The URL can be used to link to this page

CC 08-18-2020 Oral Communications_Written CommunicationsCC 08-18-20 Oral Communications Written Comments 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Lisa Warren <la-warren@att.net> Sent:Tuesday, August 18, 2020 6:48 PM To:City Clerk Subject:Re: 'slide' for Oral Communications' Lisa Warren Attachments:Cupertino Correcting Misinformation Regarding Vallco Mall Permit Process AUGUST 2020.docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. On Tuesday, August 18, 2020, 06:45:43 PM PDT, Lisa Warren <la-warren@att.net> wrote: Hello. I plan to speak during oral communications. When I do, I hope that you can 'share' the attached pdf image. Thank you. Lisa Warren Cupertino Correcting Misinformation Regarding Vallco Mall Permit Process The City requested that the plans work around the access roads or that the applicant provide documentation. By Press Release Desk, News Partner Aug 15, 2020 12:21 pm PT Press release from the City of Cupertino: August 14, 2020 The City of Cupertino is taking this opportunity to correct misinformation recently published regarding the Vallco permit process. The City has received five excavation permit submittals from the developer and staff has processed them without delay to accommodate the developer's planned demolition and construction. "The City has been processing Vallco's permit applications promptly and will continue to do so in accordance with the law," City Attorney Heather Minner said. "The City will also continue to protect public property and the public interest in a safe work site and functional infrastructure by requiring Vallco to comply with the same regulations that other developments are subject to." The City received the first excavation permit submittal in December 2018. The applicant subsequently canceled it. The second submittal was received in April 2019. However, the plan would have affected access rights to adjacent private properties along Perimeter Road and Wolfe Road. The City requested that the plans work around the access roads or that the applicant provide documentation stating that affected property owners were amendable to the impact on their access. In addition, the City let the applicant know at the same time that a polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) investigation report is needed for the issuance of an excavation permit. To date the City has not received a PCB investigation report. The City received the third submittal in July 2019. The submittal still showed removal of public access along Perimeter Road and Wolfe Road and the applicant did not provide documentation from the affected property owners. The City requested clarification from the applicant. The fourth submittal from the applicant was received in March 2020. The submittal provided more information and no longer showed removal of public access to adjacent private properties. However, the plans showed that permanent tiebacks within the public right‐of‐way were being proposed. Permanent tiebacks are not typically permitted in the City as they affect the public's long‐term use of the right of way. The submittal was not approved. The City received the fifth submittal on August 3, 2020. It is now under staff review. This press release was produced by the City of Cupertino. The views expressed here are the author's own. 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Justin Li <justinhli830@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, August 18, 2020 6:54 PM To:City Clerk Subject:Justin Li Public Comment Attachment CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Cupertino City Clerk, Please display this attachment during my public comment. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 8/18 Justin Li Public Comment Attachment Sincerely, Justin Li 1 Cyrah Caburian From:City of Cupertino Written Correspondence Subject:FW: Meeting 8/18/20 - Oral Communications From: Byron <brovegno@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 8:05 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@cupertino.org> Cc: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org> Subject: Meeting 8/18/20 ‐ Oral Communications CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I understand that my microphone may have been choppy during oral communication, so to make sure the record is clear, here is what I said. Good evening Mayor Scharf and Councilmembers. I am pleased to report that Walk Bike Cupertino Board Member Jennifer Shearin was selected by the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition as Person of the Year. In their announcement on August 6th they lauded her for her work advocating walking and biking infrastructure projects in Cupertino and said in part, “Jennifer is a key leader who orchestrated a coalition