The URL can be used to link to this page

Desk items �� Beth Ebben ��f%5 �� From: Better Cupertino [bettercupertino@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 12:56 AM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept.; City Council Subject: SB50 does not apply to the approval of rezoning or general plan amendment or other plan/code amendments SB 50 does not apply to protect developers "who were seeking rezoning or approvals of general plan amendments or specific plans." (Indirect Im�acts On School Facilities Must be Considered and Miti�ated Under CEQA (Legal Alerts, July 8, 2011) Policies to consider school impact before a development project is approved were simply removed due to SB 50. There was no attempt to rephrase the policies to comply with the law, but still consider other aspects of school impacts. For example, a new policy could be introduced to ensure that no rezoning or increased building height or other general plan amendment is approved if it would adversely impact the school systems. Such policy could require developers to fully mitigate school impact before a zoning change or general plan amendment. SB 50 still allows traffic, air quality, noise and other environment factors to be considered around schools as a condition of approval on projects. New policies should be put in place to ensure a minimum level of standards for these environmental factors when a development project is considered. New policies should be put in place to ensure that development projects provide more extensive traffic mitigation measures to improve traffic condition around school for either biking, walking, driving or shuttling. It is not sufficient to leave it up to the Environment Impact Report to protect the environment around schools. Regards, BetterCupertino 1 �,��.�t. �� <�� Beth Ebben From: Anson Ip [ip.anson@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 3:35 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: Planning Commissioners Dear planning commissioners, We object to the rezoning until the project is approved by community and the council Anson Ip Residence of Cupertino 1 , ,�� /�� V Beth Ebben From: Lisa Maletis-Massey Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 3:14 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: FW: NO to Vallco Rezoning FYI... From: Sun [mailto:sun.m.lee@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 3:07 PM To: City Council Subject: NO to Vallco Rezoning Hello Cupertino Planning Commision, It's come to my attention that there will be zoning changes to Vallco and to the 10950 N. Blaney Ave. at the Planning Commission meeting tonight. The City Council promised that there would be no rezoning until the project was approved by the community & council. As far as I'm aware, there has been no EIR, traffic or other studies done to show that is a good idea for Cupertino. Please DO NOT let Vallco be rezoned, at the very least without public input! Regards, Sun North Blaney resident i ��,�� Beth Ebben From: Yu Ying [yu.ying06@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 3:07 PM To: Aarti Shrivastava; Piu Ghosh; City of Cupertino Planning Dept.; City Council; City Clerk; Rod Sinks; Barry Chang; Gilbert Wong; Savita Vaidhyanathan; Darcy Paul Subject: Vallco is under retail zoning before residents' approval City Councils, As of today, I still remember the touching speeches Mayor Rod Sinks, and Vice Mayor Barry Chang gave on Dec. 4, where they claimed Vallco would be a specific plan, and it would not be zoned to mixed-use until the community, i.e. the residents, and the councils approve the specific plan. Now, as a Cupertino Resident, I haven't even seen the specific plan, yet, on this agenda of planning commission meeting tonight, Agenda Item #2—Attachment 1 "Draft GPA Resolution" page 47 of 47 entitled "Land Use Map" Vallco is marked as retail/commercial/residential by the planning commissioners and city staff. This is cheating and this is WRONG! They are violating the General Plan land use. I cannot believe we, residents, pay so much tax to hire these dishonest people working for us. It is time for you, honored Councilmen and Council woman, to step in and stop the abused power by unqualified staff. This agenda item needs to be removed from today's meeting. Moreover, the staff and the commissioners, owe an explanation to the residents. Yu Cupertino Residents. � �,�� ?' �� Beth Ebben �" From: Lynn Chiang [Ichiang05@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 2:56 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept.; City Council Subject: Object on Vallco to be rezoned to multiple use Hi to whom it may concern, As a Cupertino resident , I am writing to object Vallco to be rezoned to multiple use , Vallco should stay for commercial use only. My daughter goes to Collins Kindergarten, currently , the school is crowded and the traffic is already very horrible during kids drop off and pick up time, if Sand Hill is building more offices and 800+ residential units in Vallco area, it will attract more residents with kids, school will be even more crowded and traffic will be worsen even if they do build