CC/PC Staff Report 4-1-2014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
��'
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO,CA 95014-3255
C U P E RT I M Q TELEPHONE:(408)777-3308 www.cupertino.org
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Meeting: Apri11, 2014
Sub�ect
Study Session on major policy topics to be considered in the focused General Plan Amendment
(GPA-2013-01) process.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission and City Council:
■ Review policy topics for the General Plan Amendment (GPA) and provide comments.
Discussion
Background
Recent StudU Sessions
On February 19, 2014, the Planning Commission conducted a study session on the GPA Concept
Alternatives and Housing Element sites to be studied in the Environmental Impact Report
(EIR). Members of the public attended an open house prior to the study session that included
stations showcasing Draft General Plan Community Vision and Guiding Principles, Concept
Alternatives, and the proposed Housing Element sites. On March 4, 2014, the City Council
conducted a similar study session and directed staff to study the three proposed Concept
Alternatives (Alternatives A, B, and C) in the EIR for the General Plan and Housing Element.
The Council will make the final decision on the preferred alternative in the fall.
Modi�ications to the Concept Alternative Diagranis
Since the March 4, 2014 study session, minor modifications have been made to the Concept
Alternative diagrams based on Council's comments and selection of Housing Element sites to
be studied in the EIR. The modifications are only for the purpose of study in the EIR and are
summarized below:
■ The geographic distribution of residential allocations in Alternatives B and C was updated
in order to be consistent with the Housing Element Update sites selected by the Council for
study in the EIR.
� The residential density for the Stevens Creek & 85 Gateway was updated to be consistent
with the Housing Element site selected by the Council for study in the EIR in Alternatives B
and C.
919
• The residential density for the North Crossroads Sub-Area was updated to be consistent
with the Housing Element densities for Stevens Creek Office Center and Marina Plaza
selected by the Council for study in the EIR in Alternatives B and C. These two Housing
Element sites are being studied at increased densities and are located at two ends of the
North Crossroads Sub-Area (Stevens Creek Office Center and Marina Plaza). The density
increase was applied to the North Crossroads Sub-Area for consistency in the EIR.
• Clarifications to notes and allocation tables.
• Clarification that retail is not required for certain additional heights for The Hamptons
Housing Element site selected by the Council for study in the North Vallco Gateway, since
the site is currently zoned residential only and will continue to be zoned for residential
purposes.
Please refer to Attachment A for the revised Concept Alternative diagrams.
Update on the Retail Strate�
On March 6, 2014, the City published a Retail Strategy Report that analyzes retail in Cupertino,
particularly each GPA study area's suitability for retail development. The report is intended to
help inform community discussions regarding potential changes to future land uses, heights
and intensities, and development allocations along Cupertino's major mixed-use corridors. The
report pays particular attention to future repositioning or revitalization options for the Vallco
Shopping Mall and larger shopping district. Please refer to Attachment B for the Retail Strategy.
General Plan Amendment Policy Topics
The General Plan Amendment process is a focused update of the 2005 General Plan. While the
majority of the General Plan's content will remain the same, there are several major policy
topics that will be addressed through new or updated goals, policies, standards or programs.
The policy topics are broken down in the following three major categories:
■ Major Policy Conce�ts: Ideas that have emerged during the General Plan Amendment process
for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council.
■ Recent State Requirements: Recent State laws that need to be addressed in the amended
General Plan.
■ Clean-up Items: Updates and corrections that are proposed to be included in the amended
General Plan.
Each of the major policy concepts and several recent state requirements prompt questions for
the input from the P1aruling Commission and City Council.
Major Policy Topics
A. Draft 2040 Cornmunity Vision and Guiding Principles
The draft 2040 Community Vision is based on the current 2005 General Plari s vision, and has
been updated to reflect extensive community input on Cupertino's future conducted in 2013.
This includes ideas, thoughts and desires from residents, local business and property owners,
920
study area stakeholders, elected and appointed officials, and other members of the Cupertino
community.
