The URL can be used to link to this page

CC Exhibit 11-21-2017 Item No. 12 Budget for Specific Plan and Environmental Review of Vallco Shopping District - Written Communications EC� E0VE cc D # 2, NOV 2 1 2017 Edward Hirshfield 734 Stendhal Lane CUPERTINO CITY CLERK Cupertino, California 95014clairelouise@earthlink.net November 22, 2017 City Council Cupertino, California Subject: Do not rezone or change the plan for Vallco Dear Council Members, As a homeowner in Cupertino since 1963 less than 1 mile from the Vallco property I have a strong vested interest in the use and composition of the improvements to be made on that property. I strongly favor a development similar to that proposed by Sand Hills Properties for"The Hills"that included; 1. a mix of park, 2. apartments 3. commercial 4. office space. I believe that there was too much office space and not enough apartment space in the prior plan,but was happy with the general design of: a. park(grass roof) b. portion of commercial property (including the movie theater,public use 1,000 seat auditorium,and skating rink). I think it is irresponsible and unethical for the City Council to rush rezoning and reshaping of the City Plan to subvert new State laws known to become effective at the 1rst of the year. I believe the only acceptable course of action is to retain the current city plan to be adjusted in the usual way to accommodate the mix of uses to be decided by regular order in due time. 71, Edward Hirshfield CC7 Grace Schmidt # From: Liana Crabtree <lianacrabtree@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 5:34 PM To: Savita Vaidhyanathan; Darcy Paul; Barry Chang; Steven Scharf, Rod Sinks; Nina Daruwalla; Nina Daruwalla;Sue Bose;Sanjiv Kapil;John Zhao Cc: City Clerk Subject: Request to Change City Ordinances to Comply with Requirements of AB 1505 and to Add Affordable Housing Category"Extremely Low Income" Dear Cupertino City Council and Housing Commission: Please add this letter to the public record regarding(a)requests to change City ordinances to comply with requirements of AB 1505; and (b)requests to add the affordable housing category "extremely low income" for households earning 30% or less of the area median. Assembly Bill 1505 is a bright spot among the current crop of State housing laws to be enacted in 2018. The California Association of Councils of Governments supports AB 1505 and highlights the law's benefits on its Web site, including: AB 1505 provides that after the legislative body of the county or city makes the necessary ordinance amendments, the jurisdiction can require"as a condition of the development of residential rental units that more than 15% of the total number of units rented in the development be affordable to, and occupied by, household_s at 80%or less of the area median income...." Provisions apply,but AB 1505 offers an excellent opportunity for cities like Cupertino to capture from rental housing projects 15% affordable housing units for homes for moderate-income, lower income, very low income, and extremely low income households. I hope Cupertino will act quickly to avail itself to the benefits ofAB 1505 by making the necessary ordinance changes so it can begin requiring the construction of the maximum amount of affordable housing at all new rental housing developments, as the law allows And, while amending ordinances,please consider adding the income category "extremely low income"to the City's affordable housing offerings so that more individuals and families with incomes of 30% of the median can maintain homes here. Disabled individuals and their families who have established support networks in the area are depending on opportunities that will allow them to continue living in Cupertino. Sincerely, Liana Crabtree Cupertino resident REFERENCES + California Association of Councils of Governments Web site, Bill Tracker, "AB 1505 (Bloom & Chiu& Gloria) Land Use: Zoning Regulations": https://www.calcog.or index.12hp?src=directory&view=legislation&srctype=detail&back=legislation&refno=2 63 i + California Legislative Information, "AB 1505 Land Use: Zoning Regulations (2017-2018)": https:Hle 'ngi fo legislature ca.gov/facesibilINavClient.xhtml?bill id=201720180AB1505 r Total Control Panel Lo in To:cityclerk(o)cupertino.orMessage Score:57 High(60):Pass From:lianacrabtree@yahoo.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75): Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block yahoo.com f, !, This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. t 'i k `t f f, 4h k 1 f i i i 2 Grace Schmidt From: Govind Tatachari <gtc2k7@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 5:33 PM To: City Council; City Attorney's Office; City Clerk Subject: Request for immediate action before new state legislations take effect Dear Cupertino City Council: A spate of new land-use and housing legislation will take effect on 1/1/2018. Even before it was enacted,many associations including the League of California Cities,the American Planning Association,California Chapter,the California State Association of Counties and so on,opposed some of the new legislation. At the City Council's Aug.28 meeting,Palo Alto Mayor Greg Scharff framed the SB 35 legislation as an attack on local control and argued that it could worsen the city's parking problems. League of California Cities found that some of the new regulations will create new technical requirements,force land zoning,reduce mitigation fees to overcome impact,reduce zoning consistency,increase evaluation burdens,make local governments more vulnerable via court directed awards and fines,force approvals,etc. What does it mean for the City of Cupertino? Since 2014 many concerned Cupertino residents have publicly expressed strong concerns about Cupertino's long-term land-use plan and allocation process. In Dec 2014,by yielding to the developers demands for obscenely high allocations and very high density large-scale mixed-use development with"no"height limit at the Vallco Shopping District site(Vallco),the newly elected Cupertino City council made itself very vulnerable in terms of its ability to control intensity of development at that site and all across Cupertino. A majority of Cupertino residents and even residents in adjoining cities felt that Cupertino city coucil had totally overlooked the cumulative impact of this very high density gargantuan mixed-use development next to a large office complex(AC2),other dense residential developments and the new town center,all concentrated in a small region.The above scenario will have irrecoverable adverse impact on the local environment and infrastructure. The new legislation rightly favors affordable housing development.However it also loosen the ability of Cupertino city council to reign in the intensity of high density development. Thus it is imperative that Cupertino City council quickly reevaluate some of its land-use and unbalanced allocation decisions.Please take corrective actions to remove unnecessary entitlements immediately(before 12/31/2017)for the Vallco site i.e. 1)remove the 2 million square feet of office allocation, 2)ensure the General plan is carefully amended to reinstate language • to restore the maximum density,setback,building height and plane specifications to what they were at the time the current owner purchased the Vallco property, • that retail/dining/entertainment/recreation space allocation at Vallco is at least same as before 2014,and that open space at Vallco is flat and at ground level and there are no elevated rooftop or canopy parks. 3.That Vallco stays as a regional shopping/dining/entertainment/recreation destination. Please take action to make the above changes and ensure that the developer cannot exploit vulnerabilities in the General plan and the new legislation to force Cupertino city into a corner and enhance its profits at the expense of the needs of the Cupertino community. Now is the time to act before the new legislation kicks in.Please retain local control over intensity of development at Vallco site and all over Cupertino. Thank you for your consideration.Please include this letter as part of the public record. Sincerely, Govind Tatachari Cupertino resident t Total Control Panel Login To:cityclerk@cupertino.org Message Score: 10 High(60):Pass My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass 3 From:gtc2k7@gmail.com Low(90): Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. F t r t f t f 4 Grace Schmidt From: Toni Oasay-Anderson Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 5:09 PM To: City Clerk; Beth Ebben Subject: FW: Vallco Housing Allocation Attachments: Cupertino (00000002).pdf From: Matt Regan [mailto:mregan@bayareacouncil.org] Sent:Tuesday, November 21, 2017 2:58 PM To:Savita Vaidhyanathan <svaidhyanathan@cupertino.org> Subject:Vallco Housing Allocation Dear Mayor Vaidhyanathan, Please find attached the Bay Area Council's letter regarding pending efforts to change zoning at the Vallco Mall site in Cupertino. Please call me if you have any questions. Regards Matt Regan I Senior Vice President Government Relations( BAYAREA COUNCIL 353 Sacramento Street 10th Floor I San Francisco, CA 94111 415-946-8710 office 415-298-0330 cell I mregan@bayareacouncil.org I www.bayareacouncil.org AREA LEADERS W COUNCIL EiNGAGE u � Total Control Panel Login To:svaidh anathan ..cupertino.org Message Score:50 High(60): Pass From:mregan a,bayareacouncil.org My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75):Pass Low(90): ('ass Block this sender Block bayareacouncil.org This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 5 Grace Schmidt From: Kevin &Annie <kevinandannie7613@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 2:01 PM To: City Council Subject: Re: [Balancedmv] Be the heroes, not the villains, in our regional housing crisis i This fellow may have strong words,but I grew up in Cupertino and lived there for about 25 years- and I would like to see Vallco only zoned for retail myself ,I On Tue,Nov 21,2017 at 7:55 AM, Jeremy Hoffinan via Balancedmv<balancedmv&lists.balancedmv.org> wrote: Dear Cupertino City Council, I write to you regarding the Vallco development and a shocking development reported here: http://gllpertinotodqy.com/2017/11/17/councilmembers As you know, our regional housing shortage is ruining the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of our neighbors. Our region is playing a game of cruel musical chairs. The "winners" face rents going up 8- 15%year after year. The "losers" face living in vehicles on the street, or commuting for over an hour, even the teachers and firefighters who serve our cities. In this time of crisis, I am aghast that any city would consider actually downzoning residential. I know you don't want to be the villains in this story. So do the right thing! As a Mountain View resident, tech worker, and now homeowner, I have worked for four years in Mountain View to get our government to allow housing construction, especially more dense, affordable housing-- the kind that would satisfy the unmet needs of the community. It would be a slap in the face of all of the housing affordability advocates in the state for Cupertino to bar the door to housing, especially after Cupertino allowed the Apple HQ to go forward without adding any additional housing for the thousands of new workers. The 20th century shopping mall is not coming back. Millennials want strong towns, mixed use zoning, dense housing, and lively walkable streets. We don't need more asphalt wastelands. We need more homes for people. The whole region is watching you. I believe in the best in people so I believe you'll do the right thing and fight FOR HOUSING,not against it. Sincerely, Jeremy Hoffman Campaign for a Balanced Mountain View 6 Balancedmv mailing list Balancedmv(cr�,lists.balancedmv.org http:Hlists.balancedmv.or listinfo.cai/balancedmv-balancedmv.org Total Control Panel Lo in To:citycouncil(a)cupertino.org Message Score:35 High(60):Pass From:kevinandannie7613@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75): Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 7 I I Grace Schmidt From: Matt Vander Sluis <mvandersluis@greenbelt.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 1:02 PM To: City Council; Savita Vaidhyanathan; Darcy Paul; Barry Chang; Rod Sinks; Steven Scharf; David Brandt;Aarti Shrivastava; Don Sun; Geoff Paulsen; David Fung; Jerry Liu; Alan Takahashi Cc: Pilar Lorenzana-Campo Subject: Comments on City Council changes to Vallco mall site Attachments: GA comment on Vallco housing proposal 11_21_17.pdf Dear Cupertino City Councilmembers, Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this evening's City Council item regarding housing at the Vallco mall site. Please see our comments in the attached letter. Matt Vander Sluis Deputy Director Greenbelt Alliance 312 Sutter Street, Suite 510 1 San Francisco, CA 94108 1 (415) 543-6771 x322 1 cell: (707) 628-3324 1 mvandersluis(a�_greenbelt.org greenbelt.org I Facebook I Twitter Bnl-_arcrt arcerrhElt latt sare at risk ol he ift.(z lust toshrwv/developrncin. Get the facts here. Total Control Panel Login To: svaidhyanathan a,cupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60):Pass From:mvandersluis@greenbelt.org My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75):Pass Low(90): Pass Block this sender Block greenbelt.org This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 8 Grace Schmidt From: Matt Vander Sluis <mvandersluis@greenbelt.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 1:02 PM To: City Council; Savita Vaidhyanathan; Darcy Paul; Barry Chang; Rod Sinks; Steven Scharf, David Brandt;Aarti Shrivastava; Don Sun; Geoff Paulsen; David Fung;Jerry Liu; Alan Takahashi Cc: Pilar Lorenzana-Campo Subject: Comments on City Council changes to Vallco mall site Attachments: ATT00001.txt;ATT00002.htm; GA comment on Vallco housing proposal 11_21_17.pdf Total Control Panel Lo in To:rsinks(a)cupertino.orMessage Score: 1 High(60): Pas, From:mvandersluis@greenbelt.org My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75): Pass Low(90): Block this sender Block greenbelt.org This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 9 Grace Schmidt From: Matt Vander Sluis <mvandersluis@greenbelt.