CC 01-17-23 Late Oral_Written CommunicaitonsCC 01-17-2023
Written Communications
Oral
Communications
From:Connie Cunningham
To:City Clerk; City Council
Subject:Fwd: 23-1-17 City Council Oral Communications, Biodiversity
Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 7:22:36 PM
Attachments:23-1-17 Oral Communications, Biodiversity.docx
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 Kirsten,
> Please add to written communications.
> Connie
>
>
From:Rose Grymes
To:City Clerk; City Council
Cc:Connie Cunningham
Subject:Oral Communications Jan 17, 2023
Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 7:18:36 PM
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 my remarks to the written record.
Good evening city council members, and Happy 2023. Thank you most sincerely for your
energies devoted to our city. I agree with the previous two speakers on Lehigh, and support
Supervisor Simitian’s efforts, but that’s not my subject tonight.
Rather, I’m here to again voice my agreement with the popularly supported —in fact, majority
supported—Blackberry Farm plan option that transitions from its current golf course
operation to a natural habitat with non-intrusive public enjoyment of trails, vistas, and open
spaces. While the majority of Cupertino residents polled by city staff share my view, no doubt
for a variety of reasons, such a cross-section is not always available to speak directly to the
Council during meetings. They’re out there, but not always able to be in here, even virtually.
While there are many reasons for selecting the natural habitat option presented by city staff to
the Council, today I will focus on the impacts to Cupertino quality of life caused by undue
disturbance to the habitat we share, the habitat all around us.
A recent scholarly article in the journal American Scientist describes how wildlife, from
insects to birds to small mammals and larger predators, adjusts to living alongside human
developments. Characteristically, birds and animals seek to avoid people; not only their
immediate presence but also their distant sounds and their artificial lights. We generally DO
acknowledge that insects, birds, and animals contribute to our quality of life. And they, like us,
are adjusting to changing climate and water scarcity—water scarcity being a repeated way of
life in California despite recent storms. Beside these challenges, human construction and
development activities are altering the roaming behaviors and activity levels of insects, birds
and animals. Changes can force them further into conflict with human neighbors. The
solutions we must strive to prioritize are those which lead to the greatest good. Providing
isolated corridors for wildlife to pass is an inadequate response. Too often these are wrongly
sited, and the wildlife they are designed to support fail to read the memo or observe the
change.
In the case of Blackberry Farm, the greatest good for this wonderful open space environment
is allowing nature to re-create and restore a habitat as unobtrusive as possible to the wildlife it
contains, so as to maximize the benefit of this land and minimize or eliminate the driving of
wildlife under stress into nearby neighborhoods.
I will quickly add the enormously significant issue of watershed and water resources. Water
requirements for golf course operations are expensive —expensive because we pay money and
expensive because we lose this resource for other applications. In contrast, restoring the
natural habitat increases watershed availability, improves ground water recharge, and reduces
water pollutants from fertilizer application and pest control. Thank you for your consideration.
From:John Kehoe
To:City Clerk; City Council
Subject:City Council Oral Communications, Blackberry Farm Golf Course Option B
Date:Wednesday, January 18, 2023 8:17:07 AM
Attachments:Blackberry Farm Golf Course - Option B_2023.02.17.docx
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.
Hello Mayor Wei and Councilmembers,
Please add these comments to the Written Record at the City of Cupertino. I have also
attached the Word document of this message below.
Thank you very much,
John Kehoe
2023.02.17, Oral Communications, Blackberry Farm Golf Course Option B
Thank you, Mayor Wei and Council members, for this opportunity. My name is John Kehoe
and with this brief address I hope to inform the city regarding your decisions on the future of
the Blackberry Farm Golf Course. Please choose Option B: Conversion to Natural Habitat!
Enhancing our natural areas is essential for preserving our natural wildlife and maintaining
biodiversity. The basic recipe of planting locally native plants according to best practices gives
our critters the best chance of long-term success. Proper landscaping and protection are the
keys. Without essential plants we lose our wildlife. But with an expanded natural area adjacent
to the Stevens Creek, we could increase the habitat to support and even boost the populations
of our threatened monarch butterflies and bumble bees, to name just a few. Research shows
that time is running out; let’s proceed as soon as possible. To assess our current status on
biodiversity, we can refer to online data from the Xerces Society, iNaturalist or published
research articles. I have included some citations at the end of this document.