The draft 2040 Guiding Principles provide additional detail about Cupertino's future. Similar to
the Community Vision, the Guiding Principles build from the current 2005 General Plan's
Guiding Principles and have been updated based on extensive community input conducted in
2013. The Guiding Principles were refined based on additional community input and reviewed
by the Planning Commission and City Council in February and March 2014, respectively. Please
refer to Attachment C for the Draft Community Vision and Guiding Principles.
CC/PC POLICY QUESTIONS:
1. Are there any topics that are missing from the Draft 2040 Community Vision that should be
added?
2. Are there any topics that are missing from the Draft 2040 Guiding Principles that should be
added?
Action:
Following comments by the Planning Commission and City Council, staff will present the Final
2040 Community Vision and Guiding Principles in the Draft General Plan.
B. Development Allocation Sustem Chan$es
The City controls growth through a Development Allocation system that establishes a City-
wide "pool" of available future residential, hotel, commercial, and office allocation which new
projects can draw from. The purpose of this system is to ensure that new development fulfills
community goals and priorities,while minimizing traffic and quality of life impacts.
Allocations are assigned to various geographic areas in the City to provide general guidance as
to where growth is expected to occur, to study environmental effects, and to plan the circulation
network and infrastructure needed to support growth.
The City currently allocates development potential on a case-by-case basis to private projects
based on the community benefits the project would provide. The current system intentionally
allows flexibility among the allocations assigned to each geographical area. Allocations may be
redistributed from one geographical area to another if necessary and, if significant
environmental impacts, including traffic impacts, can be mitigated.
For the purposes of allocation in the seven GPA study areas, it is assumed that development
allocations will be reserved for a period of up to five years depending on the Planning
Commission and Council's input. Allocations for the Vallco Shopping District will be
permanently set aside as to incentivize revitalization.
Relationshi� to tlie 2040 Guiding Principles:
This concept would apply to Guiding Principles #6, #7 and #11.
921
CC/PC POLICY QUESTION:
1. Should the existing Development Allocation policy be kept flexible or should it be updated
to require additional review to move allocations between different geographic areas?
Action:
Any changes to this policy would be addressed through revisions to existing policies in the
Land Use/Community Design Element.
C. Communit�Benefits Program
During the GPA process, workshop participants have suggested that in order to build taller
than the maximum allowed heights, new development in the major mixed-use corridors should
provide a retail component and/or direct benefits for the City and the community. These
benefits would include items that have been discussed by the community as being needed or
desirable in Cupertino. The rationale for this approach is to ensure that new, more intensive
development directly benefits the broader Cupertino community, beyond just economic or
fiscal or project benefits.
Under the Community Benefits Program discussed in Alternatives B and C, the Planning
Commission and City Council would have discretionary approval to allow additional height
under two "tiers." Tier 1 projects would include a retail component for a moderate height
increase. Tier 2 projects would include both a retail component and a community benefit for
greater height increases. The specific increases by geographical area are shown on the Concept
Alternative diagrams for B and C in Attachment A. Community benefits would have to be
above and beyond what is required for projects that build within the standard height limits.
The initial list of potential community benefit categories includes:
■ Affordable Housing:
o Provision of housing within a project above and beyond BMR requirements
o Provision of land to build an affordable housing project
o Provision of funding to build an affordable housing project
■ Arts and Cultural Facility
■ Community Facilities:
o Senior center
o Childcare center
o Teen/youth facility
■ Conference Space
■ Museum
■ Parks and Open Space (accessible to the public):
o Contribution towards parkland
o Provide park/open space in a project
o Rooftop parks/open space
922
■ Schools:
o Funding for operations or facilities
o Providing facilities in a project
o Partnerships for projects
o Teacher housing
■ Tax Revenue Generators
o Retail
■ Transportation Improvements:
o Bike and pedestrian trails
o Transit amenities
o Contribution towards transit
o Community shuttles (to move people around to key commercial centers)
Ultimately, the specific list of community benefits would be included in the General Plan, and
potentially, in applicable Specific and Master Plans, and the City's Municipal Code. Timing and
fiznding of the various projects and criteria would be included in project-specific conditions of
approval and/or Development Agreement.
