02a. General Plan Amendments~G ~' ~ i o ~ ~`1
Projections 2009 Frequently Asked Questions
What is Projections?
As a regional land use planning agency, ABACI is responsible for describing existing
conditions, forecasting changes to the populati~~n and economy, and assisting local
governments to identify policies that address a changing environment. Projections is ABAG's
biennial forecast of population, housing, jobs, ;end income for the nine-county 101-city
region. Since 2003 ABAG has included a~ set of policy assumptions in its models that assign
more growth to azeas azound transit. This is in recognition of evolving government polices
and market conditions that promote growth in chose azeas.
While many local plans in the Bay Area (general and specific) extend to 2015 or 2020,
ABAG's Projections go out to 2035. ABAG anticipates that most of the population growth to
the Bay Area will occur beyond the scope of local plans now in place. This assumes that
local plans will need to be updated to provide i~or growth.
Why does ABAG produce forecasts?
The primary reason that ABAG produces forecasts is so that other regional agencies,
including the Metropolitan Transportation Conunission (MTC) and the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD) can use the forecast in their modeling and planning work.
Projections is also widely used by local land-u;~e planning agencies to plan for future change.
By 2035, an additional 2 million people and 1.'B million jobs will be in the Bay Area. If we
are to house all our workers and newly formed households within this region, then the Bay
Area will need neazly 700,000 new housing units. If housing for these workers and new
families is not produced in the region, our current pattern of commuting to the region for jobs
-with its bi-products of increased traffic, increased greenhouse gas emissions, and increased
traffic -will became more entrenched. Not planning for housing will not stop population
growth and in-migration.
How accurate are these forecasts?
Local governments often ask about the accuracy of ABAG's forecast as compared to the state
forecasts and other sources like the U.S. Census or the California Department of Finance.
Past ABAG forecasts have typically been within 5 percent of actual population, household
and job estimates, at the county level. Conveying to local governments our track record on
the accuracy of the regional land-use forecast, in the short-term, may be helpful. However,
policy-based projections in the long-term are nitended to encourage change to reach specific
growth policies, which does not lend to measw-ing accuracy of the forecast but does lend to
determining attainment of regional growth policies. ,.
My city is built out: How can we plan for growth?
Aerial photographs of the Bay Area show San Francisco to have been lazgely "built out" in
the early 1900s before the earthquake. However, the city looked nothing like it looks today.
Things change: an army base closes, a warehouse burns down, a shopping mall becomes
unprofitable. Jurisdictions update their general and specific plans. Within the next decade,
every jurisdiction in the Bay Area will see new housing added. With-forethought and good
planning, new housing and businesses can be added to enhance our communities.
How does my local plan fit into the regional forecast?
In the summer of 2006, ABAG contacted every• city and county in the region to acquire the
current version of their General Plan and other available planning documents. Most of these
plans extend to 2015 or 2020. So the short term forecasts rely heavily on the local plans. As
the forecasts move into the long term, policy b~~sed assumptions come into greater play.
ABAG assumes that cities will update their playas to provide for more growth.
How are economic conditions factored into ABAG's model?
Projections is a long range forecast to year 203:1. Current economic conditions have long
term consequences. But current difficulties sho~ildn't be extrapolated 25-30 years in the
future. Our models don't attempt to look at eco:aomic cycles, but instead show a smooth
trend.
What makes Projections 2009 so forward tipinking?
ABAG has developed multiple land use scenarios to test how well the regional and local land
use policies will meet the challenges posed by €;rowth over the next 30 yeazs. Assuming that
. the general and specific plans currently in place will. be updated or replaced in the next 10 to
20 years, and that the updates will provide for growth, ABAG has developed a number of
scenarios to measure our success in meeting a variety of bench-marks such as:
• Reduce person hours of delay by 20 per~;ent below today's levels by 2035
• Reduce CO2 emissions by 40 percent be;low 19901evels by 2035
• Reduce PM2.5 emissions by 10 percent below today's levels by 2035
• Reduce emissions of coazser particulate mater (PM10) by 45 percent under today's
levels by 2035
~ Reduce VMT per capita by 10 percent c~mpazed to today by 2035
• Limit regional greenfield development t~~ 900 acres per year
• Increase non-automobile dependent acce;ss to jobs and essential services by 20
percent compared to today by 2035
These targets are not mandates; rather, they wil]. provide a measuring stick to see how well
we are achieving regional transportation, equity, and environmental objectives. These targets
and the scenarios developed by ABAG have been brought before policy-makers at both Joint
Policy Committee and ABAG's Executive Boaz~i.