Without taking assertive measures to protect and preserve our natural areas, we might bear
witness to the demise and even extinction of our western monarch butterflies (Danaus
plexippus), (Schultz et al., 2017). The International Union for Conservation of Nature added
our native monarch butterfly to its red list of endangered species, (Wikipedia, 2022).
Additionally, four of California’s bumble bee species (Genus Bombus) have been recently
added to the candidate list of endangered species, per the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW, 2022). Further, a recent survey of all bumble bees in the state have shown
that, overall, population abundance is in decline (Fisher et al., 2022).
By converting the golf course to a natural area, this Council could put Cupertino on the map of
local biodiversity hotspots. We have the local talent and resources to expand habitat for
pollinators including bees and butterflies. We can propagate and plant native plants including
the necessary monarch butterfly host plants, milkweeds (Asclepias spp.), at no cost to the city.
This has been an ongoing activity at numerous areas in the County. In doing this, we could see
a new era where students of all ages flock to Cupertino for volunteer opportunities and
research while all park visitors enjoy the beauty of our natural world.
Thank you, again, for your time and attention
John Kehoe
References and citations:
Blackberry Farm Golf Course Feasibility Study: https://engagecupertino.org/bbfgolfcourse
Schultz, Brown, L. M., Pelton, E., & Crone, E. E. (2017). Citizen science monitoring
demonstrates dramatic declines of monarch butterflies in western North America.
Biological Conservation, 214, 343–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.08.019
Fisher, K., Watrous, K. M., Williams, N. M., Richardson, L. L., & Woodard, S. H. (2022). A
contemporary survey of bumble bee diversity across the state of California. Ecology
and Evolution, 12, e8505. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8505
California Department of Fish and Wildlife. “Updates to the legal status of bumble bees in
California,” October 19, 2022
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/News/updates-to-the-legal-status-of-bumble-
bees-in-california
Accessed January 15, 2023
Wikipedia. “Monarch butterfly - Conservation Status”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarch_butterfly#Conservation_status
Accessed January 16, 2023
From:Kirsten Squarcia
To:C. F
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:RE: Are electrical **anything** legal on the walkway in the park?
Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 8:30:18 AM
Attachments:image019.png
image020.png
image021.png
image022.png
image023.png
image024.png
image025.png
image026.png
image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image005.png
image006.png
image007.png
image008.png
image009.png
Good morning Charles (Council Bcc’d), your email has been received and will be included with the
written comments for Oral Communications for the January 17 City Council meeting. Regards,
Kirsten
Members of the public wishing to comment on an item on the agenda may do so in the
following ways:
1) Appear in person at Cupertino Community Hall. Members of the audience who address
the City Council must come to the lectern/microphone, and are requested to complete a
Speaker Card and identify themselves. Completion of Speaker Cards and identifying
yourself is voluntary and not required to attend the meeting or provide comments.
2) E-mail comments by 4:30 p.m. on Tuesday, January 17 to the Council at
citycouncil@cupertino.org. These e-mail comments will also be forwarded to
Councilmembers by the City Clerk’s office before the meeting and posted to the City’s
website after the meeting.
Members of the public may provide oral public comments during the meeting as follows:
Oral public comments will be accepted during the meeting. Comments may be made
during “oral communications” for matters not on the agenda, and during the public
comment period for each agenda item.
Kirsten Squarcia
City Clerk
City Manager's Office
KirstenS@cupertino.org
(408) 777-3225
From: C. F <cfu000@hotmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2023 5:05 PM
To: Kirsten Squarcia <KirstenS@cupertino.org>
Cc: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org>
Subject: Re: Are electrical **anything** legal on the walkway in the park?
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.
Kirsten,
Same issue in Creekside Park - different vehicle this time - high speed (toy) electrical vehicle
with a kid behind the wheel on the sidewalk that is FAST and SILENT enough to threaten the
safety of pedestrians.
This happens today (01/12/23) around 4:30pm at Creekside Park.
Can you please put this issue with the associated video clip into the next Council meeting
(oral communication?) so at least they know about this, then we can wait until someone really
get hit.
