PC 02-19-92 „ f
CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA. 95014
' (4a8) 252-4505
MINiITES OF THE STUDY SESSION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
( HELD ON FEBRUARY 19, 1992
� ROLL CALL:
� -
Commissioners Present: Chairman Fazekas
Vice Chairperson Mann
Commissioner Mackenzie
Commissioner Mahoney
Commissioner Austin
Staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of
! Community Development
� Ciddy Wordell, City Planner
( Marilyn Norling, Housing Coordinator
ORAL COMMIJNICATIONS:
' - None
I APPLICATION 3-GPA-90 - CITY OF CUPERTINO: ADJOURNED PUBLIC HEARING
to continue discussion of the General Plan:
a) Housing Nexus Study;
b) discussion of City Council/Planning Commission joint study
session.
Chr. Fazekas requested that the Kaiser Cement presentation be heard
at 7:30 p.m.
HousinQ Nexus Study.
Ms. Marilyn Norling, Housing Coordinator, rev�.ewed the Nexus Study.
She noted it is difficult to produce the low and very low income
housing that is required. She noted the Housing Committee is qoing
in the direction of mitigation, both for residential and non-
residential projects. The Committee feel.s the City should be
requiring housing on or off site as opposed to collecting in-lieu
fees, because of the limited amount of land within the City. She
feels the most important issue the nexus study found is the need
for housing with the development of cornmercial/industrial
development. She noted at the meeting of March 5, 1992 the Housing
Committee will be coming up with formal recommendations.
In response to Chr. Fazekas' question, Ms. Norling stated
affordable housing generally means that you don't spend more than
a third of your income towards rent or housing costs.
Planning Director Cowan presented a chart which reflects the work
done by the nexus consultant and the land use options in terms of
jobs/housing balance. He noted at present there is an imbalance of
1.29, more jobs than housing, based on build out it would be a 1.48
PLANNING COMMISSION �INUTES
Study Session of February 19, 1992 �
Page 2
� �
imbalance. Mr. Cowan talked about distribution of land use. He
noted the purpose of the chart is to describe the revocations of �
trying to reach a balance in terms of how many more housing units
would have to be built to house employees within the City. He
noted the consultants feel the City should be looking at the 30 - �
50 percent �atio to rneet the housing needs. I
Com. Mann stated the balance may not be improved, because more
housing being built does not necessarily mean employees/employers
from other cities won't buy the houses.
Com. Austin stated there should be credit given between cities.
Com. Mann stated the State should consider how far a person has to '
drive to work and if within a certain rnileage, credit should be
given.
I
In response to Chr. Fazekas question regarding fair housing, Ms.
Norling stated that employers could advertise within a Company when
housing is developed on site.
Planning Resource Associates gave a presentation.
Mr. Leon Pirofalo commended staff on their involvement in the
report. He noted they have reviewed the numbers and percentages
referred to in the report and would not comment on them at this
time unless there are questions. He noted they will spend time
discussing mitigation measures.
Don Skinner stated new commercial buildings lead to more employees
and more housing is needed. The nexus study was done to count how
much housing is needed and how many should be affordable. He
stated the total need is the most important issue and suggested a
range the City should look at to meet the need.
Mr. Cowan explained �he BMR program.
Mr. Woolfe explained what the nexus study i.s and how it connects to
the State's requirements. With regards to the rnitigation rneasures,
they explored the office campus concept which would apply to major
employers. PRA feel this has the greatest potential for supplying
the largest number of housing units. It is also a preferred
alternative as it provides the assurance that workers will also
live in Cupertino. Regarding mixed-use concept, this encourages
maximum number of housing on site. In-lieu fees were looked at and
determinied to be a second priority to providing housing. Mr.
Woolfe summarized the conclusion and findings of the nexus study.
He noted they concluded that 1.62 affordable housing units must be
constructed for every market rate unit. For each 100,000 s.f. of
retail development, there will be a demand for 147 new housing
units ; for each 100 , 000 s. f. of off ice development, a demand of 191
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Study Session of February 19, 1992
Page 3
i
units; for each 100,000 s.f. of industrial, a demand of 196 units.
, - With regards to mitigation fees, PRA determined that the prevailing
range within this region is from 40 cents a square foot to $5.50 a
� square foot of new residential development. The office/campus
development is the priority and could potentially generate between .