Relationship to the 2040 Guiding Principles:
This concept specifically implements Guiding Principles#5, #6, #7, #9, #10 and #11.
CC/PC POLICY QUESTIONS:
1. Should a comprehensive Community Benefits program be developed and included in the
amended General Plan?
2. What should the list of Community Benefits include?
3. Should there be the program have two tiers for height allocation, or should the program just
focus on community benefits from the approved list?
4. If two tiers are acceptable,what types of projects would be considered "retail?"
Action:
This change would be addressed through revised policies in the Land Use/Community Design
Element and Circulation Element.
D. Healtli�Communitu Sti�ategies
A healthy community promotes a positive physical, social and economic environment that
supports the well-being of its residents, workers and visitors. Healthy communities are places
that encourage healthy eating and physical activity. A typical healthy community strategy for a
general plan includes components such as:
■ Walkable and bikeable communities with "complete streets" designed for all modes of
transport, as well as dedicated trails
■ Transportation options and access to public transit
■ Community focal points, a sense of place
923
■ Parks, open space,public spaces, and trails
■ Access to nutritious food
■ Recreation,nutrition, and education programs
■ Adequate housing including mixed use neighborhoods and housing choices to
accommodate different life stages
■ Healthy schools with healthy nutrition and physical activity policies and practices
■ Access to appropriate health care
■ Worksite wellness initiatives
Relationslzip to tlze 2040 Guiding Principles:
T'his concept specifically implements Guiding Principles #1 through#10.
Community Input:
There was strong community workshop support for improved access to open space and
walkable/bikeable areas in Cupertino.
CC/PC POLICY QUESTION:
1. Should the City incorporate Healthy Community strategies and policies throughout the
amended General Plan?
Action:
This change would be addressed through new policies and/or programs in the Land Use and
Community Design Element, Circulation Element, and the Health and Safety Element.
E. Tecllnology Infrastructure and Access
Efficient and accessible technology is critical to improving the quality of life of residents and
ensuring local businesses have the infrastructure necessary to be competitive in a global
economy. While most technology-related infrastructure is privately financed and constructed
(e.g., telecommunications, fiber optics, WiFi), the City has the ability to work with the private
sector to expand access to technology infrastructure throughout the Cupertino. The City can
help identify technology deficiencies, coordinate public and private entities to expand
infrastructure, and ensure that there is adequate access for all residents, workers and visitors.
Relationship to the 2040 Guiding Principles:
This concept specifically implements Guiding Principles #1, #9 and #12.
Community Input:
Improved technology infrastructure was a common theme at the workshops.
CC/PC POLICY QUESTION
1. Should the City develop policies to expand technology infrastructure and access throughout
Cupertino?
924
Action:
This concept would be addressed through new policies and/or programs in the Land Use and
Community Design Element, and Health and Safety Element.
Recent State Requirements
In addition to major policy concepts, there have also been recent changes to State law that affect
the legal and content requirements of a general plan. While the City has flexibility on how to
meet these requirements, the final General Plan Amendment document will need to adequately
address recent State laws and regulations. The following is a summary of these requirements.
A. Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Assembly Bill 32 (2008) requires the California Air Resources Board to adopt regulations that
achieve 1990 greenhouse gas levels by 2020. To achieve these statewide emissions reductions
targets, CEQA Guideline Amendments (SB97), require agencies to determine, consider, and
mitigate project greenhouse gas emissions impacts. To simplify this process for local
governments, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District CEQA Guidelines outlines steps
to develop a qualified-greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategy or climate action plan in
accordance with OPR Guidance, which sets forth a process for tiering and streamlining the
analysis of project-related greenhouse gas emissions:
To achieve these requirements, the City must demonstrate how it will achieve greenhouse gas
reduction standards through land use decisions, including the general plan. The law also
includes Smart Growth Principles that should be included within the amended General Plan as
a major strategy for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Some recommended principles include
encouraging mixed-use and transit-oriented development, expanding pedestrian and bicycle
corridors, creating a job/housing balance, establishing incentives for developments that have
flexible development standards and shared parking arrangements, creating density bonuses for
affordable housing and live/work developments, and reducing vehicle trips through land use
and urban design.