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 1:02 PM To: City Council; Savita Vaidhyanathan; Darcy Paul; Barry Chang; Rod Sinks; Steven Scharf, David Brandt; Aarti Shrivastava; Don Sun; Geoff Paulsen; David Fung;Jerry Liu; Alan Takahashi Cc: Pilar Lorenzana-Campo Subject: Comments on City Council changes to Vallco mall site Attachments: GA comment on Vallco housing proposal 11_21_17.pdf Dear Cupertino City Councilmembers, Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this evening's City Council item regarding housing at the Vallco mall site. Please see our comments in the attached letter. Matt Vander Sluis Deputy Director Greenbelt Alliance 312 Sutter Street, Suite 510 1 San Francisco, CA 94108 1 (415) 543-6771 x322 1 cell: (707) 628-3324 1 mvandersluis(o7greenbelt.org greenbelt.org I Facebook I Twitter Bali Area ulvenhelt lands are at Nish nl beim;iusi tris)rcjivI developanicin. Get the facts here. Total Control Panel Loom To: sscharf@cupertino.org Message Score: I High(60): Pass From:mvandersluis@greenbelt.org My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75): P.t>s Low(90): Pins Block this sender Block greenbelt.org This message was delivered because the contentfilter score did not exceed your filter level. 10 Grace Schmidt From: Munisekar <msekar@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 12:51 PM To: City Council; Savita Vaidhyanathan Cc: City Clerk; Munisekar Dear Mayor Vaidhyanathan and City Council Members, I am Muni Madhdhipatla, Cupertino Resident of 7 years. I chose to make Cupertino home for rest of my life based on its character and identity. With the new laws passed at state level, I am really concerned that identity and character of Cupertino is going to be destroyed. I believe you have the power, authority and obligation to preserve Cupertino's identity and character from being destroyed. The City Council of Dec 2014 made a General Plan Amendment with provisional office and residential allocations to Vallco property which was a retail zoned property until then. The expectation was that the property owner would come back with a specific plan within those provisional allocations seeking city approvals. As we all know, the Vallco plan from the developer of 4.5 mil SFT concrete jungle build out with only 16% retail space was soundly defeated by 55% voters. With the new state level laws going into effect on January 1st 2018, Cupertino is facing grave danger of seeing even denser build out at Vallco. Like 100's of other local governments, I believe our city voiced concerns about these laws as well; but your concerns were ignored. These laws take away land use decisions from local governments which means every suburb and town would be made look the same - no more identity and character to our towns. I am sure City Council of Dec 2014 would not have done this GPA, had they known about these draconian laws; hindsight is always 20/20. As an elected body responsible to our residents, I request that you revoke these provisional allocations ASAP before Jan 1st to avoid impending disaster. Let the Vallco site go back to being a retail site and let the developer work with the community on their plans. You are not taking away any of their property rights as you are only reverting it back to the state it was when they purchased it. Failing to do so will put Cupertino in greater peril; the battle between people trying to destroy our city's character and residents will continue even harder; residents will speak up even more louder in the next election as they did in last elections. Please make this email part of public records. Thanks Muni Madhdhipatla Caring Cupertino Resident. Total Control Panel Loam To:citycouncil(a,cupertino.org Message Score: I High(60): F'as� From:msekar@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75): Pa— Low(90): Pay Block this sender Block gmail.com This niessage was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 12 Grace Schmidt From: Jane Natoli <wafoli@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 12:36 PM To: City Council Subject: Do not create further roadblocks for the Vallco redevelopment Hello, My name is Jane Natoli, a member of the YIMBY Party here in the Bay Area. I'm writing to you today to express my concern with the idea of modifying the general plan in a manner which appears designed to get around S133 5. The housing crisis we are experience here in the Bay Area are connected. It's not just what happens in San Francisco or Oakland or San Jose. Every city has a responsibility to build its share. The process of redeveloping the Vallco site has been delayed long enough. We cannot keep making our cities so our own children cannot live in them, as we are seeing over and over in Bay Area communities. We have a responsibility to provide for future generations, and for the people who will one day live in places like Cupertino, not just the folks who are there now, and it is shortsighted to delay redevelopment on that basis. Housing delayed is housing denied. Cupertino cannot just expect every other Bay Area city to pick up the slack. Too many communities have been doing that for way too long. We all have a responsibility. How many folks who work at Apple cannot even get a home in the city they are headquartered in? We need vision. Malls are the past and we have an opportunity to remake sites like that. We need to be welcoming more folks into our communities, now more than ever,not shutting the door and pushing them further and further away. The SB 35 and A131 515 arguments are unproven and tantamount to fear mongering. SB 35 and A131 515 are both housing bills with the overall intent of making it easier to increase the stock of housing and affordable housing in communities like Cupertino. Neither have the power to regulate non-residential uses. Vice Mayor Paul's interpretation of the law has not been validated by any objective legal analysis-or any legal analysis, for that matter. A move to strip away existing land use allocations is premature and uninformed. Cordially, Jane Natoli Total Control Panel Login To:citycouncilnacupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60):Pass From:wafoli@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90): Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 13 Grace Schmidt From: Michael Mar <megamar88@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 12:14 PM To: Steven Scharf Subject: Vallco Closed Session Hello Council Member Scharf, With the recently passed housing bills, I understand and appreciate the recommendation for a closed session to study the impact on the various Cupertino developments. I hope the session leads to greater clarity on how the bills will affect the city and the Vallco development. If an adjustment to the Vallco development is recommended, I urge the city council to proceed with a measured response that does not significantly decrease the size of the project. I have felt like this city council has always tried to do what's right within the confines of the position. That said, I must admit that I am worried with all of the cheering from the anti-development crowd. I hope people are simply reading too much into the closed session, and this is not really a move to scuttle the Vallco development before the end of the year. As a longtime resident, it would make me very sad to see another Vallco proposal end like so many of the previous proposals. As you have requested, I'd like to state that I have lived 5 minutes from Vallco for over 30 years. I attended CUSD and FUHSD school systems. I own, live, and work in Cupertino. And I have no affiliation with SHP, I have never interacted with anyone from SHP, and I have never been promised any favors or office space in Vallco. Thank you fbr your , Michael Mar Total Control Panel Login To:sscharfna,cupertino.ore Message Score: 1 High(60):Pass From:megamar88@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 14 Grace Schmidt From: Michael Mar <megamar88@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 12:14 PM To: Rod Sinks Subject: Vallco Closed Session Attachments: ATT00001.txt Total Control Panel Loin To:rsinks(a)cupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60): Pa;s From:megamar88@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75): Pas Low(90):Plt„ Block this sender Block gmail.com This message ivas delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 15 Grace Schmidt From: Michael Mar <megamar88@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 12:13 PM To: Barry Chang Subject: Vallco Closed Session Hello Council Member Chang,. With the recently passed housing bills, I understand and appreciate the recommendation for a closed session to study the impact on the various Cupertino developments. I hope the session leads to greater clarity on how the bills will affect the city and the Vallco development. If an adjustment to the Vallco development is recommended, I urge the city council to proceed with a measured response that does not significantly decrease the size of the project. I have felt like this city council has always tried to do what's right within the confines of the position. That said, I must admit that I am worried with all of the cheering from the anti-development crowd. I hope people are simply reading too much into the closed session, and this is not really a move to scuttle the Vallco development before the end of the year. As a longtime resident, it would make me very sad to see another Vallco proposal end like so many of the previous proposals. As has been requested by Councilman Scharf, I'd like to state that I have lived 5 minutes from Vallco for over 30 years. I attended CUSD and FUHSD school systems. I own, live, and work in Cupertino. And I have no affiliation with SHP, I have never interacted with anyone from SHP, and I have never been promised any favors or office space in Vallco. Thank you for your time, Michael Mar Total Control Panel To:bchang@cupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60):Pas From:megamar88@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75): Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 16 Grace Schmidt From: Michael Mar <megamar88@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 12:13 PM To: Darcy Paul Subject: Vallco Closed Session Hello Council Member Paul, With the recently passed housing bills, I understand and appreciate the recommendation for a closed session to study the impact on the various Cupertino developments. I hope the session leads to greater clarity on how the bills will affect the city and the Vallco development. If an adjustment to the Vallco development is recommended, I urge the city council to proceed with a measured response that does not significantly decrease the size of the project. I have felt like this city council has always tried to do what's right within the confines of the position. That said, I must admit that I am worried with all of the cheering from the anti-development crowd. I hope people are simply reading too much into the closed session, and this is not really a move to scuttle the Vallco development before the end of the year. As a longtime resident, it would make me very sad to see another Vallco proposal end like so many of the previous proposals. As has been requested by Councilman Scharf, I'd like to state that I have lived 5 minutes from Vallco for over 30 years. I attended CUSD and FUHSD school systems. I own, live, and work in Cupertino. And I have no affiliation with SHP, I have never interacted with anyone from SHP, and I have never been promised any favors or office space in Vallco. Thank you for your time, Michael Mar Total Control Panel Lo in To:dpaulAcupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60):Pass From:megamar88@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75): Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. I 17 I i I Grace Schmidt From: Michael Mar <megamar88@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21,2017 12:11 PM To: Savita Vaidhyanathan Subject: Vallco Closed Session I Hello Mayor Vaidhyanathan, With the recently passed housing bills, I understand and appreciate the recommendation for a closed session to study the impact on the various Cupertino developments. I hope the session leads to greater clarity on how the bills will affect the city and the Vallco development. If an adjustment to the Vallco development is recommended, I urge the city council to proceed with a measured response that does not significantly decrease the size of the project. I have felt like this city council has always tried to do what's right within the confines of the position. That said, I must admit that I am worried with all of the cheering from the anti-development crowd. I hope people are simply reading too much into the closed session, and this is not really a move to scuttle the Vallco development before the end of the year. As a longtime resident, it would make me very sad to see another Vallco proposal end like so many of the previous proposals. As has been requested by Councilman Scharf, I'd like to state that I have lived 5 minutes from Vallco for over 30 years. I attended CUSD and FUHSD school systems. I own, live, and work in Cupertino. And I have no affiliation with SHP, I have never interacted with anyone from SHP, and I have never been promised any favors or office space in Vallco. Thank you for your time, Michael Mar Total Control Panel Loem To:svaidhyanathanna Wertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60):Pass From:megamar88@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75): Pass Low(90): Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 18 Grace Schmidt From: Pam Baird <pamkbassoc@jps.net> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 11:35 AM To: City Council Subject: Changes to the General Plan- November 21 Council meeting Dear Cupertino Council members- It is distressing to learn that the Cupertino City council is considering changing zoning regulations and the General Plan without adequate and necessary input from community members. The redevelopment plans for the Vallco shopping center can provide much needed housing for Cupertino and Silicon Valley. The underlying zoning regulations allow for a well-designed mixed-use and mixed-income development on the Vallco site. The Sand Hill Property Company is prepared to move forward