT • No trees or punter strips in the bus loading area .Stevens Creek Boutevcxrd. west ofFinch 14vcnue + A 22-foot curb lane or bus duckout (see attached VTA standards for arti.culatcd buses) • A large 10' ~ 75' PCC bus stop pavement pad for future articulated buses or BRT + No trees or planter strips in tl~e Uus loading area "I'ra~asportaiio~n Impact AxaaAysis 14 - 322 11.!24/2008 16: 36 4063215787 VTA ENVIRON PL ^N PAGE 04/06 City of Cupertino November 2~, 2008 Page 3 CIVIP Intersections Upon selection of a preferred alterntative (scheme), VTA recoznn-~ends early consultation with the County of Santa Clara and VTA staff vn the final selection axld design of the proposed mitigation measures, including identifiication offair--share contribution opportunities, for the impacted C1VIP intersections as identified in the ]7BIR: • CMP m 5625 Lawrence Exp /Homestead Rd. • CMP ID 5633 Lawrence Exp / Bollinger Rd 1 Moorepark Ave • Cl\~.' II7 5636 Lawrence Exp / Calvert I:~rive (I-280 on-ratup) Parkiraa The parking study indicates that 1,658 parking spaces would be needed for Scheme 1 and 1,963 parking spaces_for Scheme 2. VTA supports the ]~xoposed reduced parking supply (based on City of Cupertino's parking supply rates) of 1.,790 parking spaces for SchgmE 2. VTA strongly encourages sharEd parkuig and impleiz~emtation of transportation demand managernerat.programs that encourage use o.f. alternate modes of transportation. Freewav LOS The freeway analysis indicates impacts of additional trips exceeding 1 % of capacity along segments of I-280 between Lawrence $xpresswa;y and I-$$O. VTEi suggests early coordination . with the appropriate agencies in identifying potential mitigation ixleasures and fair-share contribution opportunities based on VTP 2034 projects in the project area. Transnortatiou Demand ManaQCment l'I'DM) In order to reduce the number of single occupant vehicle trips generated by the project, VTA requests tl~e city to require implementation of a comprehensive TDM program as a condition of approval or mitigation measure. Effective TDIV[ programs include: • City-Carsbare • Parking Cash-Out. • Direct yr Indiroct Payments for Taking Alternate Modes • T.ray~.sit Fare Incentives such as l;co Pass 2nd Corzaziauter Checks • Employee Carpool 1V,[atching • Preferentially Located Carpool Parking • Bicycle Lockers and Bicycle Racks • On-site or Waik-Accessible Employee Sc~vices (day-care, dry-cleanil>.g, fitness, banki_rtg, convenience store) • On-site or Walk-Accessible Restaurants • Guaranteed Ride Ho11ae Program 14 - 323 11/24/2008 16:36 408321587 VTA ENVIRON PL^!J PAGE 05!06 City of Cupeztino November 24, 2P08 Page 4 We request that the City coordinate with. VTA in the identi£cation of appropriate measures to be included in the comprehensive T77M pro~am. Thank you'for t7ae opportunity to review this project.. If you 7aave any questions, please call .m.e at (408) 321-5784. Six~cerely, Roy Molseed Seniox Environmental Planner RM:kh cc: Samantha Swam, VTA cuoso2 14 - 324 11/24/2008 16:36 4083215787 UTA ENVIRON PI^N PAGE 06f06 t3BS STOP SIGN 'POLE 6' 8'-12' ti` L[i' "o FIONOLiT77lC 51tDEAAL7C AND BTTg $I~Op / PA85imTQCER PAD BENCH / 6' ' r - 70'3 -~-~- DxRHCT10N' OF 91'pAYE1. SVS STOIC XAVEKEIiT--- 1rlTit MONOLiTtitC CVRS BUS S'x`aP AND PASSENGER PAD WiTHOU'~' S1~EL~'ER ,~s puLL $ox 13[78 b"1'OP SIGN PO3£~ scas.rwLx (rrp) >^oc up a } ItONOLTI'HiC SIDEKALF[. PASSIDdCER PAD AND SIiELT'!;R PAD T F- --- ~o•m - -+J .-f- DSRECTION oiF 7TCAVEL g~ g^j~Op pAygaigN'[` •PIT1i YSONOISTRIC CUKB BUS STOP AND PASSENGER PAD s' ~PITIi SHELTER 2.s• i- coNDVM STUH UP 2.5' EDGE OF PAD 2.5• i- CONDUIT NS PULL BOX STUB UP DETAIL SAN'T'A CLARA VALLEY TR#-NSPORTA'I`ION AUTI~O'RI~'X ~ us s Tom cc~rvF-~~ uR~ ~~o.lv A R TI C` £~'LA ~' s .D B U.S.E.S 14 - 325 November 24, 2008 D I S T R I C T S I N C E 1 9 5 5 ALAMEDA COUNTY Tom Bates (Secretary) Scott Haggerty Janet Lockhart Nate Miley CONTRA COSTA COUNTY John Gioia Mark Ross Michael Shimansky Gayle B. Uilkema MARIN COUNTY Harold C. Brown, Jr. NAPA COUNTY Brad Wagenknecht (Vice-Chair) SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY Chris Daly Jake McGoldrick Gavin Newsom SAN MATED COUNTY Jerry Hill Carol Klatt SANTA CLARA COUNTY Erin Garner Yoriko Kishimoto Liz Kniss Ken Yeager SOLANO COUNTY John F_ Silva SONOMA COUNTY Tim Smith Pamela Torliatt - (Chair) Jack P. Broadbent EXECUTIVE OFFICER/APCO ~~~ s c:/~- 7F ~ d S~~ ~O°risra G~eee6` Gary Chao Department of Cormnuluty Development City of Cupertino 10300 Toile Avenue Cupertuio, CA 95014-3255 Subject: Maui Street Cupertino Project Draft Envirorunental Impact Report Dear Mi_ Chao: Bay Area Air Quality Mazzagement District (District) staff reviewed your agency's Draft Envirolunental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Main Street Cupertuio Project (Project). We understand that the DEIR addresses the potential enviromnental unpacts of two development schemes proposed for the site. Approval of the Project would allow the development of a mixed use center including up to 205,000 square feet of office space, 295,000 square feet of retail, a 250 room hotel, and 160 senior housuzg units on the approximately 18 acre site. The DEIR does not evaluate potential impacts fi-om fireplaces at the residential and hotel portions of the Project. The final EI1Z should provide this analysis unless the Project specificallyprohibits the installation of solid fuel bmziuzg devices and fireplaces. Tn the welter months, residential wood buiuing and wood smoke are major sources of pazticulate matter (PM) in the Bay Area. Reducing emissions of wood smoke is a lcey priority for the District to help protect public health and attain state and federal air quality standards. The Bay Area is in non-attauunent for the State's PM standards; azid we anticipate that the region will be designated non- attaunnent for the new federal PM stazidards as well. The District is concenied about the aLnount of particulate matter that could be produced fioni wood-bmuiuzg in future residential uses. Tlus past July, the District adopted a wood bLUZiuig regulation (Regulation 6, Rule 3) making it illegal to bu>u wood or firelogs in household fireplaces and woodstoves duruzg a wintertime Spare the Air health advisory. This rule also bails the sale and installation ofnon-EPA-certified wood- buniing devices in new construction or re-models. We recoLmneud that the final EIR quantify potential wood burning unpacts. The final EIR should also contain measures to nulunlize wood smoke emissions such as, at a minimum, supporting compliance with the District's wood burning regulation, or possibly prolubituig the installation of any wood-bmziing device in new builduZgs or outdoor areas. MM AIR 5.2 in the DEIR states that the City of Cupe>ino shall implement a number of mitigation measures to reduce diesel exhaust emissions. Due to the magnitude of the Project, we recoiTUnend that the final EIR include all feasible mitigation measures that n~Iiliiniize construction equipment exhaust emissions, specifically diesel paz-ticulate matter, a known carcinogen. Such measures could include, but are not lunited to: >~laintau~iug properly tuned engines; nlinin~Iizulg the '~ - -` - - ~. - -~ 4 -- c -. The Air Dis irict is a Certi tied Green 9usiness ~q_326 Printed using soy-based in AS on 100 % post-consumer recycled content paper 939 ELLIS-STREET - SAN FRANCISCO CALIFORNIA 94109 - 415.771.6000 - WWTN.BAAQMD.GOV Mi. Gary Chao -2- November 24, 2008 idlixig tune of diesel powered construction equipment to two mii1utes; using alternative powered construction equipment (i.e., lrybrid, compressed natural gas, biodiesel, electric); using add-on control devices such as diesel oxidation catalysts or paz-ticulate filters; and requiring all contractors to use equipment that meets Califoxixia Air Resources Board's (ARB) most recent certification standard for off-road heavy duty diesel engines. The Project's Ixutial Study quantifies the Project's potential impact on global climate change, however, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are ~.iot addressed in the DEIR. We reconmzend that the EIR analyze greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions ixZ accordance with the technical advisory issued by the Governor's Office of Plaiuiixig ancL Research, CEQA azzd CZinzate Change: Addressing Climate CZzange Through California Environnzenta7 Quality (CEQA) Act Review. 