Relationsliip to tlze 2040 Guiding Principles:
This requirement relates to Guiding Principles #3, #4 and #10.
Community Input:
Improved air quality and reduction of traffic congestion was a common theme at community
workshops.
Action:
These requirements will be addressed in the Climate Action Plan (CAP) being developed
concurrently with the GPA process, but CAP's are not required by State law. The Climate
Action Plan will include a detailed strategy and policy framework to show how the City will
meet local, regional and State greenhouse gas reduction and sustainability targets and achieve
925
emissions reductions that will arise from the GPA. This Climate Action Plan, once adopted
following certification of an EIR, may be used in the cumulative impact analysis of later
projects. The General Plan will include a reference to the Climate Action Plan for consistency
and to realize the emissions reductions mitigations established by the Climate Action Plan.
Also, the General Plan EIR will include an inventory and analysis of greenhouse gas emissions
and reduction strategies.
B. Sustainable Communities Strategies
Senate Bill 375 (2008) is the primary implementation tool of AB 32. The law requires regional
agencies (MPOs) to demonstrate how regional land use, housing, and transportation planning
decisions will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. To do this, the law requires all MPOs to update
their Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs) and prepare Regional Housing Needs Allocations
(RHNA) that result in development patterns and supporting transportation networks which
reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks. It also requires MPOs to prepare
land use and transportation planning strategies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which
are to be incorporated as an additional element of its RTP.
A major focus of this law is to achieve regional sustainability. As a major implementation piece,
the law requires regional agencies to prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) in
conjunction with Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). ABAG and MTC recently developed the
regional SCS for the Bay Area, known as the One Bay Area Plan. The SCS will effectively act as
a blueprint for future regional land use and transportation decisions. It will identify the general
location of uses, residential densities and building intensities within the region. It will also
describe how the development pattern and transportation network can work together to
feasibly reduce greenhouse gas emissions consistent with the reduction targets allocated by
State.
Having the General Plan consistent with the SCS will also allow the City to streamline the
environmental review of certain future projects, so long as they are consistent with the SCS.
This can be a large incentive for the development community, and can be leveraged by the City
to gain support for sustainable growth policies and programs.
Relationsllip to tJie 2040 Guiding Principles:
This requirement relates to Guiding Principles #1 through #6, #9 and #10.
Community Input:
Varied support was received at community workshops for sustainable development and
locations of increased growth.
Action:
The Concept Alternatives prepared during the GPA process allocate future residential and
employment growth consistent with the One Bay Area Plan. The forecast estimates in the One
Bay Area Plan form the basis of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for
jurisdictions in the Bay Area. The residential allocations in the Concept Alternatives exceed the
926
RHNA for Cupertino (1,064 units). The One Bay Area Plan identifies the Stevens Creek and De
Anza corridors as Priority Development Areas (PDAs) as potential areas where residential and
employment growth may occur because they are major transportation and transit corridors.
Alternatives B & C of the EIR anticipate that development in Cupertino will occur consistent
with the One Bay Area Plan.
In addition to land use and development allocation assumptions, the General Plan will also
address local, regional and State sustainability targets through new policies and/or programs in
the Land Use/Community Design Element, Circulation Element, Housing Element,
Environmental Resources/Sustainability Element, and Health and Safety Element.
C. Com�lete Streets
Assembly Bill 1358 (2008) requires local jurisdictions, upon any substantive revision to their
circulation element, to plan for a balanced multi-modal transportation network. This includes
meeting the needs of all users of streets, roads and highways, including motorists, pedestrians,
bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, seniors, movers of commercial goods and users of
public transportation. The City's General Plan will need to include policies related to complete
streets and identify specific areas for improvements in both standards and the Circulation
Diagram. These changes will result in not only a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, but
also promote a better quality of life for Cupertino residents, since they will have greater options
for how they move around the city.