of supporters over the span of a few years in Cupertino to make the Regnart Creek Trail possible….” I am also pleased to report that Walk Bike Cupertino Board Members Seema Lindskog and Jennifer Shearin were invited to present at a panel on Outreach and Engagement during the SVBC 2020 Bike Summit on August 6th and 7th. This is the region’s largest gathering of active transportation leaders and organizers from government, the private sector, non-profits, and the general public. Their talk was very well received. Please join us in thanking them for their work in promoting Cupertino bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. We are all the better for their civic minded efforts. Thank you for the opportunity to share this information with you. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 CC 08-18-20 #9 Stevens Creek Blvd. Bike Lane Improvements Written Comments 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, August 19, 2020 10:27 AM To:City Clerk Subject:Fw: Questions About Wolfe Road and Stevens Creek Blvd. Intersection CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. FYI. Could you please add to the public record? Thank you. ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com> To: CityCouncil@Cupertino.org <citycouncil@cupertino.org> Cc: grenna5000@yahoo.com <grenna5000@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020, 10:25:57 AM PDT Subject: Questions About Wolfe Road and Stevens Creek Blvd. Intersection Dear City Council: I am concerned about the Stevens Creek Blvd. and Wolfe Road intersection if the Bike barriers are installed there. Does this mean that the corners of the intersection will be squared off and the free right turn lane will be eliminated? This is not a good plan because traffic will stack up on Stevens Creek Blvd. and not be able to turn northbound onto Wolfe Road. all of the traffic on Stevens Creek Blvd. will back up as drivers wait for the west bound light to turn green so that they can turn right onto Wolfe Road. I have seen this happen on Homestead Road and Stelling Avenue when Sunnyvale decided to square off the corners of the intersection and did not tell Cupertino what they were doing. I was trying to turn westbound onto Homestead Road when I coming up southbound from Stelling. Sunnyvale had squared the corner of the intersection off and no one could turn right and the traffic backed up. I could not turn right. A driver behind me got so desperate to turn right that he drove up onto the sidewalk and attempted to drive right on the sidewalk making my mother who was in the passenger side of the car with me start screaming and saying a man was driving over the car. Needless to say this was an extremely frightening experience and I avoid that intersection on Homestead and Stelling to this day. I don't think removing right hand turn lanes from Stevens Creek Blvd.d Wolfe is a good plan and will make horrendous traffic backup problems.Also, squaring off the edges of the Wolfe and Stevens Creek Blvd, intersection is also not a good plan. There needs to be a lot of discussion before anything like this is done. Wolfe Road has too much at stake already in this area rather than there being any more traffic issues. Also, I am very worried about trees being cut down to try to put in these Bike Barriers at this intersection. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Jennifer Griffin CC 08-18-20 #11 Ordinance Regarding Prohibition of Parking Written Comments 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Kirsten Squarcia Sent:Tuesday, August 18, 2020 5:59 PM To:Ken Bell; City Clerk; Deborah L. Feng Cc:Munisekar; bpu94@hotmail.com; alexander.martinovic@gmail.com; Huan Bell; gacom_2009 @yahoo.com; janet.ward@hp.com; chunhuang@gmail.com; tiapatterakis@yahoo.com; Ram Namita Sripathi; Yining Subject:RE: Agenda 11 for tonight's City Council meeting Aug 18th Dear Ken (Council moved to Bcc on this email), Your presentation has been received and I will share my screen during your times for public comment (Agenda Item #11). Regards, Kirsten Kirsten Squarcia City Clerk City Manager's Office/City Clerk's Office KirstenS@Cupertino.org (408) 777-3225 From: Ken Bell <arrayscout@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 4:38 PM To: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org>; City Council <CityCouncil@cupertino.org>; Deborah L. Feng <DebF@cupertino.org> Cc: Munisekar <msekar@gmail.com>; bpu94@hotmail.com; alexander.martinovic@gmail.com; Huan Bell <thooz1@yahoo.com>; gacom_2009@yahoo.com; janet.ward@hp.com; chunhuang@gmail.com; tiapatterakis@yahoo.com; Ram Namita Sripathi <rnsripathi@gmail.com>; Yining <jyining@yahoo.com> Subject: Agenda 11 for tonight's City Council meeting Aug 18th CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi City Clerk, City