Nirmalendu Das

The special meeting convened to discuss and approve emergency assistance funds, specifically allocating $200,000 from the general fund to the below market rate affordable housing fund for unhoused residents at the encampment along Wolf Road near Interstate 280. The goal of the assistance is to mitigate safety hazards, including COVID-19 risks, by providing a pathway to housing. The plan involves offering six months of support, including motel rooms, storage for belongings, and supportive services oriented towards permanent housing, in partnership with organizations like Abode. The council also confirmed that item number two regarding the Anderson Dam matter was removed from the agenda. Discussions clarified the timeline for issuing a notice to vacate (scheduled for the day after the meeting, November 20th, with an actual vacate date of December 2nd) and confirmed that extensive outreach would occur between these dates to facilitate relocations to either supportive housing options or a designated temporary outdoor location.

The discussion focused extensively on a proposed housing project, specifically addressing public comments and clarifying technical details. Key topics included the distinction between independent and assisted living units, the city's exploration of alternative land locations, and criteria for applicant prioritization, noting legal constraints on favoring longtime residents. Significant clarification was sought regarding the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exemption, establishing that the architectural site approval is exempt because the project meets specific density and affordability thresholds (100% very low income, 50 units per acre density) and is not a discretionary approval. Further discussion covered the parking and traffic analysis, where an external consultant presented an estimate indicating an unsustainable parking deficiency during festival events, contrary to the city's initial analysis. The council addressed the potential loss of parking spaces due to ingress/egress changes and the removal of bike lanes on Mary Avenue, which would require amending existing ordinances. Legal aspects were also reviewed concerning the enforceability of the Development Disposition Agreement (DDA) versus the grant deed and regulatory agreement for long-term affordability, as well as the process for gifting city-owned land for affordable housing development, which is permitted under specific statute. The urgency of approving the DDA today was confirmed as it triggers the consortium's tax credit application process.

The meeting commenced with public comments, including a request to continue virtual meeting options for fitness classes and a formal request to discuss renaming 'Lawrence Mitty Park' to a more appropriate designation, such as 'North Rancho Park'. The primary agenda item involved a presentation on two feasibility studies for the future use of the Blackberry Farm Golf Course. Key discussion points centered on the golf course's operational issues, including an aging and inefficient irrigation system leading to high water costs ($63,000 annually) and potential drought restrictions. Safety concerns regarding errant golf balls and accessibility were also noted. The two options presented were Option A: minor repairs and improvements to the existing golf course, or Option B: converting the site to natural habitat. The presentation detailed the costs and implications of Option A, including proposals for selective tee and green replacement, safety netting, and assessing the feasibility of restoring the historical well, which was ultimately deemed not financially or environmentally sound due to high capital costs ($932,000) and potential negative impact on Stevens Creek flows. The presentation also referenced survey data from 2017 indicating high community interest in trails and improving access to natural open space.

The meeting included the approval of minutes from the October 11th meeting. A public comment session was held where a member discussed recent state housing bills (AB2097, AB2011, AB2653) and their interconnected nature, suggesting the public must read them as a package. The commission then addressed the General Plan annual review concerning land use sections, specifically Policy LU 27.4. The staff reported technical difficulties with the current spreadsheet data, leading to the postponement of this work session to allow for presentation with the correct, updated materials before the April 1st deadline. During oral communications and future items discussion, commissioners requested staff reports on school generation ratios for various property types and the infrastructure implications (pavement, parks, utilities) resulting from state housing bill rollouts. Further discussion was requested for future agendas regarding specific past project permit denials.

The Cupertino Climate Action Plan 2.0 is an update to the city's existing climate protection programs, designed to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and enhance community quality of life, green economic opportunities, social equity, and affordable housing. The plan is structured around five core categories for GHG reduction: building energy, transportation, waste, water/wastewater, and carbon sequestration. Its primary objectives include achieving a 66% reduction in per capita GHG emissions below 1990 levels by 2030 and progressing toward the City's carbon neutrality goal by 2040.