There is flexibility on how the City addresses Complete Streets requirements. The following
comments raised during community workshops are potential policies that can be
included/expanded upon in the General Plan:
• Improve connections from neighborhoods to schools and community facilities (e.g., parks,
community centers,neighborhood shopping, etc).
• Retain and improve school and community facilities and neighborhood centers around
existing residential neighborhoods.
• Create more separated pathways to schools, not just sidewalks, to provide safe walking and
bike access from new developments.
• Develop bike and pedestrian paths on existing public easements for safe and easy access.
• Identify ways to retrofit and improve major streets for bicyclists and pedestrians.
Relationship to tlie 2040 Guiding Principles:
This requirement relates to Guiding Principles #1, #3 and #4.
Commua2ity Input:
Improved mobility from neighborhoods to schools, parks, and shopping for all users of the
street (including bicycle and pedestrian users) was a common theme raised by participants
during community workshops.
CGPC POLICY QUESTIONS:
927
1. Should the City create more detailed policies and programs related to the draft list included
above?
2. Are there other key projects or ideas the Planning Commission and City Council would like
staff to include in the draft General Plan?
Action:
This requirement will be addressed through new policies and/or programs in the Circulation
Element and Land Use/Community Design Element.
D. Level of Service (LOS) Changes
Senate Bill 743 (2013) creates a process to change the way that transportation impacts are
analyzed under CEQA. Specifically, the law requires the Governor's Office of Planning and
Research (OPR) to amend the CEQA Guidelines to provide an alternative to LOS for evaluating
transportation impacts. Particularly within areas served by transit, those alternative criteria
must "promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal
transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses." Measurements of transportation impacts
may include "vehicle miles traveled, vehicle miles traveled per capita, automobile trip
generation rates, or automobile trips generated." OPR also has discretion to develop alternative
criteria for areas that are not served by transit, if appropriate.
Once the CEQA Guidelines are amended to include those alternative criteria, auto delay, as
measured solely by LOS or similar measure of traffic capacity or congestion, will no longer be
considered a significant impact under CEQA. Transportation impacts related to air quality,
noise and safety must still be analyzed under CEQA where appropriate. The law also amended
congestion management laws to allow cities and counties to opt out of LOS standards within
certain infill areas.
Relationship to tlie 2040 Guiding Principles:
This requirement relates to Guiding Principles #3, #4 and #10.
CC/PC POLICY QUESTIONS:
1. Should the City continue to use a Level of Service (LOS) based system for determining
roadway functionality and for evaluating projects during CEQA review?
2. As part of SB 743, should additional factors be evaluated with LOS to determine roadway
functionality for all users, including bicycles, pedestrians, and transit? For example, a multi-
modal LOS is currently being developed by the VTA. Other cities in the Bay Area also
analyze trip generation in addition to LOS.
Community Input:
Traffic and congestion concerns were recurring themes at the community meetings.
928
Action:
This optional approach can be addressed through new policies and/or programs in the
Circulation Element.
E. Militaru Facilities
Senate Bill 1468 (2002) requires the general plan land use element to consider the impact of new
growth on military readiness activities. It also adds military installations to the list of locations
that counties and cities must include in their circulation elements, and prohibits conservation
elements from relying on military installations' habitat or conservation programs as mitigation
measures for endangered or threatened species.
Relationsliip to tl�e 2040 Guiding Principles:
This requirement relates to Guiding Principles #2 and #10.
Action:
This requirement will be addressed through new policies and/or programs in the Land
Use/Community Design Element, Circulation Element, and Environmental
Resources/Sustainability Element.
F. Urban Water Conservation
Senate Bill SB X7-X (2009) mandates water conservation targets and efficiency improvements for
urban water suppliers. The Statewide urban water reduction target is 10 percent by 2015 and 20
percent by 2020. The General Plan will need to include policy language addressing these
targets. In addition to mandating water conservation, this law also restricts communities from
planning future growth that it does not have the adequate water resources to support
Relationsllip to tlie 2040 Guiding Principles:
This requirement relates to Guiding Principles #10 and #11.