another elementary school right next to Collins,how will current roads handle the school traffic and the traffic from the new Apple's headquarter. I live on Merritt dr, I could not even get out of my driveway during school drop off and pick up time, and there are always traffic jams on Wolfe, Homestead and Stevens Creek during rush hours. I support development but not over development. Regards, Lynn i � � �� Beth Ebben From: Yuanyuan Sun [ysquaresun@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 2:42 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: Fwd: Stop re-zoning Vallco ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Yuanyuan Sun <�quaresun(c�Lgmail.com> Date: Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 2:36 PM Subject: Stop re-zoning Vallco To: Cit�Council cupertino.org, Plannin�(cr�,upertino.org Is it true that tonight city council is going to consider rezoning Vallco?Personally I am totally against it and hope our elected council member will do their duty for the people in Cupertino, not for their own self interests, or any other interests. ...e.�.�i,t<„ii�¥.l;".S.C£�.�. �4�..i.£f. ��•1=��(i' �%�I�IT3 � £'%;�,' �..i117 . I'�`�;(s'.�i:'.I�� .`�Il7i.a, �(�4�{? 1 Beth Ebben ��n �� From: stacy wilson [777swilson@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 3:39 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: to Planning Commissioners Winnie Lee, Alan Takahashi, Geoff Paulsen, Margaret Gong, Don Sun Hello, I am a long-time resident and homeowner in Cupertino, and an active voter. I live in the Rancho Rinconada area, within walking distance to what used to be Vallco. I am very concerned about the proposed changes to the General Plan for Cupertino, apparently being considered simply to allow a developer to come into our wonderful city and build whatever he wants. You are being wooed in return for rezoning the Vallco property in order for Sand Hill to build an office park. It is completely wrong to change the General Plan for our city, MY city as well as yours, in order to accommodate ANY developer. However they want you to think about it, the truth is that if they are allowed to build 2,000,000 square feet of office space, it will be an office park with a few public amenities, and not a vibrant shopping area for all residents. It will remove any future for Vallco as a shopping area for our residents. I am not opposed to any office space, but I want to be able to shop in my own city! When Vallco was properly managed, I was there most weekends, shopping for myself or my family, or eating at the food court. Since it was mismanaged into the desolate embarrassment it is now, I shop at Westgate or Stanford- the drive to Stanford is preferable to the environment at Valley Fair for me. PLEASE be responsive to us- the residents, the homeowners, the voters of Cupertino- and realize that there is a responsibility on your part to be SURE that the majority here agree with the proposed changes. This is not an issue that is fairly decided by a small panel of 5 or 6 people when it will affect over 50,000 of us, especially when the dissent is obvious. Sincerely, Stacy Wilson 18630 Crabtree Avenue, Cupertino (408)4021109 1 r � �%� � Beth Ebben �� From: Lisa Maletis-Massey Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 3:40 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: FW: DO NOT REZONE VALLCO TO MIXED USE FYI... From: Sushma Shirish [mailto:sushma.shirish@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 3:34 PM To: City Council Subject: DO NOT REZONE VALLCO TO MIXED USE City Council Members, Please do not rezone Vallco to mixed use (commercial, residential, office). The Cupertino community does not support it. Put it on the ballot to be absolutely sure.This is a democracy, Do not violate our constitutional rights here. Sincerely, Sushma Shirish Cupertino Resident who votes and pays tax 1 .ti�� q�� ,�C.' Beth Ebben � From: Peggy Griffin [griffin@compuserve.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 1:53 PM To: Aarti Shrivastava; Piu Ghosh; City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: 2015-09-22 Planning Commission Agenda Item#2 - LAND USE MAP - IMPORTANT MISTAKE! HEADS UP! Dear Planning Commissioners and City Staff, THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT! Agenda Item#2—Attachment 1 "Draft GPA Resolution" page 47 of 47 entitled "Land Use Map" This page has significant changes that were not part of the previous Land Use Map! For one, Vallco has changed to Commercial/Office/Residential!!! This was NOT to happen until the Specific Plan was approved by the people. Otherwise it remained RETAIL-ONLY and we went to Plan B. I am still looking at each area to see what other areas changed. This is not right! The City Council said Vallco would not change until it was approved. It should NOT be part of the GPA! If there are any other locations that have been "updated" these should not change! Thank you, Peggy Griffin 1 . � '�`► �� 1/� /%� �$4:. KT . . September 21, 2015 Winnie Lee, Chairperson Cupertino Planning Commission Office of Community Development 10300 Tarre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 RE: General P{an Amendment to make edits to policy, text and figures and re-zoning of one parcel Dear Chairperson Lee and Planning Commission: KT Urban is hereby submitting the following comments regarding the propased General Plan Amendment edits to the text of the Community Visian 204�General Plan. 0#particular concern are the changes to the text that would result in the eliminaiion of"offices" as a permitted use in The�aks Gateway Node. At issue is the s#aff recommended change in Policy LU-14.5: �aks Gateway Node: "This is a gateway retail and shopping node. New residenrial a�e��t:��=��-�.