Why is ABAG using targets instead of just ei base case forecast?
We felt that it was important to describe policy assumptions in comparison to specific goals.
Past efforts at policy assumptions have been too general, and have not helped the discussion
with Local jurisdictions or other stakeholders. In its current Regional Transportation Plan, the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC;) adopted targets that aze consistent with
those used by ABAG. As the agencies have worked to improve the coordination of their
work, we felt it was appropriate to consider land. use in the same way that MTC has been
considering transportation.
2
The State of California has recently adopted re;; onal planning legislation in the form of SB
375. It will require all of the regions in the state to consider land use and transportation plans
in a coordinated way. In addition to what we ai~e currently doing in the Bay Area, SB 375
directs the Air Resources Board to adopt regional tazgets for greenhouse gas emissions.
How does the Projections forecast relate to Priority Development Areas?
The regional agencies are working with local jtuisdictions to identify Priority Development
Areas (PDAs), which aze places near transit where local communities want to focus growth.
These areas are eligible for financial incentives and support for development in these areas.
The projections alternatives both emphasize gr~~wth near transit, areas that overlap with the
PDAs. The Focused Future alternative, which I-rovides a more aggressive distribution of
growth near transit, may not be consistent with local estimates of growth in the PDAs. The
alternatives are meant to encourage discussion about land use patterns and the need to meet
regional goals. Neither is a final forecast.
Isn't it inappropriate to focus growth in are~~s that have problems with schools or
crime or infrastructure?
Growth in any azea will cause some challenges. But it can also mean additional tax base, new
households-that can contribute to a community and changes to the built environment that
might help address some of these issues.
We should also recognize that there is 20-25 ye;azs to try and address regional and local
concerns. Growth and the opportunities to solve problems, occur over the entire period. We
need to try and make improvements for existing; communities, and for people moving to
these azeas.
3
i , ~ t , ,.~t~F"f $ tt~ ~,,~dr~i=~~ 's.~~~ ~€;;i'
„~ ,t_«: .~. :ff, c' t- .a. fr JE 1 5i
.~ a.. _~,~ rt iia ft ~., '~ ~ ;x {`~' +: ~ ~t ,~ ~ ,; ~ , .t.
~ ~~~4} 3. ~~%~ ~~f~~a.i. ,~r. },t3;°;7~a~. ,YP
~~ ~;- ;~1 ~ ! a ~' i~'
~ #~ r~,_.ct ~ r2QQQ_~:' ;'i
~a. t.. { 20~15~ ~ ~~}2U1D~f`
s ~r ~~~~~ZQ15'xr f=!~Q20 `2Q25 ~' '2030 ~_'• G~:i3~203~_~,'' ~
Households 18,990 19,530 20,120 20,350 20,680 21,040 21,420 21,800
HH - Cupertino's share of County 3.36% 3.28% 3.28% 3.11% 2.97% 2.84% 2.73% 2.63%
HH - Cupertino's share of Region 0.77% 0.76% 0.75% 0.73% 0.71% 0.69% 0.68% 0.66%
Jobs 39,280 31,260 32,010 32,790 33,590 34,520 36,150 37,890
J - Cupertino's share of County 3.76% 3.58% 3.53% 3.34% 3.13% 2.93% 2.80°° 1.68%
J - Cupertino's share of Region 1.05% 0.91% 0.92°° 0.88% 0.83% 0.79% 0.76% 0.74%
Population 52,970 54,300 56,000 56,363 57,200 57,600 58,000 58,500
Pop - Cupertino's share of County 3.15% 3.08% 3.07% 2.90% 2.77% 2.64% 2.51% 2.41%
Pop - Cupertino's shore of Region 0.78% 0.77% 0.76% 0.73% 0.71% 0.69% 0.67% 0.64%
~ +j; ~S 'a ~ , F - ' t'~ ;; ',st .i~,.
