Exhibit CC 10-7-14 #1 Emails, PowerPoint CC
Karen B. Guerin
From: Dicksteinp @aol.com
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 10:17 AM
To: Gilbert Wong; Rod Sinks; Orrin Mahoney; Barry Chang; Mark Santoro
Cc: travigne-villas-hoa @googlegroups.com;faridakhanl23 @yahoo.com; pamcafeel942
@yahoo.com; betspix @gmail.com; amarsl0 @hotmail.com; rgelbogen @aol.com
Subject: Council EIR session Tue Oct 7 4-6:30 pm
Gentlemen:
Since I will probably be late for tomorrow's meeting, which is beginning rather early, I am submitting, or
reiterating, some comm.ents in advance.
1) The EIR is a bit of,a whitewash. That is, the facts are there but the conclusions need to be taken with a large
grain of salt. Impacts on traffic, air pollution and water supply that are reported as "less than significant" by
the authors may not be so regarded by the ordinary residents of Cupertino.
2) The responses to the comments on the EIR are a series of justifications -- was there ever any
acknowledgement that in a particular instance the commenter might be right and therefore something ought
to be scaled back?
3) 1 have already spoken at length about the impact on traffic and air quality of further housing development
on Blaney Avenue, but now, once again, I wish to address water supply.
4) Water is already being rationed north of here,while the latest issue of Cupertino Scene is urging residents
to conserve water and suggesting several ways to do so. Yet what good does it do for us to take shorter
showers if in the end water is not being conserved but simply transferred to thousands of new apartments and
offices? Climate change is not going way and the figures provided in the EIR for a five-year drought situation
belie their sanguine conclusions.
5) 1 am unclear as to what will happen on November 3. 1 hope that the final Plan will not be adopted the day
before the elections! Many Silicon Valley residents work long hours and cannot attend an endless series of
meetings but they do vote. Any final decisions should wait.
Sincerely,
Phyllis Dickstein
Travigne Villas
i
10/7/2014
IOWA
UP-
Y
U FA4Y,R1G♦ ,.� � "°1�
,!
h
lt4ll g- ,
1
10/7/2014
Session
Provide overview of key impact conclusions in EIR to:
— City Council members
— Members of the general public
— Organizations
— Interested agencies
a �a �
jet
s
2
10/7/2014
3)
r �Ctunn�a
hy�up�date2
■ The General Plan is a regulatory
document that sets the "ground ,
rules" for planning future growth in
Cupertino.
■
Why update it?
Re-allocate and potentially increase
city development allocations
— Consolidate review of individual GPA
requests 77-
— Inform Vallco Shopping District
Specific and/or Master Plan
— Address recent State law requirements
— Address other General Plan/Municipal
Code"clean up" items
I
3
10/7/2014
+�£ � �•�, `L� � I� �rl��#'�3� '� ��SAM � £ %,� +w "3 da.a�{ ��
Alternative A e7
■ Maintains the policies of the 2005 General Plan, but includes
additional office and hotel allocation
Alternative B
■ Revises height standards and densities at key gateways and
nodes within special areas along major transportation corridors,
and increases office, hotel and residential allocations
Alternative C
■ Revises height standards and densities at key gateways and
nodes within special areas along major transportation corridors,
incorporates property owner requests at seven study areas, and
increases office, hotel and residential allocations (at a level higher
than Alternative B)
.. i9 hrM Ge wa G.cawey
s, duav„ .�� a.�
ry
� - €
'N d4 G2m
t fj°°'f •• 1., /, —tE S�wJV..w B+r4 Getewsp'....
m..yy s -� :.. { E` 1 °- t4wAVdiva inkWnrw .,•••.
w N Oowmaee aM S 3 'S
AfternativeC
4
10/7/2014
2 „ € •
rod a ct .
2
Mator "WE BuEltlj+3'+ kYz, emam3ngrn sting fit? At..-et aT% Difference
Office-, ry 1.7.1.13 s f. 3,290,000 s.f +3,272,887 s,f.;:.
Commimial 695,624 s.f. 1,250,000 s f;;+55x,371 s f
Hotel.:' ' & 339 roarns 1,334 rooms!:'+1,000 rooms:':.
Residential `;` 1,416 units:.: 3,900 unit +2,4$4 units
Others ecialAra*s* a ''� a........!.... `',n
..... ', .
OfficeM
Camiriercial" 5;784 s f 93,67.9 s.f. +87,895 s f.
0 0
Residential 479 units 521 units " 4 42 units
?� --m
Office f 8,429,775 s f 50;231 s-$ 4,040 231 s.f. +3,500,000 s.f.