with a development that meets the urgent need to provide more housing at all income levels. Community outreach and engagement is essential for the future of Cupertino. A transparent, collaborative, and well-informed planning process must involve community input not only from Cupertino residents, but from those who work in the City and those affected in neighboring cities from rising rents and more traffic caused by workers needing to live many miles away because housing is not available locally. Cupertino is only a part of a larger region that is being "punished by prosperity". It is the duty and responsibility of all cities in the Silicon Valley to do their part to provide housing. Please do not allow anything but a full and transparent vetting of any proposed changes to the General Plan. Regards- Pamela Baird Mountain View resident (19 years) Total Control Panel Login To:cit_ycouncilra+cupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60): Past From:pamkbassoc@jps.net My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75): P s 19 Low(90): Pass Block this sender Block jps.net This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. e: E i r _ i i k I f P r 20 Grace Schmidt From: Adrian Fine <adrianfine@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 10:39 AM To: City Council Subject: General Plan Update Comments - Please Respect the Public Process Dear Cupertino City Council, My name is Adrian Fine and I'm a lifelong Palo Alto resident and I also serve on the Palo Alto City Council. Today I write you in not in my official capacity,but as a resident of the Bay Area. As we all know, the Bay Area has significant challenges around transportation, commercial growth, and housing. And each municipality has to understand their own unique challenges, opportunities, and community concerns. However, we also need to acknowledge that these are regional problems. When one city decides to build more housing, the regional jobs-housing balance is improved; when another city builds lots of commercial space, the regional balance is made worse. I was very disappointed to hear that your Council is considering amending the housing element to remove housing potential from the Vallco site. Not only does this make it harder for our region to address the housing crisis,but it also denies the will of your residents who spoke clearly in last year's elections about the need for more housing choices. I truly hope you will reconsider this action, and at the very least, follow your normal community engagement processes to have this decision-vetted by Cupertino residents. Making such a major change towards the end of the year, right around the holidays, truly diminishes your responsibility as public servants. I'm no expert on the needs and desires of Cupertino,but I implore you to think regionally and consider how your actions will affect people all across the Bay Area. Best regards, Adrian Fine Palo Alto City Council Member Adrian Fine adrianfineQj nail.com 650-468-6331 Total Control Panel Login To:citycouncilAcupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60):Pass 21 i From:adrianfine@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90): Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. i r R i t i r I'r h i i i i i 22 Grace Schmidt From: kirk vartan <kirk@kvartan.com> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 5:44 PM To: City Council Cc: senator.beall@sen.ca.gov; senator.wiener@sen.ca.gov; assemblymember.low@assembly.ca.gov; Ben.Metcalf@hcd.ca.gov; Alphonse.Le- Duc@sen.ca.gov; Ann.Fryman@sen.ca.gov;Jeff.Cretan@sen.ca.gov; Patrick.Ahrens@asm.ca.gov;Aarti Shrivastava; Pilar Lorenzana;Winchesternac Info Subject: RE: GPA-2017-04, Z-2017-02 (EA-2013-03) - Vallco Mall Honorable Mayor and Council, I urge you NOT to rush into an action before a well thought out and meaningful process can be completed on the Vallco Property. This is a regional piece of property and it looks like Sand Hill was putting a good faith effort to find a way to get this developed...with the city, the council, and the community. The efforts put forth by Councilmember Paul seems to be an over-reaction, and using numbers that don't really add up. Sure, the simple math works as suggested, but it is answering a question that no one asked and does not really seem possible. It is creating calculations that are not practically possible, but technically able to be communicated. For example, if I described how I would run the toll plaza on the bridge that leads to Neverland, it might make sense. But that doesn't mean that Neverland exists. Following the argument Councilmember Paul uses, it would mean that based on the existing commercial allocation, over 2,000 apartments would be created at over 2,700 square feet *each* in size....that's an average, meaning many would probably be more. If there were less units built, the square footage would increase. Only single family homes can accomplish this kind of square footage and we all know 35 units/acre is not a single family home measurement. The argument falls short here. Additionally, equating all "non-commercial" activity to housing is a red-herring. How can that even happen? No roads? No parks? No open space? It seems like this is a false narrative to further a message that was voted down (i.e., Measure C). Let's leave the past in the past and move the conversation forward *WITH* the developer, not isolating them. Exerting this kind of seemingly phantom requirement to enact an emergency policy with little to no public engagement or discussion is the very thing that opponents of the original plan at Vallco were against. Why would you further this? I ask you, please, for the betterment of Cupertino and the region, don't make any rushed policy decisions. Use the processes you have and lead the community and the developer to create an inspiring and needed regional destination. Thank you for your time and consideration. Kirk Vartan While I am speaking for myself, for reference, I am the President, Winchester NAC, board member of Catalyze SV, co- chair of the Stevens Creek Advisory Group, Vice-President of the Cory Neighborhood Association, and local business owner in both Santa Clara and Sunnyvale 23 Grace Schmidt From: Rich Altmaier <richalt2@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21,2017 9:21 AM To: City Council Cc: Rich Altmaier Subject: Vallco planning Dear city council,regarding making a hasty change to Vallco zoning in response to the state of California new regulations,we should not do this. All city councils are under pressure from vocal residents,and in fact the state has tried to provide some shielding and guidance for new housing approaches. Our city and our state desperately needs new housing ideas. Now is the time to understand how we can work with the new state rules. We should absolutely not be trying to dodge and evade new state rules. Please don't let any vocal minority drive a hasty response,especially when a hasty response is limiting our options and denying our future residents new housing space. Thank you, t; Rich Altmaier I 22605 Salem Ave t Cupertino,CA !` resident since 1985. b f I Total Control Panel Login E To:citycouncil(i,cupertino.org Remove this sender from my allow list From:richalt2@yahoo.com l l You received this message because the sender is on your allow list. i f 24 Grace Schmidt From: Issi Romem <issiromem@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 8:05 AM To: Jeremy Hoffman Cc: City Council; balancedmv@lists.balancedmv.org Subject: Re: [Balancedmv] Be the heroes, not the villains, in our regional housing crisis Very well put! On Nov 21,2017, at 07:55, Jeremy Hoffinan via Balancedmv<balancedmv@lists.balancedmv.org> wrote: Dear Cupertino City Council, I write to you regarding the Vallco development and a shocking development reported here: http://cLipertinotoday.com/2017/11/17/councilmembers As you know, our regional housing shortage is ruining the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of our neighbors. Our region is playing a game of cruel musical chairs. The "winners" face rents going up 8-15% year after year. The "losers" face living in vehicles on the street, or commuting for over an hour, even the teachers and firefighters who serve our cities. In this time of crisis, I am aghast that any city would consider actually downzoning residential. I know you don't want to be the villains in this story. So do the right thing! As a Mountain View resident, tech worker, and now homeowner, I have worked for four years in Mountain View to get our government to allow housing construction, especially more dense, affordable housing-- the kind that would satisfy the unmet needs of the community. It would be a slap in the face of all of the housing affordability advocates in the state for Cupertino to bar the door to housing, especially after Cupertino allowed the Apple HQ to go forward without adding any additional housing for the thousands of new workers. The 20th century shopping mall is not coming back. Millennials want strong towns, mixed use zoning, dense housing, and lively walkable streets. We don't need more asphalt wastelands. We need more homes for people. The whole region is watching you. I believe in the best in people so I believe you'll do the right thing and fight FOR HOUSING, not against it. Sincerely, Jeremy Hoffinan Campaign for a Balanced Mountain View 25 Balancedmv mailing list Balancedmv@lists.balancedmv.org h!tp:Hlists balancedmv.org/listinfo.Cgi/balancedmv-balancedmv.org Total Control Panel Lo in To:citvcouncil(a-)cupertino.org Message Score:35 High(60): Pass From:issiromem@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90): Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 26 Grace Schmidt From: Jeremy Hoffman <hoffmanj@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 7:56 AM To: City Council Cc: balancedmv@lists.balancedmv.org Subject: Be the heroes, not the villains, in our regional housing crisis Dear Cupertino City Council, I write to you regarding the Vallco development and a shocking development reported here: hLtp:Hcgpertinotoday.com/2017/11/17/councilmembers As you know, our regional housing shortage is ruining the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of our neighbors. Our region is playing a game of cruel musical chairs. The "winners" face rents going up 8- 15%year after year. The "losers" face living in vehicles on the street, or commuting for over an hour, even the teachers and firefighters who serve our cities. In this time of crisis, I am aghast that any city would consider actually downzoning residential. I know you don't want to be the villains in this story. So do the right thing! As a Mountain View resident, tech worker, and now homeowner, I have worked for four years in Mountain View to get our government to allow housing construction, especially more dense, affordable housing--the kind that would satisfy the unmet needs of the community. It would be a slap in the face of all of the housing affordability advocates in the state for Cupertino to bar the door to housing, especially after Cupertino allowed the Apple HQ to go forward without adding any additional housing for the thousands of new workers. The 20th century shopping mall is not coming back. Millennials want strong towns, mixed use zoning, dense housing, and lively walkable streets. Wedon't need more asphalt wastelands. We need more homes for people. The whole region is watching you. I believe in the best in people so I believe you'll do the right thing and fight FOR HOUSING, not against it. Sincerely, Jeremy Hoffinan Campaign for a Balanced Mountain View Total Control Panel Login To:citycouncil(i,cupertino.org Message Score:20 High(60): Pass From:hoffmanj@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Press Low(90): Pass Block this sender i 27 Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. t � i I 't 4[ 4 E 28 Grace Schmidt From: Adam Brinklow <tamlinearthly@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 7:41 AM To: Darcy Paul Subject: Re:Curbed SF, SB 35 Hello again, Council Memember. Curious about one thing, I've now had some complaints about the notice at the link below, which puts "removal of the Vallco shopping center as a housing element cite" as part of the agenda for an upcoming Planning Commission meeting. What does this actually mean? https:Hdocs.wixstatic.com/ugd/27f85d Obe3la5efb4841c4b77a9a7aO704fl90.pdf -ALB On Mon,Nov 20, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Adam Brinklow<tamlinearthly(a,gmail.com>wrote: Vice Mayor Paul, Hello,my name is Adam, I write for Curbed SF. Some folks have gotten in touch with me regarding comments you made about SB 35 and Cupertino development at an 11.7 special meeting. I can only imagine how busy you are,but if you have time for a brief conversation about it, I'd really like to give you the opportunity to respond to their criticisms and,maybe more importantly, to make sure that I understand precisely what it is you're proposing. If you'd like, you can reach me here or at 415 573 8979. Thank you very much for your time. -ALB Total Control Panel Login To:dpaul _cupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60):Pass From:tamlinearthly@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75): Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 29 Grace Schmidt From: Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 7:06 AM To: Darcy Paul Subject: Re: Meetings About Housing and Vallco Hi Darcy.Thank you for the article.I am very distressed by a lot of these bills and do think they have been very rushed with no input from anyone who lives in the Bay Area.Again,they are targetting people who live in the cities of the Bay Area and are acting like they don't care about anyone who lives hear now. All they talk about are future residents. Contrary to what some of these people who were on the Vallco Transportation Panel believe,a lot of I the new housing will wind up in Gilroy,Hollister and Monterey County.And Santa Cruz County.I have t a lot of relatives in Santa Cruz so I should know.People are already moving down there and over 17 to buy houses.If they ever fixed 17 up,half of the Bay Area would move over there.We have a young friend who just bought a house in Salinas and he is commuting to a job in San Jose