Council Members, and Deb, I'm attaching PPT and PDF (both the same for whichever you prefer to use) so that neighborhood residents can address the City Council for Agenda 11 tonight. The documents represent presentations for Cupertino residents Ken, Ram and Gary. We will keep the presentation to 8-9 minutes for these 3 individuals. Thanks! Ken 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Jennifer Shearin <shearin.jen@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, August 18, 2020 5:03 PM To:City Council; Deborah L. Feng Subject:McClellan Bike Lanes: City Council Agenda item 11 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Esteemed Mayor Scharf, City Councilmembers, and City Manager Feng, I write to you today to urge you to go forward with the McClellan separated bike lanes project into Phase 2. These physically separated lanes are a dramatic improvement for cyclists of all ages, abilities, and levels of comfort with riding near cars. The DeAnza to Westacres portion is one of the most important links, as it is where it feels the least safest to ride on McClellan. Removing street parking along the stretch, which was shown to be little‐to‐not used, is part of this needed change. As you know, this project has been in the works for many years now, and has had successful construction of Phase 1, including installing the bike lane dividers in front of homes on McClellan. Feedback from Phase 1 was that there were concerns with visibility of the dividers; the staff mitigated those concerns with additional paint and markings which will be carried into Phase 2. I understand that there are fears and concerns about any kind of change. Some of the neighbors are encouraging the Council to eliminate the concrete divider for the bike lanes for the ¼ mile (it has been erroneously stated as only 50 yards) between Westacres and DeAnza. This would this defeat the purpose of the project—it is obvious that paint is not as safe as a physical divider. Furthermore, the study on backing out onto McClellan that the city staff provided at the Council meeting in July and the positive experience of homeowners in Phase 1 show that the potential problems with backing out of driveways will very likely never be an issue for homeowners in Phase 2. An option would be spend another $300,000 to move the bike lane up to the sidewalk level and remove the grassy berm between the street and the curb, which would keep the street parking. This would be as safe as divided bike lanes and would maintain the parking that the neighbors wish for, and eliminate the concern they have about backing out of driveways. I would support this option, but it is more expensive and the neighbors who are asking to keep the parking do not seem amenable to it. (A counter proposal made by these neighbors to shoehorn in bike lanes, parking, and street traffic into our existing street footprint is risky for cyclists due to being “doored” by parked cars and also for the parked cars as the lane widths are so narrow.) I have personally ridden many times along McClellan and the roadway between DeAnza and Westacres is the most nerve‐wracking part it. (If you know me at all, you know I’m not a fearless ‘spandex’ road cyclist.) These lanes are intended for people of all ages and abilities (and amounts of courage). It’s important to get the design right, to make riders safe and encourage more cycling without impeding traffic flow. The current design does that. Thank you for your hard work on behalf of our residents, and in implementing the city’s Bicycle Transportation Plan to make it safer and easier to bike here in Cupertino. Best Wishes, Jennifer Shearin Cupertino resident CC 08-18-20 #13 Westport Cupertino Project Written Comments 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com> Sent:Tuesday, August 18, 2020 5:22 PM To:City Council Cc:City Clerk Subject:2020-08-18 CC Agenda Item 13 Oaks/Westport - IMPORTANT ITEMS to clarify IN WRITING CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Please include this email as part of the Written Communication for tonight’s City Council meeting Agenda Item #13 Oaks/Westport Dear City Council, Please include the following in the Conditions of Approval and covenants: 1. All 88 of the townhouse/rowhouses are FOR SALE units. There’s nothing in writing! ‐ Get it in writing! ‐ Don’t repeat the Nineteen800 mistake again! 2. All commercial/retail space (not just the restaurant) is open to all the public. ‐ Get it in writing! ‐ Specify exact retail square footage so it can’t be converted to residential amenity. ‐ Don’t repeat the Main Street retail mistake! 