Liang - Objective Standards for "retail as a substantial component" in STRATEGIES: LU-1.3.1 of the General Plan

From: Liang C
Date: Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 1:08 AM
Subject: Objective Standards for "retail as a substantial component" in STRATEGIES: LU-1.3.1 of the General Plan
To: City Council <citycouncil@cupertino.org>
Cc: "City of Cupertino Planning Dept." <planning@cupertino.org>, David Brandt <davidb@cupertino.org>

Dear Mayor Paul, City Council Members and Planning Staff,

The 2017 pro-housing laws might allow projects to ignore any standards without objective numbers, as you must know. The policies for mixed use zones should be reviewed as soon as possible to comply with the state laws to provide objective standards. Here are just some of the policies that might be reviewed.

STRATEGIES: LU-1.3.1: Commercial and Residential Uses.
Review the placement of commercial and residential uses based on the following criteria:
1. All mixed-use areas with commercial zoning will require retail as a substantial component.
The North De Anza Special Area is an exception.

"All mixed-use areas with commercial zoning will require retail as a substantial component."

=> What constitutes "substantial component"? More than 50% in total square footage?

LU-1.2.2: Major Employers.
Reserve a development allocation for major companies with sales office and corporate headquarters in Cupertino.
Prioritize expansion of office space for existing major companies. New office development must demonstrate that the development positively contributes to the fiscal well-being of the city.

"Reserve a development allocation for major companies with sales office and corporate headquarters in Cupertino."
=> What's a "major company"? Perhaps, measured by the annual sales revenue?

"New office development must demonstrate that the development positively contributes to the fiscal well-being of the city "

=> What's the objective standards for such policy? For example, the office space will create demands on more housing, which will in turn require the building of more affordable housing. With the 2017 pro-housing laws, the city will need to build the allocated BMR housing, which might be a substantial financial burden. How to quantify this as an objective standards? Perhaps, there should be no more office when we cannot meet RHNA allocation.

POLICY LU-1.6: JOBS/HOUSING BALANCE
Strive for a more balanced ratio of jobs and housing units.

=> Without an objective standard, this policy is only lip service. What's the balanced ratio or within the range of balanced ratio?

For Mixed-Use Urban Villages, the General Plan specifies:

"Include a substantial viable, retail component. Retail and active uses such as restaurants, outdoor dining, and entries are required along the ground floor of main street frontages."

=> What's the objective standard for "substantial viable, retail component"? Is 16% retail "substantial" or not? How to ensure "viable" retail? What must be included? Retail depends on easy access. Perhaps, sufficient parking would be required for "viable" retail since the existing mixed-use retail in Cupertino are not "viable" except the ones frequented by high school students who don't have cars.

Thank you for taking steps to protect Cupertino's General Plan through objective standards.

Sincerely,

Liang C