on 101. I think a lot of the people pushing the housing bills would like to think everyone will be living in San Francisco and Oakland,but the truth is that the work force will start spreading out to areas in the East Bay like Oakley and go as far south as Monterey. r I do think that all these housing bills were pushed through as a last ditch effort to retain control of the housing in the Bay Area and also to take advantage of the fact that the governor will soon be termed out. t What we can do about that,I don't know.But,the housing market will be moving away from the Bay Area jj anyway. i. I' The Google thing going on in Down Town San Jose may never get off the ground and may wind up like Cisco holding all that land in Coyote Valley that was never built on. Cisco wanted to have theiir future campus there and there were big plans to build all these things on the land near Gilroy and Morgan Hill. Look what happened to Cisco.I think Google has its hands full dealing with Mountain View now. I think the situation in Down TownSan Jose was a chance for Google to buy land in Down Town San Jose and to get San Jose to sell them city land.They are holding vast amounts of land in other cities.For all that the mayor of San Jose is talking about a Google Village in Down Town,I doubt !. strongly that will come to fruition soon or at all. That area is also under a building height restriction from the San Jose Airport.I don't think even the mayor of San Jose or Google could change that??! Thanks, Jennifer -- From: Darcy Paul <DPaul@cupertino.org> To: Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 6:21 AM Subject: Re: Meetings About Housing and Vallco Dear Jennifer, The new state housing laws were passed and signed by the Governor. They take effect in January. Here is a summary: 30 http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/25/housing-crisis-see-how-califomia-lawmakers-are-puttin -more- teeth-and-more-money-into-reform/ -Darcy Paul Vice-Mayor City of Cupertino On Nov 20, 2017, at 10:59 PM, Jennifer Griffin<grenna5000@yahoo.com<mailto:grenna5000@yahoo.com>> wrote: Sent: Monday,November 20, 2017 10:34 PM Subject: Meetings About Housing and Vallco Dear City Council: Why are all these meetings about the new housing bills and Vallco all happening at the same time? I thought the state was supposed to vote on these laws in the June elections in 2018 rather than have them all become effective on January 1, 2018? Why are all the Vallco meetings happening this week and next week? Are the Vallco meetings going to interrupt the City Council meeting on December 5th when other city business is supposed to be happening? Thank you very much. Sincerely, Jennifer Griffin Total Control Panel Login To:dpaul@cupertino.org Remove this sender from my allow list From:grenna5000@yahoo.com You received this message because the sender is on your allow list. i 7 I 31 Grace Schmidt From: Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 6:40 AM To: Darcy Paul Subject: Re: Meetings About Housing and Vallco Hi Darcy.Thank you for your e-mail,I know this week must be very busy.When I heard them discussing the new housing bills on the radio news a few weeks ago,they kept talking about that California would be voting on some items in the next election.I listen to KCBS most of the time. I knew that there were a battery of these housing bills being pushed through because the governor will be termed out soon.And the knew governor,be it Gavin or someone else,may have different views. They kept discussing when people voted on them in the next election and I was surprised because I thought they would have sent these through in the same way they have been without input from anyone and then the governor just signs the bills.That lead me to believe some of these we would be voting on.I was glad because many of these bills are circumventing environmental laws and the jurisdiction of the local areas and cities. San Francisco and Oakland are dictating too much of what is going on in the Bay Area. Gilroy and Hollister are going to become stronger voices as well as Santa Cruz in what happens to housing in the future. I think a lot of these housing bills are being rushed through with no over site from the rest of the state. I do not even think Southern California has had enough input. 1 am wondering w yhe a c ave coin up u could not be-pushed-a€f until-next-year - I do hope that none of these new laws about housing being passed will affect Vallco.I am wondering about the reception of these bills to the rest of the state and what the fall out will be.It does give one pause, especially I feel like we had been lead to believe we were voting on them. I am glad we are having a discussion on the housing bills next week as I feel there is a lot of things happening that no one knows about? Thanks, Jennifer .-- _......... . . From: Darcy Paul <DPaul@cupertino.org> To: Jennifer Griffin<grenna5000@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 6:21 AM Subject: Re: Meetings About Housing and Vallco Dear Jennifer, The new state housing laws were passed and signed by the Governor. They take effect in January. Here is a summary: http•//www mercurynews com/2017/09/25/housing-crisis-see-how-califomia-lawmakers-are-putting-more- teeth-and-more-money-into-reform/ -Darcy Paul 32 Vice-Mayor City of Cupertino On Nov 20, 2017, at 10:59 PM, Jennifer Griffin<grenna5000@yahoo.com<mailto:pxenna5000@yahoo.com>> wrote: Sent: Monday,November 20, 2017 10:34 PM Subject: Meetings About Housing and Vallco Dear City Council: Why are all these meetings about the new housing bills and Vallco all happening at the same time? I thought the state was supposed to vote on these laws in the June elections in 2018 rather than have them all become effective on January 1, 2018? Why are all the Vallco meetings happening this week and next week? Are the Vallco meetings going to interrupt the City Council meeting on December 5th when other city business is supposed to be happening? Thank you very much. Sincerely, Jennifer Griffin Total Control Panel Loein To:dpaul(okupertino.org Remove this sender from my allow list From:grenna5000@yahoo.com You received this message because the sender is on your allow list. 1 I I 33 Grace Schmidt From: Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 10:59 PM To: City Council Subject: Meetings About Housing and Vallco I Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 10:34 PM Subject: Meetings About Housing and Vallco i i Dear City Council: Why are all these meetings about the new housing bills and Vallco all happening at the same time?I thought the state was supposed to vote on these laws in the June elections in 2018 rather than have them all become effective on January 1,2018? Why are all the Vallco meetings happening this week and next week?Are the Vallco meetings going to interrupt the City Council meeting on December 5th when other city business is supposed to be happening? Thank you very much. Sincerely, Jennifer Griffin Total Control Panel Loom To:citycouncil(i4cupertino.org Remove this sender from my allow list From:grenna5000@yahoo.com You received this message because the sender is on your allow list. 34 Grace Schmidt From: Karen Schlesser <karenschlesser@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 8:55 PM To: City Council Subject: In opposition to General Plan Amendment Dear City Council, I was disappointed to hear that you are considering removing the residential option from the Vallco site. Cupertino is home to one of the largest employers in the area. Yet the city also has one of the most restrictive land use policies in Silicon Valley. The future and vitality of our community depends on creating room to grow. To proceed without appropriate study and community input would be disingenuous to the residents you represent. I hope you reconsider these closed sessions in favor of a transparent process in the new year. Thank you, Karen Schlesser Sunnyvale resident 'Total Control Panel Loin To:citycouncil(@Mertino.org Message Score: I High(60): Pass From:karenschlesser@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the contentfilter score did not exceed your filter level. 35 Grace Schmidt From: Pilar Lorenzana <pilar@siliconvalleyathome.org> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 8:25 PM To: Rod Sinks; Rod Sinks Subject: Vallco and mix of uses Attachments: ATT00001.txt Total Control Panel Login To:rsinksgcupertino.org Remove siliconvalleyathome.org from my allow list From:pilar@siliconvalleyathome.org You received this message because the domain siliconvalleyathome.org is on your allow list. 36 Grace Schmidt From: Pilar Lorenzana <pilar@siliconvalleyathome.org> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 8:24 PM To: savita_v@hotmail.com; savitarotarian@gmail.com Cc: Savita Vaidhyanathan Subject: Vallco and mix of uses Attachments: ATT00001.htm Good evening, Mayor Vaidhyanathan. I hope this email finds you well. I know it's been a hectic last few days and I just wanted to take a moment to share our thoughts regarding the mix of uses on Vallco in advance of your closed session discussion tomorrow. As indicated in the letter submitted to Council yesterday, we believe that Vallco is an ideal site for a mixed-use development, with a significant residential component. We do not have a formal position on the office use allocated on the site. We are puzzled, however, about the concern Vice Mayor Paul expressed during the November 7th Council hearing that recent State legislation would trigger a doubling of the eixsitng allocations. Neither SB 35 or AB 1515 would have this impact. Consequently, we do not understand the impetus for revising the underlying office or residential allocations that exist on the site. And we are concerned that this action is being considered without any public deliberation. We believe that the underlying zoning regulations on the site would create a balanced approach between office, retail, and residential uses. And we believe strongly that the Vallco site should have a significant number of new homes so that the existing jobs and housing imbalance that exists in the City is not exacerbated. We hope you will support moving forward with authorizing consultant contracts so that we can move forward with the specific plan and EIR for Vallco. Please feel to reach out to me if you have any additional questions. As always, you can reach me on my cell (408) 215-8925. Best, Pilar Lorenzana Deputy Director SV@Home Office: (510) 255-1253 pilar@siliconvalleyathome.org w(ahomle 350 W Julian St. #5, San Jose, CA 95110 Website I Facebook I Twitter I LinkedIn I Become a Member! SV@Home has a new website! Check out the Resource Hub for all your housing data needs 37 Total Control Panel Login To:svaidhyanathanAcupeertino.org Remove this sender from my allow list From:pilar@siliconvalleyathome.org You received this message because the sender is on your allow list. i ptp' t F t t[t 1 t i i 5 38 Grace Schmidt From: Alan Penn <alanp_usa@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 8:23 PM To: Savita Vaidhyanathan; Darcy Paul; Barry Chang; Steven Scharf, Rod Sinks; Don Sun; Geoff Paulsen; David Fung;Jerry Liu; Alan Takahashi Cc: City Clerk Subject: Please remove 2M square foot office allocation at Vallco Attachments: ATT00001.txt;ATT00002.htm Total Control Panel Login To:rsinks@cupertino.org Message Score:30 High(60):Pa,s From:alanp_usa@yahoo.com My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75): Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block yahoo.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 39 Grace Schmidt From: Alan Penn <alanp_usa@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 20,2017 8:23 PM To: Savita Vaidhyanathan; Darcy Paul; Barry Chang; Steven Scharf, Rod Sinks; Don Sun; Geoff Paulsen; David Fung;Jerry Liu;Alan Takahashi Cc: City Clerk Subject: Please remove 2M square foot office allocation at Vallco Dear city councilmen/councilwomen&planning commissioners, Please include this letter as part of the public record. You had heard the voices from Cupertino residents against Vallco's Measure D from 2016 election results, it is very clear our Cupertino residents don't want to have 2M square foot office and all the hight density buildings at Vallco. In addition, if we don't remove the 2M square foot office allocation at Vallco, California's SB35, SB 167/AB678, and AB 1515 will create complications that our city can't afford to have, it will also impact our neighbor cities badly. Please remove the 2M square foot office allocation at Vallco ASAP. Thanks. Sincerely yours Alan Penn Cupertino resident Total Control Panel Loam To:svaidhyanathan(i,cupertino.org Message Score:30 High(60):Pass From:alanp_usa@yahoo.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block yahoo.