7n addition, the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) recently released a resource document addressing GHG emissions from projects subject to CEQA. The resource doctunent, CEQA axzd CZinzate Change, contaiu~e an overview of availaUle tools acid models for evaluating GHG emissions axed strategies for mitigating potentially sigiiificaut GHG emissions fionz projects. The report may be downloaded at http://tv<v<~v.caucoa.or~. T'he Project should seelc to miiiinize its contribution to clinate charige by implenientiig all feasible mitigation measures to reduce GHG emissions, especially those measures targetixig the Project's vehicle miles traveled, as trazisportation represents approximately 50 percent of the Bay Area's GHG emssions. if you have airy questions regarding these coniuients, please contact Sigalle Michael, Enviromnental Plamier, at (415) 749-4683. Sincerely, Jea ggerxlcam D u Air Pollut~ i utrol Officer JR: SM cc: BAAQMD Director Erin Gamer BAAQMD Director Yorilto Kishimoto BAAQMD Director Lis I~ziss BAAQMD Director Keu Yeager 14-327 STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS TRANSP~ ATION AND HOUSING AGENCY ARNOLD SCHWARZEA*EGGER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. O. BOX 23660 OAHI.AND, CA 94623-0660 PHONE (510) 622-5491 Flex your power! FAX (510) 286-5569 Be essergy effscient! TTY 711 November 24, 2008 SCL-280-8.37 SCL280348 SCH2O08082058 Mr. Gary Chao City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Deaz Mr. Chao: Main Street Cupertino, Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) Thank you for continuing to include the California Department of Transportation (Department) in the environmental review process for the proposed project. We have reviewed the DEIR and have the following comments to offer. Traffic Forecasting Transportation Impact Analysis, page 31, Table 8, Trip Generation Estimates: For the same location and the same kind of land use,-the same trip generation rate should be applied. Community Planning Significant impacts should be reduced even if they can not be fully mitigated. Given the fact that the proposed project will generate over 100 trips during AM and PM peak hours (622 inbound and outbound in the AM peak hour and 1,264 inbound and outbound during PM peak hours for Scheme 1 and 583 inbound and outbound in the AM peak hour and 1,036 inbound and outbound during PM peals hours for Scheme 2) (p. 53-54), and segments of I-280 in the project area are already operating at an unacceptable level of service (p. 60-61), the Department recommends instituting a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program in which future employees at the project site can receive transit passes at a reduced rate in lieu of free parking to encourage alternate forms of transportation, providing bike lockers and showers for future employees that choose to bike to work, and reducing the parking requirements. Also, according to Impact TRAN- S (p. 3), "Implementation of Scheme 1 would significantly impact seven segments on Interstate (1)-280 and implementation of Scheme 2 would significantly impact six segments on Z-280 during one of the peak hours." This is considered a Significant and Unavoidable Impact. The City of Cupertino should consider various measures for reducing the motorized vehicle trip generation from the project. Reducing the parking Yequirements should be feasible, given that there will be sufficient transportation and land uses, such as the existirig bicycle and transit facilities, and office, commercial, and residential development that will serve the project site (See Figure 2.0-3 (p. 40) and 2.0-4 (p. 42)). The project proposes 1,658 parking spaces for Scheme 1 and 1,963 parking spaces for Scheme 2. In order to reduce impacts on the state highway and to promote carpooling, bicycling and public transit use, please reduce pazking for retail to 1.SOi?~_$3C~8 "C¢Itr¢ns smprooes mobility ¢cross C¢Iiforni¢° Mr. Gary Chao November 24, 2008 Page 2 promote carpooling, bicycling and public transit rise, please reduce parking for retail to 1.50-2.50 parking spaces per 1000 square feet (sf) and for office to 2.00-3.00 parking spaces per 1000 sf, which is the recommended amount per "Reforming Parking Policies to Support Smart Growth," a Metropolitan Transportation Commission study funded by the Department. In addition, mitigation measures-7.1 and 7.2 (p. 3) state that the City of Cupertino shall work with the Department for Impact TRAN-7: "The proposed narrowing of Vallco Parkway and the addition of the on-street parking would impact thc; existing bus stop at Vallco Parkway and Perimeter Road." Although the we encourage The: City to work with the Department, the commuter shuttles are funded by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Caltrain and private employers, and are operated by Caltrain. Please make that correction. Also, attached for your reference are copies of comments provided as part of the early consultation collaborative on the Draft Traffic Impact Report. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please call Jose L. Olveda of my staff at (510) 286-5535. Sincerely, LISA CARBONI District Branch Chief Local Development -Intergovernmental Review Attachments: c: State Clearinghouse 14 - 329 °C¢Ztr¢rzs improoes mobility ¢cross C¢Ziforrzz¢° Sent By: CALTRANS TRANSPORTATIO ! ~NING; 5t0 286 5560; ~ Nov-~ OS 3:22PM; Page 1/2 STATE GF OAirF[~R.t iii-gi*~,_ ETA a _ e SPORT~T70N iL D BOUSIISG AGEN Y' ~ AANOLD 6CFiW i7~~'N'G`GGER GO~JER1dOP E~~PE~'TZi~i~N'.I' OF TRAI'tiT~POR'~`~"1`~Olt7 P. O_ SOX 23660 DAISZ.AND, CA 94628-0660 PHONE 0510) 622-02493 ~ .. FLes pour potvrr! FAX (510) 256-5559 ~ Lie eraergy efjLci.~nL! TTY 711 October 21, 2008 SCL-280-8.37 SCL280348 SCH2008p820S8 Mr. Gary Chao City of Cupertino 10300 'Torre Avenue < Cupeninp, CA 95014 Bear lvLr. Chao: 1lgain Street Cu~srtirto, .Y.rarisport€tliota Iirtgact Aaa[ysis (TIA) , Thsnk you for. continuing tcs. iacludig'the Cal-iforrria I7epart~-nent of Transpc~rtatiofl (D~partrrxent) in the environmental. r,ei~ieW ptvicess for the proposed project. We have reviewed the 'I'IA and have the following additional ccimxnents to offer. lgigttway Operat[©ns - 1. 12cf~r w the `Famal.~E~egarf•, "'Transportation Impact Analysis.('I':lA)", dated September 5, 2008. 1~igures. 7'to.F%gure 17; Study intersection #20: Stevens Creek Boulevard / Lawrence Ezpr~esswsy:• Pl-ease inclucfita ttte "]ntersTats (I}-Z80 Northbound (NB) off-rump" in ttxe TrafTia Volume ~DR~; alI sccaarios of the TIA and related Level of Service Tables. Please iricc~rpori3.te t11i.s i~€orivation into the anal}+sYS and submit for our review and camment_ 2_ The off=ramp approaches -fo Sifitdrsectiotts #6, #'!, #18,-x#20, and #2Z queue back onto the freeway mriiri[i.ue and impact i~TS and Southbound I-280. These impacts need to be mitigated. Should you have any questions rejarding this lcttcr, please call Josh L. Olvada of nay staff aY X510) 286-5535. Sincerely, • I IS A. CARROIVI I3istricE SrancF! Chief Local IIevelopment - Intergovernrnez3tal Review bc_ LCarbani% JOlvedaf I'~Tlall; H~evy Qps7 ile Chron File . 7Lp/j to ~ . "Ca7Er¢,~.a imprpLps, ,-,yobsZity d-roes Ca.Liforretta"~ - '14 - 330 STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BL~ x S TP.AN° TATION A1~TD HO IN A3ENCY ~~~T1~~1W Y ®~ T~.A~~`m ~~®~TA~~~I~ 1'. O. BOX 23660 OAFr1,Aj.7D, CA 94623-0660 PHONE (510) 622-549. 1 FAX (510) 286-5559 TTY 711 October 6, 2008 Mr. Gary Chao City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Dear Mr. Chao_ Main Street Cupertino, Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) APNOLD CCI3RTAR~'NEGGER G V-EPI~TOR Flex your yozoer! 3e en-ergy e/Ticieszt! SCL-280-8.37 SCL280348 SCH2008082058 Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Depaz-tment) in the environmental review process for the proposed project. We have reviewed the TIA and have the following comments to offer. Traffic Forecasting 1. Table 8, page 31. What is the basis for all of the Pass-by Reduction Rates? 2. Table 8, page 31. Why do the different schemes have different trip generation rates if they are for the same location and land uses? The rate: applied should be the same. Additional Departmental comments will be forwazded as soon as they are received. Should you have any questions regazding this letter, please call Jose L. Olveda of my staff at (510) 286-5535. Sincerely, c ~. LISA CARBONI District Branch Chief Local Development -Intergovernmental Review bc: LCarboni/ JOlveda/ File/ PCox JLO/j to ~4-331 "Caltrans i.mnroves mobility czcross Ca~!.ijorsz!cz" " ~ - ~ ¢ ~ - - - - ~ Santa Clara -' Plannin Division ~,_; _ ,~II~~ 9 zoa~ '~`~- ~~- ~=~=' z November 24, 2008 `1Y , 4}~ ~ Mr. Gary Chao City Planner I City of Cupertino ~~ "~ 0 10300 Torre Avenue ~ ~,. _I Cupertino, CA 95014 ~~ `1 Re: Draft Focused Enviroim~ental Impact Report -Main Street Cupertino Project - Dear Mr. Chao, I ,-_i I Thank your for including the City of Santa Clara in the public review process of the Draft -' Focused Envirorunental hnpact Report (DEIR) for the Main Street Cupertino Project. The Plamiing Division and Traffic Engineering Division reviewed the document and have the Q following comments: ~. r Planning Division t._ _:~ ~ ~-' • Figure 1.0-3: Please identify the City of Cupertino/City of Santa Clara border on the Aerial Photograph. • Page 59.