Maybe I can drive a Tesla next time for a joy ride in the playground as well - it is electrical and
with 4 wheels, just bigger...
Video for this can be found here:
ToyEVInCreekside.MOV
Thanks.
--
Charles Fu
From: Kirsten Squarcia <KirstenS@cupertino.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2022 10:51 AM
To: C. F <cfu000@hotmail.com>
Cc: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org>
Subject: RE: Are electrical **anything** legal on the walkway in the park?
Good morning Charles, thank you for your e-mail. This is a matter for the Sheriff. I have forwarded
your communication to City Code Enforcement Officer Jeff Trybus who will be coordinating with the
Sheriff’s Office to have a patrol check performed during the reported times. Feel free to contact me
if you have any questions.
Regards, Kirsten
Kirsten Squarcia
City Clerk
City Manager's Office
KirstenS@cupertino.org
(408) 777-3225
From: C. F <cfu000@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2022 7:12 PM
To: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org>
Subject: Are electrical **anything** legal on the walkway in the park?
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,
Do not know who/where to send this to, please forward it to the party that is responsible for
this.
I was walking my dog in Creekside Park just now, around 6:30pm 09/28/2022, and there
were about 10+ - probably high schoolers - people riding one-wheeled
board (like this one https://www.amazon.com/Fender-OneWheel-Compatible-Fittings-
Onewheel/dp/B09TVX1F47/ref=sr_1_3?
crid=3VT7PN3958QST&keywords=onewheel+skateboard+electric&qid=1664416282&qu=eyJx
c2MiOiIzLjgwIiwicXNhIjoiMi43NSIsInFzcCI6IjAuMDAifQ%3D%3D&sprefix=onewheel+skate%2C
aps%2C170&sr=8-3)
from behind me at high (enough) speed, and a bunch of them are zig-zagging on/off the
walkway as well - and they could cause
severe injuries should they collide with someone walking along the path - while there are kids
in soccer classes right next to the
walkway as well.
Also sometimes there are (elementary?) kids riding this kind of boards (like this one
https://www.amazon.com/NOVA-Hoverboard-Balancing-Headlights-Lithium-
Ion/dp/B09GVMD5FM/ref=sr_1_9?
crid=3VT7PN3958QST&keywords=onewheel+skateboard+electric&qid=1664416560&qu=eyJx
c2MiOiIzLjgwIiwicXNhIjoiMi43NSIsInFzcCI6IjAuMDAifQ%3D%3D&sprefix=onewheel+skate%2C
aps%2C170&sr=8-9) in the park as well, as they are learning/newbie, they do not have much
control on where it will go, and are hazards for
people/animal walking close/around them
Just wondering what is the regulation for this situation? and if they are illegal, how do the
City enforce it?
Attached is the video I captured (tail end, they pass so fast I barely have time to take the
video) on what I am talking about.
If the attachment does not go through due to size, it can be found in the link below as well:
ESkatesInCreekside.MOV
Thanks for your help.
--
Charles Fu
From:Don Halsey
To:City Clerk
Subject:Presentation to CCC on 1/17/23 about Blackberry Farm Golf and Nat Hab
Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 9:36:43 PM
Attachments:Natural Habitat – Let’s Have More of It r06.pdf
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.
Here are the presentation slides I used tonight.
Thanks for your assistance.
Don Halsey
650 996 3021
From:Peggy Griffin
To:Kirsten Squarcia
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:2023-01-17 CC Mtg Item 13 Peggys Slide-Treasurers Report Oct 2022
Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 8:18:38 PM
Attachments:Agenda Item 13 - Peggys Slide Treasurers Report Oct 2022.pdf
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.
Dear City Clerk Kirsten,
I would like to speak on Agenda Item 13. Attached is the slide I would appreciate if you could display
when I speak.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin
CC 01-17-2023
Item No. 1- Study Session
Consider adopting
Cupertino City Council
Procedures Manual
Written Communications
From:Marieann Shovlin
To:City Council; City Clerk
Subject:City Council Process Improvements
Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 5:01:12 PM
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.
Dear City Council Members and City Staff,
I wholeheartedly support giving more time to Cupertino residents to
speak to the Council during their meetings.