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 40 Grace Schmidt From: Liana Crabtree <lianacrabtree@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 6:03 PM To: Savita Vaidhyanathan; Darcy Paul; Barry Chang; Steven Scharf, Rod Sinks; Don Sun; Geoff Paulsen; David Fung;Jerry Liu;Alan Takahashi Cc: City Clerk Subject: Request to Close Open-ended Aspects of the General Plan Before State Housing Laws Take Effect on 1/1/2018 Dear Cupertino City Council and Planning Commission: Please include this letter as part of the public record regarding the topic of mending vulnerabilities in the General Plan affecting the Vallco Shopping District site (Vallco)prior to the 1/1/2018 effectivity date of pending state housing laws, especially SB 35, SB 167/AB 678, and AB 1515. Now is the time to act! Spare the community from unmitigated environmental harm associated with excessive, unsupported development at Vallco. Now is the time to save Vallco as a shopping/dining/entertainment/recreation destination for the benefit of the whole community. It is imperative that the City Council close up open-ended aspects of the General Plan affecting Vallco to ensure that the City, not the State nor the developer, controls land use and density at the site.Please support the following changes to the General Plan to be enacted no later than 12131/2017. • remove the entire 2 MILLION square foot office allocation that was granted after the current property owner purchased the property • restore the maximum density specifications (1.5 feet of setback for every 1 foot of building height; 45 foot maximum building height or 60 foot maximum building height if the structure includes a retail component) to what-they were at the time the current owner purchased the Vallco property language to the General Plan to confirm V ll..o as a regional shopping/dining/entertainment/recreation destination by establishing that the retail component will be reset to no less than 50% of the total square footage of development on the site • add language to the General Plan to confirm that open space allocated at Vallco will be level (free of slope, lumps, hills, and suitable for pickup ball games, such as soccer) and located at ground level. No elevated rooftop or canopy parks. Thank you for your consideration and action to retain some level of local control at Vallco by closing open- ended aspects of the General Plan by 12/31/2017 to ensure that the developer cannot exploit vulnerabilities in the General Plan to enhance its profits at the expense of the needs and interests of residents. Sincerely, Liana Crabtree Cupertino resident RESOURCES/REFERENCES + Meyers Nave, fact sheet for 2017 housing legislation: 41 i I http•//www meyersnave.com/broad-affordable-housing bill-package-signed-governor/ + Sierra Club California Legislative Priority List 2017: https•//www.sierraclub.orWsites/www.sierraclub.orglfiles/sce/sierra-club- california/PDFs/Final 2017 Priority Bill List 10.22.17.pdf +Legislative Information, SB 35 (2017-2018): http•//le ing fo legislature ca gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill id=201720180SB35 +Legislative Information, SB 167 (2017-2018)/AB 678 (2017-2018), these bills are identical: SB 167 -https•//le ing fo legislature ca gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill id=201720180SB167 AB 678 -https:Hle 'nig fo legislature ca gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill id=201720180AB678 I + Legislative Information,AB 1515 (2017-2018): http:Hle info legislature ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill id=201720180AB1515 +City of Cupertino, General Plan, 2015-2040 (see "Chapter 3: Land Use and Community Character Element," 'Table LU-1: Citywide Development Allocation Between 2014-2040,'p LU-13 [PDF p LU-13]; and `Figure LU-1 Community Form Diagram' p LU-17 [PDF p LU-17]): http•//www Cupertino or our-city/departments/community-development/planning/general-plan/general-plan +City of Cupertino, General Plan, 2000-2020, last updated 6/1/2010 (see Community Form Map, p 2-5 [PDF p 19]; Maximum Building Heights Map p 2-11 [PDF p 25], Table 2-A Development Allocation,p 2-17, [PDF p 31]; and Policy 2-30 `Vallco Park South' p 2-25 to 2-27, [PDF pp 39-41]): htlp:H64 165 34 13/WebLink/O/doc/493595/Pa eg 1.aspx?searchid=6f3cd6f4-a3ea-42fd-b8f8-1772858ff7b6 Total Control Panel Login To:bchang@cupertino.org Message Score:30 High(60): Pass From:lianacrabtree@yahoo.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75): Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block yahoo.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 42 Grace Schmidt From: Toni Oasay-Anderson Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 5:01 PM To: City Clerk Subject: FW:Avoid hasty general plan decisions From: Pete Heller [mailto:peteheller@pacbel1.net] Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 10:28 AM To: Savita Vaidhyanathan <svaidhyanathan@cupertino.org>; Darcy Paul <DPaul@cupertino.org>; Barry Chang <BChang@cupertino.org>; Rod Sinks<RSinks@cupertino.org>; Steven Scharf<SScharf@cupertino.org> Cc: David Brandt<Davidb@cupertino.org>; Aarti Shrivastava <AartiS@cupertino.org>; Don Sun <DSun@cupertino.org>; Geoff Paulsen <GPaulsen@cupertino.org>; David Fung<DFung@cupertino.org>;Jerry Liu <JLiu @cupertino.org>; Alan Takahashi <ATakahashi@cupertino.org> Subject: Avoid hasty general plan decisions City Council and City Staff, It's clear the state is sending a signal to cities regarding the need to boost housing. But the way this is implemented is extremely important and will affect our city for at least the next generation. Don't act hastily! These decisions need to be carefully considered with plenty of community input. Be sure that you follow these principles: • Changes to the City's General Plan must be fully vetted by the Community in a transparent process • The process needs to fully analyze environmental impacts and implications for the planned re-use of the Vallco site and other affected Properties in the City. • Bring any proposed General Plan Amendments to the community FIRST before voting. This will enable citizens to be informed, provide comment, and be empowered to participate in the Civic process as intended. • All Council Members and Planning Commissioners need to respect in good faith the normal planning process by acting only after having received professional impact studies and public input. Respectfully, Pete Heller 27 year resident Total Control Panel Login To:bchang((a�cupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60): Pa„ From:petehel lergpacbel 1.net My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75): Piss Low(90): Pa» Block this sender Block pacbell.net This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 43 Grace Schmidt From: Toni Oasay-Anderson Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 5:00 PM To: City Clerk Subject: FW: Redevelopment at Vallco From: Cynthia Moll [mailto:cynthiamoll@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 1:48 PM To:City Council<CityCouncil@cupertino.org>;Savita Vaidhyanathan<svaidhyanathan@cupertino.org>; Darcy Paul <DPaul@cupertino.org>; Barry Chang<BChang@cupertino.org>; Rod Sinks<RSinks@cupertino.org>; Steven Scharf <SScharf@cupertino.org>; David Brandt<Davidb@cupertino.org>;Aarti Shrivastava<AartiS@cupertino.org>; Don Sun <DSun@cupertino.org>; Geoff Paulsen<GPaulsen@cupertino.org>; David Fung<DFung@cupertino.org>;Jerry Liu <JLiu@cupertino.org>; Alan Takahashi<ATakahashi@cupertino.org> Subject: Redevelopment at Vallco Cupertino City Council - I was disappointed to hear that the City of Cupertino chose to publish a zoning change for the site referred to as Vallco during Thanksgiving week when so many of us will be focused on spending time with our families out of town. I was more disappointed to hear that the proposed change would commit our community to a"retail only" solution for the site of a currently failed"retail only"mall. How is it that the City Council can approve office space for 5,000 employees at the new Apple campus yet fail to see the need for housing for those very same employees. My family and I have called Cupertino our home for the past five years but we have been unable to find a house to purchase since we sold our home in Orange County. We understood that we were tasking a risk when we sold our home in exchange for professional satisfaction-but never realized that we would be supplementing our income with the proceeds of that sale five years later. Housing in this town is ridiculously expensive(this is not news)but, sadly,those prices would not change with an increased supply of housing. Furthermore, it seems that the argument that is frequently used when opposing residential units at Vallco is added traffic. Have you driven to Valley Fair recently? The traffic jam begins one mile before the Winchester exit and continues from every direction into the various ingresses to the shopping center. I currently avoid Stevens Creek at all costs - I can just imagine the increased traffic on Rodrigues, Miller and other residential streets to avoid this additional Mall traffic. Better yet. Maybe it's time to leave Cupertino and the dysfunction that cripples common sense development. Respectfully yours, Cynthia Moll Tula Lane Sent from Cynthia's iPhone Total Control Panel Login To:bchangaa,cupertino.org Message Score: I High(60): Pass 44 i I From:cynthiamollAhotmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90): Pass Block this sender Block hotmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 45 Grace Schmidt From: Cynthia Moll <cynthiamoll@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 1:48 PM To: City Council; Savita Vaidhyanathan; Darcy Paul; Barry Chang; Rod Sinks; Steven Scharf, David Brandt;Aarti Shrivastava; Don Sun; Geoff Paulsen; David Fung;Jerry Liu;Alan Takahashi Subject: Redevelopment at Vallco Cupertino City Council - I was disappointed to hear that the City of Cupertino chose to publish a zoning change for the site referred to as Vallco during Thanksgiving week when so many of us will be focused on spending time with our families out of town. I was more disappointed to hear that the proposed change would commit our community to a"retail only" solution for the site of a currently failed"retail only"mall. How is it that the City Council can approve office space for 5,000 employees at the new Apple campus yet fail to see the need for housing for those very same employees. My family and I have called Cupertino our home for the past five years but we have been unable to find a house to purchase since we sold our home in Orange County. We understood that we were tasking a risk when we sold our home in exchange for professional satisfaction -but never realized that we would be supplementing our income with the proceeds of that sale five years later. Housing in this town is ridiculously expensive(this is not news)but, sadly,those prices would not change with an increased supply of housing. Furthermore, it seems that the argument that is frequently used when opposing residential units at Vallco is added traffic. Have you driven to Valley Fair recently? The traffic jam begins one mile before the Winchester -exit and continues from every direction into the various ingresses to the shopping center. I currently avoid Stevens Creek at all costs - I can just imagine the increased traffic on Rodrigues, Miller and other residential streets to avoid this additional Mall traffic. Better yet. Maybe it's time to leave Cupertino and the dysfunction that cripples common sense development. Respectfully yours, Cynthia Moll Tula Lane Sent from Cynthia's iPhone Total Control Panel Leo m To:citycouncil(a)cupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60):Pass From:cynthiamoll@hotmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90): Pass Block this sender Block hotmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 46 Grace Schmidt From: Pete Heller <peteheller@pacbell.net> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 10:28 AM To: Savita Vaidhyanathan; Darcy Paul; Barry Chang; Rod Sinks; Steven Scharf Cc: David Brandt;Aarti Shrivastava; Don Sun; Geoff Paulsen; David Fung;Jerry Liu; Alan Takahashi Subject: Avoid hasty general plan decisions City Council and City Staff, It's clear the state is sending a signal to cities regarding the need to boost housing. But the way this is implemented is extremely important and will affect our city for at least the next generation. Don't act hastily! These decisions need to be carefully considered with plenty of community input. Be sure that you follow these principles: • Changes to the City's General Plan must be fully vetted by the Community in a transparent process • The process needs to fully analyze environmental impacts and implications for the planned re-use of the Vallco site and other affected Properties in the City. • Bring any proposed General Plan Amendments to the community FIRST before voting. This will enable citizens to be informed, provide comment, and be empowered to participate in the Civic process as intended. • All Council Members and Planning Commissioners need to respect in good faith the normal planning process by acting only after having received professional impact studies and public input. Respectfully, Pete Heller 27 year resident Total Control Panel Login To:svaidhyanathan(acupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60): Pacs From:peteheller@pacbell.net My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75): h0U Low(90): Pa > Block this sender Block pacbell.net This message was delivered because the contentfzlterscore did not exceed yourfilter level. 47 Grace Schmidt From: Paulette Altmaier <paulette@altmaier.us> Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2017 10:28 PM To: City Council Subject: Removing the housing element from Vallco????? We have just received the notice telling us that the city council is looking to change the General Plan to remove housing from Vallco on a rushed schedule. i This is pretty outrageous. The city council should not make this drastic change without a proper process and without extensive citizen involvement, and without first working out a specific plan for Vallco that realizes its potential. Fundamentally, this is an attempt to enshrine Measure C in the general plan through a rushed process. We are strongly opposed to this, and have great concerns about the integrity of this process. Total Control Panel Loom To:citycouncilAcupertino.org Message Score: 15 High(60): Pass IfI From:paulette@altmaier.us My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75): Pass i' Low(90): Pass t Block this sender ( Block altmaier.us I This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. i 48 Grace Schmidt From: United Cupertino <unitedcupertino@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2017 10:03 PM To: City Council Subject: Cupertino Moves to ELIMINATE the Housing Element Designation from Vallco Can't See This Message? View in a browser RESIDENT".FOR A UNITED ClUPERTINO Cupertino Moves to ELIMINATE the Housing Element Designation from Valko ............. ....... ............. ........... 