• Inter§ections 3, 21, and 26 have been identified to have significant level of service impacts. The LOS .for these intersections should be mitigated- to backgrom~d conditions. Also, County expressway plans and the east' bound through lane Tier 1C projects should contribute their fair share- to regional facilities. The City of Santa Clara has been working with other jurisdictions and ~~ the County to deternine project's "fair share" contribution to regional facilities. '~--_~ We would be happy to share our methodology if that would be helpful. The City I of Cupertino should institute a fair share agreement to address impacts to regional facilities inside and outside of its jurisdictional boundaries. • Page 65: The discussion under the Lawrence Expressway/I-280 southbound ~;:~~~.~ ramps-Calvert Drive Intersection Impact states That the City of Cupertino and the {. County of Santa Clara had not coordinated on an appropriate mechanism for mitigating impacts to this intersection, and therefore the impact is significant and unavoidable. A lack of coordination between jurisdictions is not an acceptable reason to determine a significant and unavoidable impact. The analysis should v~... ~ either identify potential mitigation or a "fair share" contribution toward known regional improvements that would serve as project mitigation. The City of Santa ' Clara has been working with other jurisdictions to determine project's "fair share" contribution to regional facilities. The City of Cupertino should institute a fair __~ share agreement to address impacts to regional facilities inside and outside` of it_s ~~ `"` i jurisdictional boundazies_ '~-- ~ Page 70: Impact TRAN-5 indicates that the implementation of transportation demand measures would reduce impacts. Please indicate what these transportation demand measures are, or where they can be found. 1500 Warburton Avenue Santa Cara, CA 95050 - _ - - 14 - 33406) 615-2450 ~~~ ri~_~ FAX (406) 247-9857 i ~ ~ j www.cisanta-clara.ca.us t`+. ~ • Page 91: Please note that Pendin;~ Developments 28 and 29 have been approved by the City of Santa Clara. Please refer to the following table for the City of Santa Clara's latest Pending and Approved project list- Annroved Proiects as of July 21, 2008 Project Location and APN Description Intel SC-13 2250 Mission College Blvd 100,000 sf of office land use 104-39-021 Informix 3925, 3935 dz 3965 Freedom 400,000 sf of office land use Circle 104-40-034, 035 Applied 3333 Scott Boulevard, Santa Existing industrial use redeveloped to 540,000 sf Materials Clara 216-31-080 of research 8z develo ment 3-~/Coa ac 5402 Great American Parkway @ Existing office use redeveloped to 278,000 sf of Great America Yerba Buena, Santa Clara office/research 8c development 216-31-075 Yerba 5351 Great American Parkway Vacant undeveloped site developed to 911,000 sf Buena/Irvine @Yerba Buena, Santa Clara of office use 104-O1-057 Sobrato 2200 Lawson Lane, Santa Cla:^a 516,000 sf of office use 224-44-015 Santa Clara SC- 535-555 Reed Street, Santa Clara 312,000 sf data center 1V Data Center 230- 03-080 Intel SC-12b 2350 Mission College Boulevard, 100,000 sf of office land use Re en Santa Clara 104-13-097 Intel SC- 2200 Mission College Boulevard 14/South Bay @ Freedom Circle, Santa Clara 400,000 sf of office land use Dev 104-40-036 v.._~~t._«a 5301 Stevens Creek at Lawrence Existing industrial use redeveloped to 727,500 sf Paekard{Agilent 316-17-018 of office and research 8~ development Technologies 1655 Scott Boulevard at El Existing industrial use redeveloped to 132 Shea/L1L site Camino Real, Santa Clara housing units Ten rezoning areas to high-density residential North San Jose development totaling 5,841 residential units, Phase I North San Jose, CA 147,000 sf of commercial use, and 1,488,609 sf of industrial ark/office develo ment 3800 Homestead Road Kaiser Hospital (Westside of Calabazas Creel•:), 130,000 sf of medical offices Santa Clara 90 Winchester Boulevard @ BAREC Forest Avenue, Santa Clara 165 apartment units and 110 sf 303-17-047 Valley Fair 2855 Steven Creek Boulevard 678,000 sf expansion of existing shopping center 274-43-043,071, ETC Prometheus SO2 Mansion Park Drive, Santa 124 apartment units Deve]o ment Clara 097-OS-024 1331-1333 Lawrence Existing office use redeveloped to 277 multi- Marina Playa Expressway, Santa Clara family units and 63 single family units 14 - 333 Pelio 1525 Comstock Street 8z 1500 One story data center and enclosed equipment Space Park, Santa Clara ard. Demo existin buildin Investments 224-OS-049 121 y g g PendinL Proiects as of July 21. 2008 Project Location and APN Description Regency Plaza 2350 Mission College Boulevard, 300,000 sf of office use and 6,000 sf of retail use Santa Clara 104-13-097 Augustine 2620-2727 Augustine Drive Bowers Ii:dustrial (includes properties on Bowers 1,969,600 sf of office and 35,000 sf of retail Avenue and Scott Blvd), Santa Campus / Clara - E ui Office Love Existing light industrial redeveloped to 215,000 3250 Scott Boulevard 216-29-117 sf of office use Enter rises San Tomas Business Park 2600, 2800 San Tomas 1,950,000 sf of office and high-tech lab buildings Campus / Expressway 8i 2400 Condensa replacing approx. 690,000 sf of office space. Harvest Street, Santa Clara Pro erties 4301-4401 Great America @ Sobrato Mission College Blvd, Santa 600,000 sf of office use. Clara 1525 Comstock Street 8z 1500 Space Park Space Park, Santa Clara 224- 350,000 sf data center Partners LLC 0g-049, 121 San Francisco 4900 Centennial Blvd, Santa Proposed 68,500 seats, expandable up to 75,000 49er Stadium Clara seats ~- Tasman/Patrick Henry and Old Nine parcels bounded by Tas, 3,000,000 sq. ft of office/12 8z D PH, Democracy Way. OI Ironsides Construction of new 5-story building with 3300 Olcott Menlo Equities associated site improvement in conjunction with 224-47-017 demo existin 2-sto buildin 200,000 SQ.FT. Kohl/Santa 3610-3700 El Camino Real, Santa Existing shopping center redeveloped to 490 Clara Square Clara housing units and 171,000 sf of retail use Fairfield 900 Kiely Blvd 806 housing units, 45 SFD, 225 townhouses/ Development Kiely and Homestead 290-26-022 rowhouses and 536 apartments 2585 ECR 2555 El Camino Real, Santa Clara Mixed-use- 60 dwelling units, 3,300 sq. ft. retail Hotel Le Existing hotel expanding to 170-room Grande 2875 Lakeside Drive, Santa Clara hotel/condominium North San Jose 1,500,000 sf of reseazch 8z development/office Phase II City of San Jose space and 5,353 residential units Swim Center at 909 Kiely Boulevard, Santa Clara 2 Olympic-sized pools, special event venue Central Park Mission MC Blvd and Great America 000 sq. ft. 427 College Master Parkway , Plan 14 - 334 Milpitas 190 Bazber Lane, Milpitas 900 multi family units and 12,800 sq. ft of retail S care Yahoo! 5010 Old Ironsides Drive 3,000,000 sq ft office campus development 13 6- story buildings and 3 2- story common buildings • Please identify how this project complies with AB 32 relating to climate change. Traffic Engineering Division • At the intersection of Homestead Road and Lawrence Expressway, the County has identified in their Countywide Expressway. Plan a Tier 1C improvement to add an eastbound through lane. Tl.ie Project should contribute a fair share to this improvement • The Project should provide Class ]i and II bicycle parking as stated in MM Tran - 9.1 on Page 69. • The Project should implement TD]VI measures to reduce vehicle trips. Please consider our coii~uiients when preparing the Final Focused EIR. Again, thank you for including the City of Santa Clara in the review process for the Draf3 Focused EIR for the Cupertino Main Street Project. Please provide the City of Santa Clara with a copy of the Final Focused EIR for review. We look forward to working with you in the future. Sincerely, 7 FD/2 = Carol Anne Painter City Plamier CC: Kevin Riley, Director of Planning Rajeev Batra, Director of Public Works/City Engineer 14 - 335 - AR~s-t~R RESOURCES IXHIBIT E ___ __ professional consulting arbArists and tree - A TRET INVENTORY AND REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPl~~NT AT STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD AND FINCH AVENUE CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SubmitEed to: Community Development Depa>-tnient City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 9501.4-3255 Prepared by: David L. Babby ASCA Registered Co~zsulti:zg Arborist #399 ISA CertifzedAz-borist #T~E-4001A April 30, 2008 - ~d X36 p.o. box 25295, san mateo, California 94402 ~ email: arborresources@comcast.net phone: 650.654.335 1 ~ fax: 650.240.0777 ~ I~cansed contractor #796763 Dm~idL_ Bobby; Registered ConsrdtingArborist Februmy 8, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION TITLE PAGE 1.O INTRODUCTION ........... ................................................. 1 2.0 TREE COUNT AND CO1~'iPOSITION .................................. 2 3.0 SUITABIi.ITYFORPRESERVATION ................................4 4.0 TREE DISPOSITION ....................................................... 5 5.0 RECOIVIMENDATIONS .................................................... 7 5.1 Design Guidelines ................... ......................................:. 7 5.2 Protection Measures for :Before and During Development ......... 