Loading...
Director's Report OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 C U P E RT 1 N C3 (408) 777-3308 • FAX (408) 777-3333 • planning;�cupertino.org Subject: Report of the Community Development Director� Planning Commission Agenda Date: Tuesday, Apri112, 2011 The City Council met on Apri15, 2011 and discussed the following item(s) of interest to the Planning Commission: 1. Reconsideration for Wireless on Bubb - City Council denied the reconsideration, upholding the Director's original decision to approve the application. 2. CDBG - City Council conducted the first of two public hearings. The item is set for hearing on May 3, 2011 for a final decision. Miscellaneous Items: 1. C�ertino's Earth Day Festival - will be held on Saturday, April 9th from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. at Civic Center Plaza. The event's nearly 80 partners will showcase the ABCs of growing greener for the greater good: from learning how to compost, to understanding more about solar technologies, to planting a native garden. There will be something for everyone. Please stop by this highly interactive Festival, which promises fun-filled hands-on activities for all ages. 2. Invitation to Sustainable Communities Strate�y (SCS) Meetin� - Attached is an invitation from the VTA and Cities Association to provide elected leaders information on strategizing how Santa Clara County can best position itself in the development of the sustainable communities strategy. The meeting is on Thursday, Apri114th, 4:30 p.m. at Sunnyvale Council Chambers. Upcoming Dates: Apri123 Big Bunny Fun Run, 9 AM, Civic Center Apri130 Opening Ceremony Toyokawa Sister City Cherry Blossom Festiva1,12 noon, Memorial Park Amphitheater stage June 1 CREST Awards Ceremony, Community Hall, 7 to 9 p.m. Enclosures: Invitation to Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) Meeting News Article G: � Plaitning � AartiS � Director's Report � pd4-12-11.doc �� �3 f M OF SANTA CLARA COONTY Dear Council Colleagues: The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority's (VTA) Policy Advisory Committee and the Cities Association of Santa Clara County invite you to an in-depth discussion with Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) staff on the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) and its impact on Bay Area cities. The meeting will build upon previous discussions with local and regional officials regarding important new regulations impacting local cities and local land-use planning. The purpose of this meeting is to inform local elected leaders on these impacts and to strategize how Santa Clara County can best position itself in the development of the SCS. The meeting will also discuss the interrelation between the Regional Housing Needs Allocation process and the Regional Transportation Plan. Don't miss this opportunity to learn more about the impacts of regional policies for cities and to strategize with your colleagues to help shape the future of land use planning in Santa Clara County. Event details are below: Thursday, April 14 4:30 p.m. Sunnyvale Council Chambers 456 West Olive Ave., Sunnyvale Please note the Policy Advisory Committee will meet at 4 p.m. at the West Conference Room to conduct other business. Additionally, for elected leaders who are interested in more background information, VTA will be holding a 45-minute introductory meeting on transportation planning and regional policies beginning at 3:30 in the Council Chambers at Sunnyvale City Hall. The meeting will cover issues relating to the various transportation planning activities referenced by AB 32 and the SCS. Please RSVP for these meetings by sending an email to Baard.Secretarv�u:;vta.«r�. Sincerely, . � � � •� � ' Joe Pirzynski Melinda Hamilton Chair President VTA Policy Advisory Committee Cities Association of Santa Clara County /�������w��s�'V �� Cupertino considers a change to its reconsideration process By Matt Wilson mwilsonCa�community-newspapers.com Posted: 03/24/2011 08:01:32 PM PDT Cupertino is reconsidering how it handles residents' petitions for reconsideration. The city council is having city staff look at ways to make the process--which allows residents to challenge city decisions that are made in error--a lot smoother and relevant for everyone involved. On March 15, staff introduced an ordinance that would have made it harder to get a reconsideration petition before the eyes of a full city council. The council tasked city staff last month to come up with ways to help weed out petitions that do not rise to the level of reconsideration. A reconsideration must prove that some error influenced the city's decision. Possible grounds for reconsideration include the revelation of new evidence that could not have been produced at any earlier city hearing; revealing evidence that was improperly excluded at any prior city hearing; proof of facts that demonstrate that the council proceeded without or in excess of its jurisdiction; proof of facts that the council failed to provide a fair hearing; and proof that the council abused its discretion by proceeding in a manner required by law, fact or supported by evidence. The proposed ordinance would allow two council members to preview a resident's petition before it made its way to the full city council. Only if the subcommittee determined that at least one of the reconsideration criteria had been addressed would the matter then be referred to the council for a reconsideration hearing. If the petition did not meet the minimum standard, the petition would not go forward. Currently, petitions automatically go to the council for a public hearing. It costs petitioners $259 to bring a reconsideration to the council. The City's reconsideration provision was introduced in 1999 and revised in 2007 and 2008. City staff said Cupertino's reconsideration process is unusual and that most cities do not have a similar process. Reconsiderations are quite rare, and very rarely does a decision get overturned. However, over the past couple years there has been a rise in reconsideration petitions. Issues have ranged from allowing dogs off-leash in city parks to multiple challenges of cell phone towers in the city. The meetings are typically lengthy. City staff has said the process has been time-consuming for the council, staff, applicants, petitioners and the public, adding that very few petitions meet even one of the thresholds necessary for a reconsideration. Council members said that many residents continue to believe--erroneously--that the reconsideration process is similar to an appeal process, which allows applicants to challenge city decisions. A number of residents came out to the March 15 meeting to voice their support for keeping the reconsideration process the same. "I'm a two-time loser of the reconsideration process. I am glad I participated," resident Keith Murphy said. "I found it helpful. It was educational; it was great dialogue. I recommend anybody in my circumstances do the same thing, especially if it is in the community's good." Some residents suggested that the city keep the process the same so that there were fewer discussions "behind closed doors." Others suggested forming a pre-view subcommittee with individuals other than council members. "Maybe it does take hours and hours and hours, but if everybody is happy in the end, then that is what we need to do," said Jennifer Griffin, a resident of the Rancho Rinconada neighborhood. "I don't think Cupertino is big enough to have subcommittees with a five-member council." Resident Darrel Lum added that the ordinance proposal "should only be advisory to the petitioner. The petitioner should have the choice or option to continue the reconsideration process to the full city council. I don't think [the subcommittee] should be made up of council members. It should be made up of some independent party." The council agreed to let the city attorney's office find ways to tweak the reconsideration process rather than overhaul it entirely. City staff will look at ways to put a time limit on how long reconsideration hearings last and find a way to address a petition's merit separately from the item being challenged. "There needs to be some kind of reconsideration reform, but what the perfect answer is, I don't have it," Mayor Gilbert Wong said at the meeting.