Loading...
CC 07-02-2024 Item No. 9 General Plan Amendment_Written CommunicationsWritten Communications CC 7-02-2024 Item No. 9 Repeal of GPA Authorization Process From:Peggy Griffin To:City Council; Benjamin Fu; Pamela Wu Cc:City Clerk Subject:2024-07-02 City Council Meeting Agenda ITEM 9-DO NOT Repeal GPA Process Date:Monday, July 1, 2024 2:29:42 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 INCLUDE THIS EMAIL AS PART OF WRITTEN COMMUNICATION FOR THE ABOVE MEETING AGENDA ITEM. Dear Mayor Mohan and City Council, I urge you to leave this GPA process in place but correct the issues listed in the Staff Report. The reason we have this process is that projects would appear before the Planning Commission and City Council without ANY public review! By the time the public was made aware of the projects, they were a “done deal”. There was no negotiation. There were no changes. Huge amounts of staff time and developer costs for designs and detailed plans would be presented. There was no input as to whether the amendment to our GP was even acceptable! Everything was left up to behind-the-scenes lobbying and deals that had no transparency and no public input. The Staff Report lists 4 reasons it is recommending rescinding the GPA approval process. #1-Confusion regarding whether a GPA authorization approval means the project has been approved…Over and over we have heard that it does NOT mean the project has been approved, just that it can continue with the process and submit their plans. SOLUTION…make it clearer! Sunnyvale’s flowchart says just that! #2-It’s created an additional process increasing project review time…Duh, the applicant is asking to make a change to our General Plan! It SHOULD require additional review! In the case that the GPA application is not acceptable to the City Council, then it has SAVED process and review time both for the staff and the applicant! #3-Community Benefits are inconsistent and don’t provide the intended benefits…Easy, don’t have them! When community benefits were first brought up, the public was outraged and did not want them yet the crept in anyway. The project should stand on its own and be a benefit to the community as it is presented. Eliminate the community benefits. Many of these “deals” have not come to fruition or were abused. Eliminate them! Problem solved. #4-Project modification after approval triggered re-authorization. It should! Sunnyvale has a 2-year waiting period before the project can be re-submitted. That would be a good incentive to submit an accurate project in the first place. Removing this procedure and process goes back to the back room deals and no public input. All decisions would be left up to staff with no input from the public until it has already been decided. Don’t undo this procedure and process. Tighten it up! Sincerely, Peggy Griffin From:Jennifer Griffin To:City Council; City Clerk Cc:grenna5000@yahoo.com Subject:General Plan Amendment Procedure in City Date:Thursday, June 27, 2024 4:48:33 AM 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: I was shocked to see Agenda Item 9 from the 4/2/24 City Council Meeting which is Suggesting changing the Cupertino General Plan Amendment Procedure. This has nothing To do with the Housing Element. The state and HCD do not dictate how Cupertino handles It's General Plan Amendments. It is even all the more concerning since we are conducting This City Council Meeting two days before the Fourth of July holiday and 248 years Since the beginning of the Revolutionary War. Item 8 of this City Council meeting is already inflammatory enough with the proposed Rezoning of most of the city by a fraudulent Housing Element with a bunch of illegal, scandalous Missing Middle Dogma dumped into it. What have the bad RHNA numbers brought to This city? Apparently all of this. And a complete rebuild of the city's General Plan Amendment to boot. A lot of us spent our precious time in 2015 going to city meetings. So someone now Says it was wasted time? I don't think it was wasted time and we should not be trying To rebuild the city's General Plan Amendment Process in one night, especially when The Housing Element Rezoning is being dumped into the previous agenda item. The City Rezoning by the Scandal Prone Statewide Sixth Cycle Housing Element should at least take more than one night. Victory by HCD should not be made that easy. I still have tons of questions for the Rezoning which will be going through an audit in The fall. Does HCD even care? What happens on July 2 determines how I will vote in The upcoming City Election in November. It determines who I vote for governor and Other state level elections and who I vote for president even one day. With the toil and trauma of 1776, I have my right to vote and not even HCD can take that Away from me. Sincerely, Jennifer Griffin Bay Pacific Properties, LLC Mailing: Post Office Box 1652, Martinez CA 94553-0652 Overnight Delivery: 41 Shrewsbury Way, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523-2007 Tel. +1 925 550 8082, Facsimile +1 925 935 8222 Sent Via Email July 1, 2024 Mayor Mohan & Members of the City Council: I am writing to you concerning the Regular Meeting, Action Item 9 “Repeal of existing General Plan Amendment (GPA) Authorization procedure and process” scheduled for the Council Meeting at 6:45 PM on July 2, 2024. While I plan to speak during the public hearing portion of the Agenda Item, I wanted to summarize my thoughts for your consideration. I represent the owners of the properties located at 10145 North DeAnza Boulevard and 10118 - 10122 Bandley Drive, both located in the City of Cupertino. We support the staff’s recommendation to return the GPA process to the protocol that was in place before Resolution 15-078. The proposed process will 1) encourage, rather than discourage GPA amendments that could result in more housing for the community. As a city that just endured the long and arduous process of revising the General Plan and Housing Element, each and every unit added to t he community helps to meet the overall housing goals for the community. The current process adds an additional step. It would appear to provide a false hope to an applicant if successful with the “GPA Authorization” hearing when in reality it just signals the start of assembling a credible application that meets the needs of the City and provides community benefits. The elimination of the GPA Authorization step will free up both staff and Council’s time to focus on more important aspects of managing the City while not eliminating any opportunity for stakeholder input and a rigorous review from both the Planning Commission and City Council. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Greg Endom 925-550-8082