3. Building phases…guarantee that Building 1 and 2 are built as senior housing BEFORE the townhouses/rowhouses are completed. ‐ Don’t repeat the Main Street Senior Housing fiasco. GET THESE IN WRITING! Make them enforceable! Make them punishable with increasing substantial penalties. Sincerely, Peggy Griffin 1 Cyrah Caburian From:City of Cupertino Written Correspondence Subject:FW: Please have this read at tonight’s Council meeing From: Geoff Paulsen <geoffpaulsen@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 4:17 PM To: Kirsten Squarcia <KirstenS@cupertino.org> Cc: Beverley Bryant <beverleybbryant@gmail.com> Subject: Please have this read at tonight’s Council meeing CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi, Kirsten. First, congratulations! You will be a great city clerk, and you have the intelligence to untangle the uncertainties of Council votes and the kindness to do it with a smile. Now, about tonight‘s meeting: Beverley Bryant told me that you would be able to have a brief comment read at tonight‘s meeting. So, here’s the comment: “In spite of my best efforts, I recently became a white‐haired senior citizen. And I know that in spite of your best efforts ‐ and no matter what you do with your hair ‐ each of you will join me in this fraternity of fragility. Since we are an aging population in Cupertino, it’s really important that you approve the Westport senior housing project tonight. Please don’t delay, because with every passing day, the long, bony fingers of old age reach steadily into our future.” Warmly, Geoff Geoff Paulsen Former Chair, Cupertino Planning Commission 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Larry Dean <ldean95014@comcast.net> Sent:Tuesday, August 18, 2020 5:56 PM To:City Clerk Subject:Council Meeting 8.18.20 Item 13 Westport CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mayor Scharf and Council Members ‐ This will be a project with many complex issues for you to consider this evening. If you are able to come to an acceptable resolution with the developer, we would like to remind you and the city team to ensure that language including the Class IV bikeway access rights along the Western side of the development is included, as we have been assured by city staff. We also caution that the agreement ensures that the resulting HOA is obligated to allow such access and use for walkers and pedestrians to traverse from Mary Avenue to the Stevens Creek Blvd/Highway 85 on‐ ramp. Thank you for your time, diligence and efforts to make Cupertino “Safer to Walk and Bike”. For all of its citizens. Larry Dean Walk‐Bike Cupertino 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Lisa Warren <la-warren@att.net> Sent:Tuesday, August 18, 2020 6:50 PM To:City Clerk Subject:'slide' for Agenda Item 13 WestPort - Lisa Warren Attachments:p10 of Westport letter 5mtg limit and conclusion including for-sale language.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello. I plan to speak during agenda item 13 - Westport. When I do, I hope that you can 'share' the attached pdf image. Thank you. Lisa Warren *LDQ0DUWLUH -XO\ 4837-2293-3189v3 ALF\25608020 designated hearing officer or body of the city or county, or any committee or subcommittee thereof.”6HFE 7KH&RXQFLOKHDULQJVHWIRU$XJXVWZLOOEHWKHILIWKKHDULQJRQWKLV3URMHFW7KXVWKH &RXQFLOPD\QRWFRQWLQXHWKHKHDULQJQRUVHQGWKHPDWWHUEDFNWRWKH3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQIRU IXUWKHUUHYLHZ &RQFOXVLRQ ,QVXPPDU\WKLVLVDQH[HPSODU\3URMHFWWKDWZLOOUHYLWDOL]HDQLQHIILFLHQWDJLQJVKRSSLQJ FHQWHUDQGWUDQVIRUPLWLQWRDYDULHW\RIQHHGHGKRXVLQJW\SHVIRUWKH&LW\–LQFOXGLQJPDUNHW UDWHIRUVDOHURZKRXVHVDQGWRZQKRPHVVHQLRUDIIRUGDEOHUHQWDOXQLWVDQGDVVLVWHGOLYLQJDQG PHPRU\FDUHIDFLOLWLHVDORQJZLWKDQFLOODU\UHWDLOXVHV ,WGHVHUYHVVXSSRUWDQGDSSURYDORQLWVPHULWV$QG6WDWHODZPDQGDWHVLWVDSSURYDO 9HU\WUXO\\RXUV %(5/,1(5&2+(1//3 $1'5(:/)$%(5 (0DLODQGUHZIDEHU#EHUOLQHUFRP $/) FF &LW\&OHUN 'HERUDK)HQJ +HDWKHU0LQQHU(VT (OOHQ*DUEHU(VT %DUE.DXW](VT 0DUN7HUVLQL.78UEDQ 5DQG\%HNHUPDQ$WULD 0DWW:LWWH5HODWHG /DXUD:RUWKLQJWRQ)RUEHV 6WHYHQ2KOKDEHU 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:18 PM To:City Clerk Subject:Fw: Item 13 on City Council Agenda - The Oaks/ West Port CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. FYI. Could you please read this email for Public Input for Item 13 if my connection is garbled from my tablet? Thank you very much, Jennifer Griffin ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com> To: cityCouncil@Cupertino.org <citycouncil@cupertino.org>; City Clerk <cityclerk@cupertino.org> Cc: grenna5000@yahoo.com <grenna5000@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020, 02:54:17 PM PDT Subject: Item 13 on City Council Agenda - The Oaks/ West Port Dear City Council: I am writing in concern of the large construction project planned for The Oaks Shopping Center?West Port which is Item 13 on the Cupertino City Council Agenda for August 18, 2020. I do not believe that there should be the large construction proposed at