.. .. .._, -.__ fir _ii?.'LY~ P!#[
- .. ,a.... , ~
.t-..._ ._ ....,....a. , x s
._.... ... n......a..._ $~$d~§'~.` ~ ~,a' ~~
...._._. .r ¢1 ,r ~ ;~ 4,,: a rite
............._.. _ _ ._. .. _.... _...._._..
Households 565,863 595,700 614,000 653,803 696,533 739,818 785,092 827,330
Jobs 1,044,130 872,860 906,270 981,230 1,071,980 1,177,520 1,292,490 1,412,620
Population 1,682,585 1,763,000 1,822,000 1,945,300 2,063,100 2,185,800 2,310,800 2,431,400
,aa .~? '",f,~~ r ~F ,~.i„a._ `~:s, ! ',,~; ~ r. t :s: a , } .~~' f~+;~ `if+}l~l:r ~...
r . G J CTIO~I
~ ~ 9~r;' io 't~;~ ;~ s' s~~,.;'`'E .~°, ~ ;.~~'; ? ':6 . r{
Households 2,466,020 2,583,080 2,667,340 2,784,686 2,911,004 3,039,911 3,171,945 3,302,780
Jobs 3,753,460 3,449,740 3,475,840 3,734,590 4,040,690 4,379,900 4,738,730 5,107,390
Population 6,783,762 7,096,500 7,341,700 7,677,500 8,018,000 8,364,900 8,719,300 9,073,700
Comparison Projections 2007 and 2009 1 6/4/2009
Second Units
Second dwelling units (also lrnown as accessory dwelling units or granny flats) are attached or
detached, self-contained units on asingle-family residential lot. These units are o8en more
affordable due to their smaller size. The City of Cupertino allows for second units in the R-1,
RHS, A, and A-1 zoning districts.
In addition to identifying vacant or underutilized land, the City can address a portion of its RHNA
requirement through the provision of second units. ]:n order to include second units as part of the
City's overall strategy to accommodate its regional Housing need, the housing element must
include an estimate of the potential number of second units to be developed in the planning period
based on an analysis that considers the following factors:
1. the number of second units developed in the prior planning period;
2. community need for these types of housing emits,
3. the resources and/or incentives available that will encourage the development of second-
units; and
4. other relevant factors as determined by HCL-.
The City's projection of second units that will be co~mted towards its RHNA must be based on
realistic capacity and development trends of second units in the previous planning period.
Furthermore, the housing element must describe and analyze the factors that could affect second
unit development, including the development standards established by the City's Second Dwelling
Unit Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 19.84).
The housing element should also include an analysis of the anticipated affordability of
second units. The affordability levels of second units can be determined by conducting a
rent survey of existing second units or estimating the rent of a second unit using the
average rent per square foot for comparable properties and the anticipated size of the
second unit. BAE conducted an analysis to estimate the monthly rent. Assuming the
average rent/sq. ft. of $2.19 and the maximum seize of second units of 640 sq. ft., the
estimated monthly rent would be approximately $1,400. This exceeds the maximum
affordable monthly rent for avery-low income, :Four-person household of $1,170.
The only alternative to count the units as affordable would be to conduct a survey of the
existing units. However, we would not anticipal;e a high return of the surveys since the
City would be asking for the tenant to provide tl-ieir income levels. Furthermore, sites need
to be documented by APN for to be listed on the inventory of sites. We would have to
provide single family property APNs where we think development of a second unit would
occur.
Sources:
State of California, Department of Housing and Community Development. "Second Units"
http://www.hcd.ca.g'ov/hpd/housing~element2/SIA~~econdunits.oho
Substantial Rehabilitation, Conver:~ion or Preservation of
Affordable Housing
HCD does not allow cities to count units in existing affordable housing developments towards its
RHNA for very low- and low-income households. However, under limited circumstances, the City
of Cupertino can meet up to 25 percent of its RHNA by making existing units affordable through
rehabilitation, conversion, or preservation (Government Code Section 65583(c)(1)).
