Loading...
CC Exhibit 06-02-2015 Oral Communications GC &Ighs Grace Schmidt L Cpm From: Liang C <Ifchao@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday,June 02, 2015 12:40 AM To: City Council; City Clerk; City Attorney's Office Subject: None of the postcard, newsletter, staff report mentioned "a new General Plan for 2040" Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged EXHID I R11 � � � ♦ ' �-� 1:�J l7 fk.. :��z`�� ���;rr`'{�db - i a� ( /jam. A��dl'P 1 AZI da a i 2L— W a' � ✓ "aq !/ � 0152111 Many residents are very surprised to learn that the GPA approved on Dec. 4, 2014 is a new General Plan of Cupertino, which replaces the existing 2000-2020 General Plan. These residents attended Community Workshops for General Plan Amendment (GPA) and have attended numerous city meetings on GPA since June 2013. Many of them wrote to the Council and spoke at meetings. However, they were very surprised to learn that the GPA turns out to be Cupertino's New General Plan for 2040!" I wondered about it. So, I went back to look at meeting records and communications. In fact, in so many GPA postcards, newsletters, meeting notices, the city never informed the residents that the GPA is a new General Plan for the year 2040. The public were misinformed and misled! And then, in one meeting which only discussed the Housing Element, the entire new General Plan "Community Vision 2040" was adopted. "the City Council initiated a process to review several properties in the commercial districts in Cupertino, including the Vallco shopping district, as part of a focused General Plan Amendment." (GPA Newsletter#1, June 2013. GPA Postcard #1) "While the project will consider citywide land use, urban design, mobility and economic topics, it is not a 1 rewrite of the City's 2005 General Plan." (Settings and Opportunities Report, Sep. 2013) "Goal 6: Revise existing General Plan policies and diagrams as they relate to the goals listed above, and make some additional minor changes to address recent State and regional requirements." (Settings and Opportunities Report, Sep. 2013) "the majority of the General Plan's content will remain the same" (Staff Repot of April 1 City Council Meeting) "While the proposed Project considers citywide land use,urban design, mobility, and economic development choices, it is not a complete revision of the City's 2000-2020 General Plan." (EIR, June 2014) "The proposed Project considers citywide land use, urban design, mobility, and economic development choices but is not a complete revision of the City's 2000-2020 General Plan." (Staff Report of Oct. 7, 2014 City Council meeting) "General Plan Amendment to establish citywide development allocation for commercial, office,hotel and residential uses, development parameters for key study areas (including the Vallco Shopping District) and updates to address recent State Law requirements." (Dec. 2 Meeting Notice in Cupertino Courier, published on Nov. 21, 2014) All of a sudden, the new General Plan "Community Vision 2040" is approved on Dec. 4, 2014, buried inside a resolution. Yet, there is no redlined comparison of the new General Plan with the existing one. It is not easy at all for any one to tell exactly what's changed. However, almost everyone who've compared any one chapter of 2000-2020 General Plan with that in the new General Plan think it's a almost total rewrite. Many important policies in the 2000-2020 General. Plan are removed. These policy changes were not discussed in any community meeting or council'meeting. Resolution 14-211 should not have been adopted since it includes an entire new General Plan that has not been discussed nor agreed upon by the Council. The public has not had a chance to provide input either since the meeting notice did not accurately inform the public the scope of the GPA. For a responsible and transparent government,please rescind Resolution 14-211 and give the new General Plan the attention it deserves. (Please put this on the public record for written communication for June 2 meeting and as comment for future GPA meeting.) Thank you. Liang-Fang Chao Cupertino Resident 2 eA'L CUAAA- To: City of Cupertino Staff and City Council Members From: Cathy Helgerson—CAP—Citizens Against Pollution EA [ 1113I I Regarding: City Problems 1) Threats to build higher buildings leading to future skyscrapers and supporting building congestion which is to overfill or overcrowd our city and destroy the selenic view. 2) Cater to builders who can't wait to build larger and higher structures again more congestion. 3) Congest our schools with more kids crowding into smaller spaces with fewer resources available to them and our teachers. 4) General Plan issues taken lightly without regard for public view holding our City hostage while the Staff and City Council members stumble over solutions and remedies to rectify the their misconduct. 5) Destroy loyal living trees which are our rain forest they have contributed to our wellbeing and the City provides all kinds of excuses to justify the destruction. 6) Lack of concern for destroying and tearing down of parking lots and buildings which are still in good use or can be remodeled to build a new without regard for the pollution that this causes recycling concrete at the Steven Creek Quarry causing pollution to the Steven Creek Reservoir with Mercury. 7) Spending money on projects that are unnecessary and are way too expensive and are not needed. 8) Refusing to pay for new curbs and sidewalks and making the home owner pay for them even thou the City may own the property my question is what are our taxes used for? 9) Writing only two letters to Santa Clara County about Lehigh and refusing to file a law suit against them for polluting our city even thou it becomes evident each day that Lehigh cannot operate without polluting the Air,Water and Soil. 10) Allowing Apple to put up an HVAC system on their R& D Facility without regard for the pollution they are causing right next to residential properties. 11) Allowing compost to be mixed with overburden on the Steven Creek Quarry property City of Cupertino distribution center and denying that this is even taken place and distributing it to the public. 12) Former and present City Council members using their influence to promote all kinds of projects within the City and collaborate with companies who wish to benefit financially who have no regards for fair play and only exist for their own gain. I can only mention some of the problems at the City but the rest is up to the public to bring this information forward and to take part in City Government I encourage all to do so.