CC 07-03-2018 Oral CommunicationsCupertino Resident Survey Summary June 25, 2018
Concerns
Total Water Traffic Schools H ou sin g
Cupertino registered voters : 61.8 °/o 25.9% 69.9°/o 56.0 o/o 21 .0%
Cupertino Non-registered: 15.0% 24.0% 65.3°/o 56.0% 3 7.3%
Non-Cupertino: 23.2o/o 25.0% 75.0°/o 50.9°/o 2 5 .0%
All Participants: 100°/o 25.4% 70.6 °/o 55.0°/o 2 5.6%
Note: (1) Great many of the petitions are still circulated in the field .
(2) No one wants more offices
Retails
33 .0%
24 .0%
29.3%
3 0.8%
cc 7 /3 Ir%
O ~l-CDfYV'r-
Other
3 .6%
1.3%
4 .3%
3.4%
Reminder: Please help to record the data by uploading your signatures by using the tern late and then sending in the filled-in template.
Template: ht s: --shari n
The so-called alternative plans created by the consulting firm,
Opticos, is a joke at best to come up with 22-story buildings
at 294 feet high since the "resident input process," by and
large, were held in mid-days when most residents were at
work. Did the voters reject Measure D's 7-story, 130 feet
buildings in 2016? Yes, we surely did!
It was done by design. And, the city staff in charge of these
meeting failed to get participants to sign in and leave contact
information to verify the participants to be city residents, not
out-of-towners, city or school officials and those working for
or affiliated with the developers.
Most Cupertino residents are not aware of what's going on.
The cityplanning department is pulling a fast one over the
community and residents.
"Friends of Better Cupertino" is a grassroots group of citizens.
We have filed a petition with the Superior Court of
Santa Clara County, and the lawsuit is now pending
between "Friends of Better Cupertino" and the City of
Cupertino.
Anyone, interested to learn about the case, may access
these documents directly at:
https :// calif ornia. tylerhost.net/View Documents.aspx?F1D=bec81d8d-b095-47 55-9cd0-09d63 b53 725c
Please note that this is a "Mandamus Petition."
... Among other things, this court petition details why
the proposed "Vallco Site" development project is NOT
eligible for SB35 benefits because
i. it does not offer 2/3 residential square footage; and
ii. the site is listed on the statewide hazardous waste
site list
Also, as noted on p. 22 of the document, the Vallco project
does not comply with the General Plan in that some of the
proposed buildings off er no first-floor commercial facilities.
Numerous other eligibility issues ar e discussed in detail
in Exhibits 5, 6 and 7 .
Under the SB35 statute, the entire application fails if any
one of the eligibility criteria is no t satisfied.
W e demand the city to do its due diligence!!
I n short ...
By filing the "writ of mandamus petition" before the legal
90 day deadline in conjunction w ith City's fi ling of its
formal response, i.e. "the eligi b ility letter for the Vall co
Town Center SB 35 Application," t h e "Friends of Better
Cupertino" has, in turn, preserved it s right t o ch alle n ge
the substantive aspects of the City 's "eligibil it y a p proval "
of the application.
Filing this Petition has become necessary all because
either the city staff, including the acting city manager
and the planning staff, are completely incompetent or
unconscionably colluding with the developer, or both to
fail performing their legally required duty to ascertain
the applicant of the Vallco project to fully comply with
the state laws, including in particular the SB35 that
developer is trying to take advantage of.
A majority of the council members has repeatedly
obstructed the effort to remove the provisional 2 million
square feet of office space allocation at the Vall co site.
Cupertino residents should know --it might not get any
better next year if the 2018 candidates who have worked to
help Sand Hill in the past get elected or re-elected, namely
Orrin Mahoney, Hung Wei and Savita Vaidhyanathan.
Voters Be Aware!!