� 500 and 1500 new units within the City.
In response to Com. Mahoney's question regarding credit to
ernployers for providing housing as opposed to a developer buying
land and selling the home, Mr. Cowan stated an employer can
increase his yield by providing housing on site.
Com. Mackenzie stated with regards to mitigation, if the developer
only has to provide 30 percent of the units needed, will the market
' take care of the remaining 70 percent?
` Mr. Woolfe stated the key policy issue is fixing on the number of
city resident employees, which is approximately 15 percent and make
� a conscious public policy to increase this to 30 - 50 percent.
They did not feel it was practical to reach for the 100 percent
► because the region is not designed for 100 percent. He noted the
fair share allotment by ABAG incorporates the regional
considerations. He noted they do not anticipate there would be
land in Cup�rtino to provide all the housing required or needed.
Com. Mackenzie stated there seems to be a problem in regard to
mitigation measures relating to BMR and the 10 percent of units
allocated. He stated an expensive home developed creates more need
for mitigation, as it brings up the average cost of units in the
area.
Mr. Woolfe agreed that an expensive home does make it di�fficult to
provide af�ordable housing, therefore making the a�fordable housing
issue worse.
The Cornmissioners discussed the report as presented by PRA. Chr.
Fazekas stated that approximately 3/5's of what is generated �n
housing by the Nexus Study wi1.1 be affordable. Chr. Fazekas �
questioned what the highest mitigation fee�that can be charged is?
Mr. Woolfe stated it is $50 per square foot, but the City needs to
be careful what the charge is so as not to drive businesses out of
the City.
Chr. Fazekas stated the City will have to decide how active they
want to promote affordable housing in general and the nexus study
is a toQl to help the City reach their goal.
Mr. Cowan stated the Affordable Housing Committee will meet on
March 5th.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Study Session of February 19, 1992
Page 4
Chr. Fazekas opened the hearing for public testimony.
Dr. Beverley D. Bryant, NAIOP: The Association for Commercial Real
� Estate, noted the organization does represent most of the major �
developers in this area. She requested that they could have sorne. �
representation on the Affordable Housing Committee and feels their
expertise would be an asset. She feels there is an opportunity for
affordable housing on the Diocese property.
Ms. Nancy Burnett, CURB, stated they have read the Nexus Study.
She noted other areas only build 50 percent of jobs that are
created and if all the cities did this, it would bring people from
outside the Bay Area and this would have an impact of the companies
in Cupertino. She questioned the relationship between the short
fall of units in the General Plan and the number of units generated
by reallocation and additional non-residential square footage that
may be generated. She also questioned what percentage of housing �
the State will accept.
Mr. John Sobrato, Sobrato Development, noted that.major companies �
do not want housing on their campuses as they can not discriminate
between employees and non-employees. He feels the free market will
work, if areas in the City are zoned residential. He feels the in-
lieu fees should be reasonable.
Presentation by Raiser Cement Corporation.
Mr. John Janick, representing Kaiser, presented a map of the City
outlir�ing the Kaiser property. He noted the total acreage is 3600
acres and they are presently operating on 850 acres. He noted he
is a private consultant and has been studying the Kaiser property
for over four years. He stated the Council's down zoning plan
addresses approximately 200-300 acres and this is what they would
like to address. He would like to work with the Planning
Commission and/or a citizen's group to study the property and w�iat
is available. Mr. Janick reiterated the goals of the Planning
Commission. He stated most of the property is located in the
unincorporated area of Santa Clara County. There are portions in '
Los A1tos, Cupertino and Palo Alto. The property is currently
under industrial use. He described the quarry. Mr. Janick stated
they are looking into the future as to what will happen to the
property. He noted they have to study the property more and get
public input as to what is preferred. He noted the model he did is
mixed-use with 90 percent open space. He noted the taxes that
would be received by the City. He discussed the possibility of
light rail and public transportation as well as connection to the
85 freeway. He discussed development on the property and where it
could occur. He noted this is a general plan and will not be
accomplished for 10-20 years.
PLANNING COIKMISSION MINUTES
Study Session of February 19, 1992
Page 5
Com. Austin feels that development on this property is not
necessarily an improvement. She questioned the other kinds of op�n
space, other than a golf course.
