|
|
Before getting into the details of the features and issues of the three CCC initiatives, I should state that I do, indeed, have a conflict of interest in this matter. I firmly believe that City of Cupertino must have some voter-established limitations to guide its future evolution, or else the quality of life in this wonderful community will be damaged by profit-driven, unrestricted, development.
That having been said, in the following discussion, I will try to discuss facts, not opinions; and I will make an earnest effort not to let my own bias distort the objective reality. The opponents of the initiatives have been promulgating all kinds of false statements about the initiatives, in an attempt to turn public opinion against voting for them. Some of this incorrect information has been published, and voters will be misled if the facts are not clarified. An informative article by Mr. Hugh Biggar in Cupertino Courier (Vol. 50, No. 20, 8 June 2005) contained some inaccuracies that I would like to correct. Although I personally hope that the voters will approve the initiative measures in November, it is essential that the voters actually understand the features and complexities of the initiatives in order to make an informed decision. So let?s take a hard look at the three initiatives for building heights, density, and set-backs.Each of the initiatives will be a separate ballot measure; so whenever people criticize the ?CCC initiatives? as a group, their statements are likely to be incorrect; or, at best, the claims may be relevant only to some of the measures, and not to all of them. Depending on the decision of the voters, some of the initiatives may become law, and others might be rejected.
The initiative measures would establish guidelines for the characteristics of new buildings and developments, but they do not state any limitations on the amount of growth within the city. The opponents have called the proposed measures ?No-Growth Initiatives? as one part of a campaign of misinformation. Many cities do have growth limitation laws on their books, which specify a maximum rate of growth (e.g. not to exceed 2 or 3% per year, etc.). Cupertino does not have any such law now, and there is nothing contained in the initiatives that would establish a new law about growth rates. The CCC initiatives only speak to the building/site architectural features: How tall? How many dwelling units per acre? How far are the buildings located back from the street? The initiatives do not say anything about how many new buildings could be constructed, nor about how rapidly new construction may occur. Interestingly, in the past, Councilman Lowenthal has stated that he would support an ordinance with specified growth limitation of some percentage per year, as a possible alternative to the CCC initiatives. Mr. Lowenthal has also stated that the CCC initiatives would ?? not [limit] the amount of growth in Cupertino, only [affect] the shape of it?.
- The initiatives certainly would not require ?? special elections for any changes to the General Plan ??
The June 8 Courier contained a statement that the initiatives would require ??special elections for any changes to the General Plan (with the exception of existing structures, a defined section of the Vallco district, duplexes and triplexes and single family residences).? This statement needs to be clarified. The General Plan (GP) can be amended almost at any time by the City Council. (The Council often bundles together several GP amendments when the Plan is to be modified, so that citizens usually don?t keep track of how many changes actually occur.) The initiatives would not affect the procedures for GP amendments ? special elections would not be required. The City Council could continue to make future GP amendments using the existing procedure, if the voters approve the initiatives. An election (either special or regular) would only be needed to rescind the initiatives themselves, or to change the provisions in initiatives; but elections would not be needed for GP amendments concerning any other topics.
Single Family Residences The initiative measures contain exceptions for existing buildings, for existing buildings, which would allow rebuilding/remodeling within the original structural envelopes, and housing densities, even if these parameters exceed the limitations specified in the initiatives. There are also blanket exceptions for single, duplex, triplex, and fourplex residential units. Nothing in the initiatives would apply to those types of residences, in any case. Vallco The Vallco district (defined as the area between Wolfe Road and Tantau Road, and between Homestead Road and Stevens Creek Boulevard, and including those portions of the streets in the boundary) is not exempted from the initiatives. The initiatives would apply to that area, but there are more lenient allowances for building heights, densities and set-backs. Wolfe Road The Wolfe Road Commercial Corridor (defined as the area within 500 feet of the centerline of Wolfe Road, starting at the point 500 feet north of Stevens Creek Boulevard on its southern end and extending northward to Highway 280) does have an exception in the initiatives. In this business-intensive region, the heights and set-backs of commercial buildings would not be restricted by the initiatives. This means that the plan to build a large movie theatre complex on top of the Vallco Mall would not be affected if the initiatives were approved. Residential (or mixed-use) buildings in the Wolfe Road Commercial Corridor would have to conform to the more lenient limitations specified for the Vallco district, if the initiatives were approved.
Edward J. ?Ned? Britt Initiative Proponent |
|
|