10 EXiIIBITS EXH7RIT TITLE A TREE INVENTORY TABLI's B SITE MAPS (include site map index) 14 - 337 1 David L. Bobby, Registered Co~zsultingArborist ApriI30, 2008 1.0 INTRODUCTION I have been retained by the City of Cupertino Community Development Department to review the tree-related impacts associated with a proposal to develop an existing vacant site located along the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard, to the east and west sides of Finch Avenue between Tantau Avenue, Vallco Parkway and an existing housing development. The proposed development includes a mixture of retail, office, recreational buildings and parking garages. Tasks performed for this review are as follows: Identify all trees located in close proximity to the proposed development, including those located on the subject site, within the public light-of--way, and overhanging the site front neighboring properties. Measure or estimate the trees' trunk diameters where appropriate to obtain the most representative sample of trunk size; diameters are rounded to the nearest inch. Trunk diameters presented iui the 7/21/05 report by Barrie D. Coate and Associates were considered during the estimation of any rivnk diameters. Estimate canopy spreads: Ascertain the trees' health and structural integrity. Deterr,,;,,e the bees' suitability for preservation (e.g. 1ugh, moderate, or lovv). Specify which trees are regarded as "specimen trees" pursuant to Appendix B of Chapter 14.18 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. Review the following plans: [1] Sheets T-1 (dated 3/11/08), T-2, ET-1 and C1.0 (dated 4/2/08), Exhibit SD-1 (not dated) by BKF, and [2] Sheets A1.3 (dated Z/20/08) and A2.3 (dated 3/7/08) by Kenneth Rodrigues 8~ Partners, Inc. Utilize tree numbers that are presented on Sheets T-1 and T-2, the 7/21/05 report by Barrie D. Coate and Associates, and ou rectangular tags affixed to most of the trees' hunks. For trees shown on the plans but without a number, I assigned numbers according to the sequential order established on the plans and report. Show each tree's number on a copy of Sheet T-2 presented in Exhibit B. Prepare a written report contauiing the aforementioned infoiviation, and provide recommendations to help mitigate or avoid anticipated impacts to bees that will be retained, relocated or removed. Stevens Creek Boulevard g Finc7T Avenue, Cupertino Pa e 1 0 3 338 g City of Cupertino Conzmu~,ity Developme~,t Deparhnent David L. Babb; Registered Cotuulti~og Arborist April 30, 2008 2.0 TREE COUNT ~,1~TD COMPOSITION One-hundred and forty-six (146) trees of 13 various species were inventoried for this report_ They are sequentially numbered as 1 thru 146, and the table presented below identifies the type, number and percentage of each. Specific data recorded for each tree can be viewed in Exhibit A (Tree bzvetzaoty Table). The tree locations and assigned numbers can be viewed on the map presented in Exhibit B. NAME `' TREE Nl1MBER S .COUNT PERCENT OF TOTAL Aleppo Pine 1 13 1 1 Blackwood Acacia 102-106 5 3% California Pepper Tree 99-101 3 2% Canary Island Date Palm 92-98 7 5% Coast Redwood 18-24, 27-29, 127-129 13 9% Elm 1 1, 12, 25, 26, 107-1 11 , 1 14- 116, 145, 146 14 1 O% English Walnut 118-123 6 4% Orange 1 12, 124 2 1 Shame) Ash 1-10, 13-'17, 30-91, 130-144 92 63% Wattle 1 17 1 1 Eucalyptus 125 1 1 Valley Oak 126 1 1 Total 146 100% Steve~xs Creek Boulevard c~ FinclT Avenue, Cupertino Page _7 of I3 City of Cupertino Conxmunity Developme~Tt Department 14 - 339 DovidL_ Babb; Registered Corzsulting~frborist Ayril30, 2008 As illustrated in the previous table, the site is populated predominantly by shamel ash. They border the perimeter of the site along Vallco Parkway, Tantau Avenue, and partially along Stevens Creek Boulevard. One of the trees, #126, is considered a "specimen tree" pursuant to Appendix B of Chapter 14.18 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. It is a 57-inch diameter valley oak that has been dead for many years. All others are not considered native and appear to have been planted some time ago. Twenty (20) trees were not previously inventoried; they include #127 thru 146. Information regarding their assigned number, size, condition and location is presented in Exhibits A and B_ Note that the hunk locations of all but bees #29 and 138 are shown on Sheets ET-1, T-1 and T-2; the trunk locations of #29 and 138 as shown in Exhibit B are approximate and should not be construed as being surveyed. Two trees, #21 and 29, are situated on the western neighboring property along the northwest section of the site. They are included in this report as their roots and canopies are exposed to potential damage during development. Seventy-one (71) trees are situated either entirely or partially within the public right-of- way and are regarded as "street trees;" they include #2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 30-69, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, 83, 85, 87, 89, 91, 94, 97, 99, 100 and 127-138. Trees #127 thru 138 are situated within existing planters along the center median of Finch Avenue. Sfeveizs Creek Boulevard ~ Finch Avenue, Cuperti~zo Poge 3~$f l~p Cifj~ of Czryertino Convnwzity DeveToyme~zt Deyarbnent DovidL. Bobby, Registered ConsultingArborist April 30, 2008 3.0 SUITABILITY FOR: TREE PRESERVATION Each tree has been assigned a "high," "moderate" or "low" suitability for preservation rating as a method for cumulatively measuring and considering their physiological health, structural integrity, location, size and species. A description of these ratings with the assigned tree numbers are presented below; note that the "high" category comprises 17 trees (or 12-percent), the "moderate" category 50 trees (or 34-percent), and the "low" category 79 trees (or 54-percent). High: These trees appear in overall good health, have seemingly stable structures, and show a high potential of providing long-tei~ contribution to the site. They can be considered the most suitable for retention and protection. Applies to trees #12, 18-20, 22, 24, 27, 92-98 8~ 127-129. Moderate: These trees appear viable and contribute to the site, but not at seemingly significant levels. Typically, their longevity and contribution is less than those of high suitability, and frequent care of the tree and/or surrounding hardscape is usually required throughout their remaining life span. Applies to trees #1, 5-7, 9-11, 16, 1'7, 21, 23, 31-33, 35-38, 40-42, 45, 49, 50, 54-58, 60, 62, 68, 72, 86, 90, 91, 100„ 101, 113-115, 118, 120, 130 8z 133-138. Low: These trees are predisposed to irreparable health problems and/or structm-al defects that are expected to worsen regardless of measures employed (i.e. they appear beyond recovery and their continued decline or demise appears imminent in the near future). Iu most instances, they are in poor, dead and/or declining condition. Applies to trees #2-4, 8, 13-15, 25, 26, 28-30, 34, 39, 43, 44, 46-48, 51-53, 59, 61, 63-67, 69-71, 73-85, 87-89, 99, Il02-112, 116, 117, 119, 121-126, 131, 132 c4z 139-146. Steve~u Creek Boulevard ~ Finch Avenue, Cupertino Page 4~f~~ City of Cupertino Conununity Development Deparbnent Dm~id L_ Babby, Registered Consulting Arboz-ist April 30, 2008 4.0 TREE DISPOSITION As part of my review of the proposed project, I evaluated Sheets T-1, T-2, A1.3 and A2.3 to identify the anticipated disposition of inventoried trees through implementation of the proposed designs shown in both Schemes 1 and 2. Based on my evaluation of these sheets and observations of the tree, I anticipate the following disposition: Scheme 1 The following 76 trees (or 52%) to be removed: #9, 10, 12-17, 23-26, 28, 30- 32, 43, 46, 47, 54, 58, 59, 74, 76, 78, 80, 82, 84, 86 and 99-146. The following 13 trees (or 9%) to be relocated: #18-20, 22, 27 and 92-98. Scheme 2 The following 65 bees (or 45%) to be removed: #12-17, 24-26, 28, 29, 46, 47, 57, 58, 80, 82, 84 and 100-146. The following 8 trees (or 5%) to be relocated: #18-20, 22, 23, 27, 95 and 96. In the event trees listed above are intended for retention and expected to survive with a reasonable assurance, the proposed building, underground garage, street, parking lot, and storm drain water plan should consider a minimum setback from the trunks of seven times their diameters for any trenching, soil cuts, overcut, fill or soil scraping (e. g. a tree with a trunk diameter of 24 inches would have a 14-foot setback in all directions from its bunk); for multiple trunks, the largest trunk diameter should be used_ Of trees listed above, there are many not shown on Sheets T-1 and T-2 to be removed or relocated. However, these trees are in such close proximity to the proposed buildings, streets and/or parking lot that they will significantly conflict with consh-action, present risks of damage to the foundations and surrounding hardscape, and be severely impacted to the extent that their stability and longevity would be jeopardized. Consequently, their removal will be inevitable andlor can be expected. These trees are as follows: Scheme 1 (nine in total): #58, 74, 76, 78, 80, 82, 84, 86 and 98. Scheme 2 (ten in total): ,#16, 22, 