The Oaks/West Port Shopping Center. Ten stories is way too high for the corner of Mary Avenue and Stevens Creek Blvd. It is completely against our General Plan and does not fit in with the height limits along Stevens Creek Blvd. in Cupertino. It does not follow the Heart of the City plan which runs the length of Stevens Creek Blvd. from the western edge of the city to the eastern edge of the city. There is supposed to be a full 35 foot setback from Stevens Creek Blvd. and any buildings built facing Stevens Creek Blvd. are supposed to be stepped back in a 1 to 1.5 ratio or greater. The Heart of the City was worked on as a street plan for Stevens Creek Blvd. to retain the look and feel of Stevens Creek Blvd. with shade trees and a full 35 foot setback. It is unique to Cupertino and should be respected for that. Many people spent many hours working on Heart of the CIty for many years and over the years so that Heart of the City remains a vital planning document for Our City. I am proud that Heart of the CIty Plan is very specific about the street trees and the 35 foot public right of way. it is a very intrinsic plan to Cupertino and it says a lot about what our city values-- trees and greenspce. i am also against the removal of the oak trees on The Oaks property. They are trying to remove many 100 year old or older oak trees. They are also trying to cut down many young 12 year old oak trees that were planted on the property by direction of the City Council as mitigation for other trees removed from the property. this was in 2008. The City Council studied the property for many hours and went over the trees tree by tree to make sure trees were saved and also replaced. There are two oak trees on The Oaks Shopping Center entrance on Stevens Creek Blvd. that are in the public right of way and they were planted as mitigation from having to remove an oak at that location at the shopping center entrance from Steveens Creek Blvd. These two young oaks were planted in 2008 by order of the City Council. There are also 20 young 12 year old oak trees that were planted on the western boundary of The Oaks Shopping adjacnet to Highway 2 280/85 on ramp and this is near the southwest corner of the property. It is not proper to cut down trees that another City Council and the public spent hours on in 2008 to build tall high density housing and buildings all over. I suggest that the City Council records from 2008 be pulled up and consulted for the issues with the oaks being planted by the City Council at that time period. I also think it would be a travesty to remove any of the ancient oak trees on the property. These are on the south side of the jewelery store and on the north side of the jewelery store. Also, the traffic load on Mary Avenue and Stevens Creek Blvd is already at full capacity and overload and adding tons of traffic and vehicles from this proposed high rise construction would further exacerbate an already bad traffic situation. This proposed construction project is way too big and dense for this site. This has been the problem with most past proposed projects for this site and this project does not seem to have improved that overbuilding problem at all. The architecture is nice and evokes a sense of Cupertino's architectural heritage, rather than having some sort of stucco megalith, but the project is over ambitious, . too tall, too dense and leaves no open space on the site to retain the historic and important oak legacy of the property. I am so glad I was able to see it when I was a child with the big oaks there when the area was still used for farming..To me more and more those are precious and important memories that we in modern day Cupertino should try to recreate and encourage our young people to love their trees and embrace Cupertino's rural roots.One of our gifts to our youngsters is Cupertino's love of trees. To cut down oak trees needlessly is counter intuitive and counter productive to that legacy. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Jennifer Griffin 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Danielle Burnett-Foster <danibfoster@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:23 PM To:City Clerk Subject:Request for Comment on Item #13 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Clerk, Thank you for taking these public comments on item #13. I have an early appointment so I can't stay on late. Hopefully you will still read my comment or let me know where I can submit this comment and find more information. My name is Danielle and I am a resident off of Steven's Creek Blvd. I really appreciate all the efforts of the city to promote sustainability. Considering this uncomfortable heatwave and the stress of possible blackouts, and the fact that buildings account for 40% of greenhouse gas