49 Cupertino Published in the Courier on Friday the City's Move to Thwart Housing and Make Vallco a Retail-only Site, Just in Time for the Thanksgiving Holiday. Read more at Unite dCupertino.org Did you see Friday's Cupertino Courier? Wedged in fine print on page 24 and 25, you'll see the City served its official legal "NOTICE" that the Council is moving to remove the Housing Element Designation at Vallco making it impossible to develop any kind of housing, affordable or market-rate. This is an even more extreme measure than was called for on the dais at the November 7, 2017 City Council meeting by Council Members Scharf and Paul and would seem to indicate the Council member's sense this is their best chance at forever stopping redevelopment. A General Plan Amendment that takes away all the office and housing allocation achieves the goals of Measure C, which was voted down by more than 60% of Cupertino citizens. Measure C was put on the ballot by an anti-development group called "Better Cupertino", who would rather see Vallco rot than turn into a productive use. It will ensure that Vallco cannot be redeveloped into an exciting shopping, dining and entertainment experience, much less a vibrant mixed-use, mixed-income town center for our Community. Darcy Paul and Steven Scharf are attempting to make the largest change to Cupertino's General Plan in years in less than a month, over the holidays, apparently hoping that no one would notice. The perfect time to go for the jugular. Here's how they plan to do it: • November 21: Closed-Session City Council Discussion of"Down-zoning" at the Vallco Site—This proposed meeting was listed under an intentionally deceptive title on the November 21 City Council Agenda • November 27 at 9:30am: Special Environmental Review Committee Meeting to be held the Monday after Thanksgiving at 9:30am to consider the General Plan Amendment removing office and housing allocation from the Vallco site. • November 27 at 6:45pm: City Council Study Session on impacts of new California State legislation. • November 28 at 6:45pm: Planning Commission Hearing that will consider the General Plan Amendment removing office and housing allocation from the Vallco site less than 24 hours after learning about the new the housing laws and their possible impacts and without any study or Community input. • December 19: Scheduled City Council Vote on the General Plan Amendment that I J J I CITY OF CUPERTINO CITYWIDE NOTICEOF GENERAL PLAN E ZONING AMENDMENTS The Placating Comrnisai#Y7 will consider general plan amendments to addre" policy,text and figure edits and related yioning arnerutments pertaining to 1.Development potential at the Valloo Shopping District 2:Appropriate general plan and zoning amendments to implement Scenario B as shown in the housing Oem+mt of the City-is C;aneral Plan.Impknrentation of Scenario B%vuld involve at least the following changes.-a.Removal of Vallto Shopping Center(Site A2)as a housing element site:b.Increasing the number of net new units at the Hamptons (Site Bl)from 600 to 750 units,with increased density from 85 too 99 units peracre and a potential ince in heighht;c_Inert,%"ing the number of units at the Oaks Slopping Center (Site 82)from W)to 235 units, with increased density from 30 to 35 units per ave;d. Designating Glenbrook Apar"entas (Site 55) as a housing element site at a maximum density of 20 writs per ave (no changes to existing density), allocating Sit additional units to the site: and e, Rezoning 1lrxrnestsad Lanes and adjart properties (Site 86) to permit residential development at 35 dwelling units per acre;and afloea ting 132 units to the site. Thr amendments to the General Plan may include changes to tcxG policies and figures.The oranges include,but are not limited to,changes in the following Chaptors: Intr%tduction, Planning Awas, I nd Use and Community Design,and Technical Appendices, In anticipation of the amendments to the General Plan and the Zoning Map, the City of Cupertino is preparing a Second Addendum to the General Plan Amendmcnt, Housing 1zl-Linent Update,and Associated Rezoning krivircmmentat Impact Report(EER)(SCH No,20140M007)(EIR),pursuant to the requirements of the California Eattironnterrta]duality Act (CEQA), to evaluate whether the amender% nEg to the General PLut and Toning Map would have any new car -substantially more significant effects on the environment that %veto not analyrxd in the EIR to be reviewed by tete Environmental Review Committee. Application Title; CPA-2017-04, 2017.02(EA-2013=013):Proposed b}~City of Cttpc"ino;Location; Vailco Shopping District(10101, 1012=1, iUISf1 %0330,1%)333,and 10313 N.Wolfe 1fe Rd, 10380 Perimeter Rai one vacant pam-1 en the northwe,g portion of the Vallco Shopping District and two parcels with parking garages(commonly referred to as dw Macy's parking garage and JC Pentreys parking garage)with no address Hamptons Apartments(19,500 Prurwnclgr Ave),The teaks Shopping Center(21265:tevons Creek hive!and one. surface parking tot located in the northwest corner of the Shopping Center);Homestead Lanes and Adjacency(213944 20956,.and 20916 Homestead Rd and It'M N.Stelling Rd.)�and the Gloftbruoks Apartrnents(10164 and 1021,0 Pprkwro:+d Dr)(APINI til(a 2Cz tom:316 20 106,316 2D 104;315 20101,316 20 1f35;316 20 107,316 20 041,316 20 0 K);316 20 09Z 316 20 099,316 20 04t;-316 20 100;316 20 095;316 20 082;316 ofi 058;316 06050;316€6 W;3u 27030, 326 27 044 326 09 051;3.2609 052.326 09 06W,12609 061) The City of Cupertino will hold a special Environmental Review Commitee (LRCI meting to [-nrt±ader tkr<Third Addendum to the General Plan Amendment,Housing Element Update,and Associated Rexuning EIR tether with the EIR can Monday,November 271h,201', at 9:.M a.m.,in Crmfewnce Rena too (VDC Room)at Cupertino City Ball at 10300 Torre Avenue,Cupertino,CA 9,5014:end a Planning commi�*ian pukAic hstnfi'nS to kxvr*.'Jer and make c nmrning the Second Addendum and general plan and zoning amendments on Tuesday,November 28„ 2017 at 6:0'pm at the Council Chambers,Community Hall,103M Torre Avenue, Cupertino,CA 9,5014.In addition, the City will aleo hold a City Council public hearing Environmental Review Comititte+e to hider and make a docision on whether to adopt the Sea+c't>nd Addendum and hionday,NovemlNes 27,20t7 ciao AM Share via: 0 READ MORE AT UNITEDCUPERTINO.€3RG } I I You've received this email because you are a subscriber of this site If you feel you received it by mistake or wish to unsubscribe, click here 51 Total Control Panel Login To:citycouncilAcupertino.org Message Score: 10 High(60):Pass From:bounces+3420225-44la- My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass citycouncil=cupertino.org@sg.wixshoutout.com Low(90): Pass Block this sender Block sg.wixshoutout.com This message was delivered because the content filterscore did not exceed yourfilter level. I I ail 52 Grace Schmidt From: Danessa Techmanski <danessa@pacbell.net> Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2017 2:59 PM To: Savita Vaidhyanathan; Darcy Paul;Steven M. Scharf, Rod Sinks; Barry Chang; David Brandt; City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: Summary Concerns of the New Housing Bills Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Staff, I recently attended a dinner forum on the new housing bills. Although I think that the idea of building more affordable housing in earnest is a good thing, I am deeply concerned about the vague wording, lack of clear precedence and example, flexible interpretation,burden of proof on local governments, loose use of testimony from"reasonable persons", and the unforeseen consequences relating to four bills in particular. Those bills are SB 35, AB 678, SB 167, AB 1515, and AB 879. Please keep in mind that I am only a concerned lay resident and by no means any sort of expert on housing. My intent is honestly to draw your attention to conditions that I find may be problematic in the new housing bills that deserve thorough scrutiny by your persons. So here's my rundown: SB 35 1) Streamlined Approval: Sand Hill could use the 2M sq. ft. of office and unspecified height at Vallco to present a plan with with a minimum amount of affordable housing(and 90%market-rate, for-rent housing) at 35 units per acre (on a 51 acre site)plus the 2 M.sq. ft. of offices plus 600,000 sq. ft. of retail. And, because the site includes affordable housing, it could qualify for a 15% density bonus (5 additional units per acre) or 20% density bonus (7 additional units per acre) if senior housing(no affordable units required). The resulting project under such circumstances could be something close to 8M. sq. ft. 2)The elimination of CEQA could enable developers to locate lower income housing too close to freeways or other undesirable areas. 3)The 2/3rd's potential residential green light could allow both Vallco and the Oaks. Besides gain a housing density and ridiculously low rates of parking that will make both sites unfitting, unattractive, unsafe, and even more problematic for traffic. 4) It is not likely that this bill will give any relief to the majority of people from high housing prices. AB 1515 -The Worst 1) Specifies that"a housing development or project is deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with a policy, ordinance, standard, requirement if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the housing development project is consistent, complaint or in conformity." In the case that the project might have an adverse impact on public health or safety, such as proposed traffic dangers to students or the elderly crossing near the Oaks, the City must prove that such circumstances are quantifiable and 53 unavoidable and cannot be mitigated, AND you must prove that those hazards existed at the time of completed application—not in the potential future. (L,d,2). i 2) Could allow low income housing in isolation from more moderate or upscale housing(not integrated into the community), or with design features (or lack of them) that our city and residents would view as otherwise unacceptable. In other words, I do not believe that low income people should be relegated to ugly tenement housing next to freeways, cement plants, etc. 3) The burden of proof and reasonable persons clause terms are used to address adverse impacts on public health and safety. In cases such that there are potential proposed traffic dangers to students or the elderly crossing near the Oaks for example,the City must prove that such circumstances are quantifiable and unavoidable and cannot be mitigated, AND you must prove that those hazards existed at the time of completed application—not in the potential future. (L,d,2). 4)The city cannot disapprove or conditionally approve a housing development project for very low, low-, or moderate-income households including through the use of design review standards,unless it makes written findings,based upon substantial evidence in the record that the city has already adopted a housing element pursuant to this article and has met or exceeded its share of the regional housing need allocation.(L,d) If the proposed housing development project includes a mix of income categories, and the jurisdiction has not met or exceeded its share of housing needs for one or more of those categories, then the city cannot disapprove or conditionally approve the project. (L,d,1) 5) Zoning: Later paragraphs 5A, B, and C of AB 1515 address the ability to reject a project even though it may be inconsistent with both the zoning and general plan land use designations and the city's responsibility to identify all such element sites in advance. In the case that the city has not satisfied its quota of very low- or low sites it is up to the city to prove that such sites,whether residential or mixed use, would not be adequate for very low; and low-income housing as long as at least 20% of the units can be sold or rented as such. Does this in fact mean that if a plaintiff argues that an area designated as R1 could by.their estimation be zoned as an R-3 or P that those R1 areas could be changed in court and the City could be found-at fault? 6) In summary, AB 1515 appears to override the city's ability to address health, safety, density, design, and zoning without quantifiable and concrete evidence for doing so. My fear is that developers could use the inclusion of low income housing to argue greater amounts of luxury housing for example,to make their projects more viable/profitable. Of course the argument to add more office to achieve targeted profit margins is in itself moot as any addition of more office further increases the need for more housing,but I won't be surprised when it comes up. AB 678 and SB 167 (very similar bills) 1) These laws in particular will increase restrictions on the ability of the city to reduce density. 