Cornmercia! 3,724;564 s{ 701,413 s.f. 1;343,679 s:f. ; 642,266 s f
Hotel- 1,090 rooms..: 339 rooms 1,339,rooms: 41,000 rooms::,
Residential 21,399 units : 1,845 units 4;421,units. +2,526 units
tnctir �s« oa t=arrgrerve fq,!'la_rs a� 'a7Eeg at er'rteogh ar t ods m}arar�pYoyers-
and othetcommercratlmrxed=use centers,as defined'in the 2705 GatrerafF lan
"*,Net neiv croni Ere at rs not proposed rt is assumed thaf the ezistrng ltalfco AAalfsgcrare footage
(7,267,644,sf}wiffbedein ohsf4"iidih'-F&5,335s.f,wouldbe;�resarvedorfutureprotects
Note;H-bsang Eferrmerit srtes ffi have different dnsitt s as noted
s
IN
ear
.k�
I
5
10/7/2014
/
On
• Assess progress and update /
�✓✓ Gqz 3f.,�.��� `' 5c��'rr .PZ_�r a �� rb
� ., Current,
Goals
a 1114,11 % NO� 2 c a
�
AR
'.
S-1-
• Potential sites list developed through public
workshops and study sessions with
Commissions and Council
• Potential sites will be studied at varying
densities in each alternative
� �� �e
� =y(Vl�n� a�change •Moderate '�" �. .,.
,.
� pdsed y
UTA PDA
'SIM
6
10/7/2014
FM
Remainder of
Santa Clara
County: iM
$7,772 units �f
31.3%g of Region f
ABAG Region:
187,990 units
City of
Cupertino:
ni
1,064 units,--'
0.57% of ABAG
1.3%g of County
income Groapy °! of County A l Cupeftuno RF#NA %of Urttts
�..
iVe4ry�,,L'ow 0=5[#0% '356, 33.5%T
Lt]YY 3 y 51 Q ��D > y 20 ,3 3��33 � ✓
.... ....,_ .... .. .. .. .,r a. �,�:
Moderate 81-120% ,231 21:7
Abp Moderate 125°lA 2700 o
- 541
Total_ .-1",064 100°/0
Source:R,!..l H..mg Need Plan for the San Francisco Bey Area:2013-2023.Ass d b.n d Bay Area Governments
Y
Pat�ni � Hd 11 it 5GdidnE
, u
., ,. S k ( •R C�1A
SHM
r [ x a
a � L
t
1 # ' t
y $a A a
Cey$uuaCarx Nwuaing Facment 5ltsa�._ ,.<��,.Sgxuial Arass.,.�.•,•..•. �. �� �,�
w"x E xc�ze - Kcari u€tfm Utgit_w mm
vrtte x.Ya Site Nv.bm Rea50,Czpadty s3art Cram,ss +'�.a
�xYI:YACY.ata'latB:"PkpClRtt:ivmG. -'...Y
10/7/2014
a3�i4���3����y� �`'",'.�� �k:�br&6 ;,� � ���i ti.y - �a a'�g3f � •�
�GI o e 1
�iy
5'a'�., ? t- via„ a• ✓ �` r ie
a a t 3 rya° � -� i��"l ur 9 yY i
RHNAtrn #eve Abp Altrnatisr IB Attivl
as.:ai abx 's x o .%� s sr•-'' - a 1.Y i Ly.r '� -�uk
FM
AI70Ue floderate = 532 1,627 ' 1344
� cerat 54 / C?15 i 1
T6tal Sites 1,072 2,642 3477
6.''l5 WCa''� %/�/ � 9•� i /�.,,, // 064
Surplus 8 1,578 2,413
Notez: ebaw Moderate=above lllNS&.,.median income
Moderate=between 81 and 12M N area median income
HCD requires identification of a moderate surplus(-40%)beyond RHNA.
ANn
O
10/7/2014
i
I
C r u�
._.__...,.u..�,;.�,......:uv. �� .x�`�,,,,....-'•y.v:.�b�,a._�.__ P,_ .Je...... 'c»gvii�.�'3 qjN
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is State's
primary environmental protection law.
CEQA requires that public agencies disclose environmental
impacts that have physical effect on environment as follows:
— Effects found not to be significant
— Significant impacts
— Ways to mitigate or avoid impacts
— Effects that cannot be mitigated
— Alternatives
CEQA does not dictate project approval or denial.
Draft and Final Program EIR are available online at:
www.cupertinogpa.org
i
��wa,..w.....'.............,.w......_....�..._�aAa......_....,_.,_.,SwwL�.....,.�...__.+...,:......�.?::°u�«�u�d5�an'a��z.....s_ ,._?�.,.,a•....C..:...,:.3:u.!