23, 27, 28, 47, 57, 80, 82 and 84. Stevezzs Creek Boulevard ~ Finch Avenue, Cupertino Page ~k~§~2 City of Cupertino Convnunity Development Department Dm>idL. Babb>, RegzsteredCo~uuZti~tgArborist flpril30, 2008 Regarding Scheme 1, trees #1 and 11 are. indicated for removal; however, I do not identify any direct conflict to wan ant their removal (the impacts appear to be the same as for Scheme 2). As such, they are not identified in the previous lists of trees. Tree #100 is a multi-trunk California pepper tree specified on the plans for relocation. However, my observations reveal this tree is not a suitable specimen for relocation due to its multiple trunks and location against the; street sidewalk. As such, I identify it as a removal as part of my assessment. My evaluation of the bees' conditions revealed the following 33 ash trees located along the perimeter of the site are in such poor or dead condition that they are beyond recovery and their removal is suggested regardless of the proposed project: #2-4, 8, 34, 43, 47, 51-53, 59, 61, 64-67, 69, 70, 73-85, 88 and 89. Note that of these, nine (#43, 47, 59, 74, 76, 78, 80, 82, 84) are included in `trees to be removed' for Scheme 1 and four (#4-7, 80, 82, 84) are included in `trees bo be removed' for Scheme 2. The absence of supplemental water to existing trees appears as the leading factor for the decline of the vast majority of ash, elm and redwood trees at the site. If bees to be retained or relocated are expected to regain their vigor and be viable tluoughout and beyond development, it seems imperative that a watering program is implemented iunmediately. In doing so, I suggest 5 to 10 gallons per every inch of trunk diameter is applied to the unpaved ground beneath the trees' canopies (but not against their trunks) at two week intervals and at a slow rate of discharge. I am available to discuss various methods that can be employed to supply the water. Recommendations are presented in the next section as a means to avoid or mitigate impacts to trees being retained or relocated. They should be carefully followed and incorporated into the project plans. Stei~e~u Creek Boidei>ard c~ Finch Ai>e~~ue, Cupertr~to POge 61$f ~3 City ofCziperti:xo ConxnrunityDevelopme~ztDeparh~ze;at Dm~idL. Bobby, Registered ConsultingArborist ~lpril30, 2008 5.0 RECOI~~~NDATIONS Recommendations presented within this section are based on the plans reviewed, and serve as guidelines for avoiding or mitigating impacts to trees being retained or relocated. Note that they are subject to revision upon reviewing additional or revised plans. 5.1 Design Guidelines 1. For trees planned or intended for retention, the project design should adhere to the minimum setback specified in Section 4.0 of this report_ 2. The trunk locations and tree numbers of trees #127-146 should be added to Sheets T- 1 and T-2. Additionally, the font size of tree numbers shown on those sheets should be significantly increased in size to increase their visibility and plan clarity. 3. The tree numbers and tnuilc locations should be added to Sheet CLO, Exhibit SD-1, and any fixture civil site-related plan. 4. Trees to be retained and relocated should be shown (including their assigned numbers) on the Overall Site Pda~zs for both Scheme 1 and 2 (or whichever Scheme is selected), any pertinent other site plan, as well as the future landscape plans (layout; planting and uTigation). The landscape plans should also show the future locations of relocated trees, which should be at least 15 to 20 feet apart fiom another, canopies of retained trees, building foundations and hardscape. 5_ Where within a distance of 15 times a ii'unlc diameter of a tree, overcut, trenching and fill should be restricted to 30 inches from a proposed foundation, retaining wall and hardscape. 6. The proposed staircase beneath hee #1's canopy should be designed as far fiom tree #1's trunk as possible, and with a post and beam design in which uo soil cuts occur between the posts. Steve~zs Creek Bou7e>>ard ~ Finch .4 venue, Cupertino Page ?I ®~$~4 City ojCupertino Conxneunity Developnxent Deparbnent David L. Bobby, Registered ConsuTtingArborist April 30, 2008 7. Parking lot improvements are indicated on Sheet T-2. If this is to occur, trees within that area will require evaluation and their potential impacts .assessed. 8. Upon availability, I recommend all revised or additional plans are reviewed to verify tree-related impacts. 9. This report and any additional letters of review should be incorporated into the final set of project plans, titled Sheets T-1„ T-2, etc. (Tree Protection Instructions), and referenced on all site-related plans. 10. The pei~nanent and temporary drainage design, including downspouts, shall not require water being discharged on unpaved areas beneath the trees' canopies. 11. All existing, unused lines or pipes beneath the canopies of retained trees shall be abandoned and cut off at existing soil grade (rather than being dug up and causing subsequent root damage); this should be specified on applicable plans. 12. All utilities and services should be routed beyond tree canopies. In the event this is not feasible, directional boring and/or the use of a pneumatic air device (such as an Air-Spade®) must be considered. For boring, the ground above the tunnel(s) must remain undisturbed and the access pits established as far fiom the trunks as possible, preferably beyond tree canopies. 13. Any walkway proposed on private property within the setback of seven tinier a trunk diameter should be established on top of existing soil grade with no more than afour- inch vertical soil cut (including for base materials, edging and forms). Additionally, the walkway (including base materials) should be pervious, and direct compaction of the soil subgrade avoided. Soil fill can be used to bevel the raised walk to existing grade, but should be restricted to 24 inches from the edge of walk (and at least 24 inches from the nearest tree trunk). Steve~zs Creek Boulevard ~ Fi.nd:Avenue, Cupertino Page B~Pif~35 City of Cupertino Conununity Development Department David L. Babby, Registered Consulti~rg Arborist April 30, ?008 14. Installation of the future cw-b/gutter should not require horizontal soil cuts between the existing curb and trunk of a retained tree. 15. Table A of Section 14.18.185 the City Code should be used as the framework for determining the size and amount of new trees to install. The new trees should be proposed and planted beyond 15 feet from the canopies of existing trees and any areas planned for future grading. The trees shall be planted prior to final inspection, double-staked (no cross-brace) with rubber tree ties (may not be necessary for trees of 48-inch box size and larger), and all forms of irrigation of an automatic drip or soaker hose system placed on the soil surface and not in a sleeve. Additionally, to achieve the greatest assurance of proper installation, all new trees shall be installed, including necessary irrigation, by an experienced state-licensed landscape contractor or a professional tree company, and performed to professional industry standards. 16. The proposed landscape design should conform to the following guidelines: a. Turf and plant material should be installed no closer than five feet from the trunk of a retained or relocated tree, nor should it be installed withvi three feet of a newly installed tree. Unpaved areas beneath tree canopies should contain a three- to four-inch layer of coarse wood chips (but not piled against the ti-uiiks). b. Iiz-igation should not strike the trees' trunks. c. In the event trenches for iiz-igation and/or lighting are required beneath a canopy, they shall be installed in a radial direction to the trees' h-uuks. If inzgation trenches cannot be routed as such, the work may need to be performed using a pneumatic air device (such as an Air-Spade®) to avoid unnecessazy root damage. d. Stones, mulch and new fencing should not be placed against a tree's 1sunk (a mininrum two- to four-foot distance is suggested). Black plastic or landscape fabric should not be placed beneath the canopies. e. Tilling beneath canopies should be avoided, including for weed control. f. Bender board or other edging material proposed beneath the canopies should be established on top of existing soil grade (such as by using vertical stakes). Stevens Creek Boulevard Bc Finch Avenue, Cuperti~ro Page ~.~'~' City of Cupertino Connnunitj> Developme~it Deparhnervt David L. Bobby, Registered Consulting.4rborist April 30, 2008 5.2 Protection Measures before and durir~g Development 17. A_n ISA certified arborist and/or a member of ASCA (American Society of Consulting. Arborists) - to be named the "project arborist" -should be retained by the applicant or owner to assist in implementing and achieving compliance with all tree protection measures. 