�, if allowed,should be designed an the "mixed-use village"concept". We see no need to make a change to this land use policy,which otherwise already provides for some discretion through the entitlement process to deterrnine if an office use is allowed within the context o#the "mixed-use viilage". New residential and office uses would be evaluated during the project entitlement phase, and considered accordingly. Conversely, eliminating "offices uses" from this policy would make it confusing for the applicant and city staff in designing and evaluating a specific mixed-use project, and would potentially result in an impediment to the redevelopment of the Oaks Shopping Center property. We are currently in active discussions with city staff regarding the planned redevelopment of the Oaks Shopping Center property, which is i�The Oaks Gateway Node. Office uses are potentially considered an integral component of a mixed-use project at the Oaks Shopping Center property. As indicated in the Land Use Map 2000-2020 and the Project Description for the Oaks Shopping Center property, which were included in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)for the Community Vision 2040 General Plan,Office Uses have historicaliy been aliowed for this property in combination 21710 Stevens Creek Boulevard,Suite 200 � Cupertino,California 9SQ14 � Offic.e:4�8.257.2100 � Fax:40$.255.8620 ; www.kturban.com KT �:..� �� with commercial uses. The DEIR project description for this site referred to no changes proposed to the allowed land uses,and therefore included Office Uses in its analysis. Further, in 2008 the Planning Commission approved a rnixed-use project that included an office component(U-2Q07-04 8 ASA-2007- 60).The 2Q14-2022 Housing Element now also identifies the Oaks Shopping Center as a Housing Element site. In addition,the Neart of the City Specific Plan designation for the site is P(Res/CGj,where office uses are aHowed within this CG district. All these compone�ts provide the developer with gre.ater flexibili#y to design a successful project within the context of the"mixed-use village" concept for the redevelopmeni af the Oaks Shopping Center property. We therefore believe that it is premature and not necessary to remove office uses from this Policy or in reference to uses allowed in the Gateway Node at this time, and respectfully request that the Planning Cammission recommend that the5e changes should not be included with the proposed General Plan amendments. Respectfully, �--- �_ r� .� ,�-�.�," Mark Tersini, Principal KT Urban Cc: Aarti Shrivastava, Community Development Director Andy Fabe�, Berliner Cohen Daug Yount 21710 Stevens Creek Boulevard,Suite 200 ( Cupertino,California 95014 � Office:408.257.2100 � Fax:4Q8.255.8620 � www.kturban.com .�.�� C�/�� Beth Ebben From: Xuemei Lou [1ou27617@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 2:21 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: Planning Commissioner: No Vallco Rezone Planning Commissioners, I learned that VALLCO IS REZONED TO COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL/OFFICE in Tonight's Resolution in Planning Commission. It's not mentioned on the Agenda. Not mentioned in the staff report. It's again buried inside a draft Resolution in the zoning map. The very last page of the draf Resolution. The Council already promised NOT TO REZONE until the project is approved by the community and the Council. But the item is not even on the agenda. What kind of practice this is?! Please stopping doing this, and keep your promise. Regards, Xuemei 1 .,•t.�C�--��J �� C�� Beth Ebben �� From: Xiaowen Wang [xiaowenw@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 2:52 PM To: City Attorney's Office; City Clerk; City Council; David Brandt; City of Cupertino Planning Dept.; Aarti Shrivastava Subject: Vallco Rezone already? Attachments: vallco_Sep_22.pdf Dear Planning Commissioners and City Councils, I am pleased to see that the agenda item of GPA comparison table. I know the staff and some residents have been working on it for long hours. I commend for all their great efforts. However; I am appalled to find the attached figure in the daft resolution. In this figure, Vallco shopping area is clearly labeled as Commercial/Office/Residential. I want to know when and how this decision is made. As late as last week, I was still told by planning department that Vallco is zoned to commercial only until a specific plan is approved. Moreover, as late as last week, I was told the developer has not submitted the specific plan yet. I would like to know when and how this whole situation changes to the figure attached. Is such change an agenda item on any planning commission meeting or city council meeting? What is the deliberation on it for such change? I would politely ask the councils to explain your deliberation process on making such decision? As far as I follow the city council meetings, I do not recall councils have made such deliberation yet. Thank you very much. Please include this letter in the public record of tonight planning commission meeting. BR, Xiaowen Wang Cupertino Resident 1 SPEC � AL AREA AND NEIGHBCJRHOOD DIAGRAMS Dra#t � 9i16J2015 V�.LLCC� SNCJPP�f�Ca t3�S�°R�CT ,�n ��" tl � ; : e�e : � R�s �?