■ General Plan is a large-scale and long-range planning
document
■ Buildout of potential future development is based on
horizon year of 2040
■ EIR analyzes growth occurring between 2014 and 2040 -
26-year buildout horizon
■ 2040 is consistent with Plan Bay Area, Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP)/ Sustainable Community
Strategy (SCS)
9
10/7/2014
EIR
• Addresses large-scale, long-term projects encompassing
a broad scope of physical development issues, such as
General Plans, Specific or Master Plans and Zoning
Ordinances
• Analyzes full buildout scenario that accounts for all
development allowed under General Plan (27 years)
• Allows subsequent project-level environmental review for
future development to tier off Program EIR
Individual projects permitted under General Plan that warrant
further analysis under CEQA are reviewed, including identification
of impacts and mitigation measures, at time of project proposal
■ To the extent feasible, where environmental impacts are
identified, CEQA requires impact be:
— avoided,
— minimized,
— rectified,
— reduced or eliminated, or
— compensated
■ CEQA permits incorporation of mitigation measures,
designed to protect, preserve and enhance
environmental resources as:
— Goals,
— Policies and
— Strategies
10
10/7/2014
Envlronr %�nta[ Issues Anlyzd thF�
m
• Aesthetics & Visual Quality ■ Hydrology & Water Quality
• Air Quality ■ Land Use
• Biological Resources ■ Noise
• Cultural, Historical & ■ Public Services
Archaeological Resources
■ Recreation
• Geology & Soils ■ Transportation &
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions Circulation
• Hazardous Materials ■ Utilities & Service Systems
3 rnpact Cancluson
k
• No Impact
• Less Than Signification (LTS)
• Less Than Signification with Mitigation (LTS /M)
• Significant and Unavoidable
— Even with mitigation identified (SU /M) or
— No feasible mitigation can be identified (SU) or
— Due to jurisdictional issues (SU)
11
10/7/2014
No 1�r�pacts andLessThal�� rgln� �ca�lnt �r�`��c�� �x
Impact Conclusion Environmental Topics
No Impacts ■ Agricultural and Forestry
■ Mineral Resources
Less Than Significant ■ Aesthetics
■ Cultural Resources
■ Geology, Soils and Seismicity
■ Greenhouse Gas Emissions
■ Hydrology and Water Quality
■ Land Use and Planning
■ Population and Housing
■ Public Services and Recreation
13
`.iii ........z.�.a.:,._...... ......._w>.,.. 3 "' .......,max„c� �Uk. �n"mxo...m
Impact Conclusion Environmental Topics
Less Than Significant With ■ Biological Resources
Mitigation ■ Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Utilities and Service System
Significant and Unavoidable ■ Air Quality
■ Noise'
■ Transportation and Circulation
12
10/7/2014
Significant Impact:
■ Possible loss or abandonment of nests of birds protected
under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California
Department of Fish and Game Code
Mitigation Measure:
■ Nests of raptors and other birds shall be protected when
in active use _
£ .�`$ay. aA`P ,�0y✓-yam l} t
r Li
Significant Impact:
■ Known hazardous materials sites within Cupertino
Mitigation Measures:
• Prepare project-specific Environmental Site Management
Plans
• Require vapor
q P �
intrusion assessments
n
j
13
10/7/2014
; 11
Utilities 4I�st�Water): LT5 �`M fi �
,
Significant Impact:
■ Exceeds current contractually available treatment
capacity at SJ/SC Water Pollution Control Plant
Mitigation Measures:
• Work with Cupertino Sanitary District to increase
available citywide treatment and transmission capacity
• Work to establish development monitoring and tracking
system to ensure capacity is not exceeded
• Work with Cupertino Sanitary District to prepare study
to determine more current estimate of wastewater
generation rates that reflect actual development
lJtilitiess��id Oste :
Significant Impact:
■ 2023 termination of City's agreement with Newby Island
Landfill facility, and facility's estimated 2025 closure date
would result in insufficient disposal capacity at buildout
Mitigation Measures:
• Continue recycling ordinances and zero-waste policies to
further increase diversion rate and lower per capita
disposal rate
• Monitor generation volumes in relation to capacities at
receiving landfill sites to ensure adequate capacity
• Seek new landfill sites to replace Altamont and Newby
Island landfills when these landfills are closed
14
10/7/2014
� _ - a.. Ss't'�J,,..f...,4 _ >.A •tip:@.. n�%� il
Significant Impacts:
• Rate of growth in vehicles miles traveled (VMT) would
exceed rate of population and employment growth,
resulting in substantial increase in regional criteria air
pollutant emissions
• Air pollutant emissions associated with Project would result
in cumulatively considerable contribution to air quality
impacts
Mitigation Measures:
• Require compliance with BAAQMD control measures and
construction mitigation
• Require health risk assessments
Significant Impact:
■ Substantial permanent increases to ambient noise levels
throughout; primarily from increases to transportation-
related noise, especially that of automobile traffic
Mitigation Measures:
• Most effective noise-attenuation measures (e.g. sound
walls and berms) inappropriate along most streets with
.commercial or residential street frontage due to impacts
to pedestrian/bicycle connectivity and aesthetic
considerations
• These types of mitigation are considered infeasible or
inappropriate in majority of locations where sensitive land
uses already exist
15
10/7/2014
££ *£ n d T �,
�`raI�A anrasprtat�`c� • S1
Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures
_,_.Fnanonl Avo .....,.....°.`3._......... ...............ID D Cem»a R^a1
4 t I 1
"w"'d
F ( I C
G �re
y_
{ ......... ......