The City can benefit from being able to get rational feedback from their
residents.
It is important, however, to provide time to hear from all residents in
some way - and to share that communication with all other residents,
staff and Councilmembers.
Please consider ways (public forums, and other events) to accomplish this.
Thank you,
Marieann Shovlin
From:Dan Marshall
To:City Clerk
Subject:Comment on Cupertino City Council Procedures proceedures discussed 1-17-2023
Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 5:51:39 PM
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.
I am delighted that the council is establishing a set of rules and
procedures for their deliberations.
I would suggest adding an accepted process for working toward resolution
when there is disagreement between members of the Council.
In particular I suggest that each side of the disagreement can ask the
other side to state their understanding of the other side's perception and
any facts or experiences driving that perception.
For example if Bill and Betty disagree whether 1 million dollars or 10
million should be spent on a park. Bill thinks 1, Betty thinks 10. This
clause would give Bill the right to ask Betty to explain her understanding
of why Bill only wants to spend 1 million. And it would also give Betty the
right to ask Bill to explain his understanding of Betty's perspective.
Dan Marshall
408-859-6628
See a brief video about a promising approach to addressing climate change.
CC 01-17-2023
Written Communications
Item No. 2
Study Session to
consider modifying
Municipal Code Title
2 regarding
compositions and
responsibilities of
existing Commissions
and Committees
From:Peggy Griffin
To:Pamela Wu; Liang Chao; Christopher Jensen
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:RE: 2023-01-17 City Council Agenda Item #2 is misleading and should be renoticed
Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 4:52:16 PM
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.
Dear City Manager Wu,
Thank you for your response.
My concern is also the content of the material in these 2 items. They are plans to discuss and vote
on 2 items that are of concern to many people yet they are being discussed and decided during a
Study Session. Members of the public think it’s a time for discussion and Council direction, not
voting and deciding the issue entirely!
Many people are working, picking up kids, fixing dinner and when having limited time, choose to
watch and attend the regular meeting rather than a study meeting. They may even plan to speak
during Oral Communications, sharing time with someone, but the rules may change between the
Study Session and the Regular Meeting! It’s not clear when these take effect. It appeared to be
immediately.
Again, thanks for your time.
Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin
From: Pamela Wu <PamelaW@cupertino.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2023 11:03 AM
To: Liang Chao <LiangChao@cupertino.org>; Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com>; Christopher
Jensen <ChristopherJ@cupertino.org>
Cc: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org>
Subject: RE: 2023-01-17 City Council Agenda Item #2 is misleading and should be renoticed
Peggy and Councilmember Chao, thank you for your email and your concerns. The agenda
description for Item 1&2 tonight provides sufficient information for the public and City Council to
take the necessary action. Your concerns are duly noted.
Pamela
Pamela Wu
City Manager
City Manager's Office
PamelaW@cupertino.org
(408)777-1322
From: Liang Chao <LiangChao@cupertino.org>
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2023 4:19 PM
To: Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com>; Pamela Wu <PamelaW@cupertino.org>; Christopher
Jensen <ChristopherJ@cupertino.org>
Cc: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org>
Subject: Re: 2023-01-17 City Council Agenda Item #2 is misleading and should be renoticed
Thanks, Peggy.
That's a very good example from a Brown Act guide from California Attorney General's Office.
Liang Chao
Vice Mayor
City Council
LiangChao@cupertino.org
408-777-3192
From: Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com>
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2023 2:24 PM
To: Pamela Wu <PamelaW@cupertino.org>; Christopher Jensen <ChristopherJ@cupertino.org>
Cc: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org>; City Council <CityCouncil@cupertino.org>
Subject: 2023-01-17 City Council Agenda Item #2 is misleading and should be renoticed
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.
Dear City Manager Wu and City Attorney Jensen,
The 1-27-2023 City Council Agenda Item #2 (below) is misleading and should be re-noticed. It does
not mention the possible elimination of committees and sub-committees. People reading this would
think that you’re just changing what they do but they’d have NO CLUE that you are planning to
delete long standing commissions and committees!
California Office of the Attorney General’s Brown Act text
LINK: https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/the-brown-act.pdf
Below is an example of inadequate notice when a school board described an agenda item as
“continuation school site change” when in reality it was closing schools. I see the description of
“compositions and responsibilities” equally misleading when in reality it is a discussion of
eliminating commissions and sub-committees.