18. Prior to any demolition or site clearing work, apre-construction meeting should be held on-site with the project arborist: and contractor to discuss work procedures, protection fencing Locations, limits of :grading, tree removals, staging areas, routes of access, removal of existing hardscape, supplemental watering, mulching, locations for equipment washing pits, relocation of trees, and any other applicable tree protection measures. 19. Tree protective fencing shall be installed prior to any demolition, grading, surface scraping or heavy equipment arriving on site, and its precise location and placement approved by the project arboi-ist (in the form of a letter submitted to the City) prior to the issuance of any demolition, gra-ding or construction permit. It should be comprised of six-foot high chain link mounted on eight-foot tall, two-inch diameter steel posts that are driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart. Once established, the fencing must remain undisturbed and be maintained tluoughout const~ction until final inspection. 20. At the discretion of the project arborist, chain link fencing or orange plastic fencing can be used to protect any retained tees between the existing sidewalk and street. Trunk wrap protection shall consist of the lower t-unks of the trees wrapped to the first branch with two inches thick (about 10 times around) of orange plastic bound by two-inch thick wooden boards tied together on the outside. Limbs may also require wrapping in this fashion to avoid or minunize the risk of damage by large tucks. 21. Unless otherwise approved, all development activities must be perfoir~aed outside the designated fenced areas -and off unpaved areas beneath the existing hee canopies. Steve~u Creek Boulevard Bc FnzclvAvenue, Cupertino Page 194~f3T43/ City of Cupertino Community Development Department David L- Babby, Registered Co~uulting Arborist April 30, 2008 These activities include, but are not limited to, the following: demolition, grading, stripping of topsoil, trenching, equipment cleaning, stockpiling/dumping of materials, and equipmentlvehicle operation and parking. 22. The following shall be displayed on 8.5- by 11-inch signs (minimum) and attached to the tree protective fencing every 50 feet on the side facing construction activities: "Warning -Tree Protection Zone -this fence shall not be removed. Violators are subject to a penalty according to Cupertino Municipal Code." These signs should be posted prior to construction. 23. Any approved activity performed beneath tzee canopies shall be performed under the knowledge and direction of the project arborist. Unless specifically authorized by the project arborist, all ~~~ork shall be manually performed using jackhammers, hand tools and wheelbarrows. In the event roots of two inches and greater are encountered during the process, the project arborist shall be consulted. 24. Each recommendation that is presented within Section 4.0 of this report, and applicable to the construction process, shall be followed. 25. Prior to construction, I recommend a four- to five-inch layer of coarse wood chips ('/a- to '/a- inch in size) is manually spread on the section of unpaved ground that is beneath the canopies of retained trees (not necessary within 24 niches from proposed structures). The chips should remain throughout construction (and possibly beyond), and must not be placed against the trees' trunks. These wood chips can be obtained from a local tree service company. 26. Removal of existing pavement beneath canopies must be carefully performed so no soil cuts and root/trunk danZage occur during the process. Iu doing so, the hardscape surfaces shall, with a jackhanuner or pick, be broken up into manageable sections that can be manually lifted and loaded by hand into the bucket of a small tractor (e.g. a Bobcat). Any tractor or heavy equipment used duri~ig the process must remain on pavement at all times and off unpaved areas or exposed soil, base rock and roots. Steve~u Creek Boulevard ~ Finch _4ve~zue, Cupertino Page II1~f ~8 City of Cupertino Conununity Develoyn7ent Deprn-tnzet~t Dm>id L. Bobby, Registered Consulting Arborist April 30, 2008 27. Immediately upon removal of pavement beneath a tree's canopy, afour- to five-inch layer of coazse wood chips should be spread on the newly exposed surface and remain moist for atwo-week period. 28. Prior to excavating soil for a foundation, parking garage and curb/gutter, aone-foot wide trench shall be manually dug alo:ag the perimeter of these areas to the required or a 2.5- to 3-foot depth, whichever is greater (the purpose of this trench is to expose roots and allow for a clean cut to minimize root loss). The trench should be dug where soil cuts will occur closest to the ti-nnks, and any roots encountered during the process shall be cleanly severed by hand (such as with Iopper or sharp saw) against the side of the trench closest to the tree. All soil inside the trench and below the trench can be excavated using heavy equipment. Note that where within a distance of 15 times a trunk diameter of a tree, overcut, trenching and fill should be restricted to 36 inches from a proposed foundation, retaining wall and hazdscape. 29. Post/pier holes dug beneath tree canopies for any site fencing or staircases must first be reviewed by the project arborist prior to digging. A post-hole digger should be used to dig the first 2.5 to 3 feet below grade. In the event a root of two inches and greater in diameter is encountered during the process, the hole should be shifted over by about 12 inches and the process repeated. All digging below three feet can occur using a manually-operated mechanical auger. Spoils created dmzug the process should not be spread beneath a tree's c.~uopy. 30. Throughout cousti-uctiou during the months of May tluu October, supplemental water shall be supplied to retained trees. The specific trees, methodology, frequency, and amounts shall be prescribed by the project arborist- 31. All equipment shall be positioned to avoid the trunks and branches of trees. Where a conflict arises, the project arborist must be contacted to help address the situation. Stevens Creek Boulevard 8c Finch Aveaaue, Cupertiaao Page ]~4~'~ City of Cupertiaao Connnuaaitj~Developnaeaat DeporUneazf David L. Bobby, Registered Consulting Arborist April 30, ?008 32. The relocation of trees shall be performed according to the standards set forth in ANSI A300 (Part 6)-2005 Transplanting, and also by a company that has an ISA certified arborist in a supervisory role, holds a current California state-licensed contractor's license, carries General Liability and Worker's Compensation insurance, and abides by ANSI 2133.1-2006 (Safety Operations). All recommendations provided by the company for pre-, during, and post-transplant care shall be followed. 33. All tree pruning shall be performed in accordance with the most recent ANSI standards, and by a California state-licensed tree service company that has an ISA certified arborist in a supervisory role. The company selected should also cant' General Liability and Worker's Compensation insurance, and shall abide by ANSI 2133.1-2006 (Safety Operations). 34. The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil and gasoline) is prohibited beneath canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage beneath canopies. Herbicides should not be used beneath the trees' canopies; where used on site, they should be labeled for safe use near trees. Prepared By: ~~~ G David L. Bobby Registered Co~zsulting Arborist #399 Certified Arborist #id~E-400IA Date: April 30, 2008 .,~_ ~° A ~~ .~°'ppi li 'g- rv (` a~~` CQns~Ittn9 Steve~zs Creek Boulevard ~ Fi~xch Avenue, Cupertino Page 1 ~gnf3~$ City of Cupertino Connitu~aity Developme~rt Depa~7ment David L. Sabby, Registered CozzsuTtizzg Arborist flpril 30, 2008 EX~,oIT A: TREE INVENTORY TABLE Stevezzs Creek Boulevard c~ Fizzch .4 venue, Cupertino '14 - 351 City of Cupertino Connnunity Devedopmezzt Deprn-tznent TREE INVENTORY TABLE 0 y 0 ~ 0 ~ R ~ 3 ~= 3 ril ° ~ n >_ A ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ s b oo. w ic°. .. o o H m Q ?. U II iy \ ,y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S= c ~ ° ~ ~ Q q ` NpE T1tEE NAIvIE F. U ~ o o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ a . Shamel Ash 1 _. (Frorinus uhdei) 22 35 75% 25% Fair Moderate . t__ ._... _._ t_-OlnrrxGRlJ= tVV1 au u,: ~ua c. ui g .. ~ - - - ----- -- --- - Shamel Ash y (Frazinus uhdei) 11 20 O% 50% Poor Low Comments: rveany oeaa. Shamel Ash 3 (Frazinus uhdei) 1 O 15 O% 50% Poor Low I~OIS1xOG11LJ: ar cGi,y u Shamel Ash 4 (Frarinus uhdei) 18 35 25% 50% Poor Low l-~Omll]GI1LJ. 11GG aJ LL lls. Shamel Aslt 5 (Frazi+:,lc uhdei) 19 40 50% 75% Fair Moderate ~ornlllcu u: l,cc ,J u u.g- Shamel Ash 6 (Fraz:inus uhdei) 19 45 75% 50% Fair Moderate Comments: ~ arse cano y. Shamel Ash 7 (FrcULinus uhdei) 19 45 50% 75% Fair Moderate l...Al1llLCll lD. J a,JG .. y. Shamel Ash g (Fr¢1-inus uhdei) 12 45 O% 50% Poor Low L_.ommenu: a~cnaly LLc cu. Shamel Ash 9 (Frmrinus uhdei) 19 45 75% 75% Good Moderate X Cotnments- Shamel Ash 10 (Fraxinus uhdei) 19 45 75% 50% Fair Moderate X l_.omnlcuu. rclya na> cc y. Chinese Ehn 11 (Ulnrus pan~ijolia) 18 50 75% 75% Good Moderate .