Community Input:
Ensuring that future growth is adequately served by water and other public infrastructure was
a common theme raised by participants during workshops and the scoping session.
Action:
This requirement will be addressed in the Climate Action Plan being developed concurrent with
the GPA process. The Climate Action Plan will include a detailed strategy and policy
framework to show how the City will meet local, regional and State water conservation and
water supply requirements.
G. Tribal Consultation
Senate Bill 18 (2004) requires cities and counties to consult with California Native American
tribes during the general plan update process for the purpose of protecting Traditional Tribal
929
Cultural Places. The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) maintains a list of
California Native American Tribes with whom local governments must consult.
Relationship to the 2040 Guiding Principles:
This requirement relates to Guiding Principle #8.
Action:
City staff and the project consultants will consult with local tribes as part of the General Plan
Amendment process.
H. Sea Level Rise
Executive Order S-13-08 (2008) directs State agencies to develop a climate adaptation strategy
and consider a range of sea-level rise scenarios for the years 2050 and 2100 in order to assess
project vulnerability and reduce expected risks, and increase resiliency to sea-level rise. The law
established the California Climate Action Team (CAT) to coordinate statewide efforts to reduce
emissions and adapt to climate change.
Relationsliip to tlie 2040 Guiding Princi�les:
This requirement relates to Guiding Principles #2 and #10.
Action:
This requirement will be addressed in the Climate Action Plan being developed concurrent with
the General Plan Amendment process. The Climate Action Plan will include a detailed strategy
and policy framework to show how the City will meet local, regional and State climate change
adaptation targets. The General Plan will include a reference to the Climate Action Plan for
consistency.
Clean-Up Items
City staff has identified several areas within the 2005 General Plan that are in need of updates,
corrections, or clarifications. The following is a summary of these refinements:
■ Updating/correcting land use designations for various properties, as well as maps and
tables
■ Updating the Historic Resource inventory
■ Including references to newly adopted or anticipated policies,programs, and plans, such as:
o Climate Action Plan
o Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
o Storm Drain Master Plan
o ADA Transition Plan
o Proper disposal of organic waste
o Cleaner outdoor areas
o Low Impact Development(LID) stormwater measures
o Drought-tolerant/native landscaping
930
o Extended producer responsibility
o Wireless Master Plan update
o Stevens Creek Corridor Master Plan
Public Noticin�and Outreach
The following outreach efforts have been undertaken on this project to date.
Postcards
A postcard was delivered in February 2014 to all postal addresses in the City to announce
upcoming dates on the GPA and Housing Element projects. T'he postcard also provides a brief
description of the two projects and identifies the project website where interested persons may
sign up for project updates and further notices.
A previous City-wide postcard was sent in July 2013 announcing Community-wide Workshop
#1 (discussed below).
Website
A website has been set up for the combined GPA and Housing Element projects at
www.cupertinogpa.org. All technical reports, notices, and other important information are
available at the website. Interested persons may also submit comments at the website.
Workslzops,Public Meetings, Com�nissior�/Committee Meetings, Stakeholder Meetings, Study
Sessions, and Scoping Session
■ Community-wide Workshop #1 (July 18, 2013) - On July 18, 2013, the City hosted a community-
wide workshop to kick off the GPA project. As discussed above, a City-wide postcard was
sent to all City addresses, and the City's website and project website also announced the
workshop. In addition,e-mails were sent to all stakeholders and other interested parties.
■ Community-wide Workshop #2 (Octo�er 23, 2013) - On October 23, 2013, the City held a second
Community-wide Workshop to discuss community ideas for future uses, design and
mobility concepts along major mixed-use corridors (Homestead,De Anza,Wolfe, and Stevens
Creek) and within the Vallco Shopping District. E-mails were sent to all study area
stakeholders, Community-wide Workshop #1 participants, and other interested parties. The
City's website and project website also announced the workshop.
