RE OaksWestport parcel changes IMPORTANT questions (to me) (2) desk item.msg1
Beth Ebben
From:Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com>
Sent:Tuesday, May 12, 2020 3:33 PM
To:Gian Martire
Cc:City Clerk; City of Cupertino Planning Commission; City Council; City Attorney's Office
Subject:RE: Oaks/Westport parcel changes? IMPORTANT questions (to me)
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.
Editing correction on Q4…
Peggy
From: Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 3:25 PM
To: 'Gian Martire' <GianM@cupertino.org>
Cc: 'City Clerk' <CityClerk@cupertino.org>; PlanningCommission@cupertino.org; 'City Council'
<CityCouncil@cupertino.org>; City Attorney's Office <CityAttorney@cupertino.org>
Subject: RE: Oaks/Westport parcel changes? IMPORTANT questions (to me)
CITY CLERK: Please include this email in the written communications for tonight’s May 12, 2020 Planning Commission
meeting, Agenda Item #2, The Oaks/Westport project.
Gian,
I’ve added others on this email because I’m afraid you may not have time to answer these questions and I want them to
think about this.
I’m hoping you have time to answer these questions because this is my fear...regarding this project.
Q1: Is there anything in our municipal code or somewhere else to prevent them from doing the following:
‐ Get the bonus density across both parcels
‐ Build the parcel with the senior housing and all the bonus density and BMR.
‐ Sell the second parcel undeveloped
‐ Second developer comes in, decides they want to build something else.
‐ Second developer requests a bonus density on just the second parcel
Q2: (IMPORTANT) Because they only want to restrict the BMR to the one parcel, can the City require them to only get a
bonus density on that one parcel?
Q3: Can the City prevent them from double dipping on the bonus density via selling the second parcel?
Q4: If the height and setback waivers are granted for the project, does it apply to BOTH parcels? Can the second parcel
be sold and the new owner claim these waivers to request a different project [not parcel]?
Thank you for your time and effort on this project.
Peggy
2
From: Gian Martire <GianM@cupertino.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 8:33 AM
To: Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com>
Subject: RE: Oaks/Westport parcel changes?
Hi Peggy,
Sheet VTM‐1 shows the new property lines. This separates the project between the senior housing component and the
Rowhouse/Townhome component. Further, the VTM shows the required dedications to the City, street improvement
locations, as well as Bike/Ped easements through the site.
The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.
Gian Martire
Senior Planner
Planning Division
GianM@cupertino.org
(408) 777-3319
From: Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 6:55 AM
To: Gian Martire <GianM@cupertino.org>
Cc: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org>; City of Cupertino Planning Commission <PlanningCommission@cupertino.org>
Subject: Oaks/Westport parcel changes?
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.
Hi Gian,
I’m trying to figure out if the Oaks project parcels will be changed and if so, how. I don’t see any discussion regarding
any change except it was mentioned, I think, in one of the documents.
Currently, on the SCC Tax Assessor’s Map of the Oaks consists of 2 parcels (see attached PDF):
Parcel 1 = APN 326‐27‐42 which is 1.214 net acres
Parcel 2 = APN 327‐27‐43 which is 6.683 net acres
One of the documents mentioned the lot would be 2 parcels as follows:
1 parcel = 4.7 acres
1 parcel = 3.1 acres
Q: Can you point me to a place that shows these new parcels and the discussion as to why this is being done?
Thanks,
Peggy