FW 2020-05-12 PC Meeting - Agenda Item 2 OaksWestport - Requires another density bonus waiver! desk item.msg1
Beth Ebben
Subject:FW: 2020-05-12 PC Meeting - Agenda Item 2: Oaks/Westport - Requires another density bonus
waiver!
From: Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 6:33 AM
To: City of Cupertino Planning Commission <PlanningCommission@cupertino.org>; Gian Martire
<GianM@cupertino.org>; City Attorney's Office <CityAttorney@cupertino.org>
Cc: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org>; City Council <CityCouncil@cupertino.org>
Subject: 2020‐05‐12 PC Meeting ‐ Agenda Item 2: Oaks/Westport ‐ Requires another density bonus waiver!
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Please add this letter to written communications for the Planning Commission meeting scheduled for Tuesday, May 12,
2020. The letter addresses Agenda Item 2, “Development proposal to demolish a 71,250 square foot retail center (The
Oaks)…”.
Dear Planning Commissioners, Gian and City Attorney,
According to the Staff Report and all the documents, the applicant is requesting 3 waivers:
1. Height waiver
2. Slope setback waiver
3. Affordable units dispersed throughout the project waiver (Section 19.56.050.G.1)
I have 2 issues regarding the Density Bonus Waivers as described below.
ISSUE #1: BMR units should be distributed throughout the project site
Waiver #3 above for Section 19.56.050.G.1 should be denied because BMR units CAN be dispersed throughout the
project. The senior BMR units can remain within Buildings 1 and 2. This provides a variety of affordable housing
opportunities for those in need and still keeps all the senior housing units together.
All the applicant letters that lobby in favor of Waiver #3 describe this project as if it is a senior housing BMR project. This
project IS NOT entirely a senior housing project because it also has the townhouses and rowhouses which are regular
non‐age restricted market rate units. If this project were entirely a senior citizen housing development then under
Section 19.56.B it would only be allowed a max density of 20%. Also, under Section 19.56.040.A.1, no incentives or
concessions would be available for a senior housing project unless it was affordable.
So, there is no reason why the BMR units should be restricted to Buildings 1 and 2! This request should be denied.
ISSUE #2: BMR units should be identical in design as market rate units
There is an additional requirement in our Municipal Code that these affordable units “shall be identical with the design
of any market rate rental units” (Section 19.56.050.G.2).
2
Looking at the size of the units in this project (see chart below), it is obvious that this project DOES NOT MEET General
Requirement 19.56.050.G.2 Not addressing this requirement sets a precedent for ALL FUTURE PROJECTS to essentially
nullify the requirement. It is part of our Municipal Code which requires that projects follow it!
In addition, it appears Buildings 1 and 2 will be built by different developers. The BMR studio and 1‐bedroom units in
Building 2 will not be “identical with the design” of market rate studio and 1‐bedroom units in Building 1. Also, in
Building 1, it’s unclear which exact units are BMR and which are market rate. There should be a similar proportion of
the various sized units that are BMR and market rate. The distribution of BMR units in Building 1 should not all be studio
units dispersed throughout the building! It should be a variety of unit sizes dispersed throughout the project!
REQUEST: The applicant needs to provide proof that this requirement has been met or submit a request for a 4th
waiver!
Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin
SUPPORTING INFORMATION…
MUNICIPAL CODE ‐ DENSITY BONUS LAW
Section 19.56.050 General Requirements
G. Affordable units shall be provided as follows:
1. Affordable units shall be dispersed throughout the project;
2. Affordable units shall be identical with the design of any market rate rental units in the project with the
exception that a reduction of interior amenities for affordable units will be permitted upon prior approval by
the City Council as necessary to retain project affordability.
FROM PC AGENDA ITEM #2, ATTACHMENT 8 – Project Description
3
FROM ATTACHMENT 9 – Below Market Rate Project Description, Page 1 of 7
FROM STAFF REPORT, Page 19
4