To: Darcy Paul <dpaul@cupertino.org>; Rod Sinks <rsinks@cupertino.org>; Barry Chang <bchang@cupertino.org>; Steven Scharf <sscharf@cupertino.org>; Savita Vaidhyanathan <svaidhyanathan@cupertino.org>
Cc: City Attorney's Office <cityattorney@cupertino.org>; City Clerk <cityclerk@cupertino.org>; David Brandt <manager@cupertino.org>; Aarti Shrivastava <aartis@cupertino.org>; Piu Ghosh <piug@cupertino.org>; Catarina Kidd <catarinak@cupertino.org>; Daniel Parolek <daniel.parolek@opticosdesign.
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2018, 1:23:57 PM PDT
Subject: Suspend Preparations for the Specific Plan for the Vallco Shopping District Site and 2 Related Requests
Dear Mayor Paul, Vice Mayor Sinks, and Council Members Chang, Scharf, and Vaidhyanathan:
The property owner for the Vallco Shopping District site advertises today a complex of office and housing towers that has little in common with elements that will be studied in the environmental impact report (EIR) or considered by community members as part of the “design” process for the creation of the specific plan for the Vallco Shopping District site.
The property owner states that its new proposal is compliant with construction mandate law SB 35. I understand contract legal counsel for the City is now working now to determine whether or not it agrees with the property owner’s assertion of compliance where the provisions for by-right construction are concerned (no EIR, no community input, no Council approval required).
I have 4 requests in light of recent actions by the property owner for the Vallco Shopping District site:
(1) While contract legal counsel considers whether or not the new proposal is compliant with the by-right construction provisions of SB 35, suspend indefinitely all activity related to the drafting of the EIR. The property owner has signaled that it is no longer interested in the proposals it was considering in October 2017 when it asked the City to initiate the specific plan process, and the new proposal is significantly larger than what is being studied currently. As a result, any EIR work drafted under the outdated criteria would be irrelevant and not applicable to the new proposal.
(2) For the reasons cited in request (1), I also ask that you suspend immediately the community outreach effort orchestrated by land use and architecture firm Opticos Design. To continue the specific is to promote a community disservice. While the property owner may be willing to pay the City staff and the specific plan contractors to continue the scheduled events, consider that it is disingenuous and unethical to invite the community to participate in a process that will have no bearing what the property owner expects to build on the Vallco Shopping District site.
Please consider this recent quote in the New York Times from a key Apple employee as emblematic of the reason why the community engagement process for the Vallco Shopping District site must end:
“‘We didn’t make Apple Park for other people,’ Apple chief design officer Jonathan Ive said at a recent talk in Washington. ‘It wasn’t made for you....”
And so goes the Vallco Shopping District site.
(3) Absent a Council-approved specific plan on or before 6/1/2018, remove the office and housing entitlements that a majority of Council Members gave to the property owner of the Vallco Shopping District site on 12/4/2014 despite strong community opposition to such a decision. Council’s words and actions in the overnight meeting were clear and repeated: if no approved specific plan by 5/31/2018, then the office entitlement is removed and the housing allocations are distributed to 4 other sites as part of Housing Element, Scenario B.
(4) Ask contract legal counsel about how SB 35 will provide the essential infrastructure construction for water, sewer, and roads necessitated by by-right construction permission for a shopping mall site when the electorate has not voted to tax itself for any of these uses. Related, ask contract legal counsel to consider the legality of by-right construction laws, such as SB 35, that will require tax increases for necessary infrastructure improvements for the projects they will enable, but that were not approved by 2/3rds of State voters as required by law today.
Thank you for your consideration of my requests.
Sincerely,
Liana C
Cupertino resident
REFERENCES
+ Revitalize Vallco, Vallco Town Center:
http://revitalizevallco.com/
http://revitalizevallco.com/
+ City of Cupertino, Sand Hill Property Company Files SB 35 Application:
http://www.cupertino.org/Home/
+ New York Times, "Welcome to Zucktown. Where Everything Is Just Zucky." by David Streitfeld, 3/21/2018:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/
The property owner for the Vallco Shopping District site advertises today a complex of office and housing towers that has little in common with elements that will be studied in the environmental impact report (EIR) or considered by community members as part of the “design” process for the creation of the specific plan for the Vallco Shopping District site.
The property owner states that its new proposal is compliant with construction mandate law SB 35. I understand contract legal counsel for the City is now working now to determine whether or not it agrees with the property owner’s assertion of compliance where the provisions for by-right construction are concerned (no EIR, no community input, no Council approval required).
I have 4 requests in light of recent actions by the property owner for the Vallco Shopping District site:
(1) While contract legal counsel considers whether or not the new proposal is compliant with the by-right construction provisions of SB 35, suspend indefinitely all activity related to the drafting of the EIR. The property owner has signaled that it is no longer interested in the proposals it was considering in October 2017 when it asked the City to initiate the specific plan process, and the new proposal is significantly larger than what is being studied currently. As a result, any EIR work drafted under the outdated criteria would be irrelevant and not applicable to the new proposal.
(2) For the reasons cited in request (1), I also ask that you suspend immediately the community outreach effort orchestrated by land use and architecture firm Opticos Design. To continue the specific is to promote a community disservice. While the property owner may be willing to pay the City staff and the specific plan contractors to continue the scheduled events, consider that it is disingenuous and unethical to invite the community to participate in a process that will have no bearing what the property owner expects to build on the Vallco Shopping District site.
Please consider this recent quote in the New York Times from a key Apple employee as emblematic of the reason why the community engagement process for the Vallco Shopping District site must end:
“‘We didn’t make Apple Park for other people,’ Apple chief design officer Jonathan Ive said at a recent talk in Washington. ‘It wasn’t made for you....”
And so goes the Vallco Shopping District site.
(3) Absent a Council-approved specific plan on or before 6/1/2018, remove the office and housing entitlements that a majority of Council Members gave to the property owner of the Vallco Shopping District site on 12/4/2014 despite strong community opposition to such a decision. Council’s words and actions in the overnight meeting were clear and repeated: if no approved specific plan by 5/31/2018, then the office entitlement is removed and the housing allocations are distributed to 4 other sites as part of Housing Element, Scenario B.
(4) Ask contract legal counsel about how SB 35 will provide the essential infrastructure construction for water, sewer, and roads necessitated by by-right construction permission for a shopping mall site when the electorate has not voted to tax itself for any of these uses. Related, ask contract legal counsel to consider the legality of by-right construction laws, such as SB 35, that will require tax increases for necessary infrastructure improvements for the projects they will enable, but that were not approved by 2/3rds of State voters as required by law today.
Thank you for your consideration of my requests.
Sincerely,
Liana C
Cupertino resident
REFERENCES
+ Revitalize Vallco, Vallco Town Center:
http://revitalizevallco.com/
http://revitalizevallco.com/
+ City of Cupertino, Sand Hill Property Company Files SB 35 Application:
http://www.cupertino.org/Home/
+ New York Times, "Welcome to Zucktown. Where Everything Is Just Zucky." by David Streitfeld, 3/21/2018:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/
No comments:
Post a Comment