.03 new business topic
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM
Agenda Date: May 13, 2008
Item Summary:
Discuss possible improvements to the development review process
RECOMMENDATION:
Discuss this item and adopt a minute action recommending any revised process to the City
Council.
BACKGROUND:
On April 8, 2008, Chairman Miller appeared at the City Council meeting and suggested that
the City Council consider an early review option for decision makers prior to filing of a formal
planning application. The concept is that with early review applicants can be advised of major
issues or "deal breakers" when their application is in the conceptual phase.
DISCUSSION:
There are several public hearing principles that the commission should consider when
considering early review:
1) Maintain fair and impartial hearing for all sides
2) A void holding a public hearing before the formal noticed public hearing
3) Maintain the appearance and reality of objectivity of the Commission and City
Council
4) Allow the facts to come forward before reaching conclusions or project judgments
There are several models that the Commission can consider prior to making a
recommendation.
Town of Los Gatos
The Town of Los Gatos has a conceptual development review committee that consists of three
planning commissioners (out of seven) and two council members (out of five). Applicants are
given the option for a relatively low fee to present their early concepts to the committee for
feedback. Staff reports that it works fairly well.
City of Santa Rosa
Santa Rosa has a separate design review committee that allows "concept review." The
committee has strict rules for concept limiting the discussion per item to no more than fifteen
minutes and charges no fee.
3-1
Discuss possible improvements to the development review process
May 13, 2008
Page 2
Environmental Review Committee
The Cupertino ERC gets the first look at development applications and frequently provides
advice to developers on "hot-topic" items. The Commission could recommend that applicants
be given the option of appearing early for a concept review prior to filing the application. This
model has the benefit of using an existing committee and with only one council member and
one planning commissioner leaving the remainder of the commission and council independent
of criticism that they have decided the application prior to the formal hearings.
Applications typically go through several phases prior to developing their plans. The first
contact is made with staff when the application is considered confidential. Staff rigorously
respects the confidentially to avoid disrupting a negotiation that may be in process.
Staff suggests that the application should be presented early following the confidential stage
and when they are in the conceptual development phase to avoid expensive redesigns. If the
commission recommends using an existing committee like the ERC then we could offer the
service for a minimal fee such as $500.
Submitted by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developme~
2
3-2
-Jllahners looking to revise .
how projects are reviewed- \
..'ByEMIIlE CROFTON
developments was a good thing.
"Nothing of quality is ever pro-
duced unless a lot of work is put into
it," she said. "Projects that the com-
munity are mOst proud of have had
a give-andctake process. Sometimes
quality takes time."
The Cupertino Planning Com- .
.'n:rlssi9n is looking at ways to revise
. the · process for the preliminary
review of major development proj-
ects in order to save time and
money.
Planning commissioner Marty
Miller; at the April 8 commission
meeting, presented several solu-
tions that would provide developers
early feedback and direction from
both the city and residents.
"By the time it gets to us, the
developer has already spent a lot of
money on displays and plans, and
they aren't usually motivated to
make significant changes," Miller
said. "I'd like to see ways to make
the process more efficient"
Miller suggested a model similar
to one in Los Gatos, which runs a
conceptuaIreview board consisting
of. members from both the city i
council and planning commission.
"It would help facilitate the
~ocess.Los Gatos has been doingit
for aooutfive yell!"S, and their expe-
rience has been very smooth and
positive," he said.
. Other proposed solutions
ipc1ude holding a public session
With the plapning commission, city
sta1'fandthe developer, and creating
a jOint study session with city coun-
cil and staftThe idea would be to
provide iriput but keep the dialogue
on .. community and residential
issues.
"It would be a way for us to give
earlier input to the developers
before they set everything in stone,"
Millet said. "When you reduce
inicertainty and shoqen the time
frame,you get better results."
Steve Piasecki, director of com-
munity development, expressed
concern over maintaining impar-
tiality and fairness during these
informaIsessions.
"I think this can be constructive,
but very difficult," Piasecki said. "I
think you are going to have the
hearing before the hearing."
While in suppOrt of the commis-
sion's discussion,a couple of01per-
tino residents spoke about the
importance of keeping residents in
the loop.
"It's good to hear ideas floating
around to improve thecommunica-
tion between the city and develop-
~ents, but it's also important to
keep the residents involved," said
Keith Mwphy.
Resident Jennifer Griffin added
that the eXtensiVe. effortsaiId
amoui1t of time that. went into
APRIL 16, 2doiPBI~ICON VACI::EY COMMuNITY NEWSPAPERS' 13'