-.] .-. ~ Yl. c:au ~{'} ,lllltr \i)hPTP }li/ll leaders on e-inate 1.~O1r1Z0 cuu. ncary . ~.. g+. ---' -' ---- -- ----- - - - Chinese Elm 12 (L7lmuspa+vifolia) 19 50 50% 50% Fair High X X _~_ v.. .-. i:.-s~ F a..ro A:ohly a<vmmrfi -ical r_ano nv C-ornments: nea umo rvGa a,L C.,,L, ,a, -- -- --- --- -- -- - Shamel Ash 6, 5, 4(3 ), 13 (Frazinus uhdei 2, 2 15 100% 25% Fair Low X X Comments. Weak stru cture. Shamel Ash 4, 3, 3, 2, 14 (Fr¢rinus uhdei) 2 15 100% 25% Fair Low X X L.olnlncuu. rr cc,~ J Shamel Ash 6, 5, 4, 4, 15 (Froxinus uhdei) 3 15 100% 25% Fair Low X X Cornn~ents: WeaK str Site: Stevens Creels and Finch, Cupertino 14 - 352 Prepared for: Clty of Cupertfno Comm. Deve/op. Dept. Prepared by: Davfd L. Babby 1 of 10 Apri! 30, 2008 TREE INVENTORY TABLE 0 - _ o 0 ~ ~ ~ 3 I~ ~- ~~ A ~y a° ~ ~~ = _ C o g i v v ~ °- ° v ~ o - °o e " v ~ ° v C o ~ o ci ~ E ca ~ y U~ ~ `a' ° o -•- U w 'fl ~, o U U N ( v A ~~ w U U ~ ~ U E ~ c -~ \ ~\ ~ o m m ` v ~ ~ ~ - ~' ~ NO TREE NA1vIE c i ~ ~ ~ ~ o~ ~ v~ x Q v; c v, c .. Shaniel Ash 16 (Fraz-iz:us uhdei) 11, 8, 8 30 100% 50% Fair Moderate X X 20 Coast Redwood (Sequoia sempezvirens) 16 25 75% 100% Good High (X) (X) 21 Coast Redwood (Sequoia Benz en•irezzs) 17 25 ~ 50% 75% Fair Moderate Comments: Mounds of soil piled beneath cano 22 Coast Redwood (Se uoia sempezvirens) 19 25 75% 75% Good High (X) (X) 23 Coast Red~s~ood (Sequoia sem ervirezu) 20 25 75% 75% Good Moderate X (X) 24 Coast Red~~~ood (Sequoia sen:pezviz•ezzs) 19 25 100% 75% Good High X X Chinese Eln~ 25 (L77n:zzs rnvfolia) 16 45 25% O% Poor Low X X S/fe: Stevens CreeX and Finch, Cupertfno 14 - 353 Prepared for: City of Cupertino Comm. Develop. Dept. Prepared by: Oavtd L. Babby 2 of 10 Aprl/ 30, 2008 Coast Redwood 19 (Sequoia sem ewirens) 17 25 75% 100% Good High (X) (X) TREE INVENTORY TABLE 0 - 0 v 0 ~ ~ T ~ _ . v c ~~ c O sue.. ~ ~ "O ~ C O ° rn U b m C °-1 'U ~y A ~~ II ~ o ~c° TREE ~ o o ~ ~ o v ° ° ~ ~ • i NO. TREE NAME U o O r Shamel Ash U V H U U -moo _ ° ~. e N U v m .~.. U n ca o ~ c,a -• 17 45 50°/ 75°/ Fair Moderate ~ X 1 1 1 JL Coznments: Tree is declini-u . Shamel Ash 3Z, (Frog=iz:us uhdei) 18 45 75% 75% Good Moderate X Shamel Ash 33 (Frcu/zzus ulzdei) 20 45 50% 75% Fair Moderate Comments• S arse cano Shamel Ash 34 (Fraa.inus uhdei) 17 35 25°/ 75°/ Poor Low ~:ommencs: i rcc 1J u lus. Shamel Ash 35 (Fr¢rinus uhdei) 18 40 50% 75% Fair Moderate a-:onirnenu- Sbamel Ash 36 (Frasizxus ulzdei) 13 35 75% 75% Good Moderate Shamel Ash 37 (Frmcinus uhdei) 22 45 50% 75% Fair Moderate Shamel Ash 3g (F~ ml.izzus uhdei) 19 45 SO°/ 75°/ Fair Moderate l~OmmenaJ: vcl ° al~c •. Shames Ash 39 (Fraxinus uhdei) 27 50 100% 25% Fair Low _ a ..._...~e v:.....-...,c r.- AA i .ith a vrr v nnnr sh-u etiire. Vommen L,. L.GLL711l YJ Jl `mob Shamel Ash 40 (Froxinus uhdei) 14 40 50% 50% Fair Moderate Vommenrs= ~ nrsc a:~lu Shamel Ash 41 (Frcuinus uhdei) 19 40 50% 75% Fair Moderate Shamel Ash 42 (Frczzinus uhdei) 23 40 75% 50% - Fair Moderate Shamel Ash 43 (Frazinus ulzdei) 18 35 25% 50% Poor Low X l..OnllneII6- L nl Shamel Ash 44 (Fr~inus uhdei) 17 30 25% 50% Poor Low tt_-- _A__. ..F ~ ete..N...-. L:Ommenu: vcl ~ ~~ c ..a„1~ ~- ...~~ .... . . ...... ..________-___- Shamel Ash 45 (Fzzzmcinus uhdei) 19 35 _ 50% 50% Fair Moderate Sfte: Stevens CreeX and Finch, Cupertino - ~ 4 - 3r-~ Prepared for: C/ty of Cupert/no Comm. Oeve/op. Dept Apri/ 3Q 2008 Prepared by: David L. Babby 3 of 70 TREE INVENTORY TABLE 0 0 0 -~ ~ ~ e -~ O ~ O ~O O ~ ~ ~ p ~ cJ i ~^ y ~ v o ~ "' v ~ o E~-~ A y a i U~ '~ ~ U w ~' ~ ~ -- ~ ~'-' ~ r~c~ ip O o ~ O 4.a p ~~' Cp Q .~ Q 0 NO. TREE NAME ~3 x ~ o O ~ rn ~ ° v~ ~ cn ~' Shamel Ash 46 (Fraa:inus uhdei) 18 30 25% 75% Fair Low X X 47 25% ~ 7 48 ~ (Fi-Qa:inus uhdei) ~ 19 ~ 35 ~ 25% ~ 75% ~ Fair ~ Low ~ ~ ~ ~ Comments: Si 'ficant dieback. 49 Spaniel Ash (Frcuinus uhdei) 18 40 75% 50% Fair Moderate 50 Shamel Ash (Frazinus uhdei) 13 35 50% 75% Fair Moderate 51 Shamel Ash (Frmcinus uhdei) 18 30 25% 50% Poor Low Comments: Tree is Site. Stevens Creek and Ffnch, Cupertino ~ 4 - 355 Prepared for: City of Cupertino Comm. Develop. Oepf. Prepared by: David L. Babby 4 of 70 Apri/ 30, 2008 ~ 52 ~ (Frax:inus uhdei) ~ 19 ~ 30 ~ 25% ~ 50% ~ Poor ~ Low ~ ~ ~ ~ Comments: Tree is dyine. Shamel Ash 57 (Frcnizxus uhdei) 19 35 75% 50% Fair Moderate X Shamel Ash 58 (Fraz:inus uhdei) 13 25 50% 50% Fair Moderate X X TREE INVENTORY TABLE ° - 0 0 ~ ~ fr 3 - ~ -` o .. ° ~ a ob o o - c-. ~ G G ~. ~ v -~ ' Q ~ ° C7 ~a r ~ U o ~ .--. cv TREE ~ '~ \ \ " V 0 o [~°d m ~ ~ U A ~ y ~ A V ~ o ~ o O ~ i x ~ ~n = cn ~' NO. TREE NAME F, r . Shamel Ash 61 (Frm:inus uhdei) 17 30 O% 50% Poor Low .~ Shamel Ash 62 (Fray=inns u7ufei) 14 30 50% 50% Fair Moderate Comments: Si°--,Scant otebacx, a eazs to be a mg- Shamel Ash 67 (Fraxinus uhdei) 17 50 O% 50% Dead Low C eats- Tree is ueazl dead omm y Shamel Aslt 68 (Frarinus uiuiei) 18 35 50% 50% Fair Moderate Corameuts: Significan t dieback. Shamel Ash 69 (Fran=inns uhdei) 14 ti O% 50% Poor Low Con~meuts: Tree is neaz-ly dead- Shamel Ash 70 (Frcuinus uhdei) 17 35 25% ~O% Poor Low Comments: Ve s arse cano a ears to be dyin Shamel Ash 71 (Frarixxus uhdei) 15 25 25% 50% Poor Low Comments: S arse cano Shamel Ash 72 (Frcuixzus uhdei 23 30 SQ% 75% Fair Moderate Comments: Lar a deadwood and a s arse cano y. Shamel Ash 73 (Frdri»us uhdei) 16 30 25% 50% Poor Low Con~meuts: Tree is d ui - Shamel Ash 74 (Fraxinus uhdei) 21 35 O% 50% Dead Low X Comments: Tree is dead- Shan~el Ash 75 (Frmcinus uhdei) 13 25 O% 50% Poor Low Comments: Tree is nearly dead- Site: Stevens Creels and Ffnch, CuperYlno 14 - 356 Prepared for. Cify of Cupertino Comm. Develop. Dept- - Aprfl 30, 2008 Prepared by: ~avld L. Babby 5 of 10 TREE INVENTORY TABLE o 0 0 ~ _ `tl Z 3 v v = ib ~ ~~ ~ ca ~ a c`~ -o . ~ o o`° o .~ o C-. ~ C i. as ~ b r ~ - 'O ~-~. o = p ~° w b `-' U q C (~ ~ C o v v , J -p ~ = ~ E o ~ o ca o ~ p ' oy° ~. A ai . A o O TREE NAIv1E ~ U ~ o ~ o O ~ rn C 5 rn v, ~'-' Shaznel Ash 76 (Fraa'izzus uhdei) 15 25 O% 50% Poor Low X ~~omnaents: tree as neart aeaa. 77 Shaznel Ash (Fr¢xinus uhdei) 1 O 20 O% 50% Poor Low Cotrtments: Tree is pearl dead. 78 Shaznel Ash (Frmi:inus uhdei) 20 35 O% 50% Poor Low X Comments: Tree is pearl dead. 79 Shaznel Ash (Fr¢z:izzus uhdei) 16 35 25% 50% Poor Low Cotnrnents: Tree is d 'n . Shaznel Ash 80 (Fraz:inus uhdei) 16 25 O% 50% Dead Low X X Continents: Tree is dead. - 81 Shamel Ash (Frazinus uhdei) 1 O 25 25% 50% Poor Low Comtneuts: Tree has significant diebadc. Could possibly be retained, though when considering its small size and the removal of all surrotn~ding trees, I suggest its removal also. 82 Shaznel Ash (Frcuinus uhdei) 22 45 O% 25% Dead Low X X Site: Stevens CreeK and Finch, Cupertino 14 - 357 Prepared for: C/fy of Cupertino Comm. Develop. Dept Prepared by: Oavfd L. Babby 6 of 70 Apr// 30, 2008 ~ 83 ~ (Frmrinus uhdei) ~ 1 1 ~ 25 ~ O% ~ 25% ~ Dead ~ Low ~ Continents: Tree is dead_ TREE INVENTORY TABLE 0 ° 3 ~ .~ Z 3 °z o b O O ~~ G ~ G C L U '° b V ~ ` O O O O ~ H ~ Q te' U ftt a Cq [ x: ~ ~ \ ~ er ~ O ~ it ~ o ~ :0 v ~ TREE a . 'Z ~ '~ \ ~ o iy ~ o :~ $ ~ .. .- ...' °° Q ~ Q ° P a' NO. TREE NAA~E H U S o cn o O ~ in ~-' a i i ° rn " Shamel Ash 91 (Fraa:inus ulxdei) 16 40 50% 50% Fair Moderate Canary Island Date Palm 92 (Phoenix cmzariezz_sis) 30 20 100% 100% Good High - (X) `'Qrrun{.L LI: > VaVwaa u Canary Island Date Palm 93 (Phoeniscazzariensis) 31 20 100% 100% Good High (X) lJOmmenis: > uauwu u waa~ a Caz]ary Island Date Palm 94 (Plzoenla- canarierzsis) 36 20 100% 100% Good High (X) l.ommcaa u: v ~a a,wu u - Canary Island Date Palm 95 (Plzoenlx canar-ieruis) 24 20 100% 100% Good High (X) (X) - l..Onlmcu~s: <~ aaavwu u Canary Island Date Palm - 96 (Phoerzia cm:arlerxsis) 22 20 100% 100% Good High (X) (X) t:omn]envs: sax oro\vn uuaxx coca. Canary Island Date Palm 97 (Phoenix canarierzsis) 27 25 100% 75% Good High (X; Comments: 15 brown trunk feet. Canary Island Date Palm ' g$ (Phoenix cmzarie»sis) 31 25 100% 100% Good High (X Comments: I5 bro\vn trui]k feet. Califomia Pepper Tree g9 (Schinus »zo17e) 26 35 75% 25% Fair Low X Comments: Structural integrity com romised due to a lar a cavity. California Pepper Tree 20, 7, 6, 100 (Schinusmolle) 5 30 7~% 50% Fair Moderate (X a_.onuaacuaa. avva a __ _ ___ __ ___-_____ _ __ California Pepper Tree 14, I O, 9, 101 (Schlnus nzolle) 5 40 75% 50% Fair Moderate X X Blackwood Acacia 12, 1 O, 102 (Acacia melano>)alon) 1 O 45 100% 2~% Fair Low X X - I.OmR]eni5: \N eax aaaaa,auncaaau. Blackwood Acacia 12, 11, 103 (Acacia melanox~~lon) 11, 7, 5 60 50% 25% Poor Low X X Comments: Weak attaclunents and declinin Blaclc~\~ood Acacia 104 (llcacia »zelmzoa7+lon) 12 30 75% 25% Fair Low X X Comments: Lar e limb has failed from tree. Blackwood Acacia 105 (.4cacla metanoa ~lon) 8, 7 25 O% 25% Dead Low X X Comments: Tree is dead. Site: Stevens Creek and Finch, Copertlno - 14 - 358 Prepared for: City of Cupertino Comm. Develop. Oep t. Prepared by: David L. Babby 7 of 10 April 30, 2008 TREE INVENTORY TABLE .~ 0 o0 0 .~ v~ 4 si 11 ~` ~ V O y , , v 'O ,O ~ _O o o _ DD a ~ O .