emissions in the US, I strongly urge the city to require the new construction project to meet basic sustainability standards regarding materials and insulation, window placement, utilities, etc. This is the change we must see to avoid longer periods of heatwaves and blackouts. Thank you so much for your time. Best regards, Danielle Burnett‐Foster Cell: (512) 284‐5101 1 Cyrah Caburian From:City of Cupertino Written Correspondence Subject:FW: 2020-08-18 CC Agenda Item 13 - Westport Peggy Griffin's Slides Attachments:Peggy Griffin-Agenda Item 13 Slides.pdf From: Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 6:31 PM To: Kirsten Squarcia <KirstenS@cupertino.org> Cc: City Council <CityCouncil@cupertino.org> Subject: 2020‐08‐18 CC Agenda Item 13 ‐ Westport Peggy Griffin's Slides CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Kirsten, These are my talking point slides for Agenda Item #13 Thank you, Peggy Griffin GET THESE IN WRITING (Covenants and Conditions of Approval): 1. Ensure all 88 townhouses/rowhouses are FOR SALE units. - There’s nothing in writing! - Get it in writing! - Don’t repeat the Nineteen800 mistake! 2. All commercial/retail space is open to all the public. Specify exact retail square footage. - not just the restaurant - Get it in writing! - Prevent conversion to residential amenities - Don’t repeat Main Street mistake! 3. Building phases…guarantee Building 1 and 2 are built as senior housing BEFORE the townhouses/rowhouses are completed. - Don’t repeat the Main Street Senior Housing fiasco. Get these IN WRITING! Make these ENFORCEABLE! Make them PUNISHABLE with increasing SUBSTANTIAL PENALTIES BMR Comparability Requirement NOT MET – Needs Concession or Waiver The Staff Report is misleading with respect to this requirement. Staff Report, middle of Page 17 BUT Municipal Code CMC 19.56.50 Density Bonus General Requirements Section G.2 states “Affordable units SHALL BE IDENTICAL with the design of any market rate rental units in the project...” Average 2-bedroom: BMR is 244 sf smaller, about a 15’x16’ HUGE ROOM Average 1-bedroom: BMR is 75.6 sf smaller, about a 8.5’x8.5’ ROOM Average Studio: BMR is 19.1 sf smaller, about a 4’x4’ area IDENTICAL is NOT subjective! ENFORCE OUR LAWS! REQUIRE the necessary concessions or waivers! 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Joseph Fruen <jrfruen@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, August 19, 2020 12:00 AM To:Kirsten Squarcia; City Clerk; Deborah L. Feng; City Council; Darcy Paul; Jon Robert Willey; Liang Chao; Rod Sinks; Steven Scharf Subject:For public comment: Item 13: Westport/The Oaks development application CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. **To City Clerk Squarcia: I kindly ask that you read the following into the record during the public comment period for Item 13 Mayor Scharf and Members of the City Council: The project before you provides important housing options that are in short supply in Cupertino. It merits support because it helps us meet our urgent housing needs, most critically for seniors. With the applicant's request for a concession under the Density Bonus Law to set aside the BMR dispersion requirement, that law‐‐in tandem with the Housing Accountability Act‐‐appears to mandate your approval. Please do not expose the city, its reputation, and the General Fund to further damage by inviting litigation over this project. It is unfortunate that the community will not get a more beneficial project at this key site. This applicant's prior General Plan amendment applications demonstrated a willingness to negotiate alternatives with stronger benefits. As we look into the coming years, I hope you will work toward changing Cupertino's reputation as a place unwilling to negotiate. By doing so, council can exert a stronger guiding hand that maximizes the benefit to our community that new development can bring, especially as the state begins to set more aggressive and unavoidable housing goals for us. Many thanks, J.R. Fruen Cupertino resident CC 08-18-20 #14 Municipal Code Amendments to Regulate Short Term Rentals Written Comments 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com> Sent:Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:53 PM To:Deborah L. Feng Cc:City Clerk; City Council Subject:Request status on Sheriff’s Dept promised use of Triplicate Forms? CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Deb, Tonight’s discussion on Short Term Rentals reminded me that one of the improvements in communication between the City’s Code Enforcement and the Sheriff’s Dept was to start using triplicate forms so the City would receive immediate information on calls to homes. Q: Has this happened? Q: What’s the status on this? This could help other cities and jurisdictions, too. Thank you, Peggy Griffin