as
w I � ` ��
J� £ LEGEND
f
l J ¢j �� (; Study Infeme,*on
can Bo Mitigated
2;
rta eow Dr " i Rs zv or 0 =Can PotengaAy Be Mitigated Through
coordination With Other Jurisdictions
Cannot Be Mitigated
Opportunity Site
Freeway Impam
ova a'�r �y 3 '�-vp � •,5i y4 � 3� - �a� �°� °"* E ��
Alternatives Comparison Summary
'y- ��BG E f E.E��E.�fE� " �, >v. S ���,,�F F'��.a.✓a�,f/""e°f
s°�p b9J EdNE•?°P✓ E B E�d.9 Z 9.«L,y`GHL FFG.B,�AP�,3°$ Fp
c.'3��fiKf�;�,F....♦,....,+a��'.�F�J�..F��`.���,`v�if' ...�a���.?.�F.�.�-Dui.:. r 15�.�.�`� 3..��:....��f� .���-)°�,�:�,
Office 4,040,231 sf 540,231 sf 1,040,231 sf 2,540,231 sf
..
CommerGia[ 1,343,679 sf '{' ! 701,4]3 sf" ! 701413 sf 1,343,679"sf
Hotel 1,339 rooms 339 rooms 600 rooms 839 rooms
l 11 4: 421M. rts 1,895 units 1,895 Un;ts 3,316 units;
Population 12,998 5,571 5,571 9,749
Jobs 16,855 3 461
5'2 11,705
Land Use Alternative A is the Environmentally Superior Alternative.
16
10/7/2014
J
Cam arisen of Pro act Alternativ sr �
1 t ��
s { _ 9 '•� �` Y .kv 3 r.°'E- jam- 'EW5E I
� t
Aestfi'etic5 I � � LTS '' LTS LTS ;. LTS
Air Quality Su-- SU SU SU
_Blologlcal,Resources LTS/M', LTS/M LTSjM LTS/M;
Geology 5olls&Minerdi:Resources ETS ` LTS LTS LTS
Greenhouse Gas Emrssions LTS LTS LTS tTS
Hdzdld5 And II;Zdrd0u5;Nldterldl5 LTS/M LT5/M LTSJM LTS/IV]
H drp1A And 1Nater C2ua11ty � � LTS ' LT5 LTS � LTS_,'
Land Use And Planning t LTS JS LTS i LT5 ;
.. ..._ _
---
Noise SU SU SU SU
�...
Populatlon,Apd"Housing ;;, LTS LTS ii' LT5 LTS I ;j
,Pub r+rices'Antl Rec%e�tron LTS a LT5 ET5';',
Transportation And Traffic SU SU SU Su
ELltllltaes And Infrastructure LTSIM; LTS/M LTSJM LTSIM
Note SU StgnJlcent and Un v idable LTS Cess Than Steniflwnt,;L75JM Less Than Signif entwth mittgaf�onr��'���tt 1 'I
t
Response t® 3Comments D0 curnent EM
■ 45-day public review period of Draft EIR
(June 18 — August 1, 2014)
— Six comment letters from public agencies
— 19 comment letters from members of the general public
— Most comments did not pertain to adequacy of Draft EIR
■ Error correction, language edits, and clarifications were
made, but no substantial revisions.
■ Late comments raised no new unaddressed issues.
17
10/7/2014
a
oncurrer GPA House Elemen
Winter 2014 Spring 2014 Summer 2014 Fall 2014
I
I
401
L F R R Q
i ICI t '�1 I
Kb�9n,�.,FM
# � �A ✓ s {@{@ad:. ��` a:�+MJ.b=....
18
10/7/2014
renatve li ®n `lf � egsd
Hearings
Planning Commission Public Hearing
October 14, 2014, 6:45 p.m.
Cupertino Community Hall
City Council Public Hearing
November 3, 2014, 6:45 p.m.
Cupertino Community Hall
I
I
I
19