2) Will impose an extremely high bar of legitimacy for plan rejections or conditions by local governments. They will give not just greater latitude for developers,but also for housing applicants housing advocates, organization, and trade industries (UNIONS)to sue our city in court with the burden of proof falling on the city that a proposed project is in fact unacceptable. The courts can now issue orders to comply within 60 days coupled with attorney's fees and the imposition of fines to be deposited into a housing trust fund. Fines not paid within 30 days they may be increased to $50,000 per unit. 54 j 3) In my opinion these bills seems unconstitutional as they eliminate the rights of local governments and residents to determine the character of their city and they impact the welfare of existing property owners. They also eliminate important public engagement and review that could pinpoint area specific problems and impacts, and will lead to a greater air of distrust between the public and their elected representatives. AB 879 --Another Worst Requires mitigation fees to be substantially reduced without providing other funding for services and infrastructure that are required to serve new development thus falling on the backs of our City and taxpayers. For example,remedy for our already stressed sewer capacity near Vallco will have to be paid for by taxpayers, and not the developer. You cannot refuse the project for that reason. AB 678, SB 167 and AB 1515 are all known as the Anti-NIMBY laws, will limit a city's ability to disapprove or impose conditions on housing developments unless specific, measurable, quantifiable findings can be made in writing. This reads to me that a developer could argue that imposed design or density adjustments for earnest reasons could be abused to facilitate the profit margins of developers with little recourse for local governments. Note also that AB 1515, AB 678, SB 35, and SB 167 were all opposed by the American Planning Association's California Chapter. AB 1515 is sponsored and written in part by the California Building Industry Association (Hinmimmn). All have prestigious lists of environmental organizations that oppose them, including the Sierra Club (see below*). I feel that such one-size fits-all laws are a dangerous breach to democracy and could be abused more to the advantage of developers and attorneys than they may be a resolution to our housing crises. In particular I believe that they render moot the growing concerns and emerging research findings on the health hazards of traffic and air quality in Silicon Valley. Finally, the anti-Nimby laws in particular operate under the premise that everything can and should be located in Silicon Valley, They also violate the rights of persons who have invested their lives and fortunes in pursuit of a certain quality of life, and I see them as a threat to the ecology and beauty that is the trademark of California. I do believe that our city's and residents' growing awareness of the particulars of thehousing-crises would have willingly and actively resulted in the address of such issues as is in the spirit of community that makes Cupertino the caring city that it is,but at this point, that is of little recourse. Thank you for your patience and attendance. Please let me know of how I can be of support to any of you. Best always, Danessa Techmanski 30-year resident 4th generation Californian * Who are funding these housing bills? Here are a subset of those supporting these housing bills. • California Building Industry Association • Council of Infill Builders • aliforniaC Conference of Carpenters • Los Angeles County Federation of Labor 55 • Bay Area Council • California Apartment Association • California Chamber of Commerce • California Asian Chamber of Commerce • California Asian Pacific Chamber of Commerce • California Business Properties Association • Nonprofit Housing Association of Northern California i • Silicon Valley Leadership Group • YIMBY Action • San Francisco Housing Action Coalition i • San Francisco Yes-In-My-Back-Yard Party • California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund • California Association of Realtors • California League of Conservation Voters • League of Women Voters A subset of those opposing these bills: • League of California Cities • American Planning Association, California Chapter • California State Association of Counties • Rural County Representatives of California • Urban Counties of California • California State Association of Counties • Marin County Council of Mayors and Council Members • The Cities Association of Santa Clara County • Many individual cities and towns . Sierra Club of California f Total Control Panel Loem To:bchangAcupertino.org Message Score: 10 High(60): Pass From:danessa@pacbell.net My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90): Pass Block this sender Block pacbell.net This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 56 Grace Schmidt From: Pilar Lorenzana <pilar@siliconvalleyathome.org> Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2017 4:16 PM To: City Council; Savita Vaidhyanathan; Darcy Paul; Barry Chang; Rod Sinks; Steven Scharf; David Brandt;Aarti Shrivastava Cc: Corsiglia Leslye Subject: Proposed general plan and zoning ordinance amendments (GPA-2017-04, Z-2017-02 (EA-2013-03)) Attachments: ATT00001.htm; SVH_Vallco Rezone_final.pdf Mayor Vaidhyanathan and members of the Cupertino City Council, On behalf of our members,I respectfully submit the attached letter regarding upcoming City Council,Planning Commission, and Environmental Review Commission hearings about housing on the Vallco property. Sincerely, Pilar Lorenzana Deputy Director SV@Home Office: (510) 255-1253 pilar0siliconvalleyathome.org Total Control Panel Loein To:citycouncilAcupertino.org Message Score:25 High(60):Pass From:pilar@siliconvalleyathome.org My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Blocksiliconvalleyathome.org This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. svLahome 350 W Julian St. #5, San Jose, CA 95110 Website I Facebook I Twitter I LinkedIn I Become a Member! SV@Home has a new website! Check out the Resource Hub for all your housing data needs Total Control Panel Login I To:citycouncilOcupertino.org Message Score:25 High(60): Pass From:pilar@siliconvalleyathome.org My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass 57 Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block siliconvalleyathome.org This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. Total Control Panel L99in To:citvcouncilAcupertino.org Message Score:25 High(60):Pass From:pilar@siliconvalleyathome.org My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90):Pass zi Block this sender Block siliconvalleyathome.org This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. I 1 4 k E r' k 58 Grace Schmidt From: Pilar Lorenzana <pilar@siliconvalleyathome.org> Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2017 4:06 PM To: City Council Cc: Savita Vaidhyanathan; Darcy Paul; Barry Chang; Rod Sinks; Steven Scharf, David Brandt; Aarti Shrivastava Subject: Proposed general plan and zoning ordinance amendments (GPA-2017-04,Z-2017-02 (EA-2013-03)) Mayor Vaidhyanathan and members of the Cupertino City Council, On behalf of our members, I respectfully submit the attached letter regarding upcoming City Council,Planning Commission, and Environmental Review Commission hearings regarding housing on the Vallco property. Sincerely, Total Control Panel Loin To:dpaul(a)cupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60): [lass From:pilar@siliconvalleyathome.org My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75): Pass Low(90): Pass Block this sender Block siliconvalleyathome.org This message was delivered because the contentfilter score did not exceed your filter level. 59 Grace Schmidt From: Kevin Burke <kev@inburke.com> Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2017 10:17 AM To: Darcy Paul Subject: Please don't vote to downzone Cupertino (near Vallco or anywhere) Vice Mayor Paul, I'm a renter in Belmont. I've watched with worry as Cupertino has added a ton of new office space without adding any new housing to match. Those office workers need to live somewhere- if Cupertino doesn't add any new housing they'll bid up the price of apartments in my town. This is exactly what we've seen. Since 2010 Santa Clara County has added 160,000 jobs and only 30,000 new housing units. San Mateo County has added 75,000 jobs and only 4,000 housing units. Rents have nearly doubled in both counties. I think Cupertino should add enough new housing to match the office space it's building. More new housing would also help reduce upward pressure on rents. The California LAO agrees: we need more private housing construction in coastal areas. http•//www lao ca. og v/rgports/2015/finance/housing-costs/housing-costs.aspx In addition, the proposed Vallco development would provide relief in the form of a BMR unit to a large number of Cupertino families. You have the power to give those families a better life. Downzoning would make it more difficult for Cupertino to add new housing. Total Control Panel LSO m To:dpaul@,cupertino.org Message Score: I High(60):Pass From:kev@inburke.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75): Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block inburke.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 60 Grace Schmidt From: Kevin Burke <kev@inburke.com> Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2017 10:17 AM To: Savita Vaidhyanathan Subject: Please don't vote to downzone Cupertino (near Vallco or anywhere) Mayor Vaidhyanathan, I'm a renter in Belmont. I've watched with worry as Cupertino has added a ton of new office space without adding any new housing to match. Those office workers need to live somewhere - if Cupertino doesn't add any new housing they'll bid up the price of apartments in my town. This is exactly what we've seen. Since 2010 Santa Clara County has added 160,000 jobs and only 30,000 new housing units. San Mateo County has added 75,000 jobs and only 4,000 housing units. Rents have nearly doubled in both counties. I think Cupertino should add enough new housing to match the office space it's building. More new housing would also help reduce upward pressure on rents. The California LAO agrees: we need more private housing construction in coastal areas. hqp://www.lao.ca. og v/rgports/2015/finance/housing-costs/housing-costs.gUx In addition, the proposed Vallco development would provide relief in the form of a BMR unit to a large number of Cupertino families. You have the power to give those families a better life. Downzoning would make it more difficult for Cupertino to add new housing. Total Control Panel Login To:svaidhyanathan@,cupertino.org Message Score: 15 High(60): Pass From:kev@inburke.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75): Pass Low(90): Pass Block this sender Block inburke.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 61 Grace Schmidt From: Kevin Burke <kev@inburke.com> Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2017 10:17 AM To: Rod Sinks Subject: Please don't vote to downzone Cupertino (near Vallco or anywhere) Attachments: ATT00001.txt;ATT00002.htm Total Control Panel Login To:rsinksgeupertino.org Message Score: I High(60):Pas From:kev@inburke.com My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75): NS Low(90): 11as Block this sender Block inburke.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 62 Grace Schmidt From: Kevin Burke <kev@inburke.com> Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2017 10:17 AM To: Steven Scharf Subject: Please don't vote to downzone Cupertino (near Vallco or anywhere) Councilmember Scharf, I'm a renter in Belmont. I've watched with worry as Cupertino has added a ton of new office space without adding any new housing to match. Those office workers need to live somewhere- if Cupertino doesn't add any new housing they'll bid up the price of apartments in my town. This is exactly what we've seen. Since 2010 Santa Clara County has added 160,000 jobs and only 30,000 new housing units. San Mateo County has.added 75,000 jobs and only 4,000 housing units. Rents have nearly doubled in both counties. I think Cupertino should add enough new housing to match the office space it's building. More new housing would also help reduce upward pressure on rents. The California LAO agrees: we need more private housing construction in coastal areas. http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2015/finance/housing-costs/housing-costs.q x In addition, the proposed Vallco development would provide relief in the form of a BMR unit to a large number of Cupertino families. You have the power to give those families a better life. Downzoning would make it more difficult for Cupertino to add new housing. Total Control Panel Lo in To:sscharf(cDcupertino.org Remove this sender from my allow list From:kev@inburke.com You received this message because the sender is on your allow list. 63 Grace Schmidt From: Kevin Burke <kev@inburke.com> Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2017 10:17 AM To: Barry Chang Subject: Please don't vote to downzone Cupertino (near Vallco or anywhere) Councilmember Chang, I'm a renter in Belmont. I've watched with worry as Cupertino has added a ton of new office space without adding any new housing to match. Those office workers need to live somewhere - if Cupertino doesn't add any new housing they'll bid up the price of apartments in my town. This is exactly what we've seen. Since 2010 Santa Clara County has added 160,000 jobs and only 30,000 new housing units. San Mateo County has added 75,000 jobs and only 4,000 housing units. Rents have nearly doubled in both counties. I think Cupertino should add enough new housing to match the office space it's building. More new housing would also help reduce upward pressure on rents. The California LAO agrees: we need more private housing construction in coastal areas. http•//www lao ca.gov/reports/2015/finance/housing-costs/housing-costs.q x In addition,the proposed Vallco development would provide relief in the form of a BMR unit to a large number of Cupertino families. You have the power to give those families a better life. Downzoning would make it more difficult for Cupertino to add new housing. Total Control Panel Lo in To:bchang(a,cupertino.org Message Score: 15 High(60):Pass From:kev@inburke.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block inburke.