■ Otlier Public Meetings — The City also held the following additional meetings which covered
essentially the same concepts from Community-wide Workshop #2:
o Follow-up meeting for interested Cupertino residents on December 5, 2013
o Meeting with the Chamber of Commerce on January 29,2014
o Annual meeting of the Cupertino Neighborhood Block Leaders on January 29, 2014.
■ Commission and Committee Meetings —City staff introduced the GPA project before certain City
Conzmissions and the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce's Legislative Action Committee
(LAC) in order to expand awareness of the project, receive feedback, and answer questions.
Staff presented the project at the:
931
o October 2, 2013 Teen Commission meeting;
o December 6, 2013 and February 7, 2014 Legislative Action Committee meetings; and
o January 15, 2014 Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission meeting
■ Stakeholder Meetings — Meetings with key neighborhood representatives, organizations
(including the Chamber of Commerce and VTA), property owners in the study areas, etc.
were held from May 2013 through February 2014.
■ Planning Commission Study Session and Open House (February 19, 2014) — See background
section. As discussed above, a City-wide postcard was sent to all City addresses, and the
City's website and project website also announced the study session and open house. In
addition, e-mails were sent to all stakeholders, past workshop participants, and other
interested parties.
■ City Council Study Session (March 4, 2014) — See background section. As discussed above, a
City-wide postcard was sent to all City addresses, and the City's website and project website
also announced the study session. In addition, e-mails were sent to all stakeholders, past
workshop and study session participants, and other interested parties.
■ Notice of Preparation (NOP)—On March 5, 2014, the City posted a notice of preparation (NOP)
on the project website and sent it to public agencies and interested organizations to solicit
comments on the scope and content of the EIR. The last day for comments is April 7,2014.
■ EIR Scoping Session — On March 11, 2014, the City held a scoping meeting to discuss the
environmental review of the combined General Plan Amendment and Housing Element
update project. The meeting provided an opportunity for the community to comment on the
scope and content of the EIR. As discussed above, a City-wide postcard was sent to all City
addresses, and the City's website and project website also announced the scoping meeting. In
addition, e-mails were sent to all stakeholders, past workshop and study session participants,
and other interested parties.
The following table summarizes the noticing for the Apri11, 2014 joint study session:
.�� � � ��� � v � � � ��F � ��.:��� � � �
�y� �{� p, ^`� ' 'f' ��w.2�5�h ��F�.�.�: �6�' �' � � ` r� �
V�l.i�� ": w.,,. �.:.:... :� � �., �.S�.r..�f� .a�,..:��. ,- ����L4��R� 9�' �.P���`�'- @`a E 4 �2 d�: �'
■ Email sent to all study area ■ Posted on the City's official notice bulletin
stakeholders, prior workshop board (one week prior to t12e study session)
participants, and interested parties ■ Posted on the City of Cupertino's Web site
signed up through the project website (one week prior to tlie study session)
■ Citywide postcard sent to all addresses ■ Posted on the project Website (one week�1•ior
in the City to study session)
Next Steps
The goal for this study session is for the Council to collect public input and provide comments
on the major policy concepts. These comments will be used to develop policies and programs in
the Draft General Plan, which is anticipated to be released for public review in Summer 2014,
around the same time as the Draft EIR. An open house will be held in Summer 2014 when the
Draft General Plan is available. The Planning Commission and City Council is expected to
formally review the Draft General Plan Amendment in Fall 2014.
932
Pre�ared b� George Schroeder, Associate Planner
MIG, Consultant to the City of Cupertino
Reviewed bv: Gary Chao, Assistant Director of Community Development and
Aarti Shrivastava, Director of Community Development
A��roved for Submission bv David Brandt, City Manager
Attachments:
A. Revised Concept Alternative Diagrams
B. Retail Strategy
C. Draft 2040 Community Vision and Guiding Principles (excerpt from Concept
Alternatives Report)
933