¢ 1 4 �, ��L�>' tfi R � YV _. LEGEND Commercial/OfFice/Residential Transit Route s � - c; � � Beth Ebben �� From: Yu Ying [yu.ying06@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 3:46 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: Re: Vallco is under retail zoning before residents' approval Dear Planning Dept, Please forward below email to "Planning Commission", in case it confused you. Thanks for your help! Yu On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Yu Ying < ��u.�n�06(a�gmail.com> wrote: City Councils, As of today, I still remember the touching speeches Mayor Rod Sinks, and Vice Mayor Barry Chang gave on Dec. 4, where they claimed Vallco would be a specific plan, and it would not be zoned to mixed-use until the community, i.e. the residents, and the councils approve the specific plan. Now, as a Cupertino Resident, I haven't even seen the specific plan, yet, on this agenda of planning commission meeting tonight, Agenda Item #2 —Attachment 1 "Draft GPA Resolution" page 47 of 47 entitled "Land Use Map" Vallco is marked as retail/commercial/residential by the planning commissioners and city staf£ This is cheating and this is WRONG! They are violating the General Plan land use. I cannot believe we, residents, pay so much tax to hire these dishonest people working for us. It is time for you, honored Councilmen and Council woman, to step in and stop the abused power by unqualified staf£ This agenda item needs to be removed from today's meeting. Moreover, the staff and the commissioners, owe an explanation to the residents. Yu Cupertino Residents. i � �� `%�� P� Beth Ebben "�� From: Piu Ghosh Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 4:32 PM To: Beth Ebben Subject: Fwd: Valico is zoned to mixed use? FYI... Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Better Cupertino <bettercupertino(a��mail.com> Date: September 22, 2015 at 4:24:54 PM PDT To: Piu Ghosh<PiuG(a�cupertino.or�> Subject: Vallco is zoned to mixed use? Attachment 1 "Draft GPA Resolution"page 47 of 47 entitled "Land Use Map" shows Vallco as mixed use. Everyone is confused. Zoning map shows Vallco is Commercial/Regional Retail. How's Land Use Map different from Zoning Map? � � �..� �� /�.� � Beth Ebben From: vtamcupt@sbcglobal.net Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 3:57 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: Subject: Rezoning of Vallco with out mentioning on Agenda nor in Staff Report I OBJECT TO THE REZONING OF VALLCO TO COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL/OFFICE. IT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA NOR MENTIONED IN THE STAFF REPORT IT IS ON THE LAST PAGE OF THE DRAFT RESOLUTION IN THE ZONING MAP. THE COUNCIL PROMISED NOT TO REZONE UNTIL THE PROJECT IS APPROVED BY THE COMMUNITY AND THE COUNCIL. PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE THIS, AS YOU REPRESENT THE COMMUNITY NOT THE DEVELOPER. THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT DECISIONS ARE SCANDELOUS, AS THE CITIZENS ARE NOT BEING WELL REPRESENTED. SINCERELY YOURS, VIRGINIA TAMBLYN vtamcupt(a�sbc�lobal.net 1 .�� .� �/�.� �� Beth Ebben From: Stan Sieler[sieler@allegro.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 4:01 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: vallco Hi, I'm a Cupertino resident since 1981 ... and a voter. I *STRONGLY* oppose the proposed Vallco redevelopment. Adding that many offices and residents is sheer, unadulerated lunacy. thanks, Stan Sieler Lansdale Ave Cupertino 1 � , � �� Beth Ebben �� From: Lisa Maletis-Massey Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 4:24 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: FW: I object to rezoning Valco FYI... From: Todd Kushnir [mailto:caldvdsf@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 4;21 PM To: City Council Subject: I object to rezoning Valco I object to REZONING VALCO!!! DO NOT TO REZONE VALCO. . 1 �� - �� . �� Beth Ebben From: Lisa Maletis-Massey Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 4:28 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: FW: Do not approve the rezoning of valico FYI. . . -----Original Message----- From: Myoung Kang [mailto:myoung.kan�(��mail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 4:25 PM To: City Council Subject: Do not approve the rezoning of vallco I am against the rezoning and the city council promised to not rezone until the plans were approved. Please honor your words. �