Hi Twitter. Cupertino is officially starting its Housing Element/RHNA process—where they will have to plan how to build thousands of new homes. First meeting underway—joint session with the Planning and Housing Commissions for the city. Semi-live tweeting (not in order)

Councilmember Chao is shocked that Cupertino is not diverse enough (referring to Cupertino being 70% AAPI) Paul from Paul&Driskell Planning points out that it was due to concentration of affluence.

Planning Commissioner Kitty Moore is concerned around maxing out sewage plans—asks how we can proceed without a CEQA. Consultant notes that this is part of the process anyway, so it's not a concern

Moore asks: In regard to the Safety Element - is a gas station site a “contaminated site”? Then asks—if a site of a dry-cleaner, that could not be remediated for 20+ years, could be considered? Josh says, no, obviously not.

Councilmember Wiley opens that he thinks the 4.5k RHNA number is large, states that we will “need to get creative." Also doesn't realize that housing for houseless folks counts toward RHNA?

Planning Commissioner Ray Wang asks if the 500k population decrease of CA was factored in. (Answer: yes)

Planning Commissioner Saxena asks if highway 85 counts as transit connection? Does he mean the future corridor?

Saxena asks if COVID can be used to appeal housing requirements (RHNA)—is shocked that the answer is yes. Also asks what the definition of "affordable" is. Planning Commissioner Kapil also asks what "affordable means. (Not knowing this while in charge of housing is CONCERNING)

Planning Commissioner Madhdhipatla also is confused that Cupertino is not diverse. Asks why the RHNA numbers changed (they went down since the last drafts). Consultant answers that it's due to Cupertino's lack of transit)

Former Mayor Scharf (now Planning Commissioner) asks if the state would be upset if they raised the inclusionary requirements. Answer: if it's over 20%, State will review

Scharf concerned about ADUs. Asks if there is a way to know if they are affordable and whether AB 686 can be used to prevent homeowners from creating “poor” quality housing through ADUs

About 100 comments about the real problem being developers not wanting to build, or not building when given permission—jab at Vallco which has not started construction. But this is entirely the city's fault, which has not issued permits.

Another question about affordability from Housing Commissioner Tatachari who doesn't know what "Affordable" means.