In order to meet the alternative sites requirements through rehabilitation, conversion, or
preservation, the City's housing element must include a program action that requires it to provide
"committed assistance" within the first two years of the planning period. "Committed assistance"
refers to a legally enforceable agreement for the Cit}~ to provide the assistance necessary to make
identified units affordable and that the units are made available for occupancy within two years of
the execution of the agreement.
The complete checklist of requirements necessary to count rehabilitated, converted, or preserved
units toward the City's RHNA is attached. In additi~~n, the following discussion summarizes the
requirements for rehabilitation, conservation, and preservation of affordable housing.
Substantially Rehabilitated
Substantially rehabilitated units that aze counted towards the City's RHNA must result in a net
increase in the affordable housing stock for very low-income and low-income households and meet
the following requirements:
• Units must be at imminent risk of loss to the housing stock.
• The City must commit to providing displaced tenants who are not otherwise eligible for
relocation assistance under State law, with assistance, including a minimum of four months
of rent and moving expenses and comparable replacement housing.
• Occupants temporarily or permanently displaced must be provided with relocation
assistance and the City must require that an}~ displaced occupant will have the right to
reoccupy the rehabilitated units.
• Rehabilitated units must have long-term affordability requirements of at least 20 yeazs or
any other term required by federal or State funding laws.
Converted
Non-affordable units in rental complexes of 4 or more units that are converted to affordable by
acquisition or the purchase of affordability covenants and restrictions may be counted towards the
City of Cupertino's RHNA. Converted units may not be acquired through eminent domain and
must result in a net increase in housing stock afford~~ble to low- and very low-income households.
2
In addition, converted units must meet the following requirements:
• May not be currently occupied by low- or very low-income households.
• Be in decent, safe, and sanitary condition when occupied.
• Have long term affordability covenants of at least 55 years.
Maitri, a local nonprofit organization, has received $500,000 in CDBG funding from the City of
Cupertino to purchase afour-plex at 19489 Rosemazie Place for transitional housing for South
Asian victims of domestic violence. The property coin accommodate 16 people in the nine-
bedroom four-plex. The City of Cupertino may be able to count the four units in the Maitri
Transitional Housing project towards its RHNA for eery low- or low-income households.
Preserved
The City of Cupertino may receive credit towazd its RHNA for units to be preserved at affordable
housing costs to lower-income households by the acquisition of the units or the purchase of
affordability covenants for the units. Preserved unit:; must meet the following requirements:
• Be located within an assisted housing development.
• Have new long-term affordability covenants and restrictions of at least 40 years.
• Have received government assistance under specified programs.
• Be expected to convert to non low-income uses.
• Be in decent, safe, and sanitary condition.
There is one affordable housing development in the ~~ity of Cupertino that is at risk of converting
to non low-income uses. However, the 27 unit aparbnent complex, LeBeaulieu Apartments, has
affordability requirements that aze not set to expire unti12015, one yeaz after the end of the current
planning period which runs from 2007 to 2014.
Sources:
State of California, Department of Housing and Community Development. "Adequate Sites
Alternative."
http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/housing element2/SIA adegsites.phn
3
APN Ske Address
Park North
Existlng Uae (b)
wrowea unaer rcezonrng wrnon naewa r
ax. ea s e
Size Density Max. Yield Yield General PWn
(Acres) (DUA) (Units) (Units) (a) Rezoning Amendment Generel PWn land Use
Overay Zoning
316 06 050 - 051 19320 Pruneridge Ave Morley Bros. I Industrial 8.5 25 212 180 No No Indusbial /Residential P(Res)
Existing Aparment Complexes
Allowed Under Rezoning Action Needed4
Size Max. Max. Yield Existing Realistle Yield General PWn
APN Sita Address Existlng Uae (Acres) Density (Units) Units Delta (Units) (a) Rezoning Amendment General Plan Land Use
326 27 036-037 10100 Mary Avenue Glenbrook Apartments 31.34 20 626 517 109 92 No No MediumMigh 10.20 d.u./acre
326 09 040, 041, 053, 054, 064 20875 Valley Green Dr. The Villages at Cupertino 27.1 20 542 488 74 62 No No MediumMigh 10.20 d.u./acre
Subtotal Units 183 154
Sites which may not meet HGD Requirements
Allowed Under Rezoning Aetlon Needed?