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 64 Grace Schmidt From: Paulette Altmaier <Pau lette@altmaier.us> Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2017 8:21 AM To: City Council Subject: Appalled by attempted backdoor actions Dear City Council, I am appalled and angered by the efforts of members Scharf and Paul to ram through a change to the City General Plan prior to the end of the year, and behind closed doors too! We citizens of Cupertino will not tolerate this action. It is essential that the rest of the Council not be complicit in this disgraceful attempt to override the will of the people. The new state housing laws, of which I and others are very supportive,may not be contorted into a fig-leaf to change our General Plan in violation of the will of the residents of Cupertino, and to stymie the redevelopment of Vallco, the Oaks, and other critical Cupertino assets. Sincerely, Paulette Altmaier Total Control Panel Loein To:citycouncil(a�cupertino.org Message Score: 15 High(60):Pass From:paulette@altmaier.us My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90):Pros Block this sender Block altmaier.us This message was delivered because the contentfilter score did not exceed your filter level. i i 65 Grace Schmidt From: Liang-Fang Chao <Ifchao@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, November 17, 2017 11:22 PM To: City Council; David Brandt; City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: Provisions in the General Plan to Prevent Abuse Dear City Council Members and Planning Staff, At the time the City Council amended the General Plan in December 2014, the City Council left it fussy at Vallco Shopping Center site to allow the developer Sand Hill to come up with a project proposal. As a result, the current General Plan contains a massive 2 million square feet of office allocation and there is no height limit at Vallco Shopping Center site. Even a skyscraper would still comply to the current General Plan and that's worrisome. From my preliminary understanding of the new housing bills, the General Plan will be the last and only line of defense against poorly designed projects that might create significant negative impacts on Cupertino and the environments. It is essential that the General Plan gives clear and precise development standards so that there is no confusion whether a project complies with the General Plan or not to avoid potential lawsuits. It is essential that the General Plan gives sufficient limits to development standards so that projects built to the maximum of the standards would fit the characteristics of Cupertino. This is because under certain conditions, the city council will no longer have the final decision power on a streamlined project as long as it complies with the General Plan. Please examine the General Plan for the Vallco Shopping Center site and beyond. Have we clearly defined design standards in the General Plan? Should some provisions in the Municipal Code be moved to the General Plan so that streamlined projects are still subject to those provisions. Please assume the worst case, since the worst case might happen. What if Vallco Shopping Mall is sold again to another developer? What if Vallco Shopping Mall is sold to multiple developers? (Vallco has 11 parcels, I believe) Are provisions in the General Plan sufficient to set design standards for such cases? Thank you for your consideration. Regards, Liang Chao Cupertino resident Total Control Panel Login To:citycouncilP—cuperdno.org Message Score: 1 High(60):Pass From:lfchao@gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 66 67 Grace Schmidt From: Lauren Sapudar Sent: Friday, November 17, 2017 1:56 PM To: City Clerk; Beth Ebben Subject: FW: Weaken City Power - Senate Bill 167, Assembly Bill 678 and Assembly Bill 1515 From: Liang-Fang Chao [mailto:lfchao@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 17, 2017 1:12 PM To: City Council<CityCouncil@cupertino.org>; David Brandt <Davidb@cupertino.org>; City of Cupertino Planning Dept. <planning@cupertino.org> Subject:Weaken City Power-Senate Bill 167, Assembly Bill 678 and Assembly Bill 1515 Dear City Council Members and Planning Staff, Thank you for studying the housing bills to be enacted on Jan. 1, 2018. Could you please also look into bills that will weaken the city's ability to defend its decisions made in 2018 or later? If a decision is made in 2017 to amend the General Plan, what such a decision easier for the city to defend than a decision delayed to 2018? http•/lwwwlatimes com/politics/la-pol-ca-housing-legislation-signed-2o17o92A- htmistory.html The Housing Accountability Act passed in 1982 prohibits cities from saying no to housing projects that meet zoning requirements simply because they don't like them. But such cases are hard to prove. Three measures, Senate Bill 167,Assembly Bill 678 and Assembly Bill 1515,will beef up the existing law by making it easier for developers to prove a city acted in bad faith when denying a project, and by upping a city's penalty to $1o,000 per unit they rejected. What if the city defer the decision to the voters? If the city puts a project proposal or a specific/general plan amendment on the ballot for the voters to approve and the voters reject it, would that prevent any developer from suing the city? If the city were to approve/reject a project proposal or a specific/general plan amendment and a referendum is submitted to put the decision on the ballot, would that prevent any developer from suing the city for any decision made by the voters? Thank you for clarifying these questions. Liang Chao Cupertino Resident 'Total Control Panel Loge To:citycouncilAcupertino.org Message Score: I High(60): Pass 68 From:lfchaoAgmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Piss I Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 69 ii Grace Schmidt From: Lauren Sapudar Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 2:22 PM To: City Clerk Subject: FW: Better Cupertino Allies Paul and Scharf Seek to Undo the Cupertino General Plan From: United Cupertino [mailto:unitedcupertino@gmail.com] Sent:Wednesday, November 15, 2017 11:16 PM To: City Council<CityCouncil@cupertino.org> Subject: Better Cupertino Allies Paul and Scharf Seek to Undo the Cupertino General Plan Can't See This Message? View in a browser I RESIDENTS FOR A UNITED I I I � i i Better Cupertino APaul and Scharf Seek to Und the Cupertino General Plan : ....... .............. .............................................. ............................................ : 70 The Better Cupertino Allies, Councilmen Darcy Paul and Steven Scharf, are Attempting to Undo the General Plan Over the Holidays with Zero Public Input and Zero Transparency! You can be forgiven if you didn't listen to the entire 4-hour City Council Meeting on November 7, 2017, but you need to watch the last 20 minutes! That's when Better Cupertino's Council allies, Councilmen Darcy Paul and Steven Scharf, openly forced an effort to undo the Cupertino's General Plan 2040 for properties across the City such as Vallco. Just like their flawed and failed Measure C, this is an all-out NIMBY effort to stop all sustainable (re) development through-out the City. Remember, it was only a month ago that the Vallco Owner asked the City of Cupertino to restart a Community-led planning process to evaluate different alternatives with extensive public input. But before the City has conducted even a single public workshop, Paul and Scharf are attempting to STOP regular order with a back-door Council vote to block this Community-led process. To make their case, Paul and Scharf are using a new State housing bill as their foil to falsely push to undo the 2014 General Plan by the end of THIS year, just in time for the Holidays. They actually asked for multiple closed door sessions to expedite this process before New Years. How is this transparency? How is this good governance on behalf of the citizens of Cupertino? Why this dramatic rush during the Holidays? How many of our unused or decaying properties are going to be affected by Better Cupertino's no-growth goals to stop all development in Cupertino? It's clear that Councilmen Darcy Paul, Steven Scharf, and their political PAC Better Cupertino only cry "transparency!" and "community input!" when it suits their personal agenda! The sweeping changes they seek to the General Plan impact the ENTIRE City. These changes are being considered with zero professional study, zero environmental impact review, zero community input, zero community transparency, and in their rushed timeline, no understanding the vast implications of their actions. This is another half-baked, rushed-through way to stop all development in Cupertino using scare tactics to justify their ends. It sounds a lot like the flawed Measure C and all of its unintended consequences to our City. A CALL TO ACTION - Please write the Cupertino City Council and demand: - I I CITY COUNCIL MEETING November Share\Iia: I READ MORE AT Uh11TEDclJPERT[No.oRG i i I You've received this email because you are a subscriber of this site If you feel you received it by mistake or wish to unsubscribe, click here 72 Total Control Panel Login To:citvcouncil(a)cupertino.org Message Score:25 High(60):Pass From:bounces+3420225-44la- My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass citvcouncil=coertino.orgOsg.wixshoutout.com Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block sg.wixshoutout.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. I 73 i I Grace Schmidt From: Lauren Sapudar Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 2:22 PM To: City Clerk Subject: FW: Upzone, don't downzone Cupertino! From: b.gilamonster@gmail.com [mailto:b.gilamonster@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Barak Gila Sent:Thursday, November 16, 2017 1:32 PM To: Savita Vaidhyanathan <svaidhyanathan@cupertino.org>; Darcy Paul <DPaul@cupertino.org>; Barry Chang <BChang@cupertino.org>; Rod Sinks<RSinks@cupertino.org>; Steven Scharf<SScharf@cupertino.org> Subject: Upzone, don't downzone Cupertino! Hi city councilors, I'm Barak, I grew up in Cupertino (Regnart through Monta Vista '13) and my family still lives here. understand that at 11/7/17 council meeting, there was a discussion of amending the General Plan and down-zoning city neighborhoods. want Cupertino to be a place I can move back to (currently living in SF). That means denser, mixed- use developments with apartments I can come closer to affording. I would love for Vallco to be replaced with a mixed-use development, with walkable amenities so that I wouldn't have to rely on driving, and housing -- the more the better. Please don't obstruct development -- we should be pushing for more development as soon as possible. Cupertino's representatives in Sacramento, Beall, Berman, and Low, all supported SB 35, and we shouldn't thwart its intention by downzoning any part of the city. Thank you so much for your time, and please explain your position on amending the General Plan and whether you're trying to obstruct development of the Vallco property or any other proposal. -- Barak Total Control Panel Login To:behangoa)cupertino.org Message Score: I High(60): P,, From:b.gilamonster(7a,gmail.com My Spain Blocking Level: High Medium(75): P<<s> Low(90): P. Block this sender Block gmail.com This message ivas delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 74 Grace Schmidt From: Lauren Sapudar Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 2:22 PM To: City Clerk Subject: FW: DO NOT Downzone Vallco From: Ryan Booth [mailto:ryanbooth84@gmail.com] Sent:Thursday, November 16, 2017 1:46 PM To: Savita Vaidhyanathan <svaidhyanathan@cupertino.org> Subject: DO NOT Downzone Vallco Mayor Vaidhyanathan, I'm a resident of San Jose and work in Cupertino. You should not be contemplating downzoning the Vallco area to skirt around S1335. It is morally reprehensible that you're considering downzoning to avoid building housing when we're in the middle of housing shortage crisis. The fewer units we build, the greater the increase in rent and housing pricing in the area will be. Housing and rent are already unaffordable for middle class households, do not make this worse. Regards, Ryan Booth Total Control Panel Login To: svaidhyanathan@cupertino.org Message Score: I High(60): Pass From:rvanbooth84ggmail.com My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75): Pass Low(90): Pas Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 75 Grace Schmidt From: Lauren Sapudar Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 2:22 PM To: City Clerk Subject: FW: DO NOT Downzone Vallco From: Ryan Booth [mailto:ryanbooth84@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 1:46 PM To: Darcy Paul <DPaul@cupertino.org> Subject: DO NOT Downzone Vallco Vice Mayor Paul, I'm a resident of San Jose and work in Cupertino. You should not be contemplating downzoning the Vallco area to skirt around S1335. It is morally reprehensible that you're considering downzoning to avoid building housing when we're in the middle of housing shortage crisis. The fewer units we build, the greater the increase in rent and housing pricing in the area will be. Housing and rent are already unaffordable for middle class households, do not make this worse. f ERegards, Ryan Booth i 't Total Control Panel LOgIn i To:dnaulAcupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60):Pass From:ryanbooth84Agmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75):Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 76 Grace Schmidt From: Lauren Sapudar Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 2:22 PM To: City Clerk Subject: FW: DO NOT Downzone Vallco Attachments: ATT00001.txt;ATT00002.htm From: Ryan Booth [mailto:ryanbooth84@gmail.com] Sent:Thursday, November 16, 2017 1:46 PM To: Rod Sinks<RSinks@cupertino.org> Subject: DO NOT Downzone Vallco Total Control Panel Login To:rsinks(cDcupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60): Pa» From:ryanbooth84(q-)einail.com My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium(75): Pas> Low(90):Pius Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 77 Grace Schmidt From: Lauren Sapudar Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 2:21 PM To: City Clerk Subject: FW: DO NOT Downzone Vallco From: Ryan Booth [mailto:ryanbooth84@gmail.com] Sent:Thursday, November 16, 2017 1:46 PM To: Steven Scharf<SScharf@cupertino.org> Subject: DO NOT Downzone Vallco Councilmember Scharf, I'm a resident of San Jose and work in Cupertino. You should not be contemplating downzoning the Vallco area to skirt around S1335. It is morally reprehensible that you're considering downzoning to avoid building housing when we're in the middle of housing shortage crisis. The fewer units we build, the greater the increase in rent and housing pricing in the area will be. Housing and rent are already unaffordable for middle class households, do not make this worse. Regards, Ryan Booth i Total Control Panel Logm To:sscharfAcupertino.org Remove this sender from my allow list From:ryanboothMAgmail.com You received this message because the sender is on your allow list. I 78 Grace Schmidt From: Lauren Sapudar Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 2:21 PM To: City Clerk Subject: FW: DO NOT Downzone Vallco From: Ryan Booth [mailto:ryanbooth84@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 1:46 PM To: Barry Chang <BChang@cupertino.org> Subject: DO NOT Downzone Vallco Councilmember Chang, I'm a resident of San Jose and work in Cupertino. You should not be contemplating downzoning the Vallco area to skirt around S1335. It is morally reprehensible that you're considering downzoning to avoid building housing when we're in the middle of housing shortage crisis. The fewer units we build,the greater the increase in rent and housing pricing in the area will be. Housing and rent are already unaffordable for middle class households, do not make this worse. Regards, Ryan Booth Total Control Panel Login To:bchang_(a(acupertino.org Message Score: 1 High(60):Pass From:rvanbooth840,,gmail.com My Spam Blocking Level:High Medium(75): Pass Low(90):Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. 79