~ O O `N ~ ti ~ ... G ~ v ~ A ~ U~ ` q U w .~' ~ ~ N b TREE -~ 7., o a 3 v ;r o ~s ~ v~ ea ~ 0 o e~ r m o o NO. TREE NA1,~ F`- c j ~ ° ~ ° o [7 ~ S Q ~ A ~ c. Blaclcvvood Acacia 11, 9, 9, 106 (Acacia nzelm:ozyZon) 7 30 25% 25% Poor Low X X Site: Stevens Creek and FincR, Cupertino 14 - 359 Prepared for: Cfry of Cupertino Comm. Deve/op. Dept Prepared by: David L. Babby 8 of 10 Aprf/ 30, 2008 English Walnut II9 (Ju Zmzrregio) 8 5 O% O% Dead Low X X Cornnients: Dead sturup_ English Walnut 120 (Juglans re 'a) 9, 9, 8, 7 40 50% 50% Fair Moderate X X TREE INVENTORY TABLE 0 3 3 . v ~ .-. o c ~' ' o ~A ° Ya c. ~ ~ ~ - o v ~ o ~ ~ ~ vai ° c°a U ~ Pq L U ~ .~+ c .--• V V c•l V V v U L pCL ~\ y\ U O ca. °~p~ ~ U i ~ O TREE V o o a ~ C7 ,- - v "~"~ Fl i Q v ~' NO. TREE NAME H x r n O ~ 1 ~ English V/ah~ut 121 (Juglazzs regia) 7, 6, 6 25 O% O% Dead Low X X I.OII]rl]eIII:S: Lcau ucc ua~ lallcu w English Walnut 122 (Juglans regia) 16 10 O% O% Dead Low X X L-V 111111G3f y. English Walnut 123 (Juglazzs regia) 73, 10, 9 35 25% ~O% Poor Low X X Orange Tree 10, 6, 5, 124 (Ciu-us sinensis) 4, 4 1 5 25% 25°~o Poor Low X X .~~,1.11„~l,y. ... ~~. Silver-Dollaz Gum 16, 16, 125 (EucaTj+ tus poi +antben:os) 10, 9, 6 60 75% 25% Fair Low X X ~..,lal,.,~l,y. . -- - -------- Valley Oal< 126 (Quez sus lobota) 57 75 O% O% Dead Lo~v X X X 127 wuuucu y. Coast Redwood (Sequoia seznpen•irezu) a lcc aim v 30 35 ~ ~ 75% -•--~• 75% Good High X X 128 Coast Redwood (Sequoia sen: ezvirezzs) 16 25 50% 75% Fair High X X 129 Coast Redwood (Sequoia se»zpez'virezzs) 17 20 50% 75% Fair High X X 130 Shamel Ash (Fraa:inus ulzdei) 14 40 50% 50% Fair Moderate X X Site: Stevens Creels and Finch, Cupertino 14 - 360 Prepared for: City of Cupertino Comm. Develop. Dept. Prepared by: David L. Bobby 9 of t 0 April 30, 2008 Shamel Ash 133 (Frazinusulzdei) 73 35 100% 50% Good Moderate X X Shamel Ash 134 (Fi•azinus ulzdei) 18 45 75% 50% Fair Moderate X X Shamel Ash 135 (Fra~inus ulzdei) 19 50 100% 50% Good Moderate X X TREE INVENTORY TABLE 0 ' 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 3 _v ~ -- '~ ~ ~' '6 ° -° ~ o ~-~ ~ ~ 'O c m o •~ o ~~ i U _- .. "' o V~ p m U ~ o .--. c~ o 'T'REE q '~ C e o ~ o [z., ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ = ~ u " NO TREE NAAZE o U S o v ~ o ~ .' .9 o A ~ Q o . F O cn C c i rn ~^ Shamel Ash l36 (Fraxizzus uhdei) 25 40 100% 50% Good Moderate X X 137 Shamel Ash (Frcuinus uhdei) 15 35 100% 50% Good Moderate X X 138 Shamel Ash (Froa:irzus uhdei) 4 20 100% 50% Good Moderate X X 139 Shamel Ash (Fraxinus uhdei) 5, 4, 3 I S 100% 25% Fair Low X X 140 Shamel Ash (Fr¢xinus uhdei) 3, 2, I, 1 15 100% 25% Fair Low X X 141 Shame] Ash (Frazinus uhdei) 2(4), 1 15 100% 25% Fair Low X X Elm 146 (Lllnzus sp.) 6 - O% O% Dead Low X X Comments: Dead az~d has fallen over onto an upright tree. - Sife: Stevens Creels and Finch, Cupertino 14 - 361 Prepared for: City of Cupertino Comm. Oevelop_ Dept. Prepared by: LJavid L. Babby 10 of 10 Apri/ 30, 2008 Shamel Ash 144 (Frcuinus uhdei) 6(3), 2 30 100% 25% Fair Low X X Elm 245 (Ulmus sp.) 6 - O% O% Dead Low X X EXHIBIT G Planning Commission Comments 10-28-08 Page 1 - PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS FROM 10-28-8 Planning Commission Direction The Commission provided the following directions to the applicant: Issue Details Applicant Res onse Park - Consider whether the proposed park - No change at location along Stevens Creek Blvd is the best this time location Architecture -Provide architectural details on the parking - Parking garage along Vallco Parkway garage - Show how screening will work elevations - Show what ground floor convertible retail w/material space storefront on garage will look like details - Provide details on architectural elements on included buildings Senior Housing - Provide information on type of senior - Applicant housing -active or assisted senior living? will respond - Active living seniors will benefit from at hearing mixed-use development more than assisted living seniors - Consider larger senior living units, including 2-bedroom units Market-Rate -Consider adding some market-rate condos if - Applicant is Condominiums opposition to office space exists looking into this Alternative Uses - Consider other uses, if office and athletic Alternative club uses do not develop Plan C has been re aced Parking 8z - Discuss details on traffic impacts -See Draft EIR Traffic - Explain how parking works for the project on traffic - Need teaser on-street parking on Stevens impacts 8s on Creek Blvd p. 5 on staff - Need adequate 8z visible parking for report successful retail '14 - 362 Planning Comiiiission Coninients 10-28-08 Page 2 Office Use -Concern over amount of office space - Applicant is proposed awaiting - General Plan has no office allocation for this Council area --where will office allocation come direction on from? office - 60,000 square feat of office is workable allocations - Office uses will not support retail uses Retail Use - Consider retail use on proposed park site, if - Applicant Stevens Creek Blvd frontage is not best will look into location for the F'ar'k this Green Measures -Provide ideas ort "green building ' measures - Applicant to be incorporated will address - Use native/drought tolerant landscaping at hearing Hotel -Supportive of a Large scale hotel -Applicant will address at hearing '14~ 363 EXHIBIT H Public Comments 10-28-08 Public Comments expressed during the last hearing are summarized below: - Consider expanding the town square or making a larger park, rather than having two public "park" areas. - Concern about phasing of the project - Concern about adequacy of parking and traffic impacts - No support for on-street parking on Stevens Creek Blvd. and Vallco Parkway - Consider one-way circulation around the town square - Include green building measures Restore Calabazas Creek from culvert 8z incorporate into project - Keep the full 35 foot setback along Stevens Creek Blvd. w/existing tree-lined frontages - Keep the Aleppo Pine tree along Stevens Creek Blvd. - Use the proposed park along Stevens Creek Blvd. for another use, such as retail - Terrace the front of the buildings to allow for greater setbacks - Provide detail designs for the gateway entry The Commission also heard from residents of the adjacent Metropolitan mixed- use condominium project during the meeting. In addition, the City has received emails and letters (See Exhibit B) from residents since the meeting. All of these comments, emails and letters from the Metropolitan residents have expressed the following concerns: - Concern about security of Metropolitan residents. Residents have experienced vandalism and theft on their property which they feel is a result of public access allowed on their property due to required public easements recorded on the property. Residents feel that additional retail uses adjacent to their homes will increase additional foot traffic through their property, and result in more vandalism and theft. - Concern about truck loading from the internal Finch Avenue, rather than Vallco Parkway. Residents are concerned about the noise impacts onto their homes. - Preserve the proposed park along Stevens Creek Boulevard, as it will provide a buffer between the retail commercial uses and their homes, and will provide recreation space for their families. - Support the parking structures on the project site to ensure adequate parking is available. 14 - 364 ~t A,~ _i~ I` f ~ ~ - ~` ~~ I' i~~ -~ r i r~ ~~ 1 r ~~ r 1 i ~ r ~ ~ -_ _ -. 1 ~ i~~~.-~I I 1 j S...vlyacle --~ ~l l 1 i t - --- ----__ t - -~ _ lQl\ 1 ( T ~.~y na.,.a. t ~----- r t`~ _! _ ~~/ ~ i i.1--- Exhibit 1 Maximum tjuiCding Heights Saramga I _ ~ ~ ~~ s 60 feet if there is a retail component sans cmra I ` , "City Ce z nter Park "~~~ ~ ~ ~ +j ~ ~ t 60LUNGEP PO San lose '~ LEGEND Building Heights I _ J 30 Feet Roohop mechanico/equip- ~ mentand ut7/irystructures 45 Feet moy exceedstipu/ated height /imitotfons ifiheyare enclosed, <entro/ly/ocored on the roofandnot visib/e 60 Feet from adjacentstieeis. Setback Ratios Maintain the primary building bulk below a 1:1 slope line drawn 17om the arterial street curb line or lines except for the Crossroads and Vallco areas. For the Crossroads area, see the Crossroads Streeucape Plan. i For the Vallco area- Maintain the primary building bulk below a 1.5:1 (i.e., 1.5 feet of setback for every 1 foot of building height) slope line drawn from the Stevens Creek Blvd., Homestead Road and Tantau Avenue curb lines and below 1:7 :;lope line drawn from Wolfe Road curb line. For projects adjacent to residential areas: Heights and setbacks adjacent to residential areas will be deter Tined during project review. Figure 2-D. Maxirrturrt Buiidireg Heights. Building height for non-residential centers not shown is 30 feet. ~- City Boundary v ®0 ®~ Urban Service Area Boundary Sphere of Influence --- Boundary Agreement Line -j Unincorporated Areas O OS 1 Mlie ~. O 1000 ]000 30D0 Fee[ O SO0 1000 Meters CITY OF CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN ..~ 14 -