ax. ea rstrc
Size Density Max. Yield Yield General Plan
APN
Ske Address
Existlng Use (b) (Acres) (DUA) (Units) (Unita) (a) Rezoning Amendment General Plan Land Use Overlay Zoning
Homestaad
326 10 051 20680 Homestead Road Carl's Jr. 0.56 35 19 16 Yes No CommeroiayResidential P(CG)
326 10 060 20840 Homestead Road Michael's 9.31 35 325 276 Yes Na CommeroiayResidential P(CG)
326 10 063 20580 Homestead Road PW Supermarket 5.20 35 182 154 Yes Ne CommerciayResidential P(CG)
Subtotal Units 526 446
Valico Park NoRh
316 07 044 19490 Homestead Rd HP Main Campus 92.43 25 2310 1963 Yes No IndusVial /Residential PIMP)
316 07 045 19055 Pruneridge Ave HP Main Campus 1.70 25 42 35 Yes No Industrial /Residential PIMP)
316 07 046 19111 Pruneridge Ave HP Main Campus 4.11 25 102 86 Yes No Industrial /Residential PIMP)
318 09 019 10670 N Tantau Ave Industial Miscellaneous 0.93 25 23 7 9 Yes No Industrial /Residential PIMP)
318 09 027 No Situs Address Industrial Miscellaneous 0.80 25 20 17 Yes No IndusVial /Residential PIMP)
316 09 028 10710 N. Tantau Ave Industrial Miscellaneous 1.85 25 46 39 Yes No Industrial /Residential PIMP)
:itti uy uz9 10900 N. Tantau Ave New office building 6.60 25 165 140 Yes No Indusbial ! Residental PIMP)
316 09 030 18920 Forge Dr Industrial Miscellaneous 5.80 25 145 123 Yes Nc Industrial /Residential PIMP)
318 09 036 19000 Homestead Rd Kaiser/Medicel 6.60 25 165 140 Yes No Industrial /Residential PIMP)
316 09 037 16880 Homestead Industrial Miscellaneous 5.50 25 137 116 Yes No Industrial /Residential PIMP)
316 18 025 10300 N. Tantau Ave Apple bldg./former Kevin Wu 4.70 25 117 99 Yes No Industrial /Residential PIMP)
318 18027 10400 N. Tantau Ave Apple bldg./former Kevin Wu 4.43 25 110 93 Yes No IndusVial /Residential PIMP)
316 18 035 19020 Pruneridge Ave Industrial Miscellaneous 4.46 25 111 94 Yes No Industrial /Residential PIMP)
316 19 061 10100 N. Tantua Ave Verigy Bldg. 9.42 25 235 199 Yes No Industrial /Residential PIMP)
Subtotal Units 3728 3163
Non Designated Areas
342 14 066 Stevens Creek Blvd Batch Bros. 0.26 20 5 4 Yes No Commercial /Residential Residential Overlay P(CG)
342 14 104 22690 Stevens Creek Blvd Batch Bros. 0.21 20 4 3 Yes No Commercial /Residential Residential Overlay P(CG)
342 14105 S Foothill Blvd Batch Bros. 0.18 20 3 2 Yes No Commercial /Residential Residential Overlay P(CG)
Subtotal Units
Existing Aparment Complexes
Allowed Under Rezoning
Actlon Needed?
Size Max. Max. YWId Existing Ganerel PWn Land
APN Site Address Existing Use (Acres) Density (Units) Units Delta Rezoning General Plan Amendment Use Zoning
375 03 005 10200 Miller Avenue Fontainbleu Apts. 7.00 20 140 123 17 Nc No MediumMigh 10.20 d.u./a R-3