Page 30-31 of 114
REQUEST: Please re-notice this agenda item with a clear description stating it is to consider
eliminating several commissions and committees, preferably listing them.
Clear messaging improves trust.
Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin
CC 01-17-2023
Item No. 20
Status update on the
6th Cycle Housing
Element update
Written Communications
From:Ayushi Samaddar
Subject:Council reforms and Housing Element 2023
Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 5:01:32 PM
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.
Dear Cupertino City Council,
Regarding Cupertino council procedures, I support the council reforms because they (1)
promote having clear rules, (2) make it easier for people to give public comment and
participate in the process, (3) expand access to government by removing any meetings
between 10 PM to 8 AM, (4) reduce the politicization of basic governance. I would however
also like to see even longer windows to raise your hand for public comment and also more
flexibility for giving comments, like what Santa Clara County does.
I also support the reduction of committees as they needlessly use staff time, resulting in
favoring process over outcomes for our residents. We should focus on the quality of our
institutions, not the quantity.
In addition, I support an ambitious housing element. Therefore, I am advocating for the
following with regard to the housing element draft (either before or after submission): (1)
making sure AB 2011 and other housing bills are a focus of the housing element draft, as
they have the potential to make it dramatically easier for Cupertino to meet its housing
targets; (2) making sure we include and submit all comments related to the housing
element focused on specific changes needed to make it an ambitious housing element; (3)
everything in this letter which names specific changes needed from 12/20 that CFA
submitted.
Thanks,
Ayushi
From:Housing
To:City Clerk
Cc:Kerri Heusler
Subject:FW: Item 20 Suggestions for Changing Housing Element Update
Date:Wednesday, January 18, 2023 8:46:32 AM
Attachments:Chair Letter to City Council (1).pdf
Forwarding written comms rec’d from the Housing Inbox:
Cyrah Caburian
Administrative Assistant
Community Development
cyrahc@cupertino.org
(408) 777-1374
From: Neil Park-McClintick <neil@cupertinoforall.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2023 5:47 PM
To: Housing <Housing@cupertino.org>; clerkrecorder@rec.sccgov.org; Cupertino City Manager's
Office <citymanager@cupertino.org>; City Council <CityCouncil@cupertino.org>
Subject: Item 20 Suggestions for Changing Housing Element Update
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.
Dear Cupertino City Council,
I would like to resubmit the following comments regarding much-needed changes to the housing
element. While I recognize the need to submit a draft, HCD will no doubt respond that we need to
dramatically redo portions of our HE update. As such, please see the attached letter from Cupertino
for All, which is aimed to help the City, Council, and staff earn a compliant element over the span of
this year. This letter was submitted at the end of last year. The only additional ask would be to
have council direct staff to come up with (A) an analysis
of the effects of AB 2011 on Cupertino and its housing element (which are understood to be quite
impactful), (B) direct staff to come back with a list of specific policies for protection, preservation,
and production from other cities' housing elements--in particular, cities that received the green
light during their very first submission (Emeryville and Alameda should be a focus.
To:
City Clerk Kirsten Squarcia
Councilmember JR Fruen
Mayor Hung Wei
Councilmember Liang Chao
Councilmember Kitty Moore
City Manager Pamela Wu
Councilmember Sheila Mohan
Comprehensive redo of housing element draft needed
From the beginning of the housing element update process, community members
have repeatedly demanded an ambitious, honest, and conforming process from
the City of Cupertino. This means a resulting product that realistically outlines a path
forward for not only building 4,000+ homes, but also transforming the affordable
housing landscape for families across all incomes and backgrounds. However, this
outcome is only achievable if the leadership of Cupertino truly believes that the HE
update is a unique opportunity of a lifetime, rather than a burdensome task. The
recently released housing element draft unfortunately seems to indicate the latter
rather than the former. If we wish to preserve any hope of dictating our own
future as a community, Council and staff must conduct a comprehensive
redrafting process, with the following changes:
1.
2.