� Mr. Janick stated there are different kinds of open space, but
' cannot be specific at this time.
Com. Austin expressed concern as to why this project is only being
brought forward at this time.
Discussion of Planning Comnission and City Council Joint Meeting
Mr. Cowan noted the first issue discussed was Land Use and the
( Council gave an option to consider. Staff will prepare a report to
follow up on this.
` Mr. Cowan reiterated the Council's directions. He presented a map
of the City's sphere of influence and identified geographical
( boundaries.
� Mr. Cowan noted staff will prepare more detailed schedules for the
Commission and will modify the schedules to include the Hillside
' properties. The Commissioners and staff discussed future rneetings
and what will be discussed at these meetings.
Mr. Cowan noted the Council is concerned about fiscal impacts and
the Commission and staff need to look at this more closely.
The Commissioners requested that the Finance Director speak to them
again. Com. Mahoney requested that staff look at the fiscal
impacts of Vallco. .
Mr. Cowan stated that Mr. Viskovich will speak to the Commission
again regarding transportation.
Com. Austin expressed concern regarding traffic going to and from
De Anza College; Mr. Cowan stated the City has no control over
this.
Regarding light rail, Mr. Cowan stated that light rail is important
and they will look at the County T2010 study plan and integrate
this with Cupertino's future Land Use and Transportation.
Public Comments
Ms . Pat Cola stated that she has met residents in Cupertino who are
nat concerned about development of the Diocese property and feel
they should have a right to develop their property. She stated
there are many voices within the City for fair and equitable use of
this propert�r.
PLANNING COMIKISSION MINUTES
Study Session of February I9, �992
Page 6
Fr. Euqene Boyle, Diocese of San Jose, thanked the Commission for
their time and energy put into the General Plan and the Diocese
Property. He stated the proposal of the Planning Commission for
the property was a fair proposal. He feels Councilmernber Goldrnan's
proposal is unfair as a new set of rules are being applied to the �
Diocese property. He requested that the Planning Commission remain �
firm in their proposal.
Mr. John Sobrato, Sobrato Development, discussed slope density
ranges and expressed belief that the average slope of the Diocese
property is considerably lower and is unfair to be treated as
hillside property. He presented a map outlining the slope
densities and requested that staff look into this noting that 83
percent of the property is less that a 30 percent slope. He noted ,
this property is within the City lirnits and all the City services
are in place as the General Plan was contemplating 293 units. He
feels there is a contradiction regarding housing, the Diocese is �
willing to provide some and the City is requiring developers or
major corporations to provide some.
1
Mr. Bob Summers, Diocese of San Jose, stated if the Commission took {
a look at this property and identified all the criteria, they would
see that it is suitable for housing.
�
Ms. Diane Marino Ikeda, FAIR, stated the Land Use Plan put forward
by Councilman Goldman does not adequately address the affordable
housing need and the open space issue. She noted the open space
will be big private backyards. She noted the plan puts this
together with steep hillside properties. She stated the Diocese
bought this property as an investment and wants a fair return and
to keep this in rnind when considering Councilmember Goldman's Plan.
Mr. Richard Johnson stated he objects to the continuous development
in Cupertino. He noted he pays his taxes and would like to keep
the open space. He feels affordable housing is not possible in
Cupertino. He does not support Councilmember Goldman's plan.
Ms. Nancy Burnett, 729 Stendhal Ln., noted she is frustrated with
the process and feels the Diocese Property has dominated the
meetings. She noted there are other issues that need to be
addressed and feels more meetings are needed.
Mr. Phil Zeitman expressed concern regarding the process of the
hearing. He stated it is imperative that the City enacts the
Hillside Ordinance, now that Kaiser is considering development.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Study Session of February 19, 1992
Page 7
�
ADJOURNMII�'T: The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:40 P.M. to
( the next Regular Meeting of February 24 at 6:45
, p.m.
�
M -
Respectfully submitted,
C���� M ' '(�a���,
Cat erine M. Robillard,
Recording Secretary
�
Approved by the Planning Commission
I at the Regular Meeting of March 9, 1992
' Dary Fazekas, Chairman
�
Attest:
�
' /s/ Dorothy Cornelius
Dorothy Cornelius, City Cler
I