3. Site Inventory:
4. Reduce reliance on pipeline projects, expand the number of planned units in the
“heart of
5. the city,” and avoid planning homes that are unlikely to be built. Nearly ⅔ of the
planned inventory is pipeline projects, with roughly 80% of those projects being
Vallco and the Hamptons. The Hamptons in particular is unlikely to actually be
built out as
6. 600 units, given no recent developer interest and recent renovations from Irvine
Company. Meanwhile, less than 5% of the inventory is composed of the heart of
the city, the main portion of Cupertino, where most development should be
slated.
7.
8.
9.
10. Programs and Policies:
11. Urge staff and consultants to focus on new policies and programs modeled
12. after other cities’ housing elements–with a framework of the 3 Ps in mind:
production of homes, preservation of existing homes, and protection of renters.
Cities like Emeryville and Mountain View have robust policies for all three of
these planks. Cupertino’s
13. current draft introduces few new policies, instead relying almost entirely on our
existing ones, which have obviously failed to meet our housing needs.
Additionally, the draft unnecessarily restricts proposed policies, such as only
limiting parking requirements
14. for SROs and studios, instead of applying a reduction in parking to all new
homes.
15.
a.
b.
c. Sample 1: Adaptive Re-use. The City will examine opportunities to allow
for the adaptive reuse/conversion
d. or replacement of vacant or underperforming commercial spaces and
parking structures to residential units. The City will analyze the feasibility
of an Adaptive Reuse Ordinance that would target the conversion of select
types existing structures and of spaces
e. that may include ground-floor retail in an existing mixed-use structure, part
or all of an office building or parking structure
f.
g.
h.
i. Sample 2: Live/Work Units. Assess existing Live/Work regulations to see if
any modification needs
j. to be made to encourage development of Live/Work units in an effort to
diversify the City's housing types. Encourage the development or
conversion of affordable live/workspace units, and ensure owners of
existing Live/Work units are aware of the Homebuyer
k. Assistance Program available for their unit when marketing their unit for
resale, in an effort to expand affordable homeownership options.
l.
m.
n.
o. Sample 3: Family Friendly Housing. Promote housing designs and unit
mix to attract multigenerational
p. households by encouraging developers to include housing features and
more bedrooms (including four-bedroom units), as well as other on-site
amenities, such as usable outdoor open space for multigenerational use,
and multipurpose rooms that can be used for
q. after-school homework clubs, computer, art, or other resident activities.
r.
s.
t.
u. Sample 4: The creation of a tenant relocation assistance ordinance. r
more rental units have been
v. displaced because of renovations, redevelopment, and similar activities.
The City’s ordinance is intended to help lower income households with
moving costs, deposits, and securing replacement housing.
w.
x.
y.
z. Sample 5: Rental Preservation Program. The City will provide low interest
rate loans to existing
aa. rental property owners to improve the habitable condition(s) of their rental
units occupied by very low, low and moderate-income tenants.
Performance Metric(s) # of rental units renovated; # of special need units
assisted; Amount of Funds Expended
ab.
ac.
ad.
ae. Sample 6: Resident Engagement. The City will evaluate its current
committees and commission membership
af. to determine if the membership is reflective of the socio-economic and
racial mix of Cupertino or if there are any missing voices. If it is
determined, there are missing voices, the City will enhance its outreach
efforts to encourage residents from all socio-economic
ag. groups and racial backgrounds to serve on committees and commissions
when position become available. The City will investigate the restructuring
of the Housing Committee to ensure that the committee has at least one
member that resides in a BMR unit, at least
ah. one member that is a tenant, and at least one member that is a
homeowner.
ai.
aj.
ak.
al. Sample 7: Prohousing Designation. The City will seek a Prohousing
Designation from the California
am. Housing and Community Development for enacting favorable zoning and
land use policies, policies to accelerate the production of housing,
reduction of construction and development policies, and providing financial
subsidies. The Prohousing designation will
an. provide incentives, in the form of additional points or preferences in the
scoring of competitive applications for housing and infrastructure.
ao.
16.
17.
18. Needs Analysis:
19. The needs analysis is woefully inadequate for the unique housing context
20. of Cupertino, with no references to the extreme unmet housing needs of our
daytime residents–instead choosing to focus on those who already can afford to
live here. In particular, we see tremendous housing struggles among De Anza
college students, adjunct
21. faculty, teachers, low-wage workers, non-profit workers, young adults, and
seniors. For example, Cupertino severely lacks in apartments and smaller units
that would be ideal for a young professional or community college student.
Additionally, with regard to
22. AFFH, our draft does not provide a realistic assessment of segregation in our
region; we know that Cupertino has one of the lowest Latino/Latinx populations
of surrounding cities–of just 3-4% compared to San Jose’s 30%. As such, one
of our intended outcomes
23. should be to bridge this gap and greatly increase housing opportunities for
Latino, Black, and Southeast Asian communities of color.
24.
25.
26.
27. Constraints Analysis:
28. Several constraints appear to be missing, including but not limited to (1)
29. local control and neighborhood opposition, (2) underutilized land such as dying
strip malls, (3) relatively low surface area for development, (4) state law
evasion/loopholes, (5) permit processing times Additionally, several other state
laws are missing that
30. are in need of compliance like AB 2097 and AB 2011.
31.
32.
33.
34. Community Outreach:
35. While Cupertino has done some community outreach with regard to the housing
36. element, it does not seem to have actually translated into actual policies or
programs. The purpose of community outreach is to hear from traditionally
underserved communities, so new ideas emerge for how to meet these specific
housing needs. Instead, there
37. are dozens of pages of outreach, with no actual effect on the resulting sites,
programs, or policies. Additionally, much of the feedback critical of Cupertino’s
approach to the inventory appears to be missing. The City must also be honest
about its failures
38. in approaching community outreach, such as the last City Council dismantling
the stakeholder engagement group, or the anti-housing bias within the housing
survey.
39.
40.
41.
42. Transit-Oriented Development & mixed use:
43. Cupertino’s housing element draft does not seem to contain a vision for
44. the built-environment, as it isolates the thousands of planned homes from a
much needed coinciding growth of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure,
reduced car use, and vibrant, mixed-use spaces. Instead, it makes few
references to transit-oriented development
45. and even unnecessarily restricts mixed-use. We should be planning our housing
future around the reduction of car reliance and the promotion of our Climate
Action Plan 2.0.
46.
47.
48.
49. Timeline:
50. Cupertino is last in the entire county and will no doubt lose local control
51. under the builder’s remedy. Council should direct its staff and consultant team
to focus entirely on more-or-less redoing the housing element draft as quickly as
possible. The community would like to see an actual timeline and plan of action
for achieving
52. an ambitious housing element in a short period of time.
53.
54.
55.
56. Rezoning of Vallco:
57. The Rise (formerly Vallco) is the most important project for the City to
58. meet its RHNA. It includes more than half of the City’s total RHNA and 136% of
its low income units. One impediment is that the current GP and zoning do not
allow for a feasible project. While the SB 35 approval is currently in effect, if it
were to lapse,
59. the current GP/zoning designations are too restrictive and no project would
occur. To be consistent with other housing element inventory sites, the City
should
60. amend the General Plan and zoning to be consistent with The Rise project.
Strategy
61. HE-1.3 that would make a residential-only project available “by right” is
insufficient. The HE assumes that half of the units will be affordable, but that is
only feasible if there are other supporting uses to help pay for the high cost of
affordable housing,
62. such as office space.
63.
64.
65.
66. Improving fee reduction language:
67. The HE makes clear that the City’s impact fees are both very high and an outlier
in the region. This
68. can inhibit the proliferation of new housing and deter affordable projects. One of
the HE strategies calls for a reduction in fees, but does not establish a clear
path forward for which fees would be reduced or which steps would be taken.
Additionally, fee
69. waivers beyond parkland fees should be readily permissible in cases of
affordable housing projects. As a whole, the fee regime should be thoughtfully
restructured and reevaluated to strike a balance between fulfilling important city
functions, while not impeding
70. new housing development.
71.
Members across the community look forward to working with this new council and
City Manager’s office to produce an ambitious housing element update that matches
the innovation and ambition of our great town.
Sincerely,
Neil Park-McClintick
Chair, Cupertino for All
CC 01-17-2023
Item No. 23
Consider authorizing
the Director of Public
Works to reject all bids